[vibbs]

Originally Posted by architect

But I find this lens to be paisa vasool for the amateur/hobbyist on a budget.

Yes I agree it might not be the best lens out there, but you cant really argue with the price.

Friends,

Need a small help here. Been thinking of buying a 50 mm Prime for some time now. I have a 1100D with me. Now issue is budget so its only the nifty fifty that I can afford. Canon 50mm 1.8 ii for about 7.5 K, give and take a couple of hundred rupees from ebay. I checked a few reviews and was pretty much sold on it mainly because of the price and the value at that price. That was untill I saw an offer in the global site for a used SMC Pentax MF1.7 50 mm. Now I again searched and found that if I get an adapter, I can use it on my EOS without the need for any corrective optics, that are needed with canons on FD series lens.

I caught a few videos on youtube and the lens seems to be very good. So now I am tilting towards this as there are a few good deals available in ebay for used lens for around 60 USD including the shipping.

Need some suggestions from veterans here, if anybody has been using old pentax lenses on EOS Cameras and would it make sense going for the older pentax lens instead of the canon nifty fifty?

[clevermax]

Originally Posted by Shome

Hi guys, planning to go for my first ever meteor spotting on the 13th-14th Dec during the Geminid meteor shower with my Alpha 35 and 18/55 stock lens. Tentative plans are to go to a place call Parsik Hill which is at a height of about 500 feet. Any tips that might help me get a good click in case I am lucky enough to spot a few meteors?

Kit lens may not be a good idea. Go with a lens which has a wider aperture than kit. I tried using my 50mm @ f/1.7 with my A35 and I could photograph a lot of stars which were not even seen by naked eyes. Had posted that picture couple of months back in Official non-auto image thread.

EDIT: Hot linking it here

[joslicx]

@clevermax

Thats a nice pic. I have a question though. How do you differentiate if the white dots in the pic are not noise (I remember reading about some kind of noise that leaves white dots on the pic you take - it gets worse if you raise ISO). So here in this pic, how would you say the dots are stars and not noise.

Asking this just for my knowledge. I have taken some long exposures at night with my camera and I see those ugly white spots! So was wondering if I am doing something wrong.

[Rajvir Bains]

Originally Posted by clevermax

Kit lens may not be a good idea. Go with a lens which has a wider aperture than kit. I tried using my 50mm @ f/1.7 with my A35 and I could photograph a lot of stars which were not even seen by naked eyes. Had posted that picture couple of months back in Official non-auto image thread.

EDIT: Hot linking it here

Sorry for going off topic, Hello Clevermax, can you please share the exif data of this image.
The number of stars visible are amazing. Where was this picture taken ?

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by amitk26

Well there is a Canon 50 F1.2 L USM which is AF and also 24 F1.4 USM exists , I really do not know who uses them and why.

For wide field astro-photography, you need an ultra wide with large max aperture.
So 8mm 2.8, 11-16 2.8, 10mm 2.8 are really useful, as you can have 40 second long exposures with no star trailing.

Right now I have 8mm F3.5, which requires me to shoot 60 second exposures at high ISO. I would ideally like a 40 second exposure with this lens(to avoid any trailing).
With 60 seconds, I barely get by
Eg this shot I had to pull up in RAW.
With a F2.8 8mm, I could have gone for a 45 second exposure, and no need to pull up, and even when viewed large, there would have been no trailing


another advantage of having a bright wide angle is ability to take hand held dusk/dawn shots with a GND on, without getting too much camera shake or pulling up ISO.

Even for interior shooting, bright F2.8 ultra wides allow you to do a fair bit of shooting at lower ISOs hand held.
By using the still narrow DOF, and the wide field of view, you can often create the illusion of the room being bigger than it actually is. Of course any wide angle will create that illusion, but with a narrow DOF, you can get interesting creative effects.

that said, most landscape shooters barely need brighter than F5.6, hence very few bright specialist ultra wide lenses exist.

[mobike008]

Originally Posted by architect

I had gone to Pritam's at Chandni Chowk for a Vanguard tripod with Pritam's standard 20% discount on MRP. I spotted the Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro selling for Rs 8,200/- (Pritam's price)

I wouldnt want to really burst the bubble. Have this lens from last 3 years and bought it for 7K back then. We get excited with its range during the initial days but, over a short period of time that excitement dies down and you will see the flip side of this lens

It produces really soft pictures. Almost impossible to get a sharp picture at the far-end of the tele and has soft edges too

Originally Posted by architect

2. It's autofocus is very good and very fast (for its price).3. Low-light conditions are not its strong points.
4. Lack of IS means you have to learn meditation to hold the camera super-steady with that heavy telephoto up-front.
5. Macro mode is only 2:1 but good for occasional macro endeavours.

2. autofocus is its biggest disadvantage. In low light, the hunt goes on forever

3. I tried it on my D5100 and not much improvement of low light conditions

4. At 300mm with no VR/IS, you need nerves of steel to get a decent shot

5. Macro is decent for a beginner

I heard the Sigma 70-300mm is a slightly better performer. But, overall for 7K I reckon you cannot complain too much about these lens

If you'd like i can post some pics taken with Tamaron 70-300

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

For wide field astro-photography, you need an ultra wide with large max aperture.
So 8mm 2.8, 11-16 2.8, 10mm 2.8 are really useful, as you can have 40 second long exposures with no star trailing.

Lovely pic.

Now it makes sense why Canon have these ultra-fast lenses and they have a specialized camera for astro-photography too. Thanks for putting pieces of puzzle together TSK.

I think a Canon 60DA or 5D MKIII/1Dx with 24 F1.4 USM will make a perfect kit for you may be some day

[architect]

Originally Posted by mobike008

I wouldnt want to really burst the bubble.

It produces really soft pictures. Almost impossible to get a sharp picture at the far-end of the tele and has soft edges too

No bubble-bursting here, appreciate the honest feedback. My bubble had burst the day I realised that there were no nice lenses below the 30,000 mark in telephoto. It just burst again when Canon raised priced by 50% recently.

Photography, being a hobby and not a profession or an all-consuming passion, I was not willing to pay 60,000 for a telephoto (no doubt, it may be worth it). Neither was I willing to move around for 2-3 years waiting for a time when I could spare a lakh for a telephoto and a wide (that I always need for architectural photography, being an architect).

This lens has its limitations in terms of performance in poor light and at either extreme ends of its range. It is also not good at apertures more than, say, 7. But, for Rs 8,300/-, it is still somewhere to start. I did have the option of buying a better telephoto from Sigma / Tamron for around 30,000 with VR/IS but then I would rather save that money for an L series.

[mobike008]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

For wide field astro-photography, you need an ultra wide with large max aperture.So 8mm 2.8, 11-16 2.8, 10mm 2.8 are really useful, as you can have 40 second long exposures with no star trailing.

Wow, I learn something new everyday. Tanveer, I didnt know that the long exposure length is dependent on the aperture width? I mean if a lens has large aperture like 1.8, 2.8 etc...it is directly proportional to the amount of time the exposure can be extended. I was thinking the long exposure is a camera dependent feature? Please correct me if i am wrong?

Btw, I have a prime lens Nikkor F 1.8/G. Suppose using that lens on my D5100, how long can I keep the exposure open to shoot a star studded night sky?

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by mobike008

Wow, I learn something new everyday. Tanveer, I didnt know that the long exposure length is dependent on the aperture width? I mean if a lens has large aperture like 1.8, 2.8 etc...it is directly proportional to the amount of time the exposure can be extended. I was thinking the long exposure is a camera dependent feature? Please correct me if i am wrong?

Btw, I have a prime lens Nikkor F 1.8/G. Suppose using that lens on my D5100, how long can I keep the exposure open to shoot a star studded night sky?

No, you can have any length of exposure irrespective of the lens.
However, if you do not want starts to strail(become lines due to earths rotation), the max exposure you can do is
600/focal length in 35mm format
So for an 8mm lens, which is 12mm on nikon DX, you can go upto 50s, or lets say 45 seconds to be on the safe side.
With such a limit, a F1.8 lens is much better than a F3.5 lens.

[mobike008]

Originally Posted by mobike008

Btw, I have a prime lens Nikkor F 1.8/G. Suppose using that lens on my D5100, how long can I keep the exposure open to shoot a star studded night sky?

Originally Posted by tsk1979

With such a limit, a F1.8 lens is much better than a F3.5 lens.

Thanks. Can you tell me a exposure setting for shooting a picture like yours with my D5100 + F1.8G set up on a tripod on a dark and clear night with lots of stars.

Is this fine?

Aperture Mode at F1.8
45 secs exposure

Will the picture come out fine? I know its rhetorical question but, is this sample setting good for a nice starry picture?

[amitk26]

That 600/focal length is really good info.
BTW I do not see a thanks button below the post.
Its off topic but It is inconsistent for some posts it is there and disappears for some others.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by mobike008

Thanks. Can you tell me a exposure setting for shooting a picture like yours with my D5100 + F1.8G set up on a tripod on a dark and clear night with lots of stars.

Is this fine?

Aperture Mode at F1.8
45 secs exposure

Will the picture come out fine? I know its rhetorical question but, is this sample setting good for a nice starry picture?

With your 50mm 1.8 I suggest the following
ISO 3200
10 seconds
Aperture 1.8

First focus on the distant source of light, and then flick switch to manual focus.

You will get great starscapes. Get google sky, and then try to get some galaxies like andromeda pictured here

[mobike008]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

With your 50mm 1.8 I suggest the following
ISO 3200
10 seconds
Aperture 1.8

I have a 35mm lens. I am assuming above settings remain?

Originally Posted by tsk1979

First focus on the distant source of light, and then flick switch to manual focus.

I didnt quite understand this. I press the shutter halfway to focus on distant light...then switch the button on camera from AF to MF...then what?

Originally Posted by tsk1979

You will get great starscapes. Get google sky, and then try to get some galaxies like andromeda pictured here

Awesome picture. Thanks for the tip

[rajismine]

Originally Posted by mobike008

I didnt quite understand this. I press the shutter halfway to focus on distant light...then switch the button on camera from AF to MF...then what?

Awesome picture. Thanks for the tip

Just focus the lens to infinity in case of stars and click,

What he meant to say is that since in low light focusing is tough, you may want to fist focus on a distant bright object so that the lens fixes focal length. Now move from AF to MF else while going on to stars, focus will being hunting again. Now in MF, click and you are good.

My advise, don't do this much. Stars are the farthest subject anyways so simply put the lens in MF and infinity and click :-)