The milky way we have up north is definitely not as spectacular as the south. Here are 2 shots. I have trouble capturing them because there always seems to be a glow of northern lights. Can't complain, as some people will never see northern lights in their lifetime and I see them more often than not.
Still getting the hang of astrophotography. These are all shot at ISO 6400 on a D800 with the 14-24mm @ 14mm/F2.8. Really loving this combo for the purpose. It is amazing the DOF even at F2.8.
These are sure sweet! It looks like you are doing a good job with your star shots. I do agree that #2 is my favorite, and for me, on the left side the branches poking into the scene do bother me a bit, but the rest of the scene is so powerful it helps to compensate. Now with #1, I do like your shot there too. The light (sun?) that is above the tree line looks great, but in the middle of the trees to the left of that the light there I think hurts the shot. Is that light from a cabin? I would be tempted to clone out that area, or tone down the light if possible, atleast the very hottest area.
Very nice work though, and I really liked seeing the stars from up there.
I like No 2 also. It's funny that I didn't notice the branches on the left until Jim mention them. I guess the rest of the photo just sucked me in! But now that I see those branches they do seem like a distraction. I wonder why you chose to use ISO 6400 at 13s instead of 3200/26s? Do you think that using lower ISO might have lowered the noise just a bit and still kept the stars from trailing? Just curious.
These are sure sweet! It looks like you are doing a good job with your star shots. I do agree that #2 is my favorite, and for me, on the left side the branches poking into the scene do bother me a bit, but the rest of the scene is so powerful it helps to compensate. Now with #1, I do like your shot there too. The light (sun?) that is above the tree line looks great, but in the middle of the trees to the left of that the light there I think hurts the shot. Is that light from a cabin? I would be tempted to clone out that area, or tone down the light if possible, atleast the very hottest area.
Very nice work though, and I really liked seeing the stars from up there.
Ya, that is a cabin and definitely an annoyance! I will definitely try and clone it out! The other light to the right is a tower. Another annoyance! Thanks for the suggestions.
NCAndy wrote:
I like No 2 also. It's funny that I didn't notice the branches on the left until Jim mention them. I guess the rest of the photo just sucked me in! But now that I see those branches they do seem like a distraction. I wonder why you chose to use ISO 6400 at 13s instead of 3200/26s? Do you think that using lower ISO might have lowered the noise just a bit and still kept the stars from trailing? Just curious.
You know, the noise really isn't that bad imo. Anything longer than 13s and I was getting star trails. I guess that is what 36 megapixels gets ya though, and your probably right. I could have went a longer shutter at lower iso, but it's the damn pixel peeping and seeing the trails. There is so much detail it is crazy!
26 seconds and there would have been star trails noticeable even on smaller prints.
Hardcore wrote:
You know, the noise really isn't that bad imo. Anything longer than 13s and I was getting star trails. I guess that is what 36 megapixels gets ya though, and your probably right. I could have went a longer shutter at lower iso, but it's the damn pixel peeping and seeing the trails. There is so much detail it is crazy!
26 seconds and there would have been star trails noticeable even on smaller prints.
I guess that is a consequence of a high mp sensor. I hadn't thought one could see trails before about 25s or so but since the D800 can resolve such fine detail the movement is detected sooner. Thanks, that is interesting to know.
