6000x4000 pixelsQuote:
Originally Posted by alpha0ne
http://83.212.115.227/oceanic_thunderstrike.jpg
Printable View
6000x4000 pixelsQuote:
Originally Posted by alpha0ne
http://83.212.115.227/oceanic_thunderstrike.jpg
@Oj101:
In general I like them.
For pic 1, I would crop up from the bottom, maybe bring it in a little from the left as well to better define the silhouettes as subjects.
2, crop down from the top top a little above the cloud. Remove the empty space while leaving a little as a buffer of sorts
3/4, I like 4 better. Very nice work! :up:
Stunning image, kwscore :up:
I am getting into nightscapes as well. Don't have the proper lens yet, but am deciding if the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 will be wide enough, or if I should get the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8. The Sigma is over a full stop faster, but it would be 27mm vs 21mm for the Rokinon 14mm on my crop sensor. The Rokinon would need double the ISO or half the shutter speed, both of which have consequences.
Decisions...
How do you find the Milky Way? I've been outside with Google Sky Map, but I don't know what exactly I'm looking for :(
Funny you ask, because I just learned today that the central "bulge" of the Galaxy can be found between the constellations of Sagittarius and Scorpius :cool:
I was outside earlier with Google Sky Map, trying to figure out why it wasn't tracking properly. Turns out the accelerometer on my Galaxy Nexus makes for erratic behavior with the compass. Once turned off, the Sky Map behaves normally. A bit OT.
I'd go for a Tokina AT-X 11-16Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
Simply the best ultra-wide lens for crop cameras.
Check the reviews for those lenses. They blow everything else away, and they don't have as much coma as the Tokina. It is a good lens, but coma is a problem with stars.Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchZowner
Well I think the best solution is Sigma 10-20 or Tokina 11-16Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
To be honest it never used the Google Sky Map;)why ? because I live in a place like that when I go outside the Milky Way visible to the naked eye ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] Oj101
The Tokina's chromatic aberration isn't big enough to give you troubles ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
Plus you get more coverage of the sky and it's also useful for landscape & architecture & group photos compared to wide/normal angle lenses like the 18mm or higher for crop bodies.
Unless you can afford to purchase two good lenses, one wide angle & one ultra-wide angle, if sky photography is your thing, you're better off with an ultra-wide ( doesn't have to be the tokina of course, there are plenty of decent lenses out there, some with lower chroma but less image sharpness, etc, you've got to compromise, there's no ultimate lense yet :p: )
You're lucky :( I guess you stay in a fairly remote area?Quote:
Originally Posted by kwscore
Plus one for the Tokina 11-16. It's simply a fantastic lens and a little software correction takes care of the fringing (I get anywhere from 2-7 pixels on my t2i). Most of my pics are with that very lens
http://www.flickr.com/photos/darakian
lens should be listed in the exif info. In short though
a) Colors are great
b) The geometry is fantastic, very little distortion at any focal length
c) The lens is very sharp
d) Built well
e) Cheap for what it is
I can't recommend that lens enough :)
@Oj101
Very nice! I dig the first of the two!
Edit: Some wavy rocks, taken with a tokina 11-16 ;)
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7405/1...701fc944_b.jpg
_MG_9593 by Darakian, on Flickr
I just checked the Lenstip review. It looks like they revised the lens in 2012 and it does really well with coma now:
http://www.lenstip.com/379.7-Lens_re...and_bokeh.html
The last time I had checked, it did not fare well with sharpness or coma at f/2.8:
http://www.lenstip.com/165.7-Lens_re...tigmatism.html
On the other hand, the Rokinon 14 f/2.8 is sharper from center to corner than the Tokina. However that is to be expected from a prime. It's also 1/2 the price, so like was stated, lenses are about compromises. Do you pay twice as much to get the 11-16mm range and give up some sharpness?
I thought the revision 2 is just to help it deal with flare, but tbh I haven't read very much about the new version. I can't speak for the 14mm Rokinon, but I have the 8mm f.35 fisheye and I wish I hadn't bought it. The manual focusing is fine and the images are decent (though I don't like the colors). The big issue I have is that the lens gives to exif info and I have no way to read what I've done after the fact. All my other lenses at least tell me what f-stop I'm at and it makes learning from mistakes much easier. I for one would pay the extra for the tokina, but I'm sure you'll be get nice pictures with either choice.
Yeah that would bother me too. I'd hate to be in Lightroom, trying to figure out what focal length, aperture, and shutter speed I was using. Though TBH, most of my night sky stuff will be using the same settings every time. Widest aperture, highest acceptable ISO, widest FL, and the shutter speed won't vary much but that's a camera thing so it should be in the EXIF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darakian
http://www.lonelyspeck.com/how-to-ma...ky-way-galaxy/
Taken with a kit lens (Nikon 18-55mm VR). Also taken while driving, but don't tell the cops :p
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5532/1...4a1b0b49_b.jpg
_DSC0059 by Darakian, on Flickr
Hawaii huh ?
Ok Darakian, I'm notifying Kal-El of your illegal driving activity :p:
That looks freakin AWESOME :D Atomic bomb much?
Yep Hawaii. Can you guess where? :p
Thanks guys.
Hopefully for you... not near Kal-El's hometown :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Darakian
j/k
:D
But next time I'd rather have you stop put the alarm lights and get your... gear out :D
Safety first ( it looks easy and not dangerous, but it only needs to happen once, and we don't want that to happen do we ? )