Long exposure night shots of the sky... need suggestions.

[Pennywise]

anyone have a suggestion for long exposure night shots? I took this one last night:
371 seconds(~6min) | 18mm | F4.5 | ISO200

I realize that if some cloulds were in the mix it would add to the effect, but there weren't any in sight.

 

[NJMAN]

Its a tad bit blurry. Try this. Set exposure to manual mode, set ISO 200, tighten the aperture to f/10, and set the camera to self-timer. I assume you had it on a tripod. If not, hook it up to a good solid tripod. Look at the exposure meter when focusing, and meter it for about 1/3 stop below normal exposure (0). The shutter speed will gauge itself. Press the shutter release and let the timer do the work. You might also want to do mirror lockup, which helps relieve the slight vibration given off when the shutter clicks. But if you do that, remember to set mirror lockup off again when you are finished.

 

[Pennywise]

interesting, I will give that a try. I used my remote to take the picture so I wouldn't shake it.

 

[RVsForFun]

A long exposure is a long exposure...your camera was on a tripod and triggered with a remote so what else could you do? Wind can blow trees and make them blurry. I think it's a good shot...

 

[NJMAN]

Yes, thats what I was just going to add also. 6 minutes is a long time for a long exposure, and even a slight breeze that changes direction could jiggle the camera. If you configure your settings to expose for 10-30 seconds, that should give you plenty of time to get some great detail and color in low light.

I like the composition very much. I just think the tree detail could be a bit sharper.

 

[EOS_JD]

10secs may sound like a long exposure but it's not really.

Some exposures are hours long.

Read this......

http://www.danheller.com/star-trails.html

 

[NJMAN]

Those samples are really cool. It would be great to do if you have lots of time to kill.

 

[Pennywise]

Haha... I'll just start taking the picture then go see a movie and push the button again when I get back Those samples are pretty sweet. I'll just have to keep playing around.

 

[AUZambo]

I assumed you were trying to catch the motion of the stars by choosing the long exposure. If you reduce to 10-30 seconds, you will get a sharper image, but the stars will look static. Is that what you're wanting?

 

[Pennywise]

that is correct, I wanted the star movement. I wish the stars were a little brighter though. I think the sky just above the trees was too bright. There may have been lights off in the distance causing that. I didn't really notice it by eye.

 

[joyride]

I dont know if it is possible, but maybe try to find a solid object (typically I see them with cliffs or rocks) to contrast with the stars. The blurry trees are making me feel like everything was blurred (dang wind!). The trails do look nice though.

 

[astrostu]

To me, it looks out of focus blur instead of motion blur. I say this because all the stars look like they have a finite pixel size several pixels wide, and the same width throughout the entire trail.

I would suggest trying to do this on a night with a very slim moon, focus on that, and then do your trails. At least with cheaper lenses (as I've learned the hard way with my kit lens), all because you have it set to focus on infinity doesn't mean that it's in focus on infinity.

 

[neea]

This is a great first attempt. Hard to believe that they'd actually move that much in just 6 minutes.

The link with examples is awesome. Im definatley going to have to try this this summer. It'd be neat if you could get northern lights in the mix too.

Great inspiration!

 

[EOS_JD]

f4.5 is a rather narrow aperture also. If you want the foreground in focus try shooting with a narrower aperture (will increase your exposure time though by quite a bit).