Opinion on Nikon lens for night photography
Dec 6, 2016 18:30:01 #
I shoot with the D810 and the Rokinon 24mm f/1.4 and the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 both with Nikon chip. I use live view to get sharp focus and mirror up to get shot.
Dec 7, 2016 07:27:59 #
The 6mm f/2.8 full frame Nikkor is very, very wide, very, very good, but a tad expensive. It is manual, but at 6mm that's fine. You can find it occasionally for about the price of a decent house, north of $200,000. If you stick your elbows out, you see them. It has more than a 180 degree view.
Dec 7, 2016 09:41:00 #
jblazar wrote:
In my recent experience in testing several lenses for astrophotography, I didn't like the Rokinon....
That's a shame. Mine is pretty sharp. I have a 30x40 print on the wall that is a full size blowup of an aerial photography image, and the far corner is just about as sharp as the center. If one is ultra critical, there may be a slight reduction in the upper right corner, but if there is coma, I can't detect it here. I usually shoot these at f8 however, never wide open if I can help it since I need the detail.
Dec 7, 2016 10:07:33 #
PhotoArtsLA wrote:
The 6mm f/2.8 full frame Nikkor is very, very wide, very, very good, but a tad expensive...
There was a deal on one recently for only $160,000.
I'm just not sure that I would pay that much for a lens that is only really sharp for about 65-70% of its image from side to side. The edges are relatively poor. See upper photo.
For my money I prefer the $200 Rokinon 8mm f3.5 (lower photo, crop from right lower corner with heli visible). Sorry for the pixelation, I don't have the full sized image here now, but I think you can see my point.
Dec 7, 2016 14:13:42 #
Djedi wrote:
That's a shame. Mine is pretty sharp. I have a 30x40 print on the wall that is a full size blowup of an aerial photography image, and the far corner is just about as sharp as the center. If one is ultra critical, there may be a slight reduction in the upper right corner, but if there is coma, I can't detect it here. I usually shoot these at f8 however, never wide open if I can help it since I need the detail.
You are not going to see coma unless you are photographing point light sources like stars in the Milky Way. And, yes, f/8 will greatly diminish coma. For Milky Way photography, you are going to need the f/1.4 or f/2.8.
Dec 8, 2016 08:05:02 #
Colinus wrote:
Hey guys! New kid on the block. I'm looking for opinions on using the Nikon 16-35 f/4G for night skies. Most of my day time shots are landscape and I'm comfortable that this lens will serve me well. But, I've not been able to find much on its use for night photography and am looking for anyone with experience using this lens at night. Thanks for any and all help and I'm grateful for other info I've picked up while being a voyeur of this site. If curious, camera is D810.
While I haven't done much night photography to date, I can say with certainty that the "do it all" long zoom lenses such as the Tamron 16-300 or Sigma 18-300 are what should NOT be used. I know this doesn't directly apply to the O.P. because he has a full frame camera and these are intended for crop sensor models. Nonetheless, I felt it wise to warn the other readers. Here are a couple of shots taken with a Pentax K50/Sigma 18-300 combo handheld at night. You can see more on my post in Photo Gallery "Bringing a Knife to a gunfight"
Dec 8, 2016 08:46:06 #
jblazar wrote:
You are not going to see coma unless you are photographing point light sources like stars in the Milky Way. And, yes, f/8 will greatly diminish coma. For Milky Way photography, you are going to need the f/1.4 or f/2.8.
Best shot I ever got of the milky way from my polluted sky location (nr. Albany, NY) was on a very clear, cold, cold, cold winter night with my 13mm f2.8 Rokinon, so you are correct.
I think I might have been shooting wide open, but it's been a couple of years.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.