Any atrophotographers here?

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 hour ago, xQubeZx said:

And bring clothes and a chair or so if you will be out long, it gets cold when sitting still. Especially in the winter, believe me, you will freeze your ass of during the winter.

Definitely enough or appropriate clothing as you'll be out at night.  Basically, taking camping gear might be a good idea.  With a flashlight, you may want to have a red filter.  A small laser pointer might be useful too.  Ziploc bags to put the camera and lens in before bringing the gear back indoors.  Some sort of tape, to tape down the lens' zoom ring and depending on the design of the lens the focus ring too.  I own a heavy Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 lens and I use it a lot for astrophotography.  When doing astrophotography, the camera is typically pointed upwards, set to manual focus and I usually try to use the widest focal length (i.e. 14mm).  The weight of this lens' front element is heavy that overtime it can slowly fall back to the narrower focal lengths, so I just use tape to hold down the zoom ring from moving.

 

1 hour ago, randomhkkid said:

 

I think i'll be most interested in taking images of stars where they are point lights. I've read a couple places that the Fuji sensor is more sensitive to H-alpha wavelengths than almost any other unmodified camera so hopefully that helps a tad. Will be shooting at f/1.4 and 35mm (52.5mm eff) and I'm gonna be focused on trying to get the milkyway and some foreground elements if possible. According to the 500 rules I should have about 10 seconds before I get blurring, at f/1.4 and ISO 3200 hopefully I'll be able to get some decent shots.

That sentence only refers to new moon days does is not?

By the way, you mentioned visiting Norway in the summer?  Depending on where you are going, you may have shorter periods of Astro Twilight and if you're way far north the sun may not set for summer.

 

The entire period between when Astro twilight begins at night and when it ends the next morning is basically the best hours to take photos.  For example, Astro twilight and darkness period where I live, for tonight begins at roughly 22:02 and ends at tomorrow morning at 03:01.  Unfortunately the new moon for the month of May is on the 25th.  But again, depending on location (especially if you are in true dark skies areas) you can do some beautiful looking astrophotography even with moon light, but you may not see every star in the sky or the milkyway.  Astro twilight hours changes with the seasons and your location on the planet.

 

Another thing, you may want to check out a piece of free software called Stellarium.  It's a great piece of software for stargazers and photographers.

[porina]

1 hour ago, randomhkkid said:

I think i'll be most interested in taking images of stars where they are point lights. I've read a couple places that the Fuji sensor is more sensitive to H-alpha wavelengths than almost any other unmodified camera so hopefully that helps a tad. Will be shooting at f/1.4 and 35mm (52.5mm eff) and I'm gonna be focused on trying to get the milkyway and some foreground elements if possible. According to the 500 rules I should have about 10 seconds before I get blurring, at f/1.4 and ISO 3200 hopefully I'll be able to get some decent shots.

That's one area I haven't tried, but I think you could get away with a little trailing in that case. Was it 500 rule? The one where you divide a number by focal length to estimate how long you have? I don't think that takes into consideration the pixel density increases, so if you need it pixel level perfect, it might be shorter. Even if you have slight trailing, you can consider at actual viewing scales, how much could you have before it was noticeable.

 

I'd also add, most lenses are not designed to give pinpoint stars across the whole frame, especially not faster lenses. Getting a full shot of pinpoint stars is the ultimate stress test for the lens and it will reveal any weakness in focus and optical quality. It is common for there to be significant degradation as you move away from the middle of the image.

 

H-alpha sensitivity wont really help unless you are actually going for nebulae which emit it and little else.

 

I'd consider taking the star short and foreground shots separately with settings optimised for each, and combine them later.

[randomhkkid]

2 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Definitely enough or appropriate clothing as you'll be out at night.  Basically, taking camping gear might be a good idea.  With a flashlight, you may want to have a red filter.  A small laser pointer might be useful too.  Ziploc bags to put the camera and lens in before bringing the gear back indoors.  Some sort of tape, to tape down the lens' zoom ring and depending on the design of the lens the focus ring too.  I own a heavy Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 lens and I use it a lot for astrophotography.  When doing astrophotography, the camera is typically pointed upwards, set to manual focus and I usually try to use the widest focal length (i.e. 14mm).  The weight of this lens' front element is heavy that overtime it can slowly fall back to the narrower focal lengths, so I just use tape to hold down the zoom ring from moving.

 

By the way, you mentioned visiting Norway in the summer?  Depending on where you are going, you may have shorter periods of Astro Twilight and if you're way far north the sun may not set for summer.

 

The entire period between when Astro twilight begins at night and when it ends the next morning is basically the best hours to take photos.  For example, Astro twilight and darkness period where I live, for tonight begins at roughly 22:02 and ends at tomorrow morning at 03:01.  Unfortunately the new moon for the month of May is on the 25th.  But again, depending on location (especially if you are in true dark skies areas) you can do some beautiful looking astrophotography even with moon light, but you may not see every star in the sky or the milkyway.  Astro twilight hours changes with the seasons and your location on the planet.

 

Another thing, you may want to check out a piece of free software called Stellarium.  It's a great piece of software for stargazers and photographers.

Derp yeah you're right about the sun not setting or only setting for a short amount of time. I'll take the changing astro twilight into account when I do try. I'll take a look!

1 hour ago, porina said:

That's one area I haven't tried, but I think you could get away with a little trailing in that case. Was it 500 rule? The one where you divide a number by focal length to estimate how long you have? I don't think that takes into consideration the pixel density increases, so if you need it pixel level perfect, it might be shorter. Even if you have slight trailing, you can consider at actual viewing scales, how much could you have before it was noticeable.

 

I'd also add, most lenses are not designed to give pinpoint stars across the whole frame, especially not faster lenses. Getting a full shot of pinpoint stars is the ultimate stress test for the lens and it will reveal any weakness in focus and optical quality. It is common for there to be significant degradation as you move away from the middle of the image.

 

H-alpha sensitivity wont really help unless you are actually going for nebulae which emit it and little else.

 

I'd consider taking the star short and foreground shots separately with settings optimised for each, and combine them later.

Yeah it was the 500 rule, 500/focal length/crop factor. The article I read mentioned that resolution shouldn't have a noticable effect. I'm not planning to print them or do anything much beyond desktop backgrounds and social media so slight imperfections are fine for me. Yeah I'll definitely be shooting brackets. 

[xQubeZx]

If you got a 50mm equivilent I'd try to create a panorama. It can be a very cool effect if you have a sliglthy longer focal length like that. 

 

And I've printed one of my shots in like 30x50 (something like that can't remember) and unless you have your face up to it it looks pretty nice. And thats with a not so good lens. (Sony 16-50 at 3.5, that thing is not especially sharp but gets the job done) The main problem will always be noise from high ISO's. I can't really shoot over 1600 on my camera. 3200 looks horrific even after a lot done in post. So at ISO 1600 f/3.5 and 20s you can get a decent shot, especially if you stack a few and do some things in Ps. Color noise will probably be your worst enemy however. Grain can look decent, it won't really take away. Small dots of red blue and green will however look bad and is a pain to fix good in post imo. 

[randomhkkid]

13 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

If you got a 50mm equivilent I'd try to create a panorama. It can be a very cool effect if you have a sliglthy longer focal length like that. 

 

And I've printed one of my shots in like 30x50 (something like that can't remember) and unless you have your face up to it it looks pretty nice. And thats with a not so good lens. (Sony 16-50 at 3.5, that thing is not especially sharp but gets the job done) The main problem will always be noise from high ISO's. I can't really shoot over 1600 on my camera. 3200 looks horrific even after a lot done in post. So at ISO 1600 f/3.5 and 20s you can get a decent shot, especially if you stack a few and do some things in Ps. Color noise will probably be your worst enemy however. Grain can look decent, it won't really take away. Small dots of red blue and green will however look bad and is a pain to fix good in post imo. 

Thanks! I'll be trying to follow this tutorial with my 52.5mm eff. lens https://petapixel.com/2014/09/17/tutorial-shooting-medium-format-astrophotography-without-medium-format-camera/

 

My ISO is pretty clean all the way up to 6400 and my lenses have very low aberration so hopefully I'll get some nice shots. 

[cc143]

2 hours ago, randomhkkid said:

Thanks! I'll be trying to follow this tutorial with my 52.5mm eff. lens https://petapixel.com/2014/09/17/tutorial-shooting-medium-format-astrophotography-without-medium-format-camera/

 

My ISO is pretty clean all the way up to 6400 and my lenses have very low aberration so hopefully I'll get some nice shots. 

You could always look for cheap legacy manual glass and a manual adapter off ebay if you are looking for a cheap fast wider solution. Its the drawback you have with fuji, no decent electronic adapters. 

 

[xQubeZx]

7 minutes ago, cc143 said:

You could always look for cheap legacy manual glass and a manual adapter off ebay if you are looking for a cheap fast wider solution. Its the drawback you have with fuji, no decent electronic adapters. 

 

Does not really exist unless you want to pay a crazy amount. You are very lucky to find any legacy glass wider than 24mm at a decent cost. Wide lenses for 35mm film is basically 24mm or 28mm. There is a few wider but noone that I would consider worth the money. Better to buy native wide angles.

[Foxxer]

Light pollution is such an issue with astrophotography too. 

Atleast here it is.

[randomhkkid]

2 hours ago, cc143 said:

You could always look for cheap legacy manual glass and a manual adapter off ebay if you are looking for a cheap fast wider solution. Its the drawback you have with fuji, no decent electronic adapters. 

 

Yeah unfortunately the Fuji and 2 lenses is pretty much my budget for new things gone for a while  

 

I know! At least the lenses they do have are affordable and gorgeous pieces of glass

[randomhkkid]

12 minutes ago, Foxxer said:

Light pollution is such an issue with astrophotography too. 

Atleast here it is.

I bounce around a lot so hopefully I'll end up somewhere I can get some decent shots.

[cc143]

1 hour ago, randomhkkid said:

Yeah unfortunately the Fuji and 2 lenses is pretty much my budget for new things gone for a while  

 

I know! At least the lenses they do have are affordable and gorgeous pieces of glass

Which ones did you get? I assume you got the 35mm f/2.0 or f/1.4 from your post, should I also assume you got the 16-50mm? 

 

If its the 18-55mm f2.8 why don't you use that at the wide end wide open? It's not as fast as f/2 or f/1.4, but it should get the job done...

 

Their glass is astonishingly good for the price and size yes, they also have refurbished stock in the UK which comes with warranty at almost 25% off retail, which is quite nice and solves the issue of expensive glass sony for instance has, partially at least. I looked at the x-t20 up close and I have to say it is a particularly nice piece of kit for travel and street photography (although for those 2 purposes I wouldn't mind going with an x-t1 or x-t10 even, provided there was an EF adapter So I don't have to sell all my gear.) On the one hand, the native glass is part of the appeal when it comes to size and weight, on the other hand, it won't work unless you move over entirely or are prepared to maintain 2 different systems altogether, which is not really an option for many. 

[randomhkkid]

40 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Which ones did you get? I assume you got the 35mm f/2.0 or f/1.4 from your post, should I also assume you got the 16-50mm? 

 

If its the 18-55mm f2.8 why don't you use that at the wide end wide open? It's not as fast as f/2 or f/1.4, but it should get the job done...

 

Their glass is astonishingly good for the price and size yes, they also have refurbished stock in the UK which comes with warranty at almost 25% off retail, which is quite nice and solves the issue of expensive glass sony for instance has, partially at least. I looked at the x-t20 up close and I have to say it is a particularly nice piece of kit for travel and street photography (although for those 2 purposes I wouldn't mind going with an x-t1 or x-t10 even, provided there was an EF adapter So I don't have to sell all my gear.) On the one hand, the native glass is part of the appeal when it comes to size and weight, on the other hand, it won't work unless you move over entirely or are prepared to maintain 2 different systems altogether, which is not really an option for many. 

I got the 18-55mm f/2.8-4 and the 35mm f/1.4. Yeah I'll have both lenses on me so I'll definitely try both if I want a wider shot. 

 

I didn't know about the UK refurbished stock, I'll definitely take a look thanks! Yeah downside of Fuji is that there is no active EF mount adapter. I did a whole system change from Canon to Fuji though I only had one nice lens for Canon.

[xQubeZx]

3 hours ago, cc143 said:

Which ones did you get? I assume you got the 35mm f/2.0 or f/1.4 from your post, should I also assume you got the 16-50mm? 

 

If its the 18-55mm f2.8 why don't you use that at the wide end wide open? It's not as fast as f/2 or f/1.4, but it should get the job done...

 

Their glass is astonishingly good for the price and size yes, they also have refurbished stock in the UK which comes with warranty at almost 25% off retail, which is quite nice and solves the issue of expensive glass sony for instance has, partially at least. I looked at the x-t20 up close and I have to say it is a particularly nice piece of kit for travel and street photography (although for those 2 purposes I wouldn't mind going with an x-t1 or x-t10 even, provided there was an EF adapter So I don't have to sell all my gear.) On the one hand, the native glass is part of the appeal when it comes to size and weight, on the other hand, it won't work unless you move over entirely or are prepared to maintain 2 different systems altogether, which is not really an option for many. 

Donno if fuji lenses are that cheap in reality. They just have a very good round up of only APS-C lenses. Sony is expensive, but the biggest reason for that probably is because all their pro glass is for FF. That kinda sucks for us with the APS-C bodies though. I'd love a Fujibut there sadly are a few things holding me back, mainly because I have already invested in Sony glass though. 

[randomhkkid]

20 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

Donno if fuji lenses are that cheap in reality. They just have a very good round up of only APS-C lenses. Sony is expensive, but the biggest reason for that probably is because all their pro glass is for FF. That kinda sucks for us with the APS-C bodies though. I'd love a Fujibut there sadly are a few things holding me back, mainly because I have already invested in Sony glass though. 

In my experience for equivalent money you'll get better glass from Fuji than Canon/Nikon/Sony at least when it comes to the more common lenses i.e. 18-55, 23, 35mm.

 

For example the $30018-55mm kit lens review from Ken Rockwell describes it being no less sharp than a $5000 Leica.

Quote

Forget slumming with LEICA or other off-brand lenses on adapters; you can't get anything sharper and any other lens won't autofocus or autoexpose or log data, and no other adapted lens will have a diaphragm that opens and closes automatically as needed for focus and shooting. As I showed in my review of the garbagy Sony 18-55mm, there is little to no sharpness advantage to using even the world's best and most exotic fixed 35mm f/1.4 lens, the LEICA SUMMILUX-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH mit floating element ($5,000), isn't much sharper.

 

...

It gets as close as I'll ever need, and with OIS lets me shoot in the same crappy light as any of the faster fixed lenses. The lack of distortion as shot on the X-E1 also eliminates for me the distortion benefits that fixed lenses used to have. The Fuji X system is completely rewriting the book on cameras, thank goodness.

The lens choice was the deciding factor for me between the Fuji and an a6300

[cc143]

24 minutes ago, randomhkkid said:

In my experience for equivalent money you'll get better glass from Fuji than Canon/Nikon/Sony at least when it comes to the more common lenses i.e. 18-55, 23, 35mm.

 

For example the $30018-55mm kit lens review from Ken Rockwell describes it being no less sharp than a $5000 Leica.

The lens choice was the deciding factor for me between the Fuji and an a6300

That's not entirely true, the 18-55 f2.8-4.0 isn't that cheap new, its only $300 if you buy used. There's always the 17-55 f2.8 from canon at that price point. Also, you have the 11-22mm for crop bodies. Now that said, Fuji lenses are known to be exceptionally sharp for the price and size, that I will grant. 

 

You also get the 85mm 1.8 which is fairly priced, and many primes in that range, 100mm f2.8 macro, the new 50 1.8 is astonishingly good considering its ~$100. You also have a selection of Tamron/Sigma lenses which aren't available on Fuji and can't be adapted (even though I hope by the release of the x-t3 sigma will just find a way to make an adapter already.) 

 

Now, about the Rockwell thing, as far as I know he is not considered the most reputable of reviewers (I remember a rant jared polin did on an article of his regarding P mode...pretty cringeworthy). so I take everything he says with a grain of salt. Also, I'm not entirely convinced that Leica is worth the money anyway. Don't get me wrong, they are great cameras, but, I do believe a substantial amount goes to the because we are leica so we can charge 2K over everyone else. Especially with fuji's cameras in the market right now... 

 

I also think their lenses are fairly priced and if you compare price to performance with Canon or Nikon you'd find they are pretty similar.

 

@xQubeZx As far as sony is concerned, I do find their glass to be overpriced when compared to Canon or Nikon counterparts. e.g. the 70-200 2.8 Sony is priced at £700 more than the Canon right now in Jessops, and I really doubt it's any better, nevermind £700 better!  Also, their system is pretty bulky itself, that you can blame on the FF design and physics;P.

 

What I do like however is the look and feel of their cameras, some of it is nostalgia/cosmetic, yes, but for Street photography and travel especially, as someone who uses a camera+Lens combo usually over 1.5kg (and that's without the other 3-4 lenses I have in the bag, need for sturdier, more expensive and bigger tripods, and a bunch of other accessories), the fuji system is very appealing. I actually looked into it, and the fuji x-t1+ 18-55mm, 10-24mm and 35mm f/2 would weigh as much as my 5d+24-105mm, and take less space in my bag even! And then there's the issue of walking up to some random hobo in the street to take a picture with a huge camera...

 

That said, I wouldn't have 2 systems, its not worth it, even though the fuji investment is relatively cheap (I could probably get an x-t1 and 3-4 lenses for under £1,500) and even if I could justify it, I have so much Canon stuff at this point that, even if money weren't an issue, I'd still like to be able to use it.

[randomhkkid]

43 minutes ago, cc143 said:

That's not entirely true, the 18-55 f2.8-4.0 isn't that cheap new, its only $300 if you buy used. There's always the 17-55 f2.8 from canon at that price point. Also, you have the 11-22mm for crop bodies. Now that said, Fuji lenses are known to be exceptionally sharp for the price and size, that I will grant. 

 

You also get the 85mm 1.8 which is fairly priced, and many primes in that range, 100mm f2.8 macro, the new 50 1.8 is astonishingly good considering its ~$100. You also have a selection of Tamron/Sigma lenses which aren't available on Fuji and can't be adapted (even though I hope by the release of the x-t3 sigma will just find a way to make an adapter already.) 

 

Now, about the Rockwell thing, as far as I know he is not considered the most reputable of reviewers (I remember a rant jared polin did on an article of his regarding P mode...pretty cringeworthy). so I take everything he says with a grain of salt. Also, I'm not entirely convinced that Leica is worth the money anyway. Don't get me wrong, they are great cameras, but, I do believe a substantial amount goes to the because we are leica so we can charge 2K over everyone else. Especially with fuji's cameras in the market right now... 

 

I also think their lenses are fairly priced and if you compare price to performance with Canon or Nikon you'd find they are pretty similar.

 

Ah true sorry I meant the price of the lens offered as part of the kit. The body only is $900 but as a kit the total cost is $1150 so the lens is '$250'. The canon is decent but it's kinda cheap feeling plastic rather than aluminium with a nice floating focus and aperture ring.

 

Body only:

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T20-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera/dp/B01N10DO3R/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1494368223&sr=1-4&keywords=x-t20

 

Kit:

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T20-Mirrorless-XF18-55mmF2-8-4-0-OIS/dp/B01NCVNDPO/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1494368223&sr=1-2&keywords=x-t20

 

I hear the Rokinon(Samyang) lenses for Fuji are decent, but you're right in that the X system lacks the variety of Tamron/Sigma on Canon

 

Ah really? His technical write up was pretty good but I'll keep that in mind in the future

[cc143]

Just now, randomhkkid said:

Ah true sorry I meant the price of the lens offered as part of the kit. The body only is $900 but as a kit the total cost is $1150 so the lens is '$250'. The canon is decent but it's kinda cheap feeling plastic rather than aluminium with a nice floating focus and aperture ring.

 

Body only:

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T20-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera/dp/B01N10DO3R/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1494368223&sr=1-4&keywords=x-t20

 

Kit:

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T20-Mirrorless-XF18-55mmF2-8-4-0-OIS/dp/B01NCVNDPO/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1494368223&sr=1-2&keywords=x-t20

 

Ah really? His technical write up was pretty good but I'll keep that in mind in the future

I find Dx0mark and dpreview to be quite thorough. 

 

Of course the kit is going to be cheaper, its called bundling, there's entire chapters in microeconomics books, its true when you buy a 750d and 18-55mm or d5600 and 18-55mm even a 5d3 and 24-105mm. How cheap the lens seems depends on its demand elasticity.  

 

the 17-55mm is not L lens quality, but it certainly doesn't feel cheap. After all, the new 25-70mm 2.8 is plastic and trust me, it's gonna be much better built than any Fuji lens. 

[xQubeZx]

7 hours ago, randomhkkid said:

Ah true sorry I meant the price of the lens offered as part of the kit. The body only is $900 but as a kit the total cost is $1150 so the lens is '$250'. The canon is decent but it's kinda cheap feeling plastic rather than aluminium with a nice floating focus and aperture ring.

 

Body only:

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T20-Mirrorless-Digital-Camera/dp/B01N10DO3R/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1494368223&sr=1-4&keywords=x-t20

 

Kit:

https://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-X-T20-Mirrorless-XF18-55mmF2-8-4-0-OIS/dp/B01NCVNDPO/ref=sr_1_2?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1494368223&sr=1-2&keywords=x-t20

 

I hear the Rokinon(Samyang) lenses for Fuji are decent, but you're right in that the X system lacks the variety of Tamron/Sigma on Canon

 

Ah really? His technical write up was pretty good but I'll keep that in mind in the future

I envy you guys that live somewhere where things are cheaper. Here in sweden that kit would run me at least $1300. However the dude behind the camera is what makes the largest impact on the image. 

 

Have you had any time to try astrophotography yet? Its good to practice because I can almost garantuee that the first time you go out will not go that well. It takes some learning to get it right.

[randomhkkid]

8 hours ago, cc143 said:

I find Dx0mark and dpreview to be quite thorough. 

 

Of course the kit is going to be cheaper, its called bundling, there's entire chapters in microeconomics books, its true when you buy a 750d and 18-55mm or d5600 and 18-55mm even a 5d3 and 24-105mm. How cheap the lens seems depends on its demand elasticity.  

 

the 17-55mm is not L lens quality, but it certainly doesn't feel cheap. After all, the new 25-70mm 2.8 is plastic and trust me, it's gonna be much better built than any Fuji lens. 

I read those guys too, unfortunately because of the non-bayer sensor dxo doesn't have the equipment to evaluate fuji. The dpreview review was a big reason I picked the Fuji!

 

I minor in economics haha, yeah it's to do with bundling flattening the demand curve. However, this manifests as a cheaper lens to the consumer. IMHO there isn't another kit lens like this. 

 

I think it'd be hard to say without owning both these lenses are some of the best I've ever seen. 

59 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

I envy you guys that live somewhere where things are cheaper. Here in sweden that kit would run me at least $1300. However the dude behind the camera is what makes the largest impact on the image. 

 

Have you had any time to try astrophotography yet? Its good to practice because I can almost garantuee that the first time you go out will not go that well. It takes some learning to get it right.

I think we both live  in the UK where prices are even worse than mainland Europe.... However I bought all my stuff in hk so the price I paid was equivalent to US pricing. 

 

Currently preparing for my final exams for my bachelors in engineering, I hope to do some later this summer.