BRAVO!!! This is a great intro to MW photography and the many years of newer lenses and cameras. Like in 2015 the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 was the most recommended BUT had star stretching in the upper corners and then the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 has bird coma til 2.8/4. And the 500/600/400 rule till the NPF rule for those pinpoint stars for your pixel height and separation. With better/faster lenses and cameras first you may not need a tracker because a f/1.4 or 1.8 requires faster SS than a f/4. With a camera with better dynamic range you may get brighter night images at lower ISO's and with dual ISO noise levels less noise not requiring stacking if you use in camera NR (it will get rid of hot/dead pixels). It can take some time and many nights, some wasted, to learn your camera and lenses. This will show the past mistakes/bad info we all had to work with. Any camera and lens will work and it is the new software that will win the night. Like Lr's graduated filter to lower saturation then the radial filter inverted and around the whole MW from side to side will be magic with sliders for color/detail ect. Playing with an image is the best way to learn. Started with the A7s (2014) night vision so bright. But it is not so much the camera but how it is used!!! Also pay attention to time of year Jan/Feb (SE) new moon at 5am, Mar 3am to Jun/Jul 10pm (arc panos) (5 days early get a rising moon below), Aug to Nov SW vertical before 11pm and from 2 days after full moon to 2 days before full moon. Planning can get a moon behind (setting) with a lit foreground that no one will believe. A great pano rig for arc's from N to S Novoflex fast 200 deg under 2 mins set at 7 1/2 with two clicks for 15 Deg and using PTGui, best for multiple rows. PhotoPills and Planit pro (for panos), Stellarium +/SkySafari Pro to see any date/time what the sky will look like where you are/will be. Star Walk 2 will help find in the sky (when jupiter or venus not within), Clear Outside to find cloud cover for a near future date. PolarFinder to aim your tracker. Do not be afraid of light as long as you have dark skies, even under a street light you can capture.
Help! I'm just starting on this adventure. I bought your course and it has been invaluable. However, I do not have a Star Tracker yet and figured - no problem. I'll use your Star Stacking instructions. However I have a Mac and your course shows how to do it with Equator. I do have a MSM on order, so this star stacking should be temporary, but I do need to figure out what to do with the ones I have done with stacking. Is there a software program for Mac that is equivalent to Equator? If so, do you have a tutorial on that?
What are your thoughts on the Z 14-24 f2.8 versus the Z 20mm F1.8 for shooting the Milky Way and night skies. I currently have the Z14-30mm f4 and am trying to decide whether to add the 20mm or to replace it with the 14-24mm. Would appreciate your thoughts.
Hey Richard, Check this out: ua-cam.com/video/vTKMA86fylg/v-deo.html hit me with followups via email so I don't miss them hi@hudsonhenry.com You can't go wrong with either, but that should tell you a bit more.
I have seen pictures like this for years, but has never understod how its done? Is it only visible in some parts of the world, or is it something that only a camera can see and capture? Because looking up to the sky at night I have never ever seen anything like this. It’s mostly black with some bright stars here and there....
It's not that the camera sees more, it's that you can have it aggregate time as it looks. It's not an instant you're capturing. It's seconds of time as the light strikes the sensor. You gather the available light for a period of time aggregating it. :-)
Great video, very informative and some really nice images! I’m sure you know this but thought it might be worth mentioning. The longer your focal length gets the quicker stars will trail, regardless of the camera you are using. In reference to one of the delicate arch shots, shooting a 50mm on a d850 without a tracker will result in a lot of noise, primarily because you will end up running a fairly short shutter speed to combat trailing. Couple that with the ISO invariance of the D850 and your actual ISO once done processing the image is probably close to 50-100,000. Keep up the good work! Great channel!
I live in Vermont in a rural area. We have pretty dark skies. We see the milky way all the time. Also, I've spent a lot of time in wilderness areas during my life where it is about as dark as it gets. I have to say I don't think I have ever seen a view of the milky way that was quite as colorful as many of the images in this video and others. Do you all see a colorful milky way like this with the naked eye?
That's the beauty of telescopes and modern digital sensors. They allow you to aggregate more light than the human eye can bring in on it's own. In the case of the digital sensors, i'm accumulating the light reaching the sensor over minutes of time with a device beneath my camera rotating to negate the earth's rotation and keep the stars fixed. This era of night photography is just fabulous. I have seen the Milky Way look nearly like this to the naked eye years and years ago at sea when I had young night adjusted eyes and my Navy ship was running blacked out to be tactical far in the middle of the pacific. 360 degrees of it. What a memory...
@@HudsonHenryPhoto When I finally get fully geared up and retire (can't wait) I am going to dive into this stuff - or at least give it a try. It really is gorgeous stuff. I have seen gorgeous colorful northern light displays from time to time. Not the same at all because they are in our own atmosphere. Also, its not something you can see regularly unless you are in the arctic in winter. But, I assume people have put there minds to getting good quality images - maybe panos, with landscapes included? The whole astrophotography thing is amazing.
Hudson, do you find that the battery on the MSM Laser Pointer dies fairly quickly? Do you recharge yours when it dies or do you replace it? I only got a few outings with mine before the battery died.
I've been waiting for this one! I've never done any serious attempt at night sky shooting, but am awestruck by your work and would love to try it. I might take that course, although a big challenge for me is that I don't live in place of scenic wonder, and telephone poles and wires make for a poor foreground... I am near the Atlantic ocean, but would have to scope out the prospects of beach shooting (no rock formations here, unfortunately). I just added the Z7II to the arsenal, and I have all three of the Holy Trinity new Z-mount 2.8 lenses. I'd love to challenge myself!
You've got the tools you need and I'm sure you can find foregrounds that will work for you. I recommend compositing the night sky image with your foreground image as you'll see if you check out the course. There's a free download video in there www.hudsonhenry.com/kase. I'd really urge you to consider the Kase 112 Neutral night filter too. That HB-97 hood that came with your new 14-24 fits all three of those 2.8 zooms you have and it's a dream to use those big magnetic filters. I've got lots more about that at www.hudsonhenry.com/kase :-) Have fun!
I'm not a big fan of time/location blends for Milky Way photos. Shooting the sky at a different location from the foreground is just like doing a sky replacement. Even if it's only a short distance, it's not the same. Why not use a sky shot from another day and place. Sometimes getting a good MW photo isn't easy. Those that care about photography will care.
Right now the best way for me to get the highest quality image is a foreground with the camera fixed for many minutes in the last vestige of blue hour and the camera moving with the earth's rotation for many minutes for the sky. It's a quality issue. This way I don't sacrifice one or the other. I've tried to get where I want from a print making perspective in single frames and I can't get the result I want... Yet. Believe you me. When I can without the effort, skill and time required for the dual shot composite, I'll be the first to ditch the dual shot. It's a lot more work, but the result is unbeatable. For me it's final image quality. My line is the intention at the image's creation and I would not blend one night with another. We ask have our own lines. I respect other artists so long as they don't mislead.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto I understand what your saying, It is always a compromise, my favorite times of the year and lighting for foreground is just before crescent moon dips and sets to get my foreground naturally and take my sky a few minutes later after it sets and stack the sky images for noise reduction. It is much more difficult to find the proper compositions and these circumstances are rare but well worth the effort In order to get it closest to natural while retaining as much quality as I can, for me these moments in time are the ones I cherish the most.
@@morgankarno7335 Respect. I think my opinion is that Milky Way photography is a technical exercise. Getting a natural-looking photo isn't really possible because it's never visible to the naked eye. Only thanks to camera trickery can we view it in great detail. So once you have made that decision to try and capture the Milky Way and don't fully utilize all the techniques available to produce a very high-quality photo with everything in focus, good light, pinpoint stars, good detail, low noise etc. Then you are simply making compromises on what should be a display of your technical knowledge with Photography.
BRAVO!!! This is a great intro to MW photography and the many years of newer lenses and cameras. Like in 2015 the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 was the most recommended BUT had star stretching in the upper corners and then the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 has bird coma til 2.8/4. And the 500/600/400 rule till the NPF rule for those pinpoint stars for your pixel height and separation. With better/faster lenses and cameras first you may not need a tracker because a f/1.4 or 1.8 requires faster SS than a f/4. With a camera with better dynamic range you may get brighter night images at lower ISO's and with dual ISO noise levels less noise not requiring stacking if you use in camera NR (it will get rid of hot/dead pixels). It can take some time and many nights, some wasted, to learn your camera and lenses. This will show the past mistakes/bad info we all had to work with. Any camera and lens will work and it is the new software that will win the night. Like Lr's graduated filter to lower saturation then the radial filter inverted and around the whole MW from side to side will be magic with sliders for color/detail ect. Playing with an image is the best way to learn. Started with the A7s (2014) night vision so bright. But it is not so much the camera but how it is used!!! Also pay attention to time of year Jan/Feb (SE) new moon at 5am, Mar 3am to Jun/Jul 10pm (arc panos) (5 days early get a rising moon below), Aug to Nov SW vertical before 11pm and from 2 days after full moon to 2 days before full moon. Planning can get a moon behind (setting) with a lit foreground that no one will believe. A great pano rig for arc's from N to S Novoflex fast 200 deg under 2 mins set at 7 1/2 with two clicks for 15 Deg and using PTGui, best for multiple rows. PhotoPills and Planit pro (for panos), Stellarium +/SkySafari Pro to see any date/time what the sky will look like where you are/will be. Star Walk 2 will help find in the sky (when jupiter or venus not within), Clear Outside to find cloud cover for a near future date. PolarFinder to aim your tracker. Do not be afraid of light as long as you have dark skies, even under a street light you can capture.
Right on time for my trip to crater lake tomorrow for one last milky way shot this season! Great tips!
Help! I'm just starting on this adventure. I bought your course and it has been invaluable. However, I do not have a Star Tracker yet and figured - no problem. I'll use your Star Stacking instructions. However I have a Mac and your course shows how to do it with Equator. I do have a MSM on order, so this star stacking should be temporary, but I do need to figure out what to do with the ones I have done with stacking. Is there a software program for Mac that is equivalent to Equator? If so, do you have a tutorial on that?
Argh auto correct. Changes "Sequator" to Equator.
What are your thoughts on the Z 14-24 f2.8 versus the Z 20mm F1.8 for shooting the Milky Way and night skies. I currently have the Z14-30mm f4 and am trying to decide whether to add the 20mm or to replace it with the 14-24mm. Would appreciate your thoughts.
Hey Richard, Check this out: ua-cam.com/video/vTKMA86fylg/v-deo.html hit me with followups via email so I don't miss them hi@hudsonhenry.com You can't go wrong with either, but that should tell you a bit more.
I have seen pictures like this for years, but has never understod how its done? Is it only visible in some parts of the world, or is it something that only a camera can see and capture? Because looking up to the sky at night I have never ever seen anything like this. It’s mostly black with some bright stars here and there....
It's not that the camera sees more, it's that you can have it aggregate time as it looks. It's not an instant you're capturing. It's seconds of time as the light strikes the sensor. You gather the available light for a period of time aggregating it. :-)
Nice, Hudson!
Great video, very informative and some really nice images! I’m sure you know this but thought it might be worth mentioning. The longer your focal length gets the quicker stars will trail, regardless of the camera you are using. In reference to one of the delicate arch shots, shooting a 50mm on a d850 without a tracker will result in a lot of noise, primarily because you will end up running a fairly short shutter speed to combat trailing. Couple that with the ISO invariance of the D850 and your actual ISO once done processing the image is probably close to 50-100,000. Keep up the good work! Great channel!
Oh of course. My course covers all of that. The Delicate Arch was a while back. I want that again with my tracker... ;)
I live in Vermont in a rural area. We have pretty dark skies. We see the milky way all the time. Also, I've spent a lot of time in wilderness areas during my life where it is about as dark as it gets. I have to say I don't think I have ever seen a view of the milky way that was quite as colorful as many of the images in this video and others. Do you all see a colorful milky way like this with the naked eye?
That's the beauty of telescopes and modern digital sensors. They allow you to aggregate more light than the human eye can bring in on it's own. In the case of the digital sensors, i'm accumulating the light reaching the sensor over minutes of time with a device beneath my camera rotating to negate the earth's rotation and keep the stars fixed. This era of night photography is just fabulous.
I have seen the Milky Way look nearly like this to the naked eye years and years ago at sea when I had young night adjusted eyes and my Navy ship was running blacked out to be tactical far in the middle of the pacific. 360 degrees of it. What a memory...
@@HudsonHenryPhoto When I finally get fully geared up and retire (can't wait) I am going to dive into this stuff - or at least give it a try. It really is gorgeous stuff. I have seen gorgeous colorful northern light displays from time to time. Not the same at all because they are in our own atmosphere. Also, its not something you can see regularly unless you are in the arctic in winter. But, I assume people have put there minds to getting good quality images - maybe panos, with landscapes included? The whole astrophotography thing is amazing.
Hudson, do you find that the battery on the MSM Laser Pointer dies fairly quickly? Do you recharge yours when it dies or do you replace it? I only got a few outings with mine before the battery died.
Recharge it every time Rob. :)
@@HudsonHenryPhoto thank you.
I've been waiting for this one! I've never done any serious attempt at night sky shooting, but am awestruck by your work and would love to try it. I might take that course, although a big challenge for me is that I don't live in place of scenic wonder, and telephone poles and wires make for a poor foreground... I am near the Atlantic ocean, but would have to scope out the prospects of beach shooting (no rock formations here, unfortunately). I just added the Z7II to the arsenal, and I have all three of the Holy Trinity new Z-mount 2.8 lenses. I'd love to challenge myself!
You've got the tools you need and I'm sure you can find foregrounds that will work for you. I recommend compositing the night sky image with your foreground image as you'll see if you check out the course. There's a free download video in there www.hudsonhenry.com/kase. I'd really urge you to consider the Kase 112 Neutral night filter too. That HB-97 hood that came with your new 14-24 fits all three of those 2.8 zooms you have and it's a dream to use those big magnetic filters. I've got lots more about that at www.hudsonhenry.com/kase :-) Have fun!
I'm not a big fan of time/location blends for Milky Way photos. Shooting the sky at a different location from the foreground is just like doing a sky replacement. Even if it's only a short distance, it's not the same. Why not use a sky shot from another day and place.
Sometimes getting a good MW photo isn't easy. Those that care about photography will care.
Right now the best way for me to get the highest quality image is a foreground with the camera fixed for many minutes in the last vestige of blue hour and the camera moving with the earth's rotation for many minutes for the sky. It's a quality issue. This way I don't sacrifice one or the other. I've tried to get where I want from a print making perspective in single frames and I can't get the result I want... Yet. Believe you me. When I can without the effort, skill and time required for the dual shot composite, I'll be the first to ditch the dual shot. It's a lot more work, but the result is unbeatable. For me it's final image quality. My line is the intention at the image's creation and I would not blend one night with another. We ask have our own lines. I respect other artists so long as they don't mislead.
@@HudsonHenryPhoto I understand what your saying, It is always a compromise, my favorite times of the year and lighting for foreground is just before crescent moon dips and sets to get my foreground naturally and take my sky a few minutes later after it sets and stack the sky images for noise reduction. It is much more difficult to find the proper compositions and these circumstances are rare but well worth the effort In order to get it closest to natural while retaining as much quality as I can, for me these moments in time are the ones I cherish the most.
@@morgankarno7335 Respect. I think my opinion is that Milky Way photography is a technical exercise. Getting a natural-looking photo isn't really possible because it's never visible to the naked eye. Only thanks to camera trickery can we view it in great detail. So once you have made that decision to try and capture the Milky Way and don't fully utilize all the techniques available to produce a very high-quality photo with everything in focus, good light, pinpoint stars, good detail, low noise etc. Then you are simply making compromises on what should be a display of your technical knowledge with Photography.
there is no “how to” just a promo for paid coursers…