D700 & Night Photography Lens

[tomero]

Hey all,

I own a d700 and 16-35vr f4, im trying to get into night photography.. Mostly milky way shots and desert night sky.

I try to use the 16-35 but f4 doesn't get me the results i want, considering d700 is a little grainy above 3200 iso, i need a faster lens just for night shots use, i prefer wide.

At the time i got the 16-35, i didn't had the budget for a 14-24 2.8, also i use the polarizer a lot, thats why i choose the f4 lens.

My budget is low. I could buy a new Rokinon 14mm 2.8 (and have spare $) or used Nikon 16mm 2.8 fisheye.

Could you guys recommend a lens for that task, i could go as high as 800$, prime or zoom doesn't matter, just the final result. Used is ok as well.

Need help guys

Many thanks in advance.
Tom.

 

[Ansel Spear]

f4 to f2.8 is only 2 stops (ish!). Is that sufficient for what you want to achieve?

My question is: why is aperture important? Given that the night sky rotates at about 15 degrees per hour, can you not compensate for lack aperture by increased shutter times?

 

[pmenear]

The best lens by far, as you know, is the nikon 14-24 f2.8, it is even sharper than the nikon 14mm f2.8 prime (very slightly). If the budget can't be stretched to the nikon then the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 is highly rated and widely used but it does have moustache distortion, which is very hard to correct, as long as you compose your photographs with that knowledge you can work around it most of the time. If you were shooting a crop body I would advise a fisheye lens but as you are shooting full frame the 14mm will be as wide as you need.

 

[Robin Casady]

The best lens by far, as you know, is the nikon 14-24 f2.8, it is even sharper than the nikon 14mm f2.8 prime (very slightly). If the budget can't be stretched to the nikon then the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 is highly rated and widely used but it does have moustache distortion, which is very hard to correct, as long as you compose your photographs with that knowledge you can work around it most of the time. If you were shooting a crop body I would advise a fisheye lens but as you are shooting full frame the 14mm will be as wide as you need.

Isn't the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon T* ZE sharper in the corners and less distorted than the 14-24mm Nikon at f/2.8?

 

[arachnophilia]

f4 to f2.8 is only 2 stops (ish!). Is that sufficient for what you want to achieve?

f/4 to f/2.8 is exactly 1 stop.

My question is: why is aperture important? Given that the night sky rotates at about 15 degrees per hour, can you not compensate for lack aperture by increased shutter times?

there's the "rule of 600", which is your maximum shutter open duration = 600/FL. beyond that, you need to raise the ISO and open the aperture, or you get stars streaking.

i don't know a lot about it, because i don't do it. but that's what i hear.

 

[JWReagan]

I don't think I would be shooting night sky photos wide open with any lens. I'm not very well versed in night sky photography but the little I have done with my 17-35 tokina f4 were at f8 or smaller. Does the D700 not have long exposure noise reduction?

 

[Khaele]

The best lens by far, as you know, is the nikon 14-24 f2.8, it is even sharper than the nikon 14mm f2.8 prime (very slightly). If the budget can't be stretched to the nikon then the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 is highly rated and widely used but it does have moustache distortion, which is very hard to correct, as long as you compose your photographs with that knowledge you can work around it most of the time. If you were shooting a crop body I would advise a fisheye lens but as you are shooting full frame the 14mm will be as wide as you need.

Indeed, the 14-24mm f/2.8 is recommended for night photography, like for auroras:

Currently, my favorite lens for this purpose is Nikon’s AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f 2.8G ED.

Personally, I think I'll get a Samyang 14mm f/2.8 first as recommended by Erez Marom:

Recommended: a wide aperture ultra-wide angle such as the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 for night photography.

Why? Simply because I prefer to buy a 350€ lens and test it on my own in place of buying directly the 1600€ perfect zoom... or switching to a faster wide prime like a Sigma 20mm f/1.8

 

[Ansel Spear]

Silly me. of course it is. For some reason I factored in f3.5. Doh!

But if anything, it reinforces my point about shutter compensation.

 

[user_name]

The best lens by far, as you know, is the nikon 14-24 f2.8, it is even sharper than the nikon 14mm f2.8 prime (very slightly). If the budget can't be stretched to the nikon then the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 is highly rated and widely used but it does have moustache distortion, which is very hard to correct, as long as you compose your photographs with that knowledge you can work around it most of the time. If you were shooting a crop body I would advise a fisheye lens but as you are shooting full frame the 14mm will be as wide as you need.

Isn't the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon T* ZE sharper in the corners and less distorted than the 14-24mm Nikon at f/2.8?

 

[user_name]

I don't think I would be shooting night sky photos wide open with any lens. I'm not very well versed in night sky photography but the little I have done with my 17-35 tokina f4 were at f8 or smaller. Does the D700 not have long exposure noise reduction?

If the exposure time is too long you get smearing of stars unless you buy an automatic tracking mount to follow the stars as the move across the sky.

It only takes less than a minute to see visible streaking. let alone smearing.

Although a little off topic, here is a 6 minute exposure where you can see just how large the streaks get.

 

[user_name]

Hey all,

I own a d700 and 16-35vr f4, im trying to get into night photography.. Mostly milky way shots and desert night sky.

I try to use the 16-35 but f4 doesn't get me the results i want, considering d700 is a little grainy above 3200 iso, i need a faster lens just for night shots use, i prefer wide.

At the time i got the 16-35, i didn't had the budget for a 14-24 2.8, also i use the polarizer a lot, thats why i choose the f4 lens.

My budget is low. I could buy a new Rokinon 14mm 2.8 (and have spare $) or used Nikon 16mm 2.8 fisheye.

Could you guys recommend a lens for that task, i could go as high as 800$, prime or zoom doesn't matter, just the final result. Used is ok as well.

Need help guys

Many thanks in advance.
Tom.

You have a few choices.

1. Buy a fast prime like the Rokinon or Samyang lenses

2. A fast zoom like the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 (excellent optics and a great price).

3. Buy a motorized mount to track the camera to follow the stars like the AllView Mount .

4. Take multiple short exposures and stack them using a free astrophotography program like Deep Sky Stacker to combine multiple exposures to increase the total exposure.

The 16-35 has a lot of distortion at 16mm, but it may be correctable in post processing.

I would start by downloading the stacking program and experiment with that and your current lens.

You may find that you need nothing more than that to get some good shots. Then I would consider the All View tracking tripod as a way to extend your capabilities.

Lastly, a new lens like the Rokinon or something like that.

A polarizer is a bad thing for the sky with WA and UWA lenses as it causes uneven exposure across the visual field.

 

[GLLee]

Jim Richardson, who did some great night photos for National Geographic in 2008 (using a D3 and 14-24), provides a short lesson on the subject:

Jim Richardson on Night Photography -- National Geographic

Read about photographer Jim Richardson's experience photographing the Milky Way over the Owachomo Bridge from National Geographic.

photography.nationalgeographic.com

Greg Lee

 

[magiclight]

I have a D700 and Rokinon/Samyang 14mm f/2.8 which works perfectly well, especially at the lens price point.

 

[CIASpook]

Maybe you're not going to a place dark enough. 1 stop should not be causing you this much trouble.

I'll know for sure in about a month. Headed out to Joshua Tree late June to shoot stars during a new moon phase. Tomorrow my new 16-35 f/4 is being delivered for my D700.

Hopefully I won't be disappointed as you are so far.

I've gotten decent star shots from my 24-70 f/2.8.