Colorado B.S. Thread

The simple answer is yes. The more in-depth answer is you want a lens which can gather as much light as possible, as it cuts down on your exposure time (avoiding star trails, if you're not going for that) and is able to pick up on more detail/features/light in the night sky. So, most folks shoot for an f1.2 but that usually means you're getting into a pricey lens. What you have to watch out for is lens image quality. Old Nikon 50mm f1.2 lens are plentiful (and work well on a Canon full frame, like that sexy body @chenbro was showing off) and reasonably priced, but they have terrible falloff at the edges, and need to be stopped down one or two stops to avoid that... which means you should just get the f1.8 version.

I haven't played with it yet, but I adapted an old Olympus 50mm f1.8 I had laying around to my body so I can try it out at night.

Now, 18mm is pretty darn wide. You could get by with something in the 20-24mm range.

 

Thats what i wanted to know. I want to get shots like the one above but dont know what lens is to much or not enough

 

Well, just like modding offroading rigs, it's a rabbit hole to get that kind of image and usually requires a pile of gear. Good tripod, remote shutter release, fast lens, camera body with bulb setting and a good sensor, good post-processing, etc. I've read about image stacking to produce those kinds of dramatic Milky Way pics, and suspect that's not the only technique it takes to make something that striking (like illuminating the vehicles for a split second with a flashlight, etc.).

I'm still learning digital and nighttime work, so I'm no authority on the in's and out's of making something like that first pic.

 

Well I saw the soft topper and the TG rear. I was like that's a nice rig, then I saw the snorkel and was like what a minute. I've seen that before. So far you're the only CO rig I've seen

 

Went dove hunting, got zilch. So sad for me.

 

​

 

F! That! I do enough of that during the week. I slept in foos! Pretty nice

 

Was hoping to sleep in myself. Nope... dogs and kids crushed those hopes. I see another cup of coffee in my near future.

 

Thanks to Nathan @Trail Toys. He gave me this idea. A little diff fluid pump makes it so much easier.

 

I'm assuming you need a tripod for this as well, correct?

Also about 25 years ago a friend had a cable that he would hook up to the shutter button so that your finger didn't (subtly) shake the camera when snapping the picture. Is that someone you recommend using also?

 

If I ever took a picture like this, below (credit @aero3685 ) I'd walk around with a purple velvet cape and cane for a week

 

Why do you need an ecuse? Just go out with your bad self and dress how you want

 

8 posts in, and you might be my favorite member.

 

9 now.
Look out, he's out of control!

 

Yes and yes. I made mention of those in a later post. Modern cameras with mirrors have features which can "get you by" if you don't have a remote shutter release - turn on "mirror lockup" and turn on delayed shutter release (that feature which lets you setup the camera, hit the button, then get yourself in the picture). By locking the mirror up, and waiting a couple of seconds to take the picture, you give the camera a chance to settle back down/stop moving before making the image (a sturdy tripod is a must - a cheap one can carry/transmit vibrations to the camera). Only problem with this route is you have to work with exposure times built into the camera, because reaching up to press the button on the body will likely introduce movement of the camera and blur to the image.

 

Nothing wrong with that

 

One of these photos? Easy peasy, northern Nevada about 4 years ago, the Milky Way is something else