Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations

Links below open in new window

Help with taking pictures of the sky..

Sergiu

Sergiu

0
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
29
Points
0
I wasn't sure exactly which section this should go in, and i thought multimedia was best. Anyways, ive been trying to take pictures of space, and ive been using 30 second exposure times, F 2.8, and without any zoom, and what i can see on the pictures is almost as much as i could see with my naked eye.. any suggestions as to how to be able to see the milky way and a bunch more stars? By the way im using a Sony CyberShot DSC V-1. Thanks guys
 





I am not a professional photographer by any means but... You must make sure that you are shooting where there are no city lights. Also, if there is a lot of smog/pollution then you will not be able to get a good shot. Two people that I know could help would be Nikokapo and EMC2.

-Mike
 
yea where i live there really isnt a lot of pollution.. im beginning to think that its my camera.
 
Well, for one, you may want to consider a Zoom lens. even if its just 200mm zoom, That might be good for shooting specific stars and constellations.

Also, look into different lens filters, there may be an advantage to some over others. Google will help with that.

Also, Make sure your using a Tripod or some way of stablizing the camera.

Also, check and see if your camera has a "bulb" setting, Should be able to access using M (Manual) Mode, this will allow you to have an exposure time of (for most DLSRs) 30 minutes. However it may not be necessary, depends.

But if your shooting night time shots, long exposures will be the key and will be very tricky getting the perfect exposure time.

Im no expert and I've only been shooting for about a year and certainly havnt tried night time sky shots yet lol.

Also try YouTube, might be a tutorial out there
 
I'll expand this later, I've gotta go back to studying math, but all I can say for now is:

You can't take a picture of what is not there, I mean, if you're in a zone where the milky way isn't just visible you won't be able to capture it in regular conditions.
Zoom is actually not that important unless you want to shoot a specific zone (like two stars and the moon). If what you're trying to do is recreate EMC2's pic then you'll need a tripod, a remote control and a reflex camera.

You have to be in a zone where no smog makes the sky "violet" at night (such as in Buenos Aires, where I am :p), set the exposure to bulb or >30s. You'll have to experiment with f numbers, but 2.8 seems a little too big for me, I'd go for f/8 or f/11 for a start (but it depends on the setting so I don't know).

Remember, you'll have to PRACTISE a lot, and I do mean A LOT.

Start off with taking long exposure pics of stars and see how they leave a trail (>60secs exp.) and let me know how it goes ;)




(And for the love of Chuck get a Digital SLR. I'm not trying to be mean, but you won't achieve anything with a compact digital camera).
 
cust11 said:
You mean, for the love of Tim Roth.. right? :P

-Mike
Click to expand...

LOL

four_rooms-440x297.gif

four_rooms.jpg


I'd like you to point me where it resembles Chuck Norris :p
 
nikokapo said:
I'll expand this later, I've gotta go back to studying math, but all I can say for now is:

You can't take a picture of what is not there, I mean, if you're in a zone where the milky way isn't just visible you won't be able to capture it in regular conditions.
Zoom is actually not that important unless you want to shoot a specific zone (like two stars and the moon). If what you're trying to do is recreate EMC2's pic then you'll need a tripod, a remote control and a reflex camera.

You have to be in a zone where no smog makes the sky "violet" at night (such as in Buenos Aires, where I am :p), set the exposure to bulb or >30s. You'll have to experiment with f numbers, but 2.8 seems a little too big for me, I'd go for f/8 or f/11 for a start (but it depends on the setting so I don't know).

Remember, you'll have to PRACTISE a lot, and I do mean A LOT.

Start off with taking long exposure pics of stars and see how they leave a trail (>60secs exp.) and let me know how it goes ;)




(And for the love of Chuck get a Digital SLR. I'm not trying to be mean, but you won't achieve anything with a compact digital camera).
Click to expand...

X2!!!

Yes, I was referring to using zoom lenses for specific shots, filling the picture with more targeted area as opposed to the entire sky LOL.

Oh and I thought we were dealing with DSLR here LOL. Yes get one! LOL
 
nikokapo said:
I'll expand this later, I've gotta go back to studying math, but all I can say for now is:

You can't take a picture of what is not there, I mean, if you're in a zone where the milky way isn't just visible you won't be able to capture it in regular conditions.
Zoom is actually not that important unless you want to shoot a specific zone (like two stars and the moon). If what you're trying to do is recreate EMC2's pic then you'll need a tripod, a remote control and a reflex camera.

You have to be in a zone where no smog makes the sky "violet" at night (such as in Buenos Aires, where I am :p), set the exposure to bulb or >30s. You'll have to experiment with f numbers, but 2.8 seems a little too big for me, I'd go for f/8 or f/11 for a start (but it depends on the setting so I don't know).

Remember, you'll have to PRACTISE a lot, and I do mean A LOT.

Start off with taking long exposure pics of stars and see how they leave a trail (>60secs exp.) and let me know how it goes ;)




(And for the love of Chuck get a Digital SLR. I'm not trying to be mean, but you won't achieve anything with a compact digital camera).
Click to expand...

But dont you want bigger diaphragm? so you can see more? and i wasnt necessarily trying to see the milky way. i wanted to see more stars than i can with my naked eye, and well, it didnt do that. and the maximum exposure time on my stupid cybershot is 30 seconds. But im hoping to get a Nikon D90 soon :drool: . And i did have a tripod BTW.
 
One of the problems with long exposures even when using a tripod, is simply the rotation of the Earth itself. To avoid the "star trails" circular effect in long exposures, you have to use the telescope accessory that moves the camera and telescope to counteract the rotation of the Earth. Hopefully all of our astrophotography people will see this thread and add to it ... imjustintime posted a photo that shows this time exposure rotation effect.
 
Last edited:
billg519 said:
One of the problems with long exposures even when using a tripod, is simply the rotation of the Earth itself. To avoid the "star trails" circular effect in long exposures, you have to use the telescope accessory that moves the camera and telescope to counteract the rotation of the Earth. Hopefully all of our astrophotography people will see this thread and add to it ... imjustintime posted a photo that shows this time exposure rotation effect.
Click to expand...

yes i am very aware of this, but the need to have one is determined by the exposure time
 
I just did this, and all I did was put my digital camera on Manual, take the flash off, and then setting a shutter speed of 15 seconds. I was able to capture the stars and my 5mW laser beam. :)

Edit: Pictures posted here.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top