Full frame landscape options

[Steve Axford]

There's always the Canon 14mm f2.8. It's a superb lens, but it takes some practice to get good pictures from it. You also have to give up any thought of filters (no big deal in my opinion). I think it should be the best for stars as it is certainly the best for daytime sky photos.

[dulvariprestige]

Steve there are now filter systems for these UWA lenses, http://www.thephoblographer.com/2012...ematographers/

[nwhc]

thanks for the discussion and points everyone.

The 24 1.4 would be great!

This is how i see it in my head.

Tokina 11-16 @ 11mm should give me around 55 sec using the 600 rule before i start to see any movement in the stars, sounds too good to be true. So 55 sec @ 2.8 with 1600 iso could be good?

with the 24mm i would have 25 sec @ 1.4.

How much extra light would the 1.4 be letting in then the 2.8? would it be enough to beat the extra 30 secs of exposure @ 2.8?

[William W]

. . . Tokina 11-16 @ 11mm should give me around 55 sec using the 600 rule before i start to see any movement in the stars, sounds too good to be true. So 55 sec @ 2.8 with 1600 iso could be good?
with the 24mm i would have 25 sec @ 1.4.
How much extra light would the 1.4 be letting in [than] the 2.8?
would it be enough to beat the extra 30 secs of exposure @ 2.8?

Your mathematics is in error.

If you have a sky’s light, which gives you an exposure of: F/2.8 @ 55secs @ ISO1600, then using an F/1.4 Lens you can use:

F/1.4 @ 11secs @ ISO1600 ≡ F/1.4 @ 23secs @ ISO800 ≡ F/2 @ 23secs @ ISO1600.

The above three exposures are all within “The 600 Rule for Astrophotography” for a 24mm lens on a 135 Format camera.

An F/1.4 lens will allow 2 Stops more light than an F/2.8 Lens.

If you are asking about expected exposures – my expectation is you could be using ISO around ISO800~400, possibly ISO200 with a 24mm F/1.4 Lens.

WW

[nwhc]

Thanks William,

I have only dabbled with star photography and did not realise the F stop played a factor in the exposure time i thought it was only the focal length.

Do you have any links to helpful formulas for this stuff?

Cheers

[William W]

OK.

Just like in all Photography there are THREE exposure parameters:
Aperture
Shutter Speed
Sensitivity (ISO)

Making Photos of Stars or the Night Sky is nothing special in this regard – we still have the same interrelationship of these three Exposure Parameters – once we know the exposure we can increase one and we need to decrease another . . . and so on.

The reason I suggested a 24/1.4L if you wanted to make Photos of the Night Sky WITHOUT Star Trails, is because it is the fastest / widest Lens which Canon manufactures.
And the reasons we want the fastest lens is so we can use the shortest SHUTTER SPEED – i.e. to make a shutter speed shorter or as short as the “600 Rule” AND ALSO we want to use the LOWEST ISO possible, so we get the finest detail and least noticeable noise.

For Shooting Night Skies (without Star Trails) the EF24F/1.4L MkII is an exceptional lens and can certainly be used wide open (i.e. at F/1.4) to allow the leverage of both the Shutter Speed and the ISO.
So that is why I recommended a very fast lens

Also I recommended a PRIME LENS, not only because we cannot get a zoom lens as fast as F/1.4 or F/1.8 – but ALSO because there are (mostly always) less complicated optics in a Prime Lens, than a Zoom Lens. When making images of bright objects on dark backgrounds there is always the possibility of general LENS FLARE and more often a special type of flare known as GHOST IMAGES.
As a general comment, there is more chance of Ghost Images with a Zoom Lens than with a Prime Lens.
Also, in respect of reducing the likelihood of any type of Flare - you should REMOVE any filters for these Night Shots and also use a Lens Hood.
Lens hood – brings us to the next (minor) reason for using a Prime Lens and not a zoom – becase the lens hoods on Zoom Lenses are only at their maximum efficiency at the widest angle of the zoom’s compass.
And by definition (for example comparing the 16 to 35/2.8 to the 24/1.4) at FL= 16mm the zoom lens’s hood will NOT be as effective as the 24/1.4 lens’s hood – nor will the Zoom lens's hood be anywhere as effective at FL =24mm as will the Prime lens’s hood.

As for detailed guides to this particular Genre of Photography, all the foregone information has come out of my head: it is just what I know and what I teach – mainly all my references are hard copy or my own notes gathered over many years; so I don’t have any particular web-links to share with you – and I don’t use web-links as first source information much at all anyway – as much of the information is not referenced or footnoted.

You might search the library on this forum – it has some very good articles but I don’t know if there are any specifically on this topic.
And (if it is allowed to mention) other useful information could be found at ‘Cambridge in Colour’ as that forum has a very good library – I only know that because I have been asked to proof-read some of it before it was published. Also one of my Students has previously mentioned ‘Luminous Landscape’ and I have checked some of those articles my student inquired about and they were of an high standard – but again I don’t know their inventory of articles.

Apropos Photographers: Colin Southern is a friend and colleague of mine, who shots Night Landscapes, but he is not so much into Star Scapes – but notwithstanding those facts, he has written a few articles and you might look there also.

BUT – in my opinion – the greatest joy is experimenting yourself and with a digital camera like the EOS 5DMkII, the cost of making mistakes is very small, it is really only your time and a using up a few shutter releases and a very slight drain on your camera’s battery . . . so my best advice is to get out there and make some mistakes – review and ask some questions – work out what went wrong and what went right and get back out there and make some better photographs . . . and so it goes on.

WW

[nwhc]

Thanks William thats really helpful