You might want to visit dpReview's Astrophotography Forum to see what they say. Good luck with either of the lenses you select. What this means is you see more in space with the 16mm than the 10mm since it gathers more light, the name of the game in astrophotography when using unguided cameras. These figures are of course based on shooting wide open. If you do not use tracking, and by using the 200 rule as a general guideline, you can expose for 200/10 or 20 seconds without appreciable star trailing vs 200/16 or 12.5 seconds without appreciable trailing. stars etc.) With the same exposure time on the 16mm, really even less exposure time will capture more. This means you can see more space objects (i.e. The 16mm f2.0 gathers 5 times the light as a 10mm f2.8: 16/2.0=8 true aperture 10/2.8=3.6 true aperture. Well, that's a great idea ! I will have to use the Samyang 12mm f/2.8 on my Nikon J1 /V1 ! I wonder what kind of "32mm fisheye" kind of images I will get ? I can even use it on my my Nikon V1 and J5 for some really different fisheye with it's 2.7 crop factor. The great thing is that, since I bought the Nikon mount, I can use it on EVERYTHING from my D810 and D750, to my Sony a6000 (with and without the speedbooster) and a7s. I just have to set aside some time to go someplace remote. Can't wait to do some astrophotography or timelapse work with it. I plan to buy some defishing software, but for now, I think it is an interesting aesthetic that I'll be playing around with for a while. I think mine might be slightly decentered since the one of the extreme edges seems blurrier than the other, but I'll have to check further to make sure. I got mine about a month ago and it's an interesting lens with the fisheye effect. f/2.8 FULL FRAME for FX ? I just got one and it's sharp from f/2.8 onwards ! A lot of people use it exclusively for astrophotography including me. Why not settle for something in betweeen? The Rokinon 14mm 2.8. It has the f/2 aperture of the 16mm and it's fairly close to being as wide as the 10mm. It's a shame they don't make the Rokinon 12mm f/2 in Nikon F-mount. You can always expose for a little bit longer because it is so much wider and clean up any additional noise in post. If I had to choose between those two, I'd go with the 10mm. Wider angle and slower lens vs Narrower angle and faster lens? Here, I’ve tested five popular wide-angle lenses for astrophotography: the Laowa 12mm f/2.8, Rokinon 14mm f/2.4, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, Nikon. After all, a good lens during the day might be a dud for resolving pinpoint stars in a photo’s corners at night. Basically I just want a lens that will take good wide angle shots of the Milky Way. If you want to shoot sharp photos of stars, it helps to have the right lens for the job. But also the 16mm is faster and more sharp from what I have heard. I like the 10mm because it is very wide and sounds like it would get the job done for the UWA shots. I have tried astrophotography before but it was with a 50mm so I really want to try it out again and get some great landscape shots of the milky way. As the title says I'm deciding between the 10mm and 16mm. Hey guys this is my first post and I've been struggling with which lens to get.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |