Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus Micro Four Thirds

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 30, 2014, 9:52 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
chiPersei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 931
Default

I've been excited to try my Lumix 7-14mm f4 for landscape astophotography but after typing its particulars into the guy's spreadsheet and it rates far lower for this type of photography than my 20mm f1.4. And not simply (as you might think) because it's slower.
chiPersei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2014, 10:53 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
folob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 855
Default Night Photography

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.sneezy View Post
I think you are right, I guess I just lack confidence or experience to have been sure of that.
Here's an example of what the E-520's noise bands look like when the exposure is pushed. I can show it up by boosting the light a bit in my photo editing app (like this one attached), or I can generate this by winding up the ISO to 800 or so for a 10s exposure. It's always been like this BTW since new, so I took it to be the best the sensor could do in low light.

Martin

Can you try the lower ISO on the E520 (100?) with 20 to 30 seconds exposure?
__________________
Portfolio: http://agilephotography.deviantart.com/

Gears: OM-D E-M5 Mark II and E-M1 MK 1 with 14-150mm Mark II, 12-40mm f2.8, 15mm f8 cap lens, 60mm Macro, 75-300mm, Olympus Trinity -> 25/45/75mm f1.8. On the 4/3 side: 9-18mm and 50-200SWD with the MMF-2 4/3 adapter, FL-36R and FL-50. Also Rokinon mFT 7.5mm f3.5 Fisheye, Pentax 50mm f1.7 with K to m4/3 adapter, Olympus OM 200mm with OM to m4/3 adapter.
folob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2014, 8:12 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
chiPersei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.sneezy View Post
Here's an example of what the E-520's noise bands look like when the exposure is pushed.
Image stacking would greatly reduce the noise but I wonder how it would affect the banding. If you have the time here's an 8 or 9 minute video that demonstrates the benefits of stacking. The guy uses LR and Photoshop for this demo. If you don't have LR or PS there is free or cheap image stacking software out there like StarStax (usually to create star trails) that might do the job.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rydg7JGTAbw
chiPersei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2014, 8:22 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
chiPersei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 931
Default

Here are some stunning astro landscapes taken with the E-M5

http://goo.gl/WGqMGb

Something to aspire too. :-)
chiPersei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2014, 5:39 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
mr.sneezy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by folob View Post
Can you try the lower ISO on the E520 (100?) with 20 to 30 seconds exposure?
Yes, at lower ISO the noise bands are not as noticeable till you push the brightness in Photoshop etc. So I do use 100 ISO for the longer exposures and normally use 10-15s. The catch with 20-30 seconds is star trails appearing (depending on which lens I'm using).

Martin

Last edited by mr.sneezy; Jan 31, 2014 at 5:59 PM.
mr.sneezy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2014, 6:10 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
mr.sneezy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiPersei View Post
Thanks for that link, I found lonelyspec.com and bookmarked that too. Some great info there and a very professional website.

While there I watched a few other tutorials. This one is something I'd never known about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1Kfr8RG3zM

All this has me thinking about lenses again (till a body upgrade).
The Rokinon 14mm F2.8 they mention is not too badly priced, thinking their 8mm might be better on a 4/3 body though ?

Martin
mr.sneezy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2014, 6:48 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
chiPersei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 931
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.sneezy View Post
While there I watched a few other tutorials. This one is something I'd never known about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1Kfr8RG3zM
Not only did I not know about it I wouldn't have believed it had I not seen it with my own eyes. Bookmarked!

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.sneezy View Post
All this has me thinking about lenses again (till a body upgrade).
The Rokinon 14mm F2.8 they mention is not too badly priced, thinking their 8mm might be better on a 4/3 body though ?
The 14mm is rated 1032 for this type of photography while the 8mm is slightly better at 1237. I suppose that's not a big difference considering the spread on the guy's spreadsheet runs from 64 to over 6000. Personally I'd go with the 14mm because I prefer it's FOV.
chiPersei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2014, 11:37 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
chiPersei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 931
Default

I spent a few days in the southern California desert town of Borrego Springs last week. Although it was the week of the full moon if I got out early after the sun went down I could capture some night sky shots before the moon came up. I'm not well practiced at this but I am pleased at the improvement over the night sky captures I made earlier with a G3.

The first one was using the EM1 with the Zuiko 12-40 at 12mm and the second with the Pany 20mm pancake.

In the second one the Andromeda Galaxy can be picked out fairly easily.
Attached Images
  
chiPersei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2014, 8:04 PM   #29
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

chiPersi

I like them both, what kind of shutter speed are you using and are you doing anything as far as star tracking?
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2014, 8:46 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
chiPersei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 931
Default

Thanks ramcewan!

The first one using the 12-40 is 12mm, ISO 800, 15 secs at f2.8

The 2nd shot using the 20mm is ISO 250, 15 seconds at f1.7

No tracking. I find I can go 15 or 20 seconds with these lenses before trails are visible at these image sizes. At 100% you can just start to see trails.

Funny thing about the 2nd shot. I was sitting on a curb next to someone's driveway. I was about to pull the trigger when a car started coming down the street. Crap! I figured I'd wait till it drove by but the guy pulled into the driveway I was sitting at. As he used his brakes to roll into his garage I fired. Hence the red-lit foreground.
chiPersei is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:04 AM.