Reading mode: Light Dark

Long exposure night sky shots

Go to last post
B

bssfujifan

Active member
Messages
88
Reaction score
7
Location
UK
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way. I will be using a GX7 mounted on a basic tripod, which may not be very stable if there is a gentle breeze blowing. I understand that OIS/IBIS should be switched OFF when using a tripod, but wondered if it would be better left ON in the above scenario (i.e. long exposure with risk of some camera movement due to quality of tripod). I am aware that hanging a heavy object (such as a rucksack) on the tripod centre column may help, but am not sure this would be possible on my tripod.

I would appreciate any advice anyone is able to offer.

Thanks.
 
bssfujifan said:
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way. I will be using a GX7 mounted on a basic tripod, which may not be very stable if there is a gentle breeze blowing. I understand that OIS/IBIS should be switched OFF when using a tripod, but wondered if it would be better left ON in the above scenario (i.e. long exposure with risk of some camera movement due to quality of tripod). I am aware that hanging a heavy object (such as a rucksack) on the tripod centre column may help, but am not sure this would be possible on my tripod.

I would appreciate any advice anyone is able to offer.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Try draping your camera bag strap around all three legs (to put equal additional tension on them, which may dampen any potential vibrations as well as wind wobblies). Put a rock(s) in it if not heavy enough. Try to rig it so the bag itself can't swing with the breeze. If you don't need the height perspective, don't extend the legs (or only extend the upper/thicker section of legs). Don't extend the column.

Hanging the bag from the spider (leg/column section) or the column would work too if you had a way to prevent the bag from swinging.

IBIS/OIS was not designed for long exposure wobblies, I wouldn't put much stock in that thought.

--
...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the advice, Bob.
 
You may want to keep it shorter than 30 seconds unless you want the stars to form streaks.
 
Thanks, I do hope to get away with <30 seconds, but the max aperture of the lens is f4.
 
my guts tell me that it's still better to turn IS off, but this is only a guess.

you could run a little test series to find out...

in any case i would advise to keep the tripod legs as short as possible for two reasons: 1. short legs are less wobbly. 2. the camera is usually less exposed to the wind when it is closer to the ground.

good luck with your shots - night photography is such an interesting thing!
 
bssfujifan said:
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way. I will be using a GX7 mounted on a basic tripod, which may not be very stable if there is a gentle breeze blowing. I understand that OIS/IBIS should be switched OFF when using a tripod, but wondered if it would be better left ON in the above scenario (i.e. long exposure with risk of some camera movement due to quality of tripod). I am aware that hanging a heavy object (such as a rucksack) on the tripod centre column may help, but am not sure this would be possible on my tripod.

I would appreciate any advice anyone is able to offer.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
I am just starting this stuff - had a few nights experiments and my advice is don't do it - it will be very noisy and streaky.

You need to take lots and lots of short exposure pics instead and stack them. I am just experimenting with deep sky stacker myself (it is free).

I am no expert on this - just don't want you wasting your time! This is a much faster exposure than you are planning from the other night - with a much faster lens - you can already see the stars streaking igf you look close. Stacking is the answer if you dont have fancy tracking gear I reckon.



f07a4de215a9467dba9a4a63bf2cbadd.jpg



--

500px

500px.com 500px.com
 
doccy said:
bssfujifan said:
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way. I will be using a GX7 mounted on a basic tripod, which may not be very stable if there is a gentle breeze blowing. I understand that OIS/IBIS should be switched OFF when using a tripod, but wondered if it would be better left ON in the above scenario (i.e. long exposure with risk of some camera movement due to quality of tripod). I am aware that hanging a heavy object (such as a rucksack) on the tripod centre column may help, but am not sure this would be possible on my tripod.

I would appreciate any advice anyone is able to offer.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
I am just starting this stuff - had a few nights experiments and my advice is don't do it - it will be very noisy and streaky.

You need to take lots and lots of short exposure pics instead and stack them. I am just experimenting with deep sky stacker myself (it is free).
Click to expand...
You might not get it right until you put some time into it and experience the mistakes that teach one how to avoid them. That could waste a lot of nights until you get it right. One might also advise you "don't do it, I don't want you to waste your time."

;)
 
Bob Tullis said:
doccy said:
bssfujifan said:
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way. I will be using a GX7 mounted on a basic tripod, which may not be very stable if there is a gentle breeze blowing. I understand that OIS/IBIS should be switched OFF when using a tripod, but wondered if it would be better left ON in the above scenario (i.e. long exposure with risk of some camera movement due to quality of tripod). I am aware that hanging a heavy object (such as a rucksack) on the tripod centre column may help, but am not sure this would be possible on my tripod.

I would appreciate any advice anyone is able to offer.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
I am just starting this stuff - had a few nights experiments and my advice is don't do it - it will be very noisy and streaky.

You need to take lots and lots of short exposure pics instead and stack them. I am just experimenting with deep sky stacker myself (it is free).
Click to expand...
You might not get it right until you put some time into it and experience the mistakes that teach one how to avoid them. That could waste a lot of nights until you get it right. One might also advise you "don't do it, I don't want you to waste your time."

;)
Click to expand...
 
doccy said:
Bob Tullis said:
doccy said:
bssfujifan said:
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way. I will be using a GX7 mounted on a basic tripod, which may not be very stable if there is a gentle breeze blowing. I understand that OIS/IBIS should be switched OFF when using a tripod, but wondered if it would be better left ON in the above scenario (i.e. long exposure with risk of some camera movement due to quality of tripod). I am aware that hanging a heavy object (such as a rucksack) on the tripod centre column may help, but am not sure this would be possible on my tripod.

I would appreciate any advice anyone is able to offer.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
I am just starting this stuff - had a few nights experiments and my advice is don't do it - it will be very noisy and streaky.

You need to take lots and lots of short exposure pics instead and stack them. I am just experimenting with deep sky stacker myself (it is free).
Click to expand...
You might not get it right until you put some time into it and experience the mistakes that teach one how to avoid them. That could waste a lot of nights until you get it right. One might also advise you "don't do it, I don't want you to waste your time."

;)

--
...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.
Click to expand...
? I am not saying dont try to photograph the milky way - I am saying that taking 60 second exposures with an f4 lens of it is probably not going to be that useful... and he could look at stacking instead.

I'm not sure what your position is... that I should have kept quiet and let him find this out for himself so he could learn a lesson? - Even though he came on the forum first and asked for advice? Odd.
Click to expand...
Yes, stacking is THE way to get the most out of the practice. But some fairly pleasing results can be had with single exposures as well. And maybe that's all one requires.

Getting/using a faster lens (at least f/2.8), using the 1/500 rule , and on a real pristine night this is possible (of course, with much effort in post):

[IMG width="400px" alt=". at 33s (ISO 6400) this shows slight star movement, but for a first "successful" attempt who cares? This is what led to the passion to try better (I use a tracker, since) though I don't get many opportunities for it away from densely populated area light pollution)."]http://www.bobtullis.com/Main/Location/Catskills/i-m2mPWQz/2/X2/20090814-IMG_6885-X2.jpg[/IMG]
. at 33s (ISO 6400) this shows slight star movement, but for a first "successful" attempt who cares? This is what led to the passion to try better (I use a tracker, since) though I don't get many opportunities for it away from densely populated area light pollution).

Winter offers the better opportunities, when the atmosphere is colder (not as thick) and potentially drier.

I have to admit, I've not tried stacking at all (I only get 2-4 opportunities a year, and always unanticipated). I did get a tracker, since, as prev. mentioned - an iOptron Sky tracker is about $300US and easy to set up on a regular tripod. A very recommendable asset for the lazy perfectionist astro-dabbler for enabling longer exposures w/o streaking.

--
...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.
 
Last edited:
Nice pic... better than any I have so far :)

I'm not entirely sure why you were jumping on me for suggesting to a guy that a 60 sec exposure on the milky way with an F4 might not be a good use of his time... and then show a pic of a 33 sec exposure on a F2.8 as evidence though!

For your 33 second exposure using the 500 rule you would need something along the lines of a 7 or 8mm lens on micro 4/3rds? The Olympus 7-14? Thats expensive glass that I assume this guy doesn't have... so yeah... I stick by what I said about stacking unless he has some other kit he hasn't mentioned.
 
doccy said:
Nice pic... better than any I have so far :)

I'm not entirely sure why you were jumping on me for suggesting to a guy that a 60 sec exposure on the milky way with an F4 might not be a good use of his time... and then show a pic of a 33 sec exposure on a F2.8 as evidence though!

For your 33 second exposure using the 500 rule you would need something along the lines of a 7 or 8mm lens on micro 4/3rds? The Olympus 7-14? Thats expensive glass that I assume this guy doesn't have... so yeah... I stick by what I said about stacking unless he has some other kit he hasn't mentioned.
Click to expand...
You have a point there.

This isn't nearly as nice, but a first attempt with m4/3 on the E-P2 and the 20/1.7. Better results will result from the more recent OM-Ds with a higher ISO than is set here. I had something better, with m4/3 before I moved to the tracker, but I can't seem to find it now.

The milky way isn't well defined, but I was jazzed just to see Andromeda in view.

The milky way isn't well defined, but I was jazzed just to see Andromeda in view.

--
...Bob, NYC
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
http://www.bobtullis.com
.
 
Last edited:
bssfujifan said:
Hi everyone,

I am planning shooting some long exposure (up to 60 seconds) nightscapes including the Milky Way.
Click to expand...
At 60 seconds even at 9mm you get not just star trails, but also strong smearing in the MW dust bands. Make sure to take a few shorter duration shots and try stacking them.

For the tripod weight, can you drill a hole at the bottom of the center column and stick a nail through it?

Vlad
 
Sadly you don't have a fast enough lens to get enough exposure for 30 secs. And I'd say go for 20 secs. I tried two nights in a row with the 9-18, and only got away with a couple semi decent pic , being the best one shot with the 20mm 1.7. Is not the best for this kind of photography, since you want to go as wide as you can to get the most of the milky way, but is the only fast lens I have.

I'm in the look for a Rokinon 12mm f:2, which should be great for this type of photography, and will not break my pocket, like the Oly 12mm f:2.

I tried the 9-18, the Samyang 7.5mm fish eye, and the 20mm. I didn't got any good images the second night, since there was some kind of faint haze on the atmosphere that reflected the town lights, rendering everything orange. Horrible.

These are the only ones I could salvage. Not good, bot for a first try, is something.

This is not bad, but the tree in the foreground was too bright. 40 secs for shooting with a 18mm lens, is way too much. I should have shot it at 20 or 25 secs at most.
This is not bad, but the tree in the foreground was too bright. 40 secs for shooting with a 18mm lens, is way too much. I should have shot it at 20 or 25 secs at most.



One with the 7.5mm. Shot at 60secs, is way too much for 14mm equivalent. Next time, I shouldn't pass over 30 secs. Tops.
One with the 7.5mm. Shot at 60secs, is way too much for 14mm equivalent. Next time, I shouldn't pass over 30 secs. Tops.





This is the best base exposure by far, less noisy than the others, but it was shot too fast for 20mm (40mm equiv). Next time, using the 500 rule, I should not exceed 15 seconds to avoid star trails.
This is the best base exposure by far, less noisy than the others, but it was shot too fast for 20mm (40mm equiv). Next time, using the 500 rule, I should not exceed 15 seconds to avoid star trails.



I do hope you get better skies than me. Experiment a lot, and follow the 500 rule if you want to definitively avoid star trails. Fix your shutter speed, and experiment with your ISO. Don't be afraid to go too high, and expose to the right, and try to get as much light as possible. Bracket the ISO a lot.

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell
 
Someone posted here some time back that the rule of 500 (or 600) is not correct for M4/3 because of the sensor size. Instead use the rule of 250 or if you like 300? I've used 250. I have a 12-40 that I've used and, if I am careful with focusing, get what I think are completely acceptable (good images) at 12-14 mm at 20 seconds with the lens wide open at F2.8. At 17 mm you would have just about 15 seconds before you get blurring (streaking). But with F1.7 you are about 1.3 stops faster and so you should get enough light at 15 seconds without blurring the stars. I only vary the ISO from about 1600 to as much as 4000, prefer 2000-3200. Although the Milky Way is not as bright as what you might get with ISO 6400, the noise is acceptable, which I don't find the case above 4000 or so. My results are quite good (if I am careful) in LSF jpeg. The camera does such a fine job at reducing noise, I don't know if I'd get better results in RAW.

In landscape you could not use a Tracker as the scenery would be blurred as the Tracker moves with the stars.
 
Gary from Seattle said:
Someone posted here some time back that the rule of 500 (or 600) is not correct for M4/3 because of the sensor size. Instead use the rule of 250 or if you like 300? I've used 250. I have a 12-40 that I've used and, if I am careful with focusing, get what I think are completely acceptable (good images) at 12-14 mm at 20 seconds with the lens wide open at F2.8. At 17 mm you would have just about 15 seconds before you get blurring (streaking). But with F1.7 you are about 1.3 stops faster and so you should get enough light at 15 seconds without blurring the stars. I only vary the ISO from about 1600 to as much as 4000, prefer 2000-3200. Although the Milky Way is not as bright as what you might get with ISO 6400, the noise is acceptable, which I don't find the case above 4000 or so. My results are quite good (if I am careful) in LSF jpeg. The camera does such a fine job at reducing noise, I don't know if I'd get better results in RAW.

In landscape you could not use a Tracker as the scenery would be blurred as the Tracker moves with the stars.
Click to expand...
Quite right - thats why I calculated that the previous poster must have had a 7mm lens for his 33 second exposure.

You could still call it the rule of 500... but need to remember that is a rule for 35mm equivalent lenses.

I think a lot of people do use trackers for landscape shots - but you need to photograph the foreground separate and edit it in post.
 
doccy said:
Gary from Seattle said:
Someone posted here some time back that the rule of 500 (or 600) is not correct for M4/3 because of the sensor size. Instead use the rule of 250 or if you like 300? I've used 250. I have a 12-40 that I've used and, if I am careful with focusing, get what I think are completely acceptable (good images) at 12-14 mm at 20 seconds with the lens wide open at F2.8. At 17 mm you would have just about 15 seconds before you get blurring (streaking). But with F1.7 you are about 1.3 stops faster and so you should get enough light at 15 seconds without blurring the stars. I only vary the ISO from about 1600 to as much as 4000, prefer 2000-3200. Although the Milky Way is not as bright as what you might get with ISO 6400, the noise is acceptable, which I don't find the case above 4000 or so. My results are quite good (if I am careful) in LSF jpeg. The camera does such a fine job at reducing noise, I don't know if I'd get better results in RAW.

In landscape you could not use a Tracker as the scenery would be blurred as the Tracker moves with the stars.
Click to expand...
Quite right - thats why I calculated that the previous poster must have had a 7mm lens for his 33 second exposure.

You could still call it the rule of 500... but need to remember that is a rule for 35mm equivalent lenses.

I think a lot of people do use trackers for landscape shots - but you need to photograph the foreground separate and edit it in post.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks again for your helpful replies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top