Recommendation for getting the best Milky Way shot

marter · Feb 21, 2022

I will be visiting a Bortle class 1/2 site at the end of April and would like to optimize my chances of getting some good Milky Way shots. I will be using a Z6 and I have a Z 14-30mm f/4 zoom. I used this approach in 2020 at this location and posted a stacked image here which i was relatively pleased with, but I'd like to see if I can do better this time.

I have reserved a Z 20mm f/1.8 lens from LensRentals for the week, and am also considering buying a Move-Shoot-Move tracker and mount. I have the following questions and would like opinions on the best approach.

1. Given PhotoPills' NPF table for exposure time, will I see significant (or any?) improvement using the Z 20mm f/1.8 lens @ 11.23s over the zoom at 14mm f/4 @ 21.30s, assuming a tripod and stacked images?

2. How much of an improvement would a tracker give me? Would that minimize the difference in lenses?

I realize the obvious answer is to use the faster lens on a tracker, but I'm trying to gauge how much improvement I would see vs. the cost.

Thanks in advance.

Tristimulus · Feb 21, 2022

Practice before you get there. Not beeing prepared is a waste of time and effort.

swimswithtrout · Feb 22, 2022

Trackers are the great equalizer. That's how you can shoot at f10 using a SCT. You can toss the NPF tables out the window and shoot as long as your location's sky glow allows, which could be in the minutes, not seconds.... As a side note, the NPF rule greatly underestimates the actual star size of a fast lens and does not take into account coma, CA, etc which enlarge the "theoretical" size. This leads to it underestimating exposure times for fast lenses.

primeshooter · Feb 22, 2022

marter said:
I will be visiting a Bortle class 1/2 site at the end of April and would like to optimize my chances of getting some good Milky Way shots. I will be using a Z6 and I have a Z 14-30mm f/4 zoom. I used this approach in 2020 at this location and posted a stacked image here which i was relatively pleased with, but I'd like to see if I can do better this time.

I have reserved a Z 20mm f/1.8 lens from LensRentals for the week, and am also considering buying a Move-Shoot-Move tracker and mount. I have the following questions and would like opinions on the best approach.

1. Given PhotoPills' NPF table for exposure time, will I see significant (or any?) improvement using the Z 20mm f/1.8 lens @ 11.23s over the zoom at 14mm f/4 @ 21.30s, assuming a tripod and stacked images?

2. How much of an improvement would a tracker give me? Would that minimize the difference in lenses?

I realize the obvious answer is to use the faster lens on a tracker, but I'm trying to gauge how much improvement I would see vs. the cost.

Thanks in advance.

Firstly, forget these tables. As one poster said, practice here and see what works before you go. If you are wanting to just do single shots and stack, I'd forget the tracker. I use my tracker for mosaics and deep sky. With my 20 1.8, I often just do a 20 image stack. If you want to use the 20 to great a massive FOV, a tracker is great to be able to stop down to 2.8, and do several mins per panel. And obviously, for deep sky.

The biggest advantage is ultra dark skies. This was my backyard, but I can travel to get darker, and not far. I wanted to test in the backyard though, and so should you.

Just 20 minutes on the Witch Head Nebula in bortle 4/5 backyard

Milky Way Mosaic using 20mm 1.8. About 8 sky images, 8 land. Tracked each panel for 3 mins at f/2.8. An hours drive from home in the Scottish Highlands.

marter · Feb 22, 2022

swimswithtrout said:
Trackers are the great equalizer. That's how you can shoot at f10 using a SCT. You can toss the NPF tables out the window and shoot as long as your location's sky glow allows, which could be in the minutes, not seconds.... As a side note, the NPF rule greatly underestimates the actual star size of a fast lens and does not take into account coma, CA, etc which enlarge the "theoretical" size. This leads to it underestimating exposure times for fast lenses.

Thanks for the reply. As far as the NPF rule, I'm assuming it's addressing star trails and not aperture or ISO.

What I don't have a feel for is the value and result of a tracker with my Z 14-30mm f/4 vs. just using a Z 20mm f/1.8 and no tracker. Can I achieve similar results for 1/3 the cost?

Can I get any decent results of DS objects with my f/4 and a tracker?

primeshooter · Feb 22, 2022

marter said:
swimswithtrout said:

Trackers are the great equalizer. That's how you can shoot at f10 using a SCT. You can toss the NPF tables out the window and shoot as long as your location's sky glow allows, which could be in the minutes, not seconds.... As a side note, the NPF rule greatly underestimates the actual star size of a fast lens and does not take into account coma, CA, etc which enlarge the "theoretical" size. This leads to it underestimating exposure times for fast lenses.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. As far as the NPF rule, I'm assuming it's addressing star trails and not aperture or ISO.

What I don't have a feel for is the value and result of a tracker with my Z 14-30mm f/4 vs. just using a Z 20mm f/1.8 and no tracker. Can I achieve similar results for 1/3 the cost?

Can I get any decent results of DS objects with my f/4 and a tracker?

The f/4 zoom lens has poor stars at f/4, so you might want to forget that one. Going to 5.6 to get better stars is just an experience in pain. Astigmatism, chromatic aberration etc really destroy astro images, if you are wanting decent quality. Slow lenses are a non starter. Even with a tracker, an f4 is pushing it, it can be done but...the lens could be a lot better for a lot better results. Zoom lenses are severe compromises for astro in general.

marter · Feb 22, 2022

primeshooter said:
Firstly, forget these tables. As one poster said, practice here and see what works before you go. If you are wanting to just do single shots and stack, I'd forget the tracker. I use my tracker for mosaics and deep sky. With my 20 1.8, I often just do a 20 image stack. If you want to use the 20 to great a massive FOV, a tracker is great to be able to stop down to 2.8, and do several mins per panel. And obviously, for deep sky.

The biggest advantage is ultra dark skies. This was my backyard, but I can travel to get darker, and not far. I wanted to test in the backyard though, and so should you.

Thanks for the reply. Beautiful shots. You obviously know what you're doing.

Understood on the tables; they're addressing star trails but not aperture or ISO. Any guidelines for ISO settings?

I was leaning towards one solution or the other, but your examples make that 20mm f/1.8 pretty compelling. May go that route and buy it now instead of renting so I can get some practice in, and add the tracker later.

This is a shot (20 shots stacked) using the Z 14-30mm f/4 zoom on a tripod from the site in 2020. No where near the quality of your shots, but I'm trying to learn and would welcome any comments you might have, either on the shot or post processing.

Thanks again.

--

https://www.flickr.com/photos/188281258@N05/

marter · Feb 22, 2022

Thanks for the info, makes sense. I think I'll go with the Z 20mm f/1.8 and eventually get a tracker.

primeshooter · Feb 22, 2022

marter said:
Thanks for the info, makes sense. I think I'll go with the Z 20mm f/1.8 and eventually get a tracker.

primeshooter · Feb 22, 2022

marter said:
primeshooter said:

Firstly, forget these tables. As one poster said, practice here and see what works before you go. If you are wanting to just do single shots and stack, I'd forget the tracker. I use my tracker for mosaics and deep sky. With my 20 1.8, I often just do a 20 image stack. If you want to use the 20 to great a massive FOV, a tracker is great to be able to stop down to 2.8, and do several mins per panel. And obviously, for deep sky.

The biggest advantage is ultra dark skies. This was my backyard, but I can travel to get darker, and not far. I wanted to test in the backyard though, and so should you.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. Beautiful shots. You obviously know what you're doing.

Understood on the tables; they're addressing star trails but not aperture or ISO. Any guidelines for ISO settings?

Iso...generally never shoot above 1600. The reason is it just blows out star colour due to dynamic range lowering quickly as iso increases. It depends on your sensor though...with the z6 don't bother going above iso 1600 for astro. Zero advantage...only loss of DR.

marter said:
I was leaning towards one solution or the other, but your examples make that 20mm f/1.8 pretty compelling. May go that route and buy it now instead of renting so I can get some practice in, and add the tracker later.

Good idea imo. The 20 is a great lens to cut your teeth on and so versatile. I am using a 20mm 1.8g for f mount and it has got me so many great pictures over the years. The 1.8s is even better in terms of abberation control but with the tracker I escape this problem by shooting stopped down anyway. It will be good for you to ne able to use the wide open aperture on occasions you need it for single shots.

marter said:
This is a shot (20 shots stacked) using the Z 14-30mm f/4 zoom on a tripod from the site in 2020. No where near the quality of your shots, but I'm trying to learn and would welcome any comments you might have, either on the shot or post processing.

This is good especially considering the f4...but uou want to go primes for this stuff ideally. There is no need to zoom (appreciate it is just what you had though).

marter said:
Thanks again.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/188281258@N05/

marter · Feb 22, 2022

primeshooter said:
Iso...generally never shoot above 1600. The reason is it just blows out star colour due to dynamic range lowering quickly as iso increases. It depends on your sensor though...with the z6 don't bother going above iso 1600 for astro. Zero advantage...only loss of DR.

Thanks for the info. I'm not sure I can swing the lens and a tracker before the trip so I will be stacking single shots. I assume I need to use the NPF rule for avoiding star trails which shows a max exposure time of 11.23s. Will this work with an ISO of 1600 at f/1.8, or at least a good starting point?

BTW I also have a Z7 II but I assume the Z6 is better for this, correct?

primeshooter said:
This is good especially considering the f4...but uou want to go primes for this stuff ideally. There is no need to zoom (appreciate it is just what you had though)

Thanks for the comment and all the help.

swimswithtrout · Feb 22, 2022

marter said:
swimswithtrout said:

Trackers are the great equalizer. That's how you can shoot at f10 using a SCT. You can toss the NPF tables out the window and shoot as long as your location's sky glow allows, which could be in the minutes, not seconds.... As a side note, the NPF rule greatly underestimates the actual star size of a fast lens and does not take into account coma, CA, etc which enlarge the "theoretical" size. This leads to it underestimating exposure times for fast lenses.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. As far as the NPF rule, I'm assuming it's addressing star trails and not aperture or ISO.

What I don't have a feel for is the value and result of a tracker with my Z 14-30mm f/4 vs. just using a Z 20mm f/1.8 and no tracker. Can I achieve similar results for 1/3 the cost?

Can I get any decent results of DS objects with my f/4 and a tracker?

primeshooter · Feb 22, 2022

marter said:
primeshooter said:

Iso...generally never shoot above 1600. The reason is it just blows out star colour due to dynamic range lowering quickly as iso increases. It depends on your sensor though...with the z6 don't bother going above iso 1600 for astro. Zero advantage...only loss of DR.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I'm not sure I can swing the lens and a tracker before the trip so I will be stacking single shots. I assume I need to use the NPF rule for avoiding star trails which shows a max exposure time of 11.23s. Will this work with an ISO of 1600 at f/1.8, or at least a good starting point?

BTW I also have a Z7 II but I assume the Z6 is better for this, correct?

It depends what you deem acceptable. Since you are stacking a lot of images, you can be strict. 10-12 seconds, ISO 1600 and f/1.8. 20 shots will get you a clean shot, that can be stretched massively. You won't even need to do a LE foreground shot - as the stack with freeze ground selected in Sequator, will be beautifully clean.

Z7 II will be about the same when you downsize - it doesn't matter that much really IMO. I prefer using more MP as it gives more options. You cannot add detail, but you can always downsize to reduce noise, etc.

marter said:
marter said:

This is good especially considering the f4...but uou want to go primes for this stuff ideally. There is no need to zoom (appreciate it is just what you had though)

Click to expand...

Thanks for the comment and all the help.

No problem, if you are doing this well with f4 glass, time to stop handicapping yourself and get that 20 1.8.

marter · Feb 22, 2022

Thanks again.

Search

Recommendation for getting the best Milky Way shot

marter

Well-known member

Tristimulus

Veteran Member

swimswithtrout

Veteran Member

primeshooter

Veteran Member

marter

Well-known member

primeshooter

Veteran Member

marter

Well-known member

marter

Well-known member

primeshooter

Veteran Member

primeshooter

Veteran Member

marter

Well-known member

swimswithtrout

Veteran Member

primeshooter

Veteran Member

marter

Well-known member

Keyboard shortcuts