Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/08/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]the 21 produced more star motion than the 35, of course, as it's a 3,4 lens requiring longer exposure. Yes there is star movement. The only way to avoid that is to have some sort of expensive star tracking mount or to shoot at 6400+ ISO, which will not work with the Monochrom. And with the star tracking device, any foreground objects become blurred. So not much, that is affordable, is perfect. The use of a wide aperture wide angle lens is the best I can do. I also think that it's more about the mood than being an astro fanatic and I think the Monochrom will allow me to do that. So I am pleased with these tests, though certainly not images that pop out and slap you in the face. That will come with more experience hopefully. Thanks for looking and commenting Jay, Bob On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Jay Burleson <leica at jayburleson.com> wrote: > Too small of images to really tell, but it looks like with that long of > shutter speed you are getting rotation movement in the stars, maybe? > > But Palm Shadow & Sunset Lahaina are excellent. > > Jay > > On 8/14/2015 12:27 PM, Robert Adler wrote: > >> Been hanging out on Maui this past week with Jane, the grandkids and their >> parents (phew!). >> >> Decided to shoot landscapes using the old version Monochrom and had a lot >> of fun. Then, since it's a new moon (and Perseids) I thought I would try >> the Monochrom for some "long" exposure night photography. I thought the >> outcomes were pretty acceptable! >> >> As the Monochrom has a base ISO of 320 and a maximum exposure time of 240 >> seconds (not adjusted for ISO as the M240 apparently is), seemed like it >> might work. First shot is on the beach of our hotel with lots of light >> pollution: >> http://www.robertadlerphotography.com/p464101645/h53037451#h53037451 >> This was the 35 f/2 'lux ASPH set at f/2 with a 16second exposure at 1600 >> ISO. The noise was very manageable. Overall, I thought it was a positive >> test. >> >> So the next night I drove up to the top of Haleakula (10,200') to see more >> stars. Unfortunately there isn't much foreground to include in the images >> so I thought I would test the 21mm f/3,4 Super Elmar. Exposure at 1600ISO, >> 30sec and wide open gave noticeably more noise and a bit of banding: >> http://www.robertadlerphotography.com/p464101645/h53037451#h53490fd1 >> You can see (barely) the observation deck's rail and a piece of the deck >> shelter's roof in the upper right hand corner. I believe the lights in the >> distance are Wailea, though it could be Kihei. >> >> Then, after about 15 minutes of visibility after a 2 hour ride up the >> volcano, the clouds rushed in and it started raining. Didn't stop for an >> hour, so I drove home. >> >> I hope to try again tonight nearby, but the weather is not promising. >> Other >> BW images from this trip are there also if you'd like to look. I like >> using >> BW here: very different mindset for seeing. >> >> Conclusion was the 35 f/2 is good enough for BW night star photography. >> Very happy about that! >> Best, >> Bob >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Bob Adler www.robertadlerphotography.com