Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Photography
Project 365 & Daily Photos
TwistedThrottle's twisted images
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TwistedThrottle" data-source="post: 762239" data-attributes="member: 46724"><p>No, the lights from cars on the highway are much brighter than the stars. If you try to shoot the Milky Way at base ISO, you better have a very fast lens. I have only had experience shooting MW shots with a f2.8 lens, I still have to shoot at at least ISO 800. That was my reasoning for picking 1600, one stop of light slower lens needs one stop of light more ISO. With a star tracker, I would be able to take longer exposures, thereby reducing my ISO. Something I plan on doing next time. Another thing that can be done is to stack the images. I dont remember the formula, but it goes something like you increase your light by a third of a stop every time you double your stack. So, 1+1=2, 2+2=4, 4+4=8. 8 f4 shots stacked would appear like the same shot at f2.8, but to get to the next stop, you need to do 8+8=16, 16+16=32, 32+32=64. 64 of the same exact shot. When each of the shots are between 30 seconds and a minute, it becomes unrealistic real quick and the location of the MW strays too much for stacking to even be made possible, depending on the composition.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TwistedThrottle, post: 762239, member: 46724"] No, the lights from cars on the highway are much brighter than the stars. If you try to shoot the Milky Way at base ISO, you better have a very fast lens. I have only had experience shooting MW shots with a f2.8 lens, I still have to shoot at at least ISO 800. That was my reasoning for picking 1600, one stop of light slower lens needs one stop of light more ISO. With a star tracker, I would be able to take longer exposures, thereby reducing my ISO. Something I plan on doing next time. Another thing that can be done is to stack the images. I dont remember the formula, but it goes something like you increase your light by a third of a stop every time you double your stack. So, 1+1=2, 2+2=4, 4+4=8. 8 f4 shots stacked would appear like the same shot at f2.8, but to get to the next stop, you need to do 8+8=16, 16+16=32, 32+32=64. 64 of the same exact shot. When each of the shots are between 30 seconds and a minute, it becomes unrealistic real quick and the location of the MW strays too much for stacking to even be made possible, depending on the composition. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Photography
Project 365 & Daily Photos
TwistedThrottle's twisted images
Top