Highest ISO during Star Photography?

[tyqre]

i guess that drops me down to 37.5 seconds :meh:
I just took this picture a few minutes ago with 800 ISO f4 30"

just thought i would share (its cloudy out as you can see so i cant take many shots of the stars)

 

[Garbz]

Did you read the entire site where you read that you should use the Highest ISO? Because they are right, and your application is wrong. In star photography noise is your friend, your darling, the creator of your images, and you need to nurture it too to get even remotely decent results.

If you're taking 1 single image of the sky the answer is to turn on long exposure NR and use the highest ISO you can bear for noise. On my camera that would be ISO200 for a long exposure of stars. The goal is to get the most brightness in the image without causing excessive noise.

If on the other hand you're trying to get deep and detailed images of stars then what you're after is the highest ISO your camera can produce by non artificial means. For me this is ISO1600, and not "Hi 1.0" which would be ISO3200 equivalent. The result is an image that looks so noisy you probably can't see the stars. Then you take 100 more, and make sure noise reduction is off.

The key to getting deep detailed images of the cosmos is to use the statistical nature of noise to capture photons that would otherwise not be recorded. When you take High ISO shots you end up with a lot of noise, but when you STACK high ISO shots together and take the average value the noise disappears, and what is left is the anomalies in the statistics from the stray photons hitting the sensor. This will show you a starfield you would never have thought was recordable. This is how amateur astro photographers are able to take photos of things like the Andromeda galaxy from their backyards. The best image I ever saw was recorded over a period of about 1 week. The photographer took ~20 images several minutes each every night and stacked the result.

If you want to know more about the method head over to Deep Sky Image Stacker website. The software is free.

 

[McNugget801]

Stars will start moving after 30 seconds, so unless your going to do some trails use a high ISO and an open aperture.

ISO2000 F2.8 10mm Fisheye

Milky by Summit42, on Flickr

 

[tyqre]

Do what your saying is use a high ISO, wide aperture,take a lot of pictures and stack them together?
and by stacking you mean taking many pictures of the same ISO/aperture/whatever and combining the in a program (Im using a mac so i cant use Deep Star Stacker but do you have any suggestions?) or taking many different exposures and combining them? And by the highest ISO do you mean everything below HI? My camera goes up to 6400 without being on Hi.

Sorry for all the questions

 

[DiskoJoe]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

 

[tyqre]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

Yes but after 30 seconds the stars will stark to trail - which is what i do not want in this case.

 

[DiskoJoe]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

Yes but after 30 seconds the stars will stark to trail - which is what i do not want in this case.

ehh

 

[McNugget801]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

yeah, horrible settings for a star trail.

 

[tyqre]

what im really trying to do is get photos like this

Crater Lake under the Stars | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

From what i know what stacking is i dont think he used stacking for this shot. Although i am probably wrong.

 

[dmtx]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

Make sure your camera's sensor will handle a 30+ min exposure. I know of overheating issues with some models.

On the "Crater Lake under the Stars" image, I think that this was multi. images taken to capture the sky, then the land, etc. and blended together in an editor.

 

[tyqre]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

Make sure your camera's sensor will handle a 30+ min exposure. I know of overheating issues with some models.

On the "Crater Lake under the Stars" image, I think that this was multi. images taken to capture the sky, then the land, etc. and blended together in an editor.

oh, so its like an HDR image? Do you think he did image stacking for the sky?

Another Question, What are the differences between Light, Dark and Bias images?

 

[tyqre]

Stars will start moving after 30 seconds, so unless your going to do some trails use a high ISO and an open aperture.

ISO2000 F2.8 10mm Fisheye


Milky by Summit42, on Flickr

to make that image did the person do image stacking or was this 1 picture?

 

[Josh66]

iso 100 for about 30 - 40 minutes.

Make sure your camera's sensor will handle a 30+ min exposure. I know of overheating issues with some models.

On the "Crater Lake under the Stars" image, I think that this was multi. images taken to capture the sky, then the land, etc. and blended together in an editor.

oh, so its like an HDR image? Do you think he did image stacking for the sky?

Another Question, What are the differences between Light, Dark and Bias images?

It says right in the description. It's a 9 image panorama. 5 for the sky, 4 for the landscape. (So, no - no stacking. Just stitching.)

 

[tyqre]

oh ok thanks.

 

[kundalini]

Did you read the entire site where you read that you should use the Highest ISO? Because they are right, and your application is wrong. In star photography noise is your friend, your darling, the creator of your images, and you need to nurture it too to get even remotely decent results.

If you're taking 1 single image of the sky the answer is to turn on long exposure NR and use the highest ISO you can bear for noise. On my camera that would be ISO200 for a long exposure of stars. The goal is to get the most brightness in the image without causing excessive noise.

If on the other hand you're trying to get deep and detailed images of stars then what you're after is the highest ISO your camera can produce by non artificial means. For me this is ISO1600, and not "Hi 1.0" which would be ISO3200 equivalent. The result is an image that looks so noisy you probably can't see the stars. Then you take 100 more, and make sure noise reduction is off.

The key to getting deep detailed images of the cosmos is to use the statistical nature of noise to capture photons that would otherwise not be recorded. When you take High ISO shots you end up with a lot of noise, but when you STACK high ISO shots together and take the average value the noise disappears, and what is left is the anomalies in the statistics from the stray photons hitting the sensor. This will show you a starfield you would never have thought was recordable. This is how amateur astro photographers are able to take photos of things like the Andromeda galaxy from their backyards. The best image I ever saw was recorded over a period of about 1 week. The photographer took ~20 images several minutes each every night and stacked the result.

If you want to know more about the method head over to Deep Sky Image Stacker website. The software is free.

Hmmmm, I see nobody else has thanked you, so I certainly shall. Thanks for an insightful reply. I will look into the Deep Sky Image Stacker website.