Redrocks Loc: New Castle Indiana

Before COVID, I used to love to do Milky Way photography. I used a (at that time new) Sony A7RII and had a couple good lenses for the purpose. I ended up with long COVID the left me unable to walk well. I sold my Sony and lenses and bought an Olympus OM-M5 Mark III realizing I probably wouldn't be doing any Milky Way photography any more. But, I am wondering if anyone has been doing Milky Photography with Olympus cameras, what lenses do you find best and want are your typical settings?

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Chances are excellent that my answer will not be as useful as you expect. I do not do astrophotography that often. Olympus cameras are very capable of astrophotography and my recommendation is to use Live Composite for the best results.
Photographers I know shoot the Milky Way with wide angles, preferable with lenses of at least a maximum aperture of f2.8. They raised ISO to at least 1500, more if needed. The lens is usually wide open.

Exposure varies but it seems that around 20 seconds is about right. When there are interesting subjects in the background they use a LED light for extra illumination.
The advantage of Live Composite is that you are actually seen the image been recorded and can stop the exposure as per your taste. Live Composite records new lights only controlling their overexposure.

The OM5 Mk III will certainly serve your purpose.


https://learnandsupport.getolympus.com/learn-center/photography-tips/fireworks-light-trails/7-ways-you-can-use-live-composite

donspears Loc: Joshua, TX

I use the OLY 12mm f2 for night sky photography. I am ver pleased with the results.

Dave Sr Loc: Nazareth, Pennsylvania

Oly 7-14mm f/2.8, 10 sec, f/3.2, iso 6400, EM1 MKII.

Canisdirus

You can do it...but it won't ever come out as well as a ff setup.

Exposure times are pushed very high ...which allows the weakness of 4/3rd's to be more obvious...noise.

A 4/3 25mm f/1.4 is the equivalent of a 50mm f/1.4.

Look up the term 'clear aperture' and astrophotography...and you will understand what a hole 4/3 rd's puts you in for low light shots.

You can do it...but you have to work twice as hard...spend twice as long out there shooting...focus stacking...blackout shots.

You will need every trick in the book to come up with competitive shots.

Of course if you like spending 4 to 5 hours on a single shot and don't care how it comes out... have at it.

JBRIII

The 20 sec limit is due to sky rotation (makes stars stricks) unless an polar aligned, motorized equatorial mount is used for tracking.

Hip Coyote

Aa few thoughts as an Olympus user:

1- Download the Photopills app which will provide you with a lot of info about everything astro photography. For instance, if you use a 400 mil lens you will get star trails within about a second. I you use the 7-14 Pro at 7 mm you will get star trails at 36 seconds.

2- Unlike most other systems, the live composite feature of Oly makes it possible for you to do amazing things with existing light AND star trails....all without stacking. It is an amazing feature.

3- Look at GetOlympus.com. There are excellent tutorials and tips. I disagree that one has to use every trick in the book, work twice as hard or pray to the gods to get a decent astro photo. The live composite is actually easier. And the tips and tools by Oly visionaries are excellent.

4- Unlike nearly every other camera system, it is possible to hand hold some astro shots and do quite well. I would imagine the lens has to be quite wide (which is why the 7-14 is the go to lens).

5- Shoot in raw, shoot a lot and process your images. (Can we avoid yet another 20 page discussion of raw v jpeg?) I included a handheld shot of the moon I took a few years ago. This is not from a full frame, $5000 camera. It is a used $500 camera with a Pany 100-400. I acknowledge that this is not star photography, but it does disprove the idea that ff is the only way to get decent photos of things in the sky. Atmospheric conditions mean more than ff or m43 or what ever. The image stabilization of Oly is darned near from the dark arts of evil magic.

The Oly system does have drawbacks and challenges. But it also has a few advantages. The OMD Em5miii is quite capable.

JBRIII

There is some rule like divide 400? by FL = secs before stars turn to - . So if that is correct one needs a 20 mm for 20 secs. Need a wide angle anyhow unless your going to make mosaics of many photos. A 400 is a little short for the moon, but not by much so also would cover a relatively small area.

Hip Coyote

I took a seminar on astro photography (turned out not to be my thing, but it was educational). From my notes: For full frame, the rule of 500 is 500/focal length = the longest acceptable exposure of stars without streaking (with lens wide open) So with a 12 mm, one could shoot at 500/12=41.67 seconds.

For a crop frame rule is rather than use 500, use 350. I would imagine the m43 rule is 250. Where m43 has problems is with higher iso to get the exposure one may want. What I can say for sure is that PhotoPills has a calculator which is easy to use....its free and informative!

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Where are you getting your information?!? Do you think the shots shown here were 4 or 5 hours to produce each? Tell us which other camera systems, other than Olympus, have Starry Sky and Live Composite. None of the photo sites or U-Tube videos I have visited indicate an problems shooting the stars with Olympus or Panasonic. And any real time and ISO differences between full frame and 4/3rds have been basically eliminated by the new OM-1 (and the new OM-5 will have the same sensor). Please provide us your sources by URL so we can see this "information" for ourselves. Yes, it is easier with full frame. Yes, there is an ISO difference of about two stops with the older cameras, but hardly a real hurdle to overcome. Just take a look at all the 4/3rds astro shots, including Panasonic, that can be found on the internet.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I do (or at least did) astrophotography quite a bit. I like to do it as part of a group or workshop. That's partly for the increased safety that comes from being with others when out at night and partly because I like to see what others are doing, how they are doing it, and what they are using to do it with. By far, most of the folks who do this sort of photography use full frame cameras and wide, fast lenses. But one friend had a great outing with his D500 and Nikkor 10-20mm AF-P zoom. (I should note that he is a great photographer who I have never seen or heard blame his equipment for any shortcoming in an image.) My personal choice is a D850 with the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom. I started out with a D810 and that same lens. It was fine, but even the fairly small improvements provided by the D850 make the photography noticeably easier.

It really boils down to three things. Unless you are using a tracker (which is actually the current "rage"), the first requirement is that you are going to need a camera that comfortably work at an ISO of 4000-5000. While it is true that noise can be removed later in post processing, the nature of the subject is such that if too much processing is required to get rid of noise, it is inevitable that some of the stars are going to be sacrificed with it. So the cleaner the starting point, the better the finished product.

Historically, the "Rule of 500," as explained above, has been used to determine maximum exposure duration with any given focal length lens. With new high-resolution cameras, using a Rule of 300 is better. Please note that this rule is based on the physical relationship between the focal length of the lens and the density of the sensel locations. This rule DOES NOT get adjusted for sensor size. End result is that most of the time, you are going to be working with exposure times of 20-45 seconds if exposing at f/2.8. In practice, shutter times of 25-35 seconds become the practical working range for lenses around 14mm. Think about this when you choose your tripod. And if it makes you feel better, get a remote shutter release or set a shutter delay. In reality, disturbance of a quarter second or so against a 30 second exposure is not going to result in anything visible in your image. I've shot with and without a remote release. You will never see any effects, primarily because of the very limited dynamic range of your camera at the working ISOs.

The final requirement is that your camera's sensor has enough resolution to capture and record the point images of as many as possible of the several thousand stars that will be in the visual field. A corollary to this requirement is that your lens must have enough resolving power to separate those points of light into separate images. The big hangup against using smaller sensors for the night sky is that they just don't hve enough sensor points to resolve enough individual stars. This is complicated by the general shortage of lenses for those cameras that are fast enough and have enough resolving power to do the job well.

Personally, I have never set up my D500 and experimented to see what I could accomplish with it in a night session. It is a pretty big deal for me to be able to go out and shoot, so I've always used the best and most suitable of what I have so that I'd have the best chance at success. My confidence is pretty high that I could come away with something, just not something as good as the proper tools will let me produce.

A lot depends on your standards and expectations. Is it worth trying? Certainly. Just use what you know and think through how it will be different with your new equipment and what adjustments you need to make.

Redrocks Loc: New Castle Indiana

Thank you for the great response. I agree completely with your answer. I am quite familiar with Milky Way photography, but have not done any since COVID because of the physical condition it left me in. But, I am like you in that I just enjoy being outside during the coolness of the night and beauty of the Milky Way. I am a bit crazy I guess, but I like the thrill of the coyote call and the possibility of seeing a rattlesnake and it is all a part of the adventure. I’m not trying to make an award winning image, but to have the experience and recall it when I look at the print.

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

I may not be able to add anything that you don't know already, but my notes say the OM-D E-M5 iii does "star tracking". There are some other Oly models that do as well. You listed the model without the "E" so I don't know if that means anything. Star tracking is where the image stabilization system in the body is used to slowly pivot the sensor to track the stars during a long exposure. So unlike many, you can get your shot in maybe one frame. That's all I got. Good luck out there!

Redrocks Loc: New Castle Indiana

Great info. I will check it out. Thanks for the tip. P.S. The "E" was my error. I am just trying to get used and learn the Olympus camera. I always have used Sony, but I need something lighter now and just bought the Olympus recently.