The Milky Way

[molested_cow]

Beware of where the moon is too! Shoot away from it if it's up. Also, take the opportunity to include the landscape in the shot(or composite) with the moon light. It will be cool!

 

[TCampbell]

My galaxy photos are similar to others.... 14mm lens, ISO 1600, f/2.8, 40 seconds.

You will still need to process them a bit. You can also take a dark frame to "subtract" the noise (same exposure as the real image except you leave the lens cap on. Some cameras have a long-exposure noise reduction mode which causes the camera to internally take a dark frame immediately following the real shot (e.g. if I enable this on my camera and take a 40 second shot, the camera will actually take 80 seconds. It'll take 40 seconds with the shutter open, followed by 40 more seconds with the shutter closed. That means I don't need to pop on a lens cap, but that's a trivial thing to do if your camera doesn't have a noise reduction mode.)


Milky Way by Tim Campbell1, on Flickr

BTW, the above was taken in "good" but not "great" dark skies. You can see the glow of light pollution above the trees which you don't see at the very top of the image. I was having difficulty with this. At a darker sky, ISO 3200 would have worked better, but at this location it just picked up even more light pollution. I had to really work on this in post to improve the contrast. Also the best months to take such an image would be in July or August when Sagittarius is up (that's probably the brightest part of the Milky Way with the best structure of dust lanes, etc.)

This was taken in September and Sagittarius had already set -- so this is not the richest part of the Milky Way. Knowing "when" to get the best image is as much as knowing the best exposure to use.

 

[tevo]

My galaxy photos are similar to others.... 14mm lens, ISO 1600, f/2.8, 40 seconds.

You will still need to process them a bit. You can also take a dark frame to "subtract" the noise (same exposure as the real image except you leave the lens cap on. Some cameras have a long-exposure noise reduction mode which causes the camera to internally take a dark frame immediately following the real shot (e.g. if I enable this on my camera and take a 40 second shot, the camera will actually take 80 seconds. It'll take 40 seconds with the shutter open, followed by 40 more seconds with the shutter closed. That means I don't need to pop on a lens cap, but that's a trivial thing to do if your camera doesn't have a noise reduction mode.)


Milky Way by Tim Campbell1, on Flickr

BTW, the above was taken in "good" but not "great" dark skies. You can see the glow of light pollution above the trees which you don't see at the very top of the image. I was having difficulty with this. At a darker sky, ISO 3200 would have worked better, but at this location it just picked up even more light pollution. I had to really work on this in post to improve the contrast. Also the best months to take such an image would be in July or August when Sagittarius is up (that's probably the brightest part of the Milky Way with the best structure of dust lanes, etc.)

This was taken in September and Sagittarius had already set -- so this is not the richest part of the Milky Way. Knowing "when" to get the best image is as much as knowing the best exposure to use.

Wow, great shot. From the looks of things, I won't have much luck capturing the stars much less the Milky Way from where I am currently, there is far too much light. I might venture into the mountains on Wednesday night and try my luck there.

 

[TimGreyPhotography]

The wider you are shooting the longer exposure you can do. I believe a good formula for calculating the maximum time without showing star trails is 600/Focal Length(35mm equivalent). So the tokina at 11mm is going to be 16.5mm equivalent on a 1.5x sensor. 600/16.5 = ~36sec. So to be safe I would stick to 30second exposures to minimize the formation of star trails. You are going to want to shoot wide open, high ISO, and focused to infinity with noise reduction on if you have it. If you are shooting a foreground with the milky way you are going to want to shoot 2 frames with 2 different focus points. Make sure you are using a steady tripod. If you dont have a remote shutter release I would set the timer and expose for 30sec. Dont worry to much about the high ISO.

 

[jake337]

An interesting read:

Island in the Sky: Christoph Malin talks about his time-lapse documentary of the night sky near the Island of La Palma | Nikon Rumors



Says he usually starts off at ISO 2500-8000

 

[kykr]

I've spent a fair amount of time in the Apostle Islands on the southern shore of Lake Superior. Being a National Lakeshore, there's a "Friends" support group, and one fundraiser has been the sale of four incredible photographs of the Milky Way at lighthouses within the park. Outer Island was done first, and at the bottom of the link is a lot of information on how they did it.

http://www.friendsoftheapostleislands.org/outer-island-lighthouse-photo.html

 

[McNugget801]

I've shot the Milky way plenty of times with my old Tokina 11-16 and got some pretty decent results. Dont bother shooting anything below ISO1600 at 2.8. Also, where are you shooting from? The most photogenic area of the milky way isn't visible in the northern hemisphere this time of year, it will make its way back up this direction in May and will be prime in July.

 

[invisible]

I highly recommend using the wireless remote with mirror lock up. Let the internal timer run out from mirror up to picture actuation. I've been doing that with my astrophotography and it helps with vibration reduction.

While using mirror lockup will not hurt, it won't make any positive difference either. Think about it: if you need a long exposure to burn a dark scene onto the sensor, how much light do you think will enter the sensor in the fraction of the second that the mirror will be moving if you don't lock it up?

Shooting that wide you should be able to get away with 5" exposure @ 2.8 without any streaks and adjust ISO as needed. The wider you go the more play you have with exposure time.

Five seconds at f/2.8 would require an insanely-high ISO that would show more noise than stars (unless you're shooting with a Nikon D4). See Tim's comment below for solid information.

The wider you are shooting the longer exposure you can do. I believe a good formula for calculating the maximum time without showing star trails is 600/Focal Length(35mm equivalent). So the tokina at 11mm is going to be 16.5mm equivalent on a 1.5x sensor. 600/16.5 = ~36sec. So to be safe I would stick to 30second exposures to minimize the formation of star trails. You are going to want to shoot wide open, high ISO, and focused to infinity with noise reduction on if you have it. If you are shooting a foreground with the milky way you are going to want to shoot 2 frames with 2 different focus points. Make sure you are using a steady tripod. If you dont have a remote shutter release I would set the timer and expose for 30sec. Dont worry to much about the high ISO.

I agree with all of the above, except maybe the use of the camera's noise reduction (unless you don't mind waiting for about 30 seconds between photos). At the settings Tim suggested, expect your ISO not to have to go higher than 1600. The below is not necessarily a well-composed photo, and the aurora kind of "ruined" the night sky by making it brighter, but it shows you what you can get at f/2.8, 30 seconds, ISO 1600.

Have fun!

 

[TheFantasticG]

Meh. 1stly, I use remote with mirror lock up on a telescope mostly but also with night shots as well and I don't see why you couldn't use it doing landscape shots such as yours posted above. Doesn't hurt anything to use it, does it? 2ndly, Tim said the same thing I said which was my point: The wider you are shooting the longer exposure you can do.

 

[McNugget801]

ISO2000 F2.8 (new moon)


First Night at White Pocket by Summit42, on Flickr

 

[invisible]

Meh. 1stly, I use remote with mirror lock up on a telescope mostly but also with night shots as well and I don't see why you couldn't use it doing landscape shots such as yours posted above. Doesn't hurt anything to use it, does it? 2ndly, Tim said the same thing I said which was my point: The wider you are shooting the longer exposure you can do.

Why not also recommend shooting the Milky Way using flash? It won't do any harm either, so why not?

I haven't shot with a telescope before, but I assume that having the ability to magnify the stars should also bring more light in, which means that locking up the mirror might make a difference in that case. But, unlike what you just said, shooting the sky with a telescope and shooting a nocturnal landscape at 11mm are actually totally different beasts.

I have no interest in engaging in a pointless discussion but someone needs to point out when certain advice is not good. I'm not a night-shooting expert by any means, but I know enough to realize that you shouldn't be dishing out advice – let alone using "meh" when your expertise is put into question with the facts. Yes, the wider you are shooting the longer the exposure you can do, but the best the OP can do is completely ignore everything you wrote, to avoid confusion.

 

[shefjr]

OP I would strongly encourage you to read this post by Sw1tchFX.
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/articles-interest/276016-shooting-night-pictures-stars-stuff.html
It has everything you could want to know about with step by step instructions. Everyone above has given good advice and information, but the above link gives you all the steps.
I hope it helps.

 

[TheFantasticG]

Sw1tchFX has some good info in that thread.

Why not also recommend shooting the Milky Way using flash? It won't do any harm either, so why not?

That's just a retarded comparison. Really.

I haven't shot with a telescope before, but I assume that having the ability to magnify the stars should also bring more light in, which means that locking up the mirror might make a difference in that case. But, unlike what you just said, shooting the sky with a telescope and shooting a nocturnal landscape at 11mm are actually totally different beasts.

Just because they are different beasts doesn't mean techniques used with one doesn't, or rather, can't help with the other.

I have no interest in engaging in a pointless discussion but someone needs to point out when certain advice is not good. I'm not a night-shooting expert by any means, but I know enough to realize that you shouldn't be dishing out advice – let alone using "meh" when your expertise is put into question with the facts. Yes, the wider you are shooting the longer the exposure you can do, but the best the OP can do is completely ignore everything you wrote, to avoid confusion.

I think good advice that's why I use it which is why I give it. The fact is that it doesn't hurt to use remote + mirror lock up with a long focal length or short focal length with night time exposures. If you think there is harm in that advice it is your problem.

And your attitude reminds me of the image I attached to this post.

 

[invisible]

You just said:

The fact is that it doesn't hurt to use remote + mirror lock up with a long focal length or short focal length with night time exposures. If you think there is harm in that advice it is your problem.

What I previously said (and you are referencing):

While using mirror lockup will not hurt, it won't make any positive difference either.

...so it's safe to say that you have reading-comprehension issues. I won't bother replying to the rest of your good stuff.

TPF is an amazing gathering place for photographers in all stages of development. Most of those who know what they're talking about are happy to share their experience, as a result of which I've learned a lot here, like many others. But it hasn't been without bumps in the road – sometimes it's been difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. Misinformed advice sets you back – you follow directions expecting to see certain results, and when the results are not what you expected you feel like you failed... which sucks big time. For those of us with a little more mileage on our wheels it's important to pay it forward, not just by giving advice but also by singling out incorrect advice – not with the goal of making the adviser look bad, but to ensure that those who are trying to learn don't feel discouraged.

So, TheFantasticG, you're super cool, funny and über-knowledgeable but for the time being keep the night-photography advice to yourself. You're not going to be able to shoot the night sky with a 5-second exposure like you said – there is just no way unless you have a Nikon D4. In this particular case you won't improve the sharpness by locking up the mirror, like I explained above.

I suggest you don't call other people's posts "retarded" when you try to defend the indefensible.

 

[TheFantasticG]

You need to relax. It really isn't that serious. We have differing opinions, obviously. Go get and drink or whatever you need to do. It's not bad advice to use remote + mirror lock up for night exposures. Chill out. Go take some pics or whatever you need to do. When I go out in a few days to the dark site near my house I will be doing exactly what I stated with the remote and setting exposure as I need to. I will use the remote + mirror lock up to reduce chance of vibration. Critical when I'm using a Celestron C8-SGT, less so on 11-16mm lens. But when I'm going for all the sharpness I can get it doesn't hurt to use it. It's really a small detail to b1tch over. Don't like it? Don't use it.