RayF Loc: New Jersey

I would like to give astrophotography a try.
It seems a full frame camera is best.

I have a Canon 80d and Canon RP. The only wide angle lenses I have are EF-S. Do you think I would have better results using the EF -S on the RP or the crop sensor for Astro.

Thank you

Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA

What do you plan to shoot, the moon, the planets, the stars, the milky way?

dangriss Loc: Fresno, CA

Use the crop sensor. An EF-S lens will just focus to a circle in the center of the full frame sensor.

RayF Loc: New Jersey

Optimistically trying the Milky Way

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

You will do better with the crop lens on the crop camera. Or rent or borrow a wide angle lens for the full frame. The Rokinon lenses are good - excellent and at a reasonable price. I think you can get a 14mm for the full frame for around $225.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

There s an Astronomical Photography section: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-109-1.html They offer tutorials and lots of other information. Check it out.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

It really depend on exactly what your targeted results are.

14mm f/2.8 lenses on frull frame cameras are pretty much the standard for wide view night sky photography. That being said, I have a friend who uses the new Nikkor 10-20mm DX zoom on his D500 and gets beautiful results. So if you are willing to do some work, you can get good results with an array of equipment, especially if you are willing to stitch panoramas. If you think about what you are photographing in the night sky, it will become clear that more resolution is better. The advantage of using wide angle lenses on high resolution cameras is that you can use longer exposures without seeing star movement in your images.

The old rule of thumb was to calculate maximum exposure time using the "Rule of 500," divide 500 by the focal length to get exposure time. This holds whether you are shooting a DX or FX camera. That would yield about 35 seconds for a 14mm lens. Lots of folks now try to use a "Rule of 300" instead when using a high resolution camera like a D850. That leads to an exposure time a little over 20 seconds. I personally go a little longer than that without ill effects.

You will want a reasonably fast lens. I use the 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom and generally use exposures of 25 seconds at f/2.8 and ISO 4,000. Next time out at a good dark sky location, I'm going to experiment with upping the ISO to 5,000 or maybe 6,400 to compare results. This post is to a 10 image panorama that I did a couple of years ago with that exposure using a D810. It was my first effort at night sky photography.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-556060-1.html

Finally...you will have to capture raw images and plan on post processing. Even at the suggested exposures, you are going to be depending on the dynamic range of your camera, and you will need to bring the star images up, reduce noise, and manage "horizon glow." Also...most folks use a white balance around 4000K. I do not. I set a Kelvin temperature closer to a normal "Daylight" setting...usually around 5800K. 4000K will help reduce horizon glow, but in my judgement makes everything too blue.

You don't tell us what you have already, equipment-wise. I would say that if you can get close to 24mm full frame equivalent with a pretty wide aperture, you should be OK to start. I'd suggest starting with that, then deciding where you want to do.

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Rules of thumb are good for starting points. I use 20 or 25 seconds as my max time as anything longer causes trailing. I have a Sigma Art 14-24mm f2.8, and use any focal length that serves my purposes (on a Canon 6D). I like to take multiple sky photos and stack in StarryLandscapeStacker to reduce noise and get great color.

I use ISO 4,000, 5,000, 6400 and on up as needed. It depends on the sky and ambient light, and what I want to do with the foreground.

As much as I like to capture fore and sky in one shot, sometimes I have to take and process both separately and then blend in post.

Here's one I tool a couple of weeks ago where the mountain was so large and far away I could not illuminte it with LLL so I took shot during blue hour and blended with 20 exposure stack of sky.

(Download)

Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

It would appear you know what you’re doing ..., I heard the Sigma Art 14-24 2.8 really performs well , giving Nikon a run for the money ..not to mention the price ...

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Its already been answered to use your crop sensor lens on your crop sensor camera.

Next step is to try it. Stars really push the limits on camera lenses due to the fact that stars are point sources of light and because of this, they bring out all the deficiencies in the lens such as coma distortion, astigmatism distrortion, chromatic aberrations, and more.

Try your lens or lenses and see how well your stars look. It they look good, you are ready to go for what you want.

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

I use a jeweler's loupe (small magnifying glass) to fine tune my lens focus. Proper focus is so important if you want stars that are sharp points.

Cookie223 Loc: New Jersey

You should consider looking at a club, or look at a forum.
Skywatchers is a great forum and it’s free. Don’t forget we have an excellent astronomy section here too.
Good luck

https://www.go-astronomy.com/astro-clubs-state.php?State=NJ

JBRIII

I would try both cameras. I have mostly done solar and lunar eclipses. But both there and a few efforts with stars have indicated to me thst a canon 60d does better than the 70d for example. Many true astro cameras go with fewer but bigger pixels, better dynamic range possible between dim and bright stars in a given time.
Some one a few months ago had a good statement about getting into an interesting, but depth subject with astro photograpy.
Have fun,

RayF Loc: New Jersey

I want to thank everyone for their answers. I would like to purchase the Rokinon 14mm but trying to not spend at this time.
The whole question I asked might be silly because I live in New Jersey and it is difficult to find a dark night sky here on the east coast. Maybe out over the ocean is my best bet.
In any event I value your opinions and will carry on. EF-S on 80d it is.
Thank you all.

JBRIII

There are light pollution filters designed to reduce lighting effects. Unfortunately only available in 50 mm at the max and can be quite expensive, but something to consider for the future.