Marlboro night

[Ben Egbert]

I took this at Marlboro point the first night when my normal viewpoint was inhabited by another party. It was dark until about 4:00AM when the moon came up. I had 20 minutes to shoot with moonlight on the terrain before the MW core was gone.,

A headlight stopped the time lapse about that time so I repositioned for a single image MW with some moonlight. I did not like it much however and the next night I got a better single which I will show at another time.

This was taken with the Canon R5 with a Rokinon 14mm f2.4 shooting at f2.8 25 seconds, ISO 3200. I tried to bring up the ground layer but it was too messy so I just cropped most of it out for this video.

I worked hard on the color and brightness. I am not fully satisfied with the color, but I like the brightness. I prefer a darker sky.

I rendered this at 15FPS in Photoshop rather than 29.75

CC welcome

 

[AlanLichty]

Interesting to see the flight paths across the low horizon. Nice MW.

 

[chuckp]

Nice Job, I like the flight paths also. I thought I would never say that since they ruin a lot of astro pics but they are pretty cool in time lapse.

 

[JimFox]

Hey Ben, I think this is your best one yet! I think your brightness in the sky looks good. You made a great decision with just that small bit of ground layer since it would be so dark anyway. I would try pushing the saturation a little more and just see how it looked? But by no means do I think you have to do that as the night sky has a pretty natural look to it.

My one question though is why is it so short? Why don't we get to see the Milky Way rising up from the horizon? While I like seeing the Milky Way move, to me there is nothing more majestic then watching the Milky Way as it rises up from below the ground.

 

[Ben Egbert]

Interesting to see the flight paths across the low horizon. Nice MW.

Thanks Alan, we also saw Star link sattelites earlier.

Nice Job, I like the flight paths also. I thought I would never say that since they ruin a lot of astro pics but they are pretty cool in time lapse.

Thanks Chuck, no matter how remote you get airplanes seem to be there.

Hey Ben, I think this is your best one yet! I think your brightness in the sky looks good. You made a great decision with just that small bit of ground layer since it would be so dark anyway. I would try pushing the saturation a little more and just see how it looked? But by no means do I think you have to do that as the night sky has a pretty natural look to it.

My one question though is why is it so short? Why don't we get to see the Milky Way rising up from the horizon? While I like seeing the Milky Way move, to me there is nothing more majestic then watching the Milky Way as it rises up from below the ground.

Never occurred to me. I set my alarm for when the MY core would become visible and shot until it was nearly done. I would have shot another 20 minutes but I had the headlight issue.

 

[JimFox]

Thanks Alan, we also saw Star link sattelites earlier.




Thanks Chuck, no matter how remote you get airplanes seem to be there.



Never occurred to me. I set my alarm for when the MY core would become visible and shot until it was nearly done. I would have shot another 20 minutes but I had the headlight issue.

Yeah, I had suggested it to you before a few times. Since you have the dummy battery so the camera can run all night, once the night sky gets as dark as it will get, usually 1.5 hours after sunset, just set up your camera and let it shoot. Then you don't need an alarm to wake you up for the Milky Way if you want to sleep.

 

[Ben Egbert]

I used the battery, but I was not sure where to aim the camera (even though I had the phone ap), I also wanted to be near the camera when the moon came up to reposition it and take advantage of the light and maybe get a better view of Marlboro. As it turned out, I did reposition.

 

[Mike Lewis]

Ben,

Very nice! I have that exact same combo of camera and lens (as I stubbornly wait for an RF version of the Sigma 14 f/1.8 to come out) - great to see them at work here. I like the 15 fps, seems to work well for the time-lapse. And I don't know if you did it to shut me up, but I really appreciated the music credit at the beginning. I will have to go look that artist up, I like that type of music and it worked very well with this subject.

ML

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ben,

Very nice! I have that exact same combo of camera and lens (as I stubbornly wait for an RF version of the Sigma 14 f/1.8 to come out) - great to see them at work here. I like the 15 fps, seems to work well for the time-lapse. And I don't know if you did it to shut me up, but I really appreciated the music credit at the beginning. I will have to go look that artist up, I like that type of music and it worked very well with this subject.

ML

Thanks' Mike. I have started adding music credits because you suggested it. Some of the ones that are free have wield titles.

This camera and lens combo is pretty neat, but this lens is EF mount and requires an adaptor which does not seem to hurt. In issue in Photoshop is that the lens correction for viggnetting produces very bright corners. I think the profile in Photoshop is for EF cameras. Anyway, I use CA but turn off Viggnette

 

[Kyle Jones]

I think this came out really nice. I think your color is probably technically accurate, but I like to push it a little more toward blue. It just looks nice to me that way.

I sometimes use the distortion corrections in LR/PS, but pretty much never use the vignetting correction.

Mike - if it makes you feel better, the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.4 is better controlled for distortion and coma than the Sigma...

 

[Ben Egbert]

I think this came out really nice. I think your color is probably technically accurate, but I like to push it a little more toward blue. It just looks nice to me that way.

I sometimes use the distortion corrections in LR/PS, but pretty much never use the vignetting correction.

Mike - if it makes you feel better, the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.4 is better controlled for distortion and coma than the Sigma...

Thanks Kyle. I also like more blue but its hard to get in a time lapse without turning the stars blue.

On a single, I make a star mask and a sky mask where I can make the sky bluer without effecting the stars.

 

[Mike Lewis]

I think this came out really nice. I think your color is probably technically accurate, but I like to push it a little more toward blue. It just looks nice to me that way.

I sometimes use the distortion corrections in LR/PS, but pretty much never use the vignetting correction.

Mike - if it makes you feel better, the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.4 is better controlled for distortion and coma than the Sigma...

Kyle,

Really? That is good info. Perhaps I will have to look at that at least as an interim solution. I already rented the Sigma for our upcoming trip, but I will dig into that 14/2.4 again and possibly reconsider it...

ML

 

[Kyle Jones]

Kyle,

Really? That is good info. Perhaps I will have to look at that at least as an interim solution. I already rented the Sigma for our upcoming trip, but I will dig into that 14/2.4 again and possibly reconsider it...

ML

This is consistent with what I've seen on other sites. Coma and astigmatism are better on the Samyang, although the Sigma is still very good. The Sigma has f/1.8 and autofocus and the Samyang is half the cost. Both lenses are really really nice for night photography.

https://www.dpreview.com/videos/881...shootout-samyang-14mm-f2-4-vs-sigma-14mm-f1-8

 

[Ben Egbert]

Beware, I used my Rokinon for landscapes and had the vignette issue. Either you accept the overcorrected Adobe preset or let it vignette then try to clean it up later. It would really be great if Rokinon offered an RF mount. I am going to do a test and see if i have the same problem with my EF 11-24.

 

[Kyle Jones]

I'm surprised the vignette was a problem for landscapes. I concluded that it is too strong at f/2.4 so I usually stop down to 2.8 for my night shots where it looks better (for reference, when I used to use the older Samyang 14/2.8 lens I always stopped that one down a little too). I've used the lens for landscapes and thought it was nearly flawless at f/8. As a point of reference, the canon EF 16-35 f/2.8 III has about 4 stops of vignetting in the corners which is really steep.

I have never seen any signs of degradation from using the canon EF-RF lens adapters, although I have only used the first party canon adapters.

 

[Mike Lewis]

This is consistent with what I've seen on other sites. Coma and astigmatism are better on the Samyang, although the Sigma is still very good. The Sigma has f/1.8 and autofocus and the Samyang is half the cost. Both lenses are really really nice for night photography.

https://www.dpreview.com/videos/881...shootout-samyang-14mm-f2-4-vs-sigma-14mm-f1-8

Kyle,

Thanks for the link. Very informative!

ML

 

[Ben Egbert]

The problem is if you use coorrection it brightens the corner too much

 

[Kyle Jones]

I'd agree with that - I never use the correction...

 

[Ben Egbert]

If you don't use the correction, its overly dark, and least at f2,8. I need to relook at the f8 shot and wee how it looks with correction off. I sometimes turn on correction and then adjust vignette to -70

 

[Ben Egbert]

Ok, I reprocessed my landscape without correction, and it works pretty good but you lose geometric control.