Night photography tips

Dear friends,

I am an old m50 owner and in my backpag there are three lenses: 11-22, 32, 55-250.

In the last trip I realized the beautiful 32mm hasn't IS..:D

The incoming trip I'd like to be ready for a kind of photography I'd like to shot:

Is it possible according to you to get something similar with our camera and these lenses?

In particular - do you have any nice tutorial to learn some skill to take pictures similar to the second one with the lamp light beam?

I tried with the 32mm but I couldn't stand so much as 20-30seconds (with ISO 400) without moving and at the end the beam burnt the picture...

Any help will be appreciated

PS:

this is so far what I achieved to get with the 11-22:

Thank you!

Sittatunga wrote:

Nipar wrote:

Dear friends,

I am an old m50 owner and in my backpag there are three lenses: 11-22, 32, 55-250.

In the last trip I realized the beautiful 32mm hasn't IS..:D

I'd use a tripod for all of these, and manual focus.

The incoming trip I'd like to be ready for a kind of photography I'd like to shot:

Is it possible according to you to get something similar with our camera and these lenses?

In particular - do you have any nice tutorial to learn some skill to take pictures similar to the second one with the lamp light beam?

I tried with the 32mm but I couldn't stand so much as 20-30seconds (with ISO 400) without moving and at the end the beam burnt the picture...

Maybe have the jeep heading into the image rather than cutting off its nose. ISO 1600 would have still given a good result with 5-8s exposure. A less bright torch would have helped too, but I'm not a fan of phallic torch beams.

Any help will be appreciated

PS:

this is so far what I achieved to get with the 11-22:

That's really good, specially for an f/4 lens. The Samyang (Rokinon in the USA) 12mm f/2 is 4x as bright, easier to focus manually and stays in focus of the camera goes to sleep.

I agree, it will be a bit of a challenge to get low-light results with the f4 zoom, but it is possible with a tripod and good planning.

The 32mm f1.4 is a fantastic lens for low light, but your intended use needs to have a 'nifty fifty' angle of view ---- which is possible, but often night scenes lend themselves better for wide angle use (as with the Milky way shot here).

Normally I shoot astro with the 22mm f2, Sigma 16mm f1.4, or Rokinon 12mm f2 for that reason. The 22mm f2 is an outstanding low light lens for its price and is the cheapest lens I mention, it's just wide enough to be quite usable for astro. But a manual focus lens is preferable, if possible, for the reasons Sittatunga mentions.

In low light post-processing becomes important - RAW shooting and using software such as Topaz de-noise or my favorite DxO PhotoLab 5 gives very good results with little to no noise.

Best advice is to practice, practice, practice with the lens and setup you want well in advance. It's too easy to make simple mistakes when it really counts if you don't have enough experience shooting at night. In the dark you have to really know your equipment and what you want to do, to get good results.

Thank you!

Nipar wrote:

Dear friends,

I am an old m50 owner and in my backpag there are three lenses: 11-22, 32, 55-250.

In the last trip I realized the beautiful 32mm hasn't IS..:D

You don't need AF or IS for long exposure night shots.

The incoming trip I'd like to be ready for a kind of photography I'd like to shot:

I was going to suggest asking in the astro forum, but perhaps best not to. Many of the experienced regulars there are strongly opposed to these type of posed shots with powerful flashlights.

Is it possible according to you to get something similar with our camera and these lenses?

Probably. Your 32mm f1.4 may be the best option but the FoV is pretty narrow for a Milky Way shot. The 11mm is nice and wide, but too slow. A 22mm f2 would be a better compromise - or a wide 3rd party lens.

In particular - do you have any nice tutorial to learn some skill to take pictures similar to the second one with the lamp light beam?

No. Roger's website clarkvision.com is a very useful resource for all things astro (gear, shooting & post processing), but I almost guarantee that he will mention that he is STRONGLY opposed to such shots somewhere on the website.

I tried with the 32mm but I couldn't stand so much as 20-30seconds (with ISO 400) without moving and at the end the beam burnt the picture...

Are you referring to hand-holding the camera or holding the torch ?

The camera should be on a sturdy tripod.

At 32mm you shouldn't be more than 6-8 seconds otherwise you will start seeing elongated stars - Rule of 200 for APS-C gives 200 / 32 = 6.25 seconds.

The torch doesn't have to be on for the entire exposure. You need to experiment with how long it is on for to give your the desired result - probably around 1/3rd of shutter speed time.

Any help will be appreciated

PS:

this is so far what I achieved to get with the 11-22:

Thank you!

That image from 11-22mm could probably be stretched using curves to bring out the Milky Way a fair bit more - see Roger's website.

Good advice so far. I’d go for the Rokinon 12mm.

I say go right ahead and use a torch and get creative.  Folks would only eschew them because they’ve seen so many that they’d seem cliche.  But they’re new to you, and that’s what matters.  Enjoy!

R2

ps. I’d just add that if any of the images in your post aren’t yours, that credit be given to the authors, or if unknown that it be made clear(er) that they are others’ photos. Thx

Nipar wrote:

Dear friends,

I am an old m50 owner and in my backpag there are three lenses: 11-22, 32, 55-250.

The  EF-M 11-22mm and EF-M 32mm f/1.4 lenses can certainly be used.  The EF-M 55-250mm lens can capture decent moon+landscape shot but is not suitable for Milky Way photography.
.
The 11-22mm lens is fairly dim at f/4-5.6 so you'll be forced to use a much higher ISO setting and that's going to result in smeary details.  So you'll lose many of the fainter stars and a lot of the fine structure details will be lost with that lens.  But it can still be used and it performs better on cameras like the M50 rather than on the earlier EOS M model camera bodies.
.

In the last trip I realized the beautiful 32mm hasn't IS..:D

This lens doesn't need Image Stabilization because of the wide f/1.4 aperture.  Most super-bright lenses tend not to feature I.S.  And Night photography of this nature demands that a Tripod be used.  The EF-M 32mm f/1.4 is the fastest native lens available in the EF-M mount but it's also a more narrow lens, producing a less-than ideal field of view (FOV).   So you can either use it to take a narrow shot of the Milky Way or you can tile several images together into a Mosaic with it.
.

A Mosaic of 4 images taken with the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 lens on the EOS M6.
* A NiSi Night Filter was used for this photograph.

A two-shot vertical panorama, taken with the EF-M 22mm f/2 lens + EOS M6.

.

The incoming trip I'd like to be ready for a kind of photography I'd like to shot:

Is it possible according to you to get something similar with our camera and these lenses?

The image at the top looks to be a composite made from two photographs.  One for the vehicle and one for the Milky Way behind it.  There's a lot of people taking a similar type of image recently and they use the same method, sometimes sharing their techniques online.
.
As for being possible, yes indeed.  It will help if you can get to a Darker Sky Location.  This would be a location away from city lights.  Sometimes you can find them in the Mountains or on a beach where there's no nearby city lights.  City lights cause so-called "Light Pollution" and this is simply a term to describe lights from the city striking tiny participles in the air, washing out a scene and making it much harder to see the Milky Way, even with your camera.  Your camera will always see much more than your eyes can, especially with a longer exposure. There's a chart called a "Bortle Sky Index Chart" which shows what you can expect to see of the Milky Way from these locations.  Some Bortle Sky Index charts are more detailed than others but this one is more visual and may help you with your expectations.  I tend to only have access to a Bortle 3 or possibly a Bortle 2 sky location and I have to drive about an hour from my home to access them because I live near a major city...
.

Bortle Sky Index chart for determining what you can see from your location.

.

In particular - do you have any nice tutorial to learn some skill to take pictures similar to the second one with the lamp light beam?

Taking pictures with a flashlight in the scene as a prop is easy enough for anyone.  You may find that you need to turn off the flashlight after a couple of seconds, even if your exposure is much longer.   You can turn the flashlight on and off at any time during the duration of the exposure.
.

EOS M (2012 model) + EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM lens. I took this picture back when digital astrophotography was only just becoming popular, and the use of flashlights for a prop was not as common. It's now becoming something of a cliche these days.

EOS M (2012 model) + EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens.

The tiny an EXTREMELY affordable EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens (on the EOS M camera).

.

I tried with the 32mm but I couldn't stand so much as 20-30seconds (with ISO 400) without moving and at the end the beam burnt the picture...

The ideal exposure time for the EF-M 32mm lens is going to be under 15 seconds.  You can take a longer exposure if you want, but the Earth is turning and this will cause the stars to produce trails.  So instead of dots for stars, you'll seen lines forming.  The brightness of your lens (ie widest aperture) and the focal length of your lens will determine how long your maximum exposure can be without the stars trailing.   A few pictures down, I have shows the ideal settings for the four EF-M lenses that I have on hand.  You can use the same for the same (or very similar) results.  I used a Bortle 3 location (rural) for those shots.
.

This shows how much of the Galactic Core (the brightest part of the Milky Way) can be captured with the EF-M 32mm f/2 STM lens.

.

Any help will be appreciated

PS:

this is so far what I achieved to get with the 11-22:

Thank you!

The EF-M 11-22mm lens is a WIDE lens at 11mm but it's also a DIM lens because it has a smaller aperture, even when open wide to f/4.  The smaller the f-number, the wider the aperture is.  This is why your EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens is so much brighter and can take a photograph in shorter time than other, dimmer lenses.  I'd also strongly recommend that you consider the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens for Milky Way exposures because it's bright and sharp and offers exceptional value for the low price.  It's one of the best Astro lenses out there for the EOS M camera system.
.

A 20 second exposure from the EF-M 22mm f/2 lens (+ EOS M6) - edited for contrast and to enhance detail.  Shots like this one were taken with a Tungsten White Balance - hence the blue sky hue.

How much field of view your EF-M 11-22mm has compared to the EF-M 32mm lens.

Ideal settings with the EF-M lenses I had on hand. Shot in a Bortle 3 location.

The EF-M 11-22mm lens is WIDE at 11mm... so you'd think it's going to be ideal.  But it's really too dim to be effectively useful.  You can capture the bright core of the Milky Way with it but you'll have to edit the image aggressively to get near this shot... and the finer stars & details will still be smeared.

.
If you're interested in taking pictures like the ones you posted, the methods or techniques vary only slightly, depending on the lens used.  The same camera settings can usually be shared between lenses of a similar type.
.
The only tools you'll need are your camera, (1) a suitable lens (bright if possible) and (2) a tripod.  You'll want a flashlight to see what you're doing in the dark and you'll want to plan your shot so that there's no Moon in the sky at that time.  The moon will impact your shot if it's there... even a small crescent moon will do this.  I'd recommend downloading a free program for your computer or your smartphone called "Stellarium" and this will enable you to plan for when and were the brighter areas of the Milky Way will be in the night sky when you are out there.  The version of Stellarium for your phone is simpler.  The version for your home computer offers a lot of professional features but is still easy to use.
.
There's usually part of the Milky Way visible in the sky at any time, but since the Earth's position is changing throughout the year and because the Earth is rotating, different areas of the Milky Way will not always be visible in the same part of the sky all year around.  This also applies to the bright core of the Milky Way.  So for shots where you need it to be behind people or props like a car, you may need to plan your shots long ahead of time.  And hope the weather is good.  But sometimes clouds in the sky can create a wonderful effect if you can still see the Milky Way though gaps between them.  Use the built-in self-timer on your camera to avoid camera-shake when taking your images. Astrophotography is about learning lessons as you go so don't be afraid to experiment and try new settings to see what the results will be.

Marco,

I'm always amazed when I come across one of your excellent posts. Even though I'm not a current EOS-M user, I always almost always bookmark your posts, just in case.

Dunlin wrote:

Marco,

I'm always amazed when I come across one of your excellent posts. Even though I'm not a current EOS-M user, I always almost always bookmark your posts, just in case.

Thank you Dunlin. I didn't have many online sources to reference when I first started doing Astro but now there's plenty out there for anyone to spend days exploring.  I learned what settings worked via trial and experimentation using whatever I had on hand.  Now that there's a lot more information available to others, it's easier to just point them in the right direction.  Though I'd shot random Astro with older PowerShot cameras, like the Pro1, the S400 and the G11... the EOS M system with its larger sensor has always offered great results.
.
With my own photography, I'm still experimenting to see where the limitations are with some types of Astro.  Sometimes physics gets in the way but occasionally I get lucky. As for the EOS M system, it's been a wonderful experience to work with these cameras.  Their size is perhaps part of their charm.  I think my first comment on using the EOS M was that it made photography "fun" again.

R2D2 wrote:

ps. I’d just add that if any of the images in your post aren’t yours, that credit be given to the authors, or if unknown that it be made clear(er) that they are others’ photos.

Perfectly well said.

Yehuda

Great walkthrough for getting into astro. Remains no excuse except laziness. Thanks Marco.

Nipar wrote:

Do you think that over ISO 5000 the picture will start being noisy?

Noise is a user tolerance thing so each person may be different. IMO ISO 1600 is about as far as I would go.

If you're interested in taking pictures like the ones you posted, the methods or techniques vary only slightly, depending on the lens used. The same camera settings

Just one more question: how can I disable the AF and set the focus to infinite with the 11-22 or 32mm?

Don't use "infinity" on any lens, EF-M or otherwise. Even the best MF lens is unlikely to have an infinity mark or hard stop that is accurate enough for stars.

Use Live View, set the screen to maximum magnification (10x ?) and manually focus on a bright star trying to get the star as sharp (small & pinpoint-ish) as possible. Once that is done. make sure you don't touch the focus ring again.

Some lens have a specific leverage but EF-Ms don't (the 32mm has but I don't know what it serves..)

Not sure what you mean by this ? Are you referring to switches built in to the lenses ?

Andy01 wrote:

Nipar wrote:

Do you think that over ISO 5000 the picture will start being noisy?

Noise is a user tolerance thing so each person may be different. IMO ISO 1600 is about as far as I would go.

That was the world before DxO. If you're willing to shoot RAW and use DxO Deep Prime with DxO PureRaw or PhotoLab 5, you can easily go to ISO 6400 and with careful processing even beyond that to ISO 8000-16000.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65548513

If you're interested in taking pictures like the ones you posted, the methods or techniques vary only slightly, depending on the lens used. The same camera settings

Just one more question: how can I disable the AF and set the focus to infinite with the 11-22 or 32mm?

Don't use "infinity" on any lens, EF-M or otherwise. Even the best MF lens is unlikely to have an infinity mark or hard stop that is accurate enough for stars.

Use Live View, set the screen to maximum magnification (10x ?) and manually focus on a bright star trying to get the star as sharp (small & pinpoint-ish) as possible. Once that is done. make sure you don't touch the focus ring again.

Some lens have a specific leverage but EF-Ms don't (the 32mm has but I don't know what it serves..)

Not sure what you mean by this ? Are you referring to switches built in to the lenses ?

Larry Rexley wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Nipar wrote:

Do you think that over ISO 5000 the picture will start being noisy?

Noise is a user tolerance thing so each person may be different. IMO ISO 1600 is about as far as I would go.

That was the world before DxO. If you're willing to shoot RAW and use DxO Deep Prime with DxO PureRaw or PhotoLab 5, you can easily go to ISO 6400 and with careful processing even beyond that to ISO 8000-16000.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65548513

How well does it work for astro/stars ? Genuine question - I have never used it. Concern is that it may "remove" smaller stars mistaking them for noise ?

If you're interested in taking pictures like the ones you posted, the methods or techniques vary only slightly, depending on the lens used. The same camera settings

Just one more question: how can I disable the AF and set the focus to infinite with the 11-22 or 32mm?

Don't use "infinity" on any lens, EF-M or otherwise. Even the best MF lens is unlikely to have an infinity mark or hard stop that is accurate enough for stars.

Use Live View, set the screen to maximum magnification (10x ?) and manually focus on a bright star trying to get the star as sharp (small & pinpoint-ish) as possible. Once that is done. make sure you don't touch the focus ring again.

Some lens have a specific leverage but EF-Ms don't (the 32mm has but I don't know what it serves..)

Not sure what you mean by this ? Are you referring to switches built in to the lenses ?

Andy01 wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Nipar wrote:

Do you think that over ISO 5000 the picture will start being noisy?

Noise is a user tolerance thing so each person may be different. IMO ISO 1600 is about as far as I would go.

That was the world before DxO. If you're willing to shoot RAW and use DxO Deep Prime with DxO PureRaw or PhotoLab 5, you can easily go to ISO 6400 and with careful processing even beyond that to ISO 8000-16000.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65548513

How well does it work for astro/stars ? Genuine question - I have never used it. Concern is that it may "remove" smaller stars mistaking them for noise ?

DxO handles noise very well, keeping a fair amount of detail even in astrophotos. When I process using Deep prime, I adjust the Deep Prime luminance setting to a point where just a hint of grain still comes through which is also the level which seems to preserve any real detail that's present.

Here's a post with a few astrophotos in an infrared thread I started, they're mostly taken with a Canon M200 which doesn't do quite as well at high ISOs as the M6ii. Some of the shots were taken at 'ISO' speeds of 400 and 800, however all of them were processed with DxO PhotoLab 5 using Deep Prime de-noise, and for all of them I did a lot of curve adjustment and contrast enhancement which would result in noise much more like you would typically see at high ISO's. As a general rule you can probably add about 2-3 EV of ISO due to my bringing out the shadow detail --- so an ISO 800 shot really was pushed to around ISO 3200 - 6400.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66358186

Where I've been especially impressed with DxO for astro use is its ability to remove low-level deep-shadow chroma noise, which is a bane of astrophotography. They use some algorithm to calculate the original color of sections of an image and are able to reproduce relatively accurate colors in what initially appear to be such color-noisy areas. Sometimes I think an image is going to be unusable due to so much chroma noise--- yet I still get nice results using DxO without all the color noise that was in the original image.

If you're interested in taking pictures like the ones you posted, the methods or techniques vary only slightly, depending on the lens used. The same camera settings

Just one more question: how can I disable the AF and set the focus to infinite with the 11-22 or 32mm?

Don't use "infinity" on any lens, EF-M or otherwise. Even the best MF lens is unlikely to have an infinity mark or hard stop that is accurate enough for stars.

Use Live View, set the screen to maximum magnification (10x ?) and manually focus on a bright star trying to get the star as sharp (small & pinpoint-ish) as possible. Once that is done. make sure you don't touch the focus ring again.

Some lens have a specific leverage but EF-Ms don't (the 32mm has but I don't know what it serves..)

Not sure what you mean by this ? Are you referring to switches built in to the lenses ?

Nipar wrote:

Dear Marco, first thing: I really do thank you for the whole post you had the effort to write.

Really, really, thank you.

You are entirely welcome. The very reason I took many of these photographs was just to share the results with the forum members here.

I premise: I had previously some experience of night photography: I have a tripod and the three lenses I mentioned.

Sounds like you have all the essentials.  Be sure to bring a flashlight with you to see your camera buttons and just in case you drop something... (like your phone)... in the dark.  I've done this.  In fact I dropped both my phone and my flashlight at the same time during an exposure in long grass after midnight.  Not pleasant.

I asked how to get the best out of I could with these lenses as for now I would prefer not buying another lens as I'm going to leave for a central asia trip next week and I'm already carrying three lenses. Furthemore, buying the 22mm would be not using anymore the 11-22 and it would be a pitty for me

These two lenses share a 22mm focal length but they produce very different results due to the aperture on the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens. It's also incredibly affordable and makes for a terrific travel lens.  There's just a subtle amount of Bokeh on the EF-M 22mm f/2 lens that makes it terrific for portraits or closer subjects.  It's not as strong as on the EF-M 32mm f/1.4 lens but it's nice and smooth and it tends to enhance the shot.
.
Below are some Images taken with the EF-M 22mm f/2 lens that I didn't post before.  I'm only posting them now so you can see that this lens is a practical one for wide-field astro.  But if you don't need the lens otherwise, your EF-M 32mm f/1.4 lens should make do with a tighter framing.
.

EOS M6 + EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens.  This is a single exposure but it's been very carefully edited to enhance all the necessary details.  Saturn is in the scene and appears as the bright blue star.  A touch of color was added or enhanced at the very top of the frame.  Edited only in Photoshop.  Shot in RAW (for once... all my other shots were taken in JPEG).  Note that I've used a Tungsten White Balance in my images.... something you may not necessarily want to do.  Not quite a Bortle 3 sky.
Setting up the EOS M6 with the EF-M 22mm f/2 lens for the shot Above.

EOS M6 + EF-M 22mm f/2 STM lens (2x shot vertical panorama with Mars)

That's why I want to try some "settings already tested" for the lenses I have to get nice pictures

I've never thought of taking night sky photography with the 32mm indeed as I know, even though a fast lens, not suitable because of POV.

Don't be discouraged.  In fact a lot of people with Full Frame cameras like to use a 50mm lens for their Astro Landscapes.

The fact the 32mm hasn't IS has been misunderstood as I was refering the fact (untold) that the last trip I took most of the videos with the 32mm but came back home I realized the were shaking....because I didn't know the missing of IS.

Ah, I see. Yes, I took some video with another lens recently (EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS Macro) and was pretty unhappy with the amount of camera shake... although that lens does have Image Stabilization. I ended up having to stabilize the footage further using software.  If you are new to this lens and use your camera with Auto ISO, or Auto shutter speed settings,  I find that the camera shutter speed needs to be set to at least 1/80 second to avoid camera shake when taking shots in daylight if you are not standing perfectly still.  The camera will often prefer to defer to around 1/60 sec for some reason and whilst most shots turn out in daylight, it's sometimes just a little too slow unless you are standing still.
.
The EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens does have a narrower Field of View but it comes close to a 50mm lens when seated on an APS-C sensor camera like the EOS M-series.  This means it's a very good overall lens for portraits and travel.  But it's still useful as an astro lens because it's fairly darned bright at f/1.4.  It's also VERY sharp even with the aperture wide open at maximum.
.

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM - Red Moon during the Australian Bushfires

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens.
A two shot blend taken together (the sky required a slightly longer exposure)

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens (Canon have since borrowed this shot from me - *with the 'Protage' logo removed from the lens warmer strap.)

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens - my favorite tree.

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens
This would best be described as a two-shot exposure 'fantasy piece'.

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens - the large Magellanic Cloud (Dwarf Galaxy)

EOS M6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens - a closeup of a crystal sphere (inverted)

EOS m6 + EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM lens - Comet 46P/Wirtanen (slightly cropped)

Did you set this value in M-mode according to your "eye" or you used A-mode?

I took a number of shots with each lens and sorted through them on the computer to select the best ones as finals. I did this to determine what the very best results would require for each lens. This way I can quickly set up the same settings in future if shooting under similarly dark skies using the same lenses.

Do you think that over ISO 5000 the picture will start being noisy?

Unless shooting with a larger sensor with Full Frame, then yes. BUT.... you can sometimes shoot with higher ISO and capture more detail. A noisy image isn't necessarily a bad one. Plus you may be able to use modern software (like DeNoise A.I. by Topaz Labs) to reduce noise later during editing. I generally won't shoot over ISO 2500 with the EOS M cameras although occasionally I may try to use ISO 6400.  I've included a shot below that was taken at ISO 5000 with the EF-M 11-22mm lens on the EOS M6 camera.  It's not too bad, actually.  Not ideal but better than on the old EOS M (Mk 1) camera from 2012.

Just one more question: how can I disable the AF and set the focus to infinite with the 11-22 or 32mm?

Most of the recent EOS M cameras have a Manual Focus/Auto Focus button on the back of the camera though the M200 might require you to go into the menu for this. On the EOS M6 that I use, the AF/MF button is on the rear of the camera.  From memory, I seem to remember you can switch to MF with the menu.
.

EOS M + EF-M 11-22mm lens - a 2x Shot Panorama.  Note that this was pushing the sensor as far as it could go on other older 2012 model EOS M.   The details of the milky Way were smeary. The glow on the horizon was from the city of Sydney in the distance.  Bortle 3 (rural) location.

EOS M6 + EF-M 11-22mm lens - better results from the EOS M6 camera.  Not as bright a lens as you might want.  But nice contrast and you can still coax out the major details from the galactic core.  This was with ISO 5000 ... and the lens performed better on the newer sensors.

.
Once Manual Focus has been selected, Zoom in on a star and then manually turn the lens focus left and right until you feel that the subject is perfectly in focus. If you are not confident with your ability to manually focus the lens, consider takeing a few shots and then manually refocusing the lens again before taking a few more pictures. Review your images on the LCD screen to see if the pictures are in focus. Cold temperatures can sometimes alter the focus on a lens during shooting. So it helps to check your focus every half an hour or so. It may not change but it can happen. I also like to use the self timer to ensure no vibration occurs. A 2 second timer is usually fine. The touch screen can also be set up to trigger the self timer and this can add even more stability.

Some lens have a specific leverage but EF-Ms don't (the 32mm has but I don't know what it serves..)

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean. Are you saying that the 32mm lens seems not to have a special purpose for users because of the 32mm focal length?

Great post Marco, thanks for all the useful info and great images.

Amazing photos Marco....

Did you use the original M6 or the M6 II?