On 7/11/2025 at 8:59 AM, Cations said:

If price wasn't an issue would you get the 12-24mm 2.8 or the 14mm 1.8?

I chose the 14mm for the combo of speed, size and weight and would make that choice again, for me. It fits well within my usual travel setup (which otherwise has two zooms). For purely aurora use I would probably still choose the 14/1.8 over a 12-24/2.8 but I think both would give you great results and if you don't care about size/weight the zoom will be more versatile.

5 hours ago, astroHoward said:

I had never looked at your flickr until now Jessica, most impressive photography. You have a good eye for composition. Clearly good at panos. I must ask, do you use PTGui or another tool?

Thanks. I actually do not do as many panos, LOL I started making them more especially last year and the year before, hence Page 1 of the stream might look this way. But if you go page 2, 3, 4, you will hardly see any. I make them in Photoshop. Most of my development is in Lightroom with only some images requiring PS, such as focus stacks or exposure blending.

RE: exposure time

Here at my latitude, I find longer exposure times helps bring out blues and purples (i.e. shorter wavelength light).
At 24mm, star trails are pretty much a non-issue unless I'm intentionally trying to image the stars + aurora with a higher zoom (75-105mm) ...and for this stacking is the preferred method with exposures no greater than 3-5 sec (with no tracker). All depends on exactly what the photo is trying to capture...i.e faint, low elevation aurora = long exposure times with some zoom vs. brighter/more complex aurora at higher latitudes using faster wide angle lenses. For me down here, I've never seen aurora directly overhead (though May 2024 sparked aurora about 60 deg elevation) to see these fine features.
One other trick that I haven't tried (but like to), is to make a "stitched" image. Using this old technology, theoretically you can zoom in on aurora to maximize color and detail, then use stitch to simulate a wide angle shot. Hopefully I'll another chance in this solar cycle to test out the technique?

16 hours ago, Eder Galway said:

Could someone tell me how to take a selfie with an aurora?
The settings would be:
ISO 1200-6400
F 1.8-2.0
Distance from the person to be in focus: 1/2 hyperfocal distance.
The problem is with the exposure time: if it's 4-5 seconds, the person may not be sharp. The correct exposure would be 1/250 or 1/500. But then, the lens might not have enough time to capture enough light for the person to be visible.
I would then have to set a higher ISO, burning out parts of the aurora if it's strong.
I've read that people use flash or lights like flashlights to illuminate the person.
What do you think? Could you help me?
Thanks!!

I have seen some great pics taken with the aid of a small light that lights up the person - but if the Auroras are strong enough, or if the moon is out you may not even need it. Of course it always depends on the situation and the strength of the Auroras, too.

The small light could be a stationary light near the person (on the ground), a camera flash, (or a flashlight so one does light painting with it "painting" the person with the light, but then you need a 2nd person to do it).

If you use a stationary light, you can also set it so it only puts out light for part of the exposure time when you need longer exposure for the Auroras. That way the person you see in the image will be only lit for a short amount of time (less movement), and is less visible during the lightless part of the exposure.

You just need to experiment with it to see what works best for you. You could practice it while shooting the Milky Way, for example, if you don't have Auroras available - then you know how to do it when the Auroras show up. Of course it won't be exactly the same timing, but you get a good handle on how to approach it.

Does the camera have a USB or bluetooth connection available? If so, then use a remote shutter release. Many modern camera's have bluetooth, and a remote/fob to trigger the camera can be had for under $10.
Once the settings are determined for nightime shooting...usually seconds (at least), then just a quick burp (1/30 - 1/60 second) of light is all you need to illuminate a foreground subject.

22 hours ago, JessicaF said:

Do you like my images, @Cations ? They are shot mostly with 14-30 mm f4 lens, 24-70 mm f4 (now smashed). and recently with 24-70 mm f2.8. I do not mean to trivialize the importance of a good lens here. But with a better lens, you will collect more aurora light as well as the light pollution. What makes a far bigger difference is to go to a better sky and minimize the light pollution. I know it is easier said than done, and I have an advantage living more out in the sticks. And I will add that it is better to shoot under bad sky than not go out at all.

I have a chem question but it is about anions, so I assume you probably would not know the answer ... LOL just joking here. Chemistry is important. No relationship can exist without it.

Love your images!

Sorry your lens got smashed.

LOL! Most people think "Kay-shens" like in vacations?

I named my cat ion, so that way when people come over I can say "This is my cat, ion." and see who gets it. I'm in favor of getting a lot of cats and calling them ion, Eye-on, Aye-on, I-on, i-On, etc... and just using different inflections so they know who they are when called, but Mrs. Ion won't tolerate any more than one cat.

I should probably break down and buy the 14mm 1.8 now because I'll have it for the next storm which could appear at anytime and I'll be ready for it. If I wait, I might miss something special...

16 minutes ago, Cations said:

Love your images!

Sorry your lens got smashed.

LOL! Most people think "Kay-shens" like in vacations?

I named my cat ion, so that way when people come over I can say "This is my cat, ion." and see who gets it. I'm in favor of getting a lot of cats and calling them ion, Eye-on, Aye-on, I-on, i-On, etc... and just using different inflections so they know who they are when called, but Mrs. Ion won't tolerate any more than one cat.

I should probably break down and buy the 14mm 1.8 now because I'll have it for the next storm which could appear at anytime and I'll be ready for it. If I wait, I might miss something special...

LoL you made me smile, cat-ion :) so wonderfully nerdy. Great choice with the lens! I am 100% sure u will love it.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by JessicaF

On 7/16/2025 at 4:45 PM, Cations said:

Love your images!

Sorry your lens got smashed.

LOL! Most people think "Kay-shens" like in vacations?

I named my cat ion, so that way when people come over I can say "This is my cat, ion." and see who gets it. I'm in favor of getting a lot of cats and calling them ion, Eye-on, Aye-on, I-on, i-On, etc... and just using different inflections so they know who they are when called, but Mrs. Ion won't tolerate any more than one cat.

I should probably break down and buy the 14mm 1.8 now because I'll have it for the next storm which could appear at anytime and I'll be ready for it. If I wait, I might miss something special...

Edited August 6Aug 6 by Cations

On 7/15/2025 at 9:46 PM, DavidS said:

I chose the 14mm for the combo of speed, size and weight and would make that choice again, for me. It fits well within my usual travel setup (which otherwise has two zooms). For purely aurora use I would probably still choose the 14/1.8 over a 12-24/2.8 but I think both would give you great results and if you don't care about size/weight the zoom will be more versatile.

I just ordered the Sigma 14mm f1.4 which I had rush shipped (I never do that, but it was only a tiny bit more) so hopefully it will get here by the end of the day (I paid for that). I could have waited until the weekend for tax free, but I want the auroras if they manifest tomorrow night. I've watched a ton of reviews and it has a slight edge over the Sony 14mm f1.8 in astrophotography and I don't care about the size (I'm shooting on a tripod ffs so that won't matter much, and I've lugged around a heavy backpack every day so I'm used to carrying heavy bags, this won't be that heavy).

So hopefully the auroras will manifest and it will stay cloudless as forecast (supposed to clear up right as twilight descends across the northeast).

We'll all have our eyes on Mt. Katahdin (Thank you @JessicaF !!!)

https://www.neoc.com/webcam3/

13 minutes ago, Cations said:

I just ordered the Sigma 14mm f1.4 which I had rush shipped (I never do that, but it was only a tiny bit more) so hopefully it will get here by the end of the day (I paid for that). I could have waited until the weekend for tax free, but I want the auroras if they manifest tomorrow night. I've watched a ton of reviews and it has a slight edge over the Sony 14mm f1.8 in astrophotography and I don't care about the size (I'm shooting on a tripod ffs so that won't matter much, and I've lugged around a heavy backpack every day so I'm used to carrying heavy bags, this won't be that heavy).

So hopefully the auroras will manifest and it will stay cloudless as forecast (supposed to clear up right as twilight descends across the northeast).

We'll all have our eyes on Mt. Katahdin (Thank you @JessicaF !!!)

https://www.neoc.com/webcam3/

Any suggestions on what to do when I first get the lens to make sure it is a good copy? I will probably get it right before I take my ions to fencing class and take it with me to prep for twilight which will descend right after we get home.

On 7/16/2025 at 1:45 PM, Cations said:

Love your images!

Sorry your lens got smashed.

LOL! Most people think "Kay-shens" like in vacations?

I named my cat ion, so that way when people come over I can say "This is my cat, ion." and see who gets it. I'm in favor of getting a lot of cats and calling them ion, Eye-on, Aye-on, I-on, i-On, etc... and just using different inflections so they know who they are when called, but Mrs. Ion won't tolerate any more than one cat.

I should probably break down and buy the 14mm 1.8 now because I'll have it for the next storm which could appear at anytime and I'll be ready for it. If I wait, I might miss something special...

Keep an eye on that cat! 🐈‍⬛. Ion. Cool name. 😎

Edited August 6Aug 6 by hamateur 1953
My next cat will be named Kaypee. ( Kp) 🤣🤣🤣

1 hour ago, Cations said:

Any suggestions on what to do when I first get the lens to make sure it is a good copy? I will probably get it right before I take my ions to fencing class and take it with me to prep for twilight which will descend right after we get home.

The most brutal test of any camera lens (or telescope) is a night sky star test. Even some of the best lenses can struggle with this test.

Use a good star field, like the milky way, ideally from a decent dark sky. Focus as best you can, take some images in a raw format. Exposure should be long enough to capture the stars but not too long you get trailing if on a simple tripod. If really testing things you could take exposures wide open then stop down. IE taking some as 1.4, 1.8, 2, etc, Examine the test shots on a computer at full size and see how the stars look.

Now I do not know what a good copy of that lens should look like. Certainly it should at least be uniform across the fov. That is, if you have some star distortion, such as chromatic aberration or coma at the corners (typical), a better lens will at least be the same in all corners.

Another good test for a super wide angle like a 14mm would be is a large wall with horizontal lines (such as bricks or blocks). Any mustache distortion and areas of poor focus will show up on that kind of image at f1.4. Its not unusual to have some distortion in super wild angle lenses.

I have a Sigma Art 40mm f1.4 lens for Canon EOS and it is the only lens I have that has near perfect pinpoint stars from corner to corner wide open at f1.4. However it is a huge lens for its FL and has significant vignetting. But thats something you can get ride of in post processing.

1 hour ago, astroHoward said:

The most brutal test of any camera lens (or telescope) is a night sky star test. Even some of the best lenses can struggle with this test.

Use a good star field, like the milky way, ideally from a decent dark sky. Focus as best you can, take some images in a raw format. Exposure should be long enough to capture the stars but not too long you get trailing if on a simple tripod. If really testing things you could take exposures wide open then stop down. IE taking some as 1.4, 1.8, 2, etc, Examine the test shots on a computer at full size and see how the stars look.

Now I do not know what a good copy of that lens should look like. Certainly it should at least be uniform across the fov. That is, if you have some star distortion, such as chromatic aberration or coma at the corners (typical), a better lens will at least be the same in all corners.

Another good test for a super wide angle like a 14mm would be is a large wall with horizontal lines (such as bricks or blocks). Any mustache distortion and areas of poor focus will show up on that kind of image at f1.4. Its not unusual to have some distortion in super wild angle lenses.

I have a Sigma Art 40mm f1.4 lens for Canon EOS and it is the only lens I have that has near perfect pinpoint stars from corner to corner wide open at f1.4. However it is a huge lens for its FL and has significant vignetting. But thats something you can get ride of in post processing.

Bless you! Thank you very much, this is exactly what I needed.

One of the reviews I watched said to make sure it is a good copy of the lens. They also said that it slightly beat out the Sony 14 1.8 for sharpness (at 1.8), which is why I got it. For me it was almost the same price as the Sony so I got it. My first non-Sony lens

Thank you very much for your help. I'll try the wall test while the little ones are fencing and then the stars as soon as it gets dark unless I need to be snapping for the aurora and then it will be a "live test" I guess...

2 hours ago, hamateur 1953 said:

Keep an eye on that cat! 🐈‍⬛. Ion. Cool name. 😎

Nice!

Finally, I ordered a "Canon EOS RP" mirrorless camera, without a lens. I will use the lenses from the previous Canon 2000D camera via an adapter, and then it will be seen, you may have to fork out for Tamron type lenses or the original. Full-frame, acceptable light sensitivity, at least an order of magnitude better than 2000D. Inexpensive, although for this money you could take a little more functional competitor, but I prefer Canon on principle. Of course, I could have bought a flagship one, but common sense tells me that there is no need for this. When the moon goes away, I'll try to take pictures of the starry sky, and if there are auroras, it will be even cool. I do not regret that I bought an entry-level camera first. I've learned how to make the most of this camera, and now I know the limitations I've faced and I know what I need now.

Here are some photos taken with a Canon 2000D entry-level camera:

there are about 100 frames here, I don't remember exactly, I put them together in the DSS program:

21 frames, I did my best

Edited August 11Aug 11 by Samrau
Translation correction

Congratulations with your new camera @Samrau . You made some great pictures with your entry level camera and you are very much correct, it was the correct decision to buy the 2000D as your first camera. First you got to learn how to swim before hopping into the pool unassisted. Still, skills are way more important than having top notch gear. Hope to see some great images from your new camera in the months ahead!

Congrats @Samrau . Canon is always good choice. My way with Canons: 350d (rebel XT) -> 40d -> 5DMKII -> R8. Have fun and I'm also waiting for new shoots! 😊

Congrats to your new toy, @Samrau ! Going from a cropped sensor to a full frame will make a big difference for low light imaging. Love that M 31 pic. Enjoy and keep posting! ❤️

Beautiful @Samrau Bravo dude!

Agree also on the M31 shot! Incredible

I wanted to share my first impressions of the new Canon RP camera. After taking my first photos with the Canon RF 24-50mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM lens, I was almost disappointed with the camera, wondering if my crop 2000D was better. When I received the EF-RF adapter, I mounted my EF-S lenses and compared them. The RF 24-50mm lens was simply terrible! I also have a diagonal fisheye lens, but it is designed for APS-C. Even when I set the RP to APS-C format, I have to close the aperture a lot to get good sharpness. For now, I'll use Canon EF-S lenses with an adapter and select the ones I need. Overall, it's a great and affordable camera. I'm still getting used to the differences in the interface, but the controls are similar, and I primarily use the Canon Camera Connect app.

One of my absolute favorites from May 10th. Shot in central Iowa USA

Edited August 21Aug 21 by Miles

Once I bought a RISESPRAY 50mm, F1.7 fixed lens for Canon 2000D for shooting nebulae, comets and galaxies. It seemed pretty good and affordable to me, and considering the crop factor it gave me a more suitable 80mm, but when I installed it into a full-frame RP via an adapter, the first thing I noticed was how excellent its light sensitivity was, but along with it I acquired aberrations that I did not notice on the 2000D: spherical aberration in the center, and coma at the edges. You can still live with vignetting. You have to close the aperture to F2.8-3.5. And then I had a question: do all light-sensitive lenses have such optical distortion? Or is it absent in expensive lenses? I just ran into a problem choosing a lens for my Canon RP, the entire market is filled with lenses for Sony, it's just awful. And I don't want to overpay. Apparently I'll have to fork out, talk me out of it

ISO1600\4s\F1.7

Well I don't know the answer for sure. I bet I know someone who might be able to help. The company lens rentals that has really high quality stuff, including the very tippy top of the best for at least Canon and many other companies has been very helpful as a technical advisor when I needed to ask what I should use. I haven't done it for night time stuff. But I did rent. They're top of the line equipment for the total solar eclipse in 2024. So I'm betting if you can speak to them. They would happily advise

I should say I have no affiliation with them. I just like their way of doing things and have used them personally for a variety of photographic projects, family trips, etc. And was happy all the time with their help

For some reason I wasn't getting alerts and basically missed a couple events. Also health reasons. Even if when I had gotten the alert I wouldn't have been able to go. Unfortunately that will probably continue for chronic issues. That said, I do have my new toy a full frame Cannon. I'm using a R6 Mark II. I couldn't afford a new lens so I'm going with what I got a 35. That's pretty fast. It should work well enough since I was pleased with what I got using the same lens on an apsc where it gets the 1.6 Factor. So while maybe not as ideals of fully wide open and that can be a goal for funds later down the road, I'd be thrilled to see what this does. If it matches up with an event and appropriate skies and I physically feeling well enough to go do things. Let's hope this upcoming one works.

2 hours ago, Samrau said:

And then I had a question: do all light-sensitive lenses have such optical distortion? Or is it absent in expensive lenses?

I'm not sure but I'm afraid - yes... I have Canon EF 24/1.4 II USM and when the lens is wide open coma and chromatic aberration are huge! The lens cost about average monthly salary in Poland (≈1400€), so it's not cheap. Sharpness is good but I still have to set aperture at 2.8 or even 4.0 to reduce coma. But even so, I'm satisfied 😁

That's how looks corner at 2.8, ISO 3200, full frame Canon R8, after postprocess:

Edited August 31Aug 31 by Przemysław
I used word 'edge' when I meant 'corner' - fixed.

5 minutes ago, Przemysław said:

I'm not sure but I'm afraid - yes... I have CanУ меня Canon EF 24/1.4 II USM, и когда объектив открыт на полную, кома и хроматические аберрации огромны! ost about average monthly salary in Poland (≈1400€), so it's not cheap. Sharpness is good but I still have to set aperture at 2.8 or even 4.0 to reduce coma. But even so, I'm satisfied 😁

That's how looks edge at 2.8, ISO 3200, full frame Canon R8, after postprocess:

OMG. Are you sure this isn't a defective lens? Did you drop it? 😅Or did you send a cropped section of the photo?

My KIT Canon EF-S 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS II for Canon 2000D has exactly the same aberrations. You talked me out of buying such an expensive lens.

18 minutes ago, Samrau said:

O mój Boże. Jesteś pewien, że to nie jest wadliwy obiektyw? Upuściłeś go? 😅 A może wysłałeś wycięty fragment zdjęcia?

Hehehe, no worries, it's a corner 😁

@Przemysław @bluedemon25 By the way, I'm waiting for my order for a super wide-angle fixed full-frame lens. According to reviews and overviews, it takes very decent pictures. I hope I'll have time to receive it tomorrow. It's a diagonal fisheye - my favorite format. Take a closer look, maybe you'll like it too. Available for different bayonets.

https://www.ttartisan.com/?full-frame-lenses/62.html