Printable View
Anyone know of any good resources or even posts on this site about the different techniques of capturing the milky way? It seems the search function is down at this moment and I usually like to do some research before posting a question.
Thanks,
Rocco
Hey Rocco...I'm not sure about technique, but I do know it takes a really good lens at infinity, and it helps to have a fast one , too. Here are a couple examples I took while in Yosemite. Actually they were taken at my Dad's second house in Pine Mountain Lake, near Yosemite. All taken with 1D4 and my new Zeiss 35 1.4 @1.4...
Big dipper, at 25 sec, @iso 200
[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/0243.Vacation_2D00_63.jpg[/img]
20sec @ISO 320
[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/7851.Vacation_2D00_64.jpg[/img]
10sec@ISO 400
[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/8561.Vacation_2D00_69.jpg[/img]
and my favorite with shooting star..30sec ISO 200
[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/800x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/1108.Vacation_2D00_62.jpg[/img]
And then I found out when I got home, that there was an app from Amazon for my DroidX that has GPS and a Star Chart..just downloaded it, but it was too late...next time.
The great thing about digital, is go out and try, and see what you come up with. give it a shot, it's fun!!
Gregg
Shooting the milky way is one of my favorite hobbies. There are several different methods. Here is a rough overview of what you need:
You will need dark skies. This is the primary factor. Most night skies, these days, reveal only light pollution -- very little of the milky way can get through (unless you want to do a narrow-band image of the milky way). Find a lost astronomy club and they can tell you all the good spots near (e.g. 2 hour drive) and far (8 hour drive). What they can
Ooooh I like this topic (Hi everybody BTW - it's been a while between posts for me)
First of all, here's a pic I took of the Milky Way a couple of weeks back.
Canon 5D2, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L @ 49secs, 24mm, ISO 3200, f/5.0
www.flickr.com/.../5807181371][img][View:http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2340/5807181371_fd0aefece1_z.jpg][/img][/url]
www.flickr.com/.../5807181371]The Milky Way[/url] by www.flickr.com/.../ben_taylor_au]Ben__Taylor[/url], on Flickr
Now, the tips I have for you. If you want to create a static shot like this one you'll need a reasonably fast shot. So less than 30 secs is ok although you still might get a little movement (as you can see slightly above). To achieve this, though you'll need a high ISO. This is much easier with a full frame camera because the high ISO performance is much better than a crop sencor. Lightroom 3 handles noise very well for me as well so that helps.
If you want to get some good startrails you can either stack a bunch of shorter exposures or take one extended exposure like this one (approx 35 mins)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2761/...91b915ae_z.jpg
Milky Way Star Trails by Ben__Taylor, on Flickr
As Daniel said, a dark sky is a MUST. Too much ambient light will ruin the photo. Where I took this shot, there's nothing for a very long way. Basically the middle of nowhere.
Which lens, for a night sky the wider the better. I would love to have had a wider lens for this shot so I would say 24mm equivalent focal length (on FF) is as narrow as you'd like to go.
Tripod - check. No way around this one.
Also try to get somewhere with something interesting in the foreground - it gives the shot some perspective and makes things more interesting overall.
Hope this helps.
Ben
Thanks for the feedback guys. (and WOW Ben, that
I made a while back 17mm on your 7D should be fine. When stacking shots I've always used the startrails application. I can never get it to change to english though for some reason so I've historically fumbled my way around the German version.
When using startrails you do have to take a dark frame as you mentioned to help the program delineate between stars and just random noise - I normally just put the lens cap on for a shot and do it that way. I have attempted stacking in photoshop but it takes AGES with the 5D2 file sizes.
Here's a shot I took a while ago with my 40D and Canon 10-22mm UWA lens. From memory it was about 460 x 10 sec images stacked. I much prefer to take just one long exposure photo. Less work, better results. However this is much more achievable with the 5D2.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2585/...2d75e942_z.jpg
Boulia Star trails by Ben__Taylor, on Flickr
BTW I used a torch to light up the foreground here.
wow...now that's what I'm talking about. You guys make my attempts look really meager!!! I will have to try harder next time!!
Gregg
OT I know
I always wondered why when Canon introduced the 20DA (Astronomy) that this was the first and last version. I now understand that this community has moved to use purpose built video cameras for their telescopes (some with a CCD cooler to reduce thermal noise). These are often cheaper than a DSLR and are designed to attach directly to the eyepiece. They then take a few minutes of video of the subject direct to a laptop and use software (freeware I understand) to compensate for movement and atmospheric changes.
I
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raid
I think the primary reason they only did it was is because it failed to meet sales expectations. If they had made a lot of money, I'm sure they would have continued doing astronomy versions of newer cameras. I think the reason it failed is twofold: the market is small, and Canon crippled the product. By cripple, I mean they went to a lot of work to slightly modify the IR filter rather than get rid of it altogether. Why did they cripple it? Because of the whiny panty-waisted worry worts. ("Oh noes! If Canon removes the IR filter, then the camera will be able to see through clothes! Wont somebody think of the children!!?!11oneone"). So, as per usual, fear trumps freedom, and no one can get unfiltered cameras. Any serious astronomer would still have to send in their 20Da to have the filter removed, and if they're going to bother doing that, why not just buy a (much, much) cheaper 20d in the first place? The only market for a 20Da is astrophotographers that *don't* want to image infra-red, making the market that much smaller.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raid
Actually, we still use DSLRs and purpose-built CCDs. The video cameras are primarily for planetary imaging.
Here is one I took last month from my front yard of the saggitarius/ scorpio area.
It was only a 30 second exposure, taken at 16mm but cropped. Longer than 30 seconds would have caused the stars to blur (even more than they already are)
I keep planning to try a longer exposure with a tracking mount, but I've had clouds at the other new moons this summer :(
[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/12/2021.milky-way-amboy-fr.JPG[/img]
What ISO are you guys using? I can
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocco
Under dark skies, almost always 1600.
ETTR then ITTR. Increase your exposure as much as possible without causing other problems (e.g. too much motion blur), then, if you still have room on the right of your histogram, use "ISO To The Right" -- increase your ISO as much as possible without clipping any desired highlights *or* going over the maximum useful ISO setting. For a given (fixed) exposure, high ISO has *less* noise than low ISO. That may seem counter-intuitive, but it's true. The maximum useful ISO on any Canon camera is never more than 3200, and usually no more than 1600. (That's because 6400 and above is a braindamaged digital operation in the camera.)
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocco
I usually go with daylight, then play with it in post to see what looks best.
1/30 sec is not going to be long enough.
My typical settings are ISO 3200, 10-30sec exposure, f/4.0 -f/5.6 depending on the level of exposure I want to achieve.