pyang921 Posted February 2, 2014 Share #1 Posted February 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi everyone! I am thinking about getting another lens for star photography especially shooting the milky way. I am currently using a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 on my sony a7r. I found 21mm f/1.4 is the fastest in all wide-angle lenses but no sample shots can be found online. Anyone know if its performance is better than Canon 24mm f/1.4? I guess it is 2-stop faster than f/2.8 and the extra 3mm makes it wider than 24mm, though not much. I have heard 21mm summilux has some distortion issues whilst 24mm summilux is much better. Which one would you recommend? Thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Hi pyang921, Take a look here 21mm/24mm f/1.4 for star photography?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pfhrased Posted February 3, 2014 Share #2 Posted February 3, 2014 It's likely that any M lens wider than 35mm will have issues on the A7R - and most of them are only showing a properly sharp image across the frame at ~f/8. You're better off using something else - Samyang/Rokinon do plan a 24 1.4 with native FE mount, for example. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted February 3, 2014 Share #3 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) I just pointed my 21 Summilux out the window 8s @ f/1.4 ISO 160 on a M9. The camera is not squared so vertical perspective is what it is. There is quite a bit of light pollution, but you can see Orion in the center and hopefully gauge the sharpness; degree of coma and chromatic aberration. It seems sharp with well controlled coma to me. The DNG file is here if you want to look deeper. http://www.donaldingram.com/ForumImages/L1004475.DNG and a full size jpg http://www.donaldingram.com/ForumImages/L1004475full.jpg Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Edited February 3, 2014 by FrozenInTime 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/221378-21mm24mm-f14-for-star-photography/?do=findComment&comment=2524415'>More sharing options...
rramesh Posted February 3, 2014 Share #4 Posted February 3, 2014 I don't quite understand the need for f/1.4 to photograph stars. After all most night shots like this will need long exposures anyway, and with a suitable tripod, easily accomplished. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted February 3, 2014 Share #5 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) I don't quite understand the need for f/1.4 to photograph stars. After all most night shots like this will need long exposures anyway, and with a suitable tripod, easily accomplished. The Earth is rotating - so long exposures are great if you want star trails. If you expose for longer than ~ 60/focallength seconds you you will see trails. The long exposure photos with e.g. the Milky Way are traditionally taken using an equatorial mount, which when correctly aligned, tracks out the stars motion. If you want a forground object e.g. a tree to be sillioueted against a static star field you either need short exposures or to play tricks in the darkroom/post to combine, align and mask multiple images. Google widefield astrophotography - there is a good introduction on Steve Huff's site Edited February 3, 2014 by FrozenInTime 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted February 4, 2014 Share #6 Posted February 4, 2014 Yes, but the difference in exposure needs for f/1.4 vs say f/2.8 or f/3.4 to discern any trails would be minimal, I think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted February 4, 2014 Share #7 Posted February 4, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, but the difference in exposure needs for f/1.4 vs say f/2.8 or f/3.4 to discern any trails would be minimal, I think. Not true, as the difference in 2 or 3 stops can be substantial. Many people limit exposure time to under 30 seconds to avoid star trails, and unless you want to crank up the ISO and introduce significant noise in your image a fast aperture is the way to go. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfhrased Posted February 4, 2014 Share #8 Posted February 4, 2014 If you're doing this using an M9 / MM / M240 then have a good look at the Voigtländer 21mm f1.8 - but as said previously, if you're looking to adapt M lenses to A7R, don't bother, because they will be smeary until at least f8, and will probably have massive light falloff and colour issues around the edges until ~35mm. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted February 4, 2014 Share #9 Posted February 4, 2014 Not true, as the difference in 2 or 3 stops can be substantial. Many people limit exposure time to under 30 seconds to avoid star trails, and unless you want to crank up the ISO and introduce significant noise in your image a fast aperture is the way to go. For the price difference between 3.4 and 1.4 OP could buy a telescope mount that is motorized and would track stars properly all night. (Once it was aligned of course.) I don't think it would be too large either. OP - Check someplace like (in the US) Sky & Telescope magazine or the inevitable Google-verse. s-a Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted February 4, 2014 Share #10 Posted February 4, 2014 Also cheaper would be to pick up a Pentax K-3 and add the 0-GPS1 that adds the "ASTROTRACER" to compensate star motion by moving the sensor using the image stabilization in the body. I've seen some impressive results from that rig, but with the APS-C sensor wider lenses are needed. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyang921 Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share #11 Posted February 10, 2014 I just pointed my 21 Summilux out the window 8s @ f/1.4 ISO 160 on a M9.The camera is not squared so vertical perspective is what it is. There is quite a bit of light pollution, but you can see Orion in the center and hopefully gauge the sharpness; degree of coma and chromatic aberration. It seems sharp with well controlled coma to me. The DNG file is here if you want to look deeper. http://www.donaldingram.com/ForumImages/L1004475.DNG and a full size jpg http://www.donaldingram.com/ForumImages/L1004475full.jpg Wow! Thank you so much for this! I've been looking for test shots like this for a while! Is that coma controllable at all? Would that happen if I go somewhere with less light pollution? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyang921 Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share #12 Posted February 10, 2014 For the price difference between 3.4 and 1.4 OP could buy a telescope mount that is motorized and would track stars properly all night. (Once it was aligned of course.) I don't think it would be too large either.OP - Check someplace like (in the US) Sky & Telescope magazine or the inevitable Google-verse. s-a Well, most of my astro-photography includes a bit of landscapes such as mountains etc. So really I cannot use a tracking mount This style photography really empty your wallet substantially Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyang921 Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share #13 Posted February 10, 2014 If you're doing this using an M9 / MM / M240 then have a good look at the Voigtländer 21mm f1.8 - but as said previously, if you're looking to adapt M lenses to A7R, don't bother, because they will be smeary until at least f8, and will probably have massive light falloff and colour issues around the edges until ~35mm. Is that color smearing only happen with non-Leica M lenses? I saw several test shots with 24mm summilux, and they look fine, though they are not night, long exposure photos. I wonder if that would make a difference on color smearing. Is there any source that has confirmed 21mm summilux can be used on A7r and has absolutely no problem with long exposure? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted February 10, 2014 Share #14 Posted February 10, 2014 Is that coma controllable at all? Would that happen if I go somewhere with less light pollution? The only way to improve coma is to stop down ; but you will also find slower lenses often intrinsically have less coma ; so the 21/3.4 full open is likely to have less coma than the 21/1.4 stopped down to f/3.4. Light pollution does not effect coma; but lenses with larger physical apertures record fainter point sources, whereas diffuse light source exposure is governed by relative aperture. For use on the A7/A7r the Rokinon 24/1.4 would seem to be an excellent choice see How to Pick a Lens for Milky Way Photography | lonely speck 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmut99 Posted May 18, 2016 Share #15 Posted May 18, 2016 Hi everyone! I am thinking about getting another lens for star photography especially shooting the milky way. I am currently using a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 on my sony a7r. I found 21mm f/1.4 is the fastest in all wide-angle lenses but no sample shots can be found online. Anyone know if its performance is better than Canon 24mm f/1.4? I guess it is 2-stop faster than f/2.8 and the extra 3mm makes it wider than 24mm, though not much. I have heard 21mm summilux has some distortion issues whilst 24mm summilux is much better. Which one would you recommend? Thanks! If it's not too late...here's a shot with the 21mm f1.4 on the SL http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253192-leica-sl-image-thread-post-your-examples-here/?p=3045927 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 18, 2016 Share #16 Posted May 18, 2016 There is little to choose in optical quality between the Summilux 21 and Summilux 24. For lenses of this speed they are superb. It all depends on the use you plan to take; star shots are one thing, but these lenses are too fine -and expensive- to neglect their use for the rest of your photography. However, given the present-day improvements in high-ISO performance I would question the need for super-fast lenses for star photography. The Super-Elmars offer perfect edge-to-edge sharpness, minimal distortion, a flat focal plane, more so than any faster lens can offer. If I were to head out in the night I would take the Super-Elmar 18, a good tripod and crank up the ISO (within limits, of course ) Heck, the price difference would get me a A7SII... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted May 18, 2016 Share #17 Posted May 18, 2016 Here's Orion setting, over Adelaide (light "pollution"), looking west. It's upside down here... With an M8 and CV 15mm f4.5 @ 160 ISO, 24 sec, f4.5, (20mm equivalence) SOOC Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/221378-21mm24mm-f14-for-star-photography/?do=findComment&comment=3047154'>More sharing options...
jmahto Posted May 18, 2016 Share #18 Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) Shooting Milkyway require more exposure than bright stars since the stars in it are much more faint. You also need a foreground to make it look interesting which negates tracking mount. I have shot Milkyway with M240+CV 15mm V2 and have described the results and limitations of M240 in detail in the following link: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/240073-leica-m-240-its-serious-drawbacks-for-landscape-shooters-%E2%80%93-but-can-we-fix-it/page-9?do=findComment&comment=2884531 But I also would like to add that I did a very good 8x11 print of the very same picture and don't see any grain and very little star streak on the print even with close inspection. Therefore most of our concerns about high ISO grain, coma and star treak should be moderated by looking at actual output rather than by 1:1 pixel peeping. Edited May 18, 2016 by jmahto 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frase Posted May 20, 2016 Share #19 Posted May 20, 2016 Astrphotography especially stars is now mostly done by stacking rather than long exposure, most Astro mounts will not track accurately enough for anything more than 5 minutes after that they need to have a guider. The Rokinon lenses are very popular with astrophotographers and seem to work much better than the canon equivalents. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted November 17, 2016 Share #20 Posted November 17, 2016 Anyone with experience with - or that can show examples with - the 24 Lux at f1.4 for (pinpoint) star photography? Im am particularly interested in learning about the lens' coma characteristics. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.