Meteors

Had the camera set up, with the interval timer configured so that I could go to bed (work at 6am). All worked ok, except it was Bl*@dy CLOUDY ALL NIGHT!!!
 
I was out from midnight til 4am, saw loads, got about 20 on camera, some very faint, a couple of good ones, just editing today, will take a while!
 
Very nice. Did that get publised somewhere? Thought I had seen it somewhere

What's a good lens (canon) for doing this? Something wide I'm guessing?
 
Very nice. Did that get publised somewhere? Thought I had seen it somewhere

What's a good lens (canon) for doing this? Something wide I'm guessing?
 
Not that I'm aware of seeing as I just finished editing it 30 minutes ago :)

Any 10-20mm type lens I guess, Canon Sigma and Tokina do wide angle lenses. This was a 14mm Samyang lens which I bought for star shots, it's manual focus and on most bodies non-metering but it's fast at f/2.8. Tokina do a 11-16mm f/2.8 but it's fairly pricey.
 
sorry about the double post

Must have had deja vu over seeing that pic.

The only lens i have for this is a 50mm, which some say isnt too bad, but it didnt seem too wide (this is a crop cam) but still, wasnt that wide
 
I know what you mean though. There's a very similar photo on here somewhere from a while ago. Not sure if it's the same location, but it's a meteor shower photo.

Still nice though :)
 
al4x said:
sorry about the double post

Must have had deja vu over seeing that pic.

The only lens i have for this is a 50mm, which some say isnt too bad, but it didnt seem too wide (this is a crop cam) but still, wasnt that wide
Click to expand...

You'd be lucky to get anything on a 50mm, but if you did it would be big at least. Don't you have a kit lens?
 
ElDude said:
I know what you mean though. There's a very similar photo on here somewhere from a while ago. Not sure if it's the same location, but it's a meteor shower photo.

Still nice though :)
Click to expand...

I've posted a few from that location over the years but not meteors. In the end meteor showers are meteor showers where ever you are :)
 
Last night, I had mine set on a tripod, 35(ish) mm, 10seconds, ISO 12800, f4 (yes I was pushing limits).

The ISO was really so I could minimise shutter speed. I tried slightly more, but the 500 rule seems to be more of a 400 rule for me for some reason. I got Milky Way reasonably clearly in mine which was one of the big things I wanted, but had I not, I wouldn't have had to push ISO so high.

As for shooting, I found it to be spam shots. If you're on a tripod, if you see one, by the time you've hit the shutter, it's gone. And you can't have your camera pointed at the whole sky, so pick your area and hope.

Going to try and look through my shots tomorrow I think.

kd
 
Did I actually get two? Or are they artifacts of some kind?

P1000607-L.jpg


The big original can be found here, I didn't want to post 10mb in the thread.

http://lx3.smugmug.com/Nature/LX7-Astrophotography
 
2 for sure but you might have caught a third as well but am not sure

scratch that i count 5 looking at the original
 
King Damager said:
As for shooting, I found it to be spam shots. If you're on a tripod, if you see one, by the time you've hit the shutter, it's gone. And you can't have your camera pointed at the whole sky, so pick your area and hope.

Going to try and look through my shots tomorrow I think.

kd
Click to expand...

You can't really get meteor shots like that, they are too fast to be able to react to, you need to just leave your camera set up and let it keep taking shots continuously.

It is just set up and hope that you get one in the frame which is why I would say to use the widest lens you have.
 
david25 said:
Did I actually get two? Or are they artifacts of some kind?

http://lx3.smugmug.com/Nature/LX7-Astrophotography/i-ZQzzzFM/0/L/P1000607-L.jpg[IMG]

The big original can be found here, I didn't want to post 10mb in the thread.

[URL="http://lx3.smugmug.com/Nature/LX7-Astrophotography"]http://lx3.smugmug.com/Nature/LX7-Astrophotography[/URL][/QUOTE]

I think they are satellites, the lines are too uniform, you should see a tail and head as they enter the atmosphere.
Click to expand...
 
They are slow, they don't usually go across the whole frame. If you took consecutive shots then check the previous and next shot to see if they are on there, they sometimes go in and out of the Earths shadow which reduces how well you can see them.
 
I don't have my body yet so using the gfs

Iwas using
F3.2
Iso 800 camera only goes to 1600
15-20 seconds

I didn't get anything and I couldn't fit much more than the main W of cassiopia into the shot
Not sure if iso 800 is enough (only used an slr a handful of times)

I'm fairly sure I saw the iss and got a pic, although it just looks like a thick white line
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom