Posted by Howard Cihak on September 25, 2012 at 10:25 PM
After giving up on the Tetons and Yellowstone, I drove up to Glacier. One of my goals on this trip was to try my hand at night sky shots. This one was taken with a Canon 60D, 10-22 wide angle zoom at 11mm, f/3.5 and 15 seconds with an ISO of 6400.
All suggestions and critical comments gladly accepted.
Posted by Erik Aagaard on September 25, 2012 at 11:49 PM
Hi, Howard - Isn't it amazing how much more there is in the night sky than is visible to the naked eye? I love playing with night shots - you never know what you'll get, and if it works, it's mind-blowingly cool and different.
Good job getting the ground horizontal - my biggest problem sometimes is seeing enough detail through the viewfiender to frame it correctly, and also to be able to focus.
Looking at your image, and filtering it through my own experience, I'd say you could easily have doubled the exposure and gotten more "data" for the image, for lack of a better word. Of course, that would mean either a longer exposure, and the accompanying star trails, and / or a higher ISO and the accompanying noise.
Or a faster lens. Personally, I use my two fastest lenses - a 50mm f/1.8 and a 24mm f/2.8 - on my 5DII for night photography. I lust after a 24 f/1.4, but I gotta sell something to justify that! Even if you don't shoot it wide open, a faster lens makes it easier to see to frame, and it gives you the flexibility of that extra stop or half-stop of light. I apologize in advance that I'm not aware of what's available that would be wide enough on your 60D and not completely break the bank for you... I know the 50mm would be way too tight on your 60D, an I suspect the 24 would also have a frustratingly narrow field of view.
Anyway, good job and thanks for sharing.
Posted by John Mumaw on September 26, 2012 at 6:34 AM
Turned out pretty well. It appears that there is no light pollution at all up that way.
I agree with Erik. I think that you could have gone up to a 30 sec. exposure with no star movement for more data.
Consider using a tungsten white balance to cool the exposure and then tweaking that to taste.
Posted by Grant Collier on September 26, 2012 at 10:52 PM
Nice shot. I agree with Eric and John. Might even push the exposure to 45 seconds, even if it creates some minimal star trails. Otherwise there's just too much noise at f3.5. With less noise you can process it a little more aggressively and bring out more contrast without also bringing out too much noise. Topaz Denoise can also help with the noise if you can afford it. Or even just some despeckling in Photoshop or more noise reduction in Lightroom might help.
If anyone can help with night shots, it would Grant. He's the man.
Posted by Howard Cihak on October 5, 2012 at 8:06 PM
Is the aperture the controlling factor for producing noise or the ISO? My instincts would be to go for the widest possible aperture with the lowest possible ISO. Or are my instincts wrong?
Discussion
5 repliesAll suggestions and critical comments gladly accepted.
Good job getting the ground horizontal - my biggest problem sometimes is seeing enough detail through the viewfiender to frame it correctly, and also to be able to focus.
Looking at your image, and filtering it through my own experience, I'd say you could easily have doubled the exposure and gotten more "data" for the image, for lack of a better word. Of course, that would mean either a longer exposure, and the accompanying star trails, and / or a higher ISO and the accompanying noise.
Or a faster lens. Personally, I use my two fastest lenses - a 50mm f/1.8 and a 24mm f/2.8 - on my 5DII for night photography. I lust after a 24 f/1.4, but I gotta sell something to justify that! Even if you don't shoot it wide open, a faster lens makes it easier to see to frame, and it gives you the flexibility of that extra stop or half-stop of light. I apologize in advance that I'm not aware of what's available that would be wide enough on your 60D and not completely break the bank for you... I know the 50mm would be way too tight on your 60D, an I suspect the 24 would also have a frustratingly narrow field of view.
Anyway, good job and thanks for sharing.
I agree with Erik. I think that you could have gone up to a 30 sec. exposure with no star movement for more data.
Consider using a tungsten white balance to cool the exposure and then tweaking that to taste.