alexandre wrote:
If you said this about Lensbaby maybe I'd believe.
As much as I love Zuiko lenses, Chris is right. Every one of them has some of the worst coma I have ever seen wide open. That doesn't mean they can't take great pictures of many, many things. Just not stars, wide-open.
Here is what the C/Y Zeiss Distagon 21mm does near the far left corner. I consider this at the edge of what I would consider acceptable. As you move towards the center fo the frame, this isn't an issue with the 21mm Distagon. This is wide open (f2.8) at ISO3200 on a 5D mkII: http://vhaudio.com/landscapephotos/_MG_4929.jpg
I am a total rookie when it comes to taking pics of the night sky. However, here is one I took with a 1DSIII at ISO 1600, 10 second exposure with a Zeiss 35/2 at F2:
alexandre wrote:
If you said this about Lensbaby maybe I'd believe.
Zuikos are excellent lenses for stopped-down landscapes, and maybe even moonlit shots- but not for stars unless you have a tracking equatorial mount.
which brings up my next point- if you want to take good star pics, stop the lens down and use a tracking mount, like the Kenko Skymemo. Or stop the lens down and blend shorter (<20 sec) shots together in post. Not fun, but those are the best ways to do it.
Nikon D3X seems to sell for about $8000 (new... right?). Are there cheaper alternatives?
--chris
you get what you pay for, as with everything. The Skymemo is supposed to be a great place to start for serious astrophotography- but i think you could get a somewhat decent Meade or something for under $300. The build really matters though on these, as the cheaper worm gears in a low end model wont' accurately keep pace over longer exposures and you will get slight drift/misalignment.
Thanks. A tracking mount isn't a viable option if I also want to include landscape elements. I agree, if just sky though- equatorial mount with clock drive is the way to go.
Here's an example of a shot I took with the 21mm Distagon + 5DmkII. This was a quick field process on an uncalibrated laptop, and only Camera Raw noise reduciton used.
Preaching to the choir, Rob ;-) I rarely use my Canon lenses (except the new 70-200 f2.8 IS mkII), because there are so many great alt lenses out there. However, for this type of photography, there are very specific challenges that need to be overcome that are uniquely different from a typical landscape shot.
The crux of this challenge is what is the best WA lens that can be used wide open or stopped down to f2.0 for point light sources? To date, the Distagon 21mm is best, but I really could use an extra stop, since ISO 3200 is the max I can get before serious degradation takes place in the 5D mkII, and 30 second expoures are max to avoid distracting star trails.
I guess I'm still confused. Why not try out that expensive 24L first before looking for another lens? Two stops faster than the 21/2.8, about the same focal length, and... you already own it.
Yes, I plan on trying out this weekend. I posted in alt because I wanted to know if any other alt lenses out there were being used for this specific type of photography.
One approach to dealing with the lens' shortcomings is to focus on a foreground subject and let the stars go soft. The subject will be in sharp focus, but the stars will go just soft enough so that the coma is not noticeable as much.
I can't think of any other lenses that would be better. We might just have to sit tight and wait for newer Canon bodies that will do ISO 6400 (and up) cleaner and better than current bodies
Thank you, tjavery! I really dig the 1st image. This is precisely the kind of feedback I'm looking for. Do you have a full frame corner crop of this image? I'll try mine out this weekend, and will also compare at f2.8 to the Zeiss 21mm at f2.8. I'm hoping someone will post their experience with the Nikon 24mm f1.4 for stars.
