Blog

How I shot Comet C/2025 A6 (Lemmon) over Scotland

Introduction

C/2025 A6 (Lemmon) is a non-periodic comet discovered by the Mount Lemmon Survey in images obtained on 3 January 2025.

The Witch

In 1657, legend has it that a woman suspected of witchcraft was burnt here during the Scottish Witch Trials. Records show that around 6–9 women were condemned as witches and were killed in this small village of Dunning. For me, this place is a testament to the every woman that died during the witch trials that went on around the world hundreds of years ago.

C/2025 A6 (Lemmon) is a non-periodic comet discovered by the Mount Lemmon Survey in images obtained on 3 January 2025. It won't visit us again for over 1300 years. Needless to say, this was my only chance to photograph it.

In order to show the comet with all it's detail, which is only just visible in dark sky locations, and fairly small in terms of angular size in the night sky; I shot it on it's own with a fast telephoto lens to gather the structure and huge ion tail behind it. I decided to leave it like this rather than shrink it down too much as it looked to grand shot up close. The shooting and processing of an image like this is a huge task and takes time, no matter one's experience level. Including shooting, it must have totalled about 8 hours minmum.

Shooting the Sky Mosaic

I obtained this picture in the village of Dunning, Perthshire. Because it was clear the second time I arrived here last night, I got immediately to concerning myself with shooting the sky and not the foreground first (cloud could scupper my shot at any moment). This is generally speaking, the way to go about taking shots such as these. I used a Nikon Z8 with a Tamron 35/1.4 lens. This is a spectacularly well corrected lens on starlight, which can be shot wide open at f/1.4 (which is exactly what I did, because cloud was an issue last night). A 35mm f/1.4 lens isn’t always associated with astrophotography (particularly with beginners), however it is an excellent lens to get tighter on deep sky objects, asterisms, constellations, and the milky way. How I used it last night, was to make a panoramic image to encompase the same field of view as the foreground would end up being. I did 30s exposures in vertical orientation, ISO 800 at f/1.4. I took five of these, with generous overlaps. This was all done on my polar aligned Star Adventurer tracker mount, in order that I got perfect stars right into the corners, and great detail.

Shooting the Foreground

I shot the foreground with a 20mm/1.8S nikkor. I ensured that I would obtain the same field of view as the sky mosaic. I shot at ISO 800, 2 minutes, f/1.8. I choose this aperture, because I wanted a nice depth of field falloff, and had nothing important in the corners to concern myself with. I made sure that focus was on the grave, as at infinity this area would not be in perfect focus.

The Technical Side of obtaining a Deepfield Comet Picture

To image the comet you see embedded in this panoramic picture, I used a Nikon Z8 camera with their 70-200/2.8S lens on a Star Adventurer star tracker mount. I use the ‘pro pack’ version with wifi for this mount, which allows me to properly balance the payload with the counterweight kit onto the top of the mount. This is essential in order to do any sort of deep sky, or ‘magnified’ close up images of celestial objects such as comets or galaxies / constellations. I took approximately 50 pictures of the comet on it’s own at 200mm. I used about 43; seven having some light cloud obstruct the view of the comet during the exposures.

I shot the comet as mentioned, at 200mm with the following settings:

Aperture of f/2.8
Exposure time of 30s
ISO of 800

I will address these in order. The widest aperture is always where we should use the lens for comet imaging. Forget worrying about lens aberrations and the stars in the midframes corners, at least for now. The most important point to hold in your mind is that we need to collect light and fast. We do this by having the largest aperture. This concept is called clear aperture and you can read more about this online if you want to understand it in a deeper way as it relates to astrophotography. This brings me nicely to the exposure time. The other way we gather light, is clearly via exposure length; in fact these are the only two variables that influence the final collected light. (ISO is a digital boost for the most part, and does not change the physical light collected during at exposure). Lastly, the ISO of 800 was selected because it is sufficiently low enough as to protect the star cores from blowing out to white during the individual sub exposures, and because it, along with the aperture and exposure time, created a histogram with the data bump being approximately 1/3 from the left wall. We have to be really careful here. I am often slightly under this, to protect the stars blowing out to white, which doesn’t tend to look great in the final picture. Notice that I have picked up the individual star colours in the final shot above? Let me be clear here, that the Star Adventurer mount is capable of easily doing one minute tracked sub exposures at 200mm. In fact, I’ve managed two minutes with accurate stars. I’ve even pushed to over two minutes before…

This is a very good result for only approximately 21 minutes of total data. The more data we get, the better the image can be, technically speaking. You should always aim for this, however sometimes cloud, rain or life stops us from going any further. This image could only really be improved from a technical standpoint by increasing the number of sub exposures that I can stack together in post processing and / or by moving up to a telescope with a larger effective aperture. (Remember that aperture is a ratio of focal length. There are f/11 scopes with greater aperture than my 200/2.8 lens which has approximately 71mm of aperture). We can surmise this via the basic equation:

Focal Length / lens aperture ratio = effective aperture for light collection

So imagine I used an 800mm telescope with an f4 aperture. I would have 200mm of aperture to gather light. Significantly more aperture, yes, however with that comes the demand for significantly more equipment, accuracy and alignment. And of course…expense and weight! For me, there aren’t enough clear nights in Scotland in my opinion for me personally to take this side of what I do any further as I already split my clear nights between landscape astro, and deep sky shooting already. I do absolutely enjoy every minute of maxing out what I have. There are of course limits of what a 200mm lens can resolve, with regards to the physical size or the ‘angular view’ of the object in the sky. The smallest of objects need more aperture and focal length, that’s just the way it is. I find it extremely satisfying to max out or ‘use up’ every possible trick in the book to create the best picture from the equipment I own, in a carriable sized package.

I will add more to this article soon, and have just this evening photographed the comet under even darkier skies, so watch this space.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Autumnal Milky Way over the Hermitage - How I made the Picture

Milky Way at Black Linn Falls, Hermitage, Scotland

Introduction

I recently visited Black Linn Falls at the Hermitage in Perthshire to make this picture. In order to produce an image such as this, takes great physical effort and technical knowledge. In this series, I am going to explain what it takes to pull this off.

Plan

I knew that the milky way extended around to the south west direction in autumn in the northern hemisphere; this is what began the idea for the shot. I used ‘PhotoPills’ to give me a general idea of alignment, and Google Earth Pro. Photopills is a wasted opportunity to me. It gives some advice on alignment, however the VR function is pretty useless. It doesn’t allow the user to see the milky way (or object) over the landscape you are going to be shooting in, which is what we really want. It literally just randomly overlays it in your house in the VR mode that it has: not that useful, I mean, I don’t care what the milky way looks like over my television set, right? You have to physically go to the location to see what will be, which defeats the point when planning. I was in touch with the app maker about this two years ago to advise and they advised they where planning to do what I asked; implement the VR element over the shooting landscape, however that still has not surfaced as of it. To be honest, although I go with a rough plan, I am not a planner. I find it stifling and boring to have a rigid idea of what I want. Sometimes I never know what I want; but I know what I don’t want, image wise. The best app overall is ‘Planit Pro’. This is a subscription app with a per monthly payment, however it does just what I ask and need: it lets as see the landscape with the milky way overhead, and at different focal lengths.

The alignment of the milky way seemed to check out that at around midnight, whereby the southern milky way would align up over the falls. I arrived much earlier than this, in order to hike in, test equipment, and get ready to shoot.

Equipment

Star Adventurer 2i Star Tracker Mount

This is essential for any landscape astrophotographer to be able to capture the greatest, most detailed views of the cosmos. I always have this with me, every night. With an ultrawide angle lens of say 14mm, we can easily do 10 or more minute exposures. Even around 35-50mm, we can do multiple minutes of exposure easily without star trails showing up in our images.

Nikon Z8

I used a Nikon Z8 to capture the sky of this image. The Z8 has a very useful function that is also present in Sony land, whereby it allows us to see the starlight and landscape much better than in the past. Nikon call this ‘Starlight View’. When enabling this function, it assists physically seeing the scene, and enabling the shooter to focus. I used the Z8 to capture the sky frame on the Star Adventurer mount.

Nikon D810

I still use DSLR kit, because technically speaking there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. The images produced, will be exactly the same. The major reason I used it this evening, was because I had the Sigma 14/1.8 Art attached to it. Perfect for capturing the ultra dark foreground with the aperture collecting over double the amount of light that my 14-24/2.8 will.

Sigma 14mm 1.8 Art

The Sigma 14/1.8 is a lens I still use regularly, particularly during large auroral displays, but also in other situations like here. In this particular case, I used it for collect the foreground scene, using the f/1.8 aperture. At f/1.8, this lens is sharp enough to collect a scene like this when shooting wide open. It took ten minutes of exposure to begin to register the foreground at ISO 800! Any fall off in sharpness in the corners is fine, we don’t want to be directing the viewer into the corners of the image, etc.

Nikon 14-24/2.8S

I used the Nikkor natively on the Z8 body of course. This allowed me to achieve excellent quality starlight at 14mm. I have no qualms using the 14mm Sigma to do this either despite the higher astigmatism and coma that it has wide open, however as I will explain later, this was about streamlining the shot and time it took to make it.

Other Stuff

I use a Gitzo Mountaineer series carbon fibre tripod and a Manfrotto 055 aluminium tripod with the star adventurer mount. I do not use remote timers (more on this soon), and on the Z8 enables selection of predetermined exposure times in body which is helpful also. I use L brackets on all my cameras for astrophotography and landscape photography. I am using a Smallrig L bracket on my Z8, for example. The reason I do so, is that it place the centre of gravity right over the tracker when using the camera vertically.

Arriving on Scene Setup

Upon arrival, I checked out the best possible area to shoot and went about polar aligning the Star Adventurer tracker. I then arrived at a composition that I wanted to show and fitted my D810 with the 14mm f/1.8 Sigma lens. I was then fixed in place after this, by design. I dropped the monitor down to about minus 3 to protect some night vision and also to allow me to judge exposure better (with histogram enabled of course). I enabled long exposure noise reduction in camera. This takes a black frame of the corresponding time of the initial exposure and subtracts it in camera, meaning it cancels out most of hot pixels that can show themselves over an ultra long exposure time such as used for this shot (ten minutes). After composing, I focused and then put the camera to timed mode (not bulb or 30 seconds). Bulb is useless unless we use remotes, and I personally hate using remotes at night in this day and age, and 30 seconds was going to be no where near long enough exposure time to make the shot. Timed mode allows us to use exposure delay mode, which I enabled, then after we push the shutter, the exposure proceeds until we press the shutter again. You might think that would cause problems with shake, however I have never found that and others will confirm that this is the case. As long as we carefully roll a finger over the shutter to end the exposure, you will obtain a sharp picture. This is a liberating way of working, freeing us of using pesky remotes in the dark. After selecting mirror-up mode in combination with exposure delay, I began the exposure in manual mode. My settings where as follows - aperture of f/1.8, exposure time would be 10 minutes, with an ISO of 800. I set my watch for 10 minutes and after that time passed, I pushed the shutter button again. The camera then switched into long exposure noise reduction mode, which means it was out of action for a further 10 minutes. A total of 20 minutes to take the foreground might sound excessive, or perhaps even ludacrous, however to do this to a high level is what it requires.

I then turned my attention to my other camera that I brought with me, the Nikon Z8. I mounted the Z8 to the Star Adventurer, enabled the red light mode, dropped the screen brightness, put the camera into manual mode and focused on the bright star Vega, which we can see on the right of the image. I turned on the star tracker, after confirming good polar alignment and set the exposure delay mode to 3s, manual mode, and selected 3 minutes at ISO 800. I nearly always select an ISO of 500-800 on the Z8, due to the dual gain point, which reduces read noise in the electronics whilst shooting. I kept the aperture at f/2.8 - the Nikon 14-24/2.8 is stellar at this focal length on starlight, stars remind round and decent quality right into the corners. I made sure I was at 14mm on the zoom ring. I now had obtained both the foreground and sky for the shot. Sometimes I will take three tracked sky shots and stack them, and this is a good way of doing things, however on this night I did not.

The venerable Sky Watcher Star Adventurer has helped me make most of my night sky pictures

Processing

Now the work really begins. And I do not say this lightly, or imply that this image is fake. I say this because, technically speaking, every night sky image is a composite, and potentially nearly every landscape image is that has contrasty light. Why? Well, because they nearly always require multiple exposures to get the best fidelity in the final picture. Even with a fast aperture lens, it is impossible to capture the night sky in high detail without doing multiple minutes of exposure. Try shooting the night sky with single shots, which means no long exposure foreground, and a short sky exposure. Let me save you time and tell you that the result is only pleasing at very small sizes, and sometimes not even at that. The night sky is a little light-starved!

Editing of the Tracked Sky Exposure

I tend to edit the sky exposure first, however it really doesn’t matter which way we do it. I tend to import the expsoure into Photoshop via a smart object and do some basic camera raw adjustments to it before I stretch it. To learn more about stretching, which is a whole topic in itself, see my other tutorial here. As I stretch the image, I feather the stretch off so that it impacts less on the horizon then at the mid portion and zenith of the sky. I do this because nine times out of ten we are dealing with some horizon light pollution, so we don’t want to brighten this in most instances. As I stretch, I select the stars and apply a colour preserving stretch. I split the stars and background from each other using StarXTerminator. This allows me to pull out the faint detail from this patch of the night sky which is much more subtle in it’s details than the milky way core is for example. Having the stars on one layer, and the background on another, lets me perform again, some basic camera raw global adjustments, further background stretching, and some colour / light pollution fixes before recombining the two. Before I do so, I can display the stars how I want them by applying a curve layer above the stars only layer and using a clipping mask in order to reveal more or less stars in the final result. I do not use minimum filters, as this produces bad artefacts even when done subtly, and this method works a hundred times better so I find it is now completely redundant.

I pull the file to reveal more than our eye sees (because our eyes see very little compared to what is possible). However, I like to stop before it becomes garrish, like we would expect a seasoned shooter to do in any other photographic discipline, for example Landscape Photography. I do not shoot with astro modded cameras for this reason. I believe that these images look very odd to the final viewer, especially if they are not astronomers or astrophotographers such as we are. The average person has no idea what nebulae are, and it often looks like a fake AI generated result to many. I want to avoid this as much as possible. I think these views of the cosmos belong in deep sky astrophotography, which I also enjoy. I leave these views for that. I am about editing to display the feeling, the twinkly dreamy night impression that I get when I am on location. I simply don’t think about the nebulae up there, for the most part, when doing these types of shot. Final steps include a final noise reduction, applied lightly using NoiseXTerminator. We shouldn’t need too much noise reduction if we have good data, and haven’t pulled it to riduclous levels (remember, that these things will bring out noise as we process).

Editing of the Foreground Exposure

To ensure realism, we need to make it that both of these pictures play together nicely. There are many points we should consider in order to do this. One of the major ones, is relative brightness. If you want the final result to look as natural and as real as possible, we much realise that the sky has to be brighter than the foreground and land below it. If the scene below is edited brighter than the sky, it is instantly un-natural, so tread carefully. Next is colour. We must ensure our white balances are the same, or at the very least show some semblance to one another. This is easily tackled in camera raw, before import, or when in Photoshop, which is where I edit this exposure also. Of course we can adjust the sky and foreground after recombining them in the next step, however it is best to get them as close as possible to how we want them before doing so. This will help prevent artefacts and halos at the places they intersect and are masked together. The foreground exposure is nearly always brightened in post using the exposure slider, curves, and selective white adjustment, often with some local masking. Be careful of using the shadow slider. Adjusting shadows upwards, will bring out noise extremely fast, even on ultra long exposures in dark places. Consider why you would want to brighten a shadow in a foreground? We do not want the viewer gazing into back shadows. I will usually do a curve adjustment and fade off the blacks at the left most side of the histogram. I do this, because it matches what our eyes see in shadows at night (barely nothing) but it prevents them going to clipped black, which most of the time you want to avoid as it can again, throw artefacts into the finished result. If there is a horizon I level it, if I find it is not sitting correctly. If there is distortion present on objects (perspective distortion, not lens distortion), I will sometimes correct this. I didn’t here. The tree on the right leans slightly (though admittedly, not as much as implied), however fixing this would have affected the bright star sitting by it - Vega, and it doesn’t really detract from the end result. Because I shot with long exposure noise reduction enabled, there are very few hot pixels to clean up, and the file should be clean provided a long enough exposure was used. The rule is, you think long is enough? Go longer…You can nearly never get enough exposure on the foreground, particulary in ultra dark sky locations - which stands to reason. After I get the file close to done I look to finish the image.

Combine and Finish

After saving both images independantly, I bring them both into Photoshop as smart objects. This is important, because it means that we can tweak them on the fly in camera raw, in order to make them blend correctly. We can make a selection of the land, then refine it in the select and mask workspace. We then apply it to the file. Often this will cause issues we need to fix. The most likely will be that haloing appears around objects where they both intersect on each other. This can be fixed by opening up the brighter exposure, and pulling down the highlights in camera raw, saving, then watching the intersection improve and the halo dissapate. For some images however, especially ones that involve ultra complex scene objects such as trees in my example, involve an even more complex masking solution. Enter Luminosity Masking, which is what I used here to recombine the images. This allows me to select the dark foreground and get finer control of the branches and leaves. We still have access to Adobe camera raw as long as we imported the files correctly, in order to adjust the files that will intersect one another in the mask to be able to produce a convincing, high quality result. I do not sharpen most of my work, other than the very light sharpning applied in camera raw, etc. I find digital images are too sharp out of the box mostly, and it is a look I want to avoid. Sharpning itself introduces halos and other problems also, which then takes steps to mitigate and clean up.

Final Thought

The total edit time for this shot is approximately three to four hours. That might sound absurd, however like I said before, this is generally what is often required to edit a complex scene to a high level of quality. Part of this time is also taken up by trying certain things that perhaps do not work so well, then going back in the workflow to try something better or different. Even despite my experience level with landscape astrophotography (and I’d imagine many other shooters too), it still isn’t a quick process. Rushing tends to not be advantageous to obtaining a good end result I fine.

I hope you have found this useful and please note I offer an editing service which includes the full photoshop file to be able to reconcile and understand each individual step, with email support for any questions as how to do something, or to ask questions on why I am doing something. Despite being for the most part completely self taught, the fastest way to learn something to a high level is to watch someone who is already doing it. I would have got where I am a lot faster than it took me!

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Nearly Every Day I Consider Dropping Mirrorless for DSLRs Only

The D810 - most of the D850 for less money

Introduction

If you have visited my gear section, you will see I still own a variety of DSLRs and mirrorless camera bodies. I’ve always essentially reconciled the following fact: I can do what I do with cameras 10-15 years old easily. One of the reasons for this; I simply do not require the bells and whistles of modern mirrorless. However, it goes deeper than this. Sensor technology has really not improved much at all since the 36 megapixel design that came along in 2012 with the D800 body, and a few years later, in the D810. For me, this is existential, because I can and do literally still use these bodies today and notice zero difference in the final result. In fact, sometimes the newer mirrorless designs are slightly more noisy (Nikon Z8 has more noise containted in the RAW data due to it’s stacked sensor design). Here I want to consider what using DSLRs would mean going forward.

Pros and Cons

You may know I have written about the pros / cons of mirrorless and DSLRs already. As I read my own words, part of me still feels ‘gamed’ by the consumerist, marketing machine that we are all wrapped up in. I’ve already stated that because I don’t need anything more than fairly basic autofocus (even for my wedding work), that the only real thing that matters to me is the sensor tech and camera reliability - dependability. I already had this. Despite this, I need to be fair to mirrorless; I did gain things with the Nikon Z8. I get access to more modern lenses, USB charging, advanced autofocus for those times I might need that. It’s much better at night. What do I mean by this? Well I mean ergonomically. The screen, the liveview, I can see what I am shooting. It’s much easier, it is. However, it’s not impossible to shoot with say a D850 in the dark. I mean I did it for nearly a decade and I was absolutely fine. I must admit I really love the Nikon D850 overall. It is an extremely advanced, back-side illuminated sensor with extremely low noise, high detail and good colour output. The RAW files have phenomenal pull-ability, it is a camera that absolutely has the best 35mm format sensor ever. As mentioned, it even edges out the Z8 slightly, and the Z7ii (it has no focus grid burried in the data etc).

The Things I Had Not Considered

Through time certain things have come to realisations about mirrorless camera technology.

One of the very obvious things about mirrorless is the fact the sensor is always on whenever the camera is operational. Mirrorless cameras literally show a ‘live-view’ electronic readout of the sensor, there’s no optical finder to look through. This actually means that mirrorless sensors tend to degrade much faster than DSLR variants, because they are always on, all the time, when the camera is being used and the wait time between each picture, that sensor is on, whereas DSLRS can be used without sensor activation right up til the point of taking the physical shot. (Of course, it’s a similar situation between the two in astrophotography, as the live view is used on the DSLR, typically). So what do we notice? Nikon have included a remap pixels option in their mirrorless line, and they know fine well why they are offering this. I notice that pixels burn out and die much more in these sensor designs. Whilst I don’t expect them to die any time soon, I really doubt in 20-30 years they will even function, or function close to how they were at the start of their life…(I know to many this might sound strange, but I am still shooting with a D700 that has a sensor that functions without issue from 2008). I like my stuff to last, and old antequated concept I know, but that’s me. I thrive on such a mantra.

Further to the above, sensor technology really hasn’t improved much in over a decade. The biggest advance has been back-side illumination (present in the D850), which basically reduecs noise by improving signal to noise ratio. The most recent ‘advancement’ is the use of global shutters. These are ultra fast sensors that read the entire sensor at one time, meaning no unusual effects, banding or in video modes, any jello effects. However, they come at a huge cost; their image quality really suffers in the noise department. They really only belong with sports photographers. So as I have mentioned, sensor technology isn’t really much different at the time of writing (summer 2025), compared to a D810 which was released a decade ago. Think of how cheap a D810 is now compared to the latest mirrorless camera and you will understand what I am trying to say here.

Next up, I am going to come out and state this; optical finders are nicer to shoot with in nearly every situation except astrophotography. I do not understand why wedding or sports photographers would want to stare at a TV screen all day, for me, I’ve lost the very real connection to the subject that I see through my D700, D800, D810, D850 viewfinder. This will likely be a polarising opinion to many readers, however it is my firmly held view. I accept as most will likely agree, that for astrophotography, DSLRs are used like mirrorless cameras, they use a live sensor feed we came to call ‘Live View’ at the inception of early digital.

Autofocus is generally better with the latest mirrorless, however that is only applied to the latest in Nikon land, the Z7 and Z7ii variants are worse than the D850 in my opinion and I generally dislike these models for a lot of different reasons. So has mentioned, I’ll give autofocus recognition to Nikon’s latest flagship - the Nikon Z8 right now. That said, most of the time I shoot things that either don’t move (landscapes), portraits. We don’t need high tech autofocus to do this, no matter what anyone tells you. Learn to use the camera you have and you will likely be good with it. The D810 and especially the D850, can more than handle this. You will not have eye autofocus technology, however most pictures made in the last hundred years didn’t either…One caveat I might be inclined to include here would be about the fact that the D850 is on par, or perhaps just slightly better in low light than the Z8, in terms of autofocus. It works better with flash assist lights, etc; so bare this in mind.

Battery life is another huge point. It will likely never be such that a mirrorless design will even approach a DSLR in terms of how far the battery can go. (Especially if you pop a ‘C’ variant battery into the D850 from the mirrorless line. It just goes forever!) Yes I am aware that a mirrorless camera could shoot thousands of shots in the time it is on, however once you concede a mirrorless camera has a battery drain from the moment it is switched on, unlike DSLRs, you know they will never win in these stakes, especially if like me, you do not smash the shutter button constantly and you wait for pictures. Mirrorless sensors have the clock ticking from the first image taken, every moment looking through the finder we are sucking battery life out of the camera. Of course, the opposite is true with any DSLR. The power drain is negligible until the shot is physically taken, and the mirror slides up to reveal the sensor and make the exposure.

DSLRs always have mechanical shutters. There are many mirrorless designs that forgo this, ala the Z8, and use a fast readout sensor to compensate for it. I can tell you from experience, this gives some damn strange and wonky results when shot anywhere near LED lighting. Do you have any idea how often one encounters LED lighting in this age? It’s everywhere. It’s throughout a large part of my house (not the bedrooms). Nikon have included tweak settings to calm the problems down (banding and other wonkyness) but it’s a huge faff and gets in the way of the picture. It’s not fun in the slighest, and it’s not my scene at all. Needless to say, indoors when the lights are on, I don’t even reach for the Z8. I can’t trust it in those situations like I can my DSLRs.

Adapter Faff is a thing. They make things really crappy, ergonomically. Whilst I use my Tamron 35/1.4 (an optically superb, class leading optic) on my Z8, I wouldn’t call it enjoyable. The lens sits so far in front of the body, it is front heavy and overly large. On a DSLR, it feels much better, in every way. The big camera companies might have to reconcile a simple fact from me; I’m very happy with my lenses. You too, might want to continue shooting with a favourite lens. and not fork out again for essentially the same thing. In that case, I urge you to consider using them natively, on DSLRs. The further interesting caveat here is, that the Tamron 35/1.4 (2019 design) beats any native 35mm lens on Z mount for astrophotography. So I loose nothing optically here, but save a bunch of money.

Mirrorless don’t have the Zen that DSLRs have. Let’s be fair. Hold a D700, a D810, a D850 and tell me that it doesn’t feel like a piece of precision built military equipment. Now do the same with comparable mirrorless designs. Yeah, they feel more like electronics and consumables that will not last the test of time compared to solidly built DSLRs. (A bit like electric cars!). This will matter to some, and not to others. Again, the experience of shooting to me is heightened by such things. I like and appreciate the solid feel of a precision built instrument in my hands. It feels empowering, and it is.

Shooters nowadays are so caught up in the type of camera used to take a picture. They have forgotten that it is for the most part, completely irrelevant if a mirrorless camera were used or not to take the picture. The end result, is always a digital still image. This is a bold statement, however it is very true. Infact, as we have shown, tech has taken one step forward and two steps back in some cases (consider the Z8, which has third stop less dynamic range over the D810 and D850 DSLRs, in order to achieve a faster readout, and better autofocus). We just horse traded, but came out with the thing that produces the final result, the physical sensor, being worse off! Do’h! Consider this, when you fork out for that ‘upgrade’.

The Andromeda Galaxy. Shot with a Nikon D850 and a telephoto zoom lens (70-200/2.8E)

Dismayed By Photography

I was speaking to a friend I’ve known for many years now via a well known photography forum. He is a very experienced birder predominantly and he has said something quite profound several times now that I reconcile with deeply:

“How many more pictures does the world actually need of birds in flight, or birds sitting on branches? Or Landscapes? Pretty girls in portraits with bokeh backgrounds? Or milky way shots?”

I know, this might sound quite doom and gloom, but actually consider what he says for a moment and on a deeper level, there is some truth to this. It’s also interesting that he openly admits it from his own genre. Motivation to shoot can be low for many reasons, however I would say this could be the strongest contender. Aside from folks trying to become ‘Insta-famous’ at any cost (reels and funny dances on the popularity contest that is social media), I think many recognise that every genre has been done to death in almost every way possible. So why does this matter? Well, if one is being more selective about when they go out and do this (as I am), cost effectiveness comes into play much quicker, than it did at the fast evolving early digital age when camera tech leaped and bounded with each new camera. I don’t see much innovation now. I don’t see things that excite me that much that parting with 3K really makes any difference, for the most part. If I am honest, a D800 / D810 would let me match anything anyone is doing now, bar sports. That’s a heck of a saving, if I can forgo some bells and whilstles (which for the most part, I absolutely can). Take a look at the image here which I shot of Andromeda. Do you have any idea how many pictures there are of this galaxy online? The difference is; this one is mine ;-) .

What About When The DSLR Fails?

I’ve heard this argument a lot. Even if you are in your early 20s, there are enough DSLRs in the world to last a very long time (ebay, craigslist etc). There are also going to be places that can repair them, if you cannot simply buy a new copy (which I conceed, will sometimes be the easier option). This wouldn’t worry me in the slightest. I couple it with the previous paragraph. I am being much more selective in my work now; I am shooting less frames than I ever have done.

Final Thought

At the moment, this is more of a thought piece. Perhaps the only thing that saves the Z8 with me, is infact the landscape astrophotography genre. There are of course, camera’s from other brands comparable in some ways to the Z8, like the Sony ARIV have functions which benefit photographer’s working in the dark, like the Z8 does. I wrote this because I still see the value in DSLRs, and probably always will. If you can avoid mirrorless, I actually would! This is coming from someone who has a top line mirrorless body and four ultimately pro and very expensive lenses.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Nikon Z8 Firmware Upgrade 3.00

Introduction

I am pleased to see Nikon still supporting a two year old flagship camera with new and meaningful upgrades via firmware. Nikon seem to be doing this with most of their mirrorless line and I applaud them for it. This is how business should be done in a shrinking camera market. All camera makers around at present generally release less cameras than in the digital boom of the earlier 2000’s; however companies like Nikon tweak and improve them if possible over the course of their lifespan. It’s not perfect, however Sony and Canon could take note here…

The Upgrades

1. Pixel shift shooting function has been upgraded.
- The automatic exposure bracketing can be used together with the pixel shift function, so that high-quality, high-pixel images can be obtained along with exposure change data, which is the basis for HDR synthesis.

2. Focus shift shooting function has been upgraded.
- It is now possible to use pixel shift, which implements high-quality, high-pixel images along with optimal focus detection data for each shooting section, as an option. The foundation for satisfying both the best image quality and the best resolution has been established.

3. Flexible Picture Control support has been made possible.
- After creating a personal color tone adjusted to the user's preference through Nikon NX STUDIO, it can be applied to the camera via a memory card and applied in real time as a custom picture control.

4. Focus range limit settings can now be adjusted within the camera body. - You can now directly determine the close and long distance ranges for focus detection, enabling faster focus detection without being interrupted by unnecessary interference subjects when shooting flowers, birds, sports, etc.

5. The subject detection function has been enhanced.
- The subject recognition option can now be used with manual focus lenses, and the image magnification during shooting has been expanded to 400%. In particular, when shooting close-up, after checking the screen magnification, you can return from the enlarged zoom to the actual shooting range with just one half-press of the shutter, enabling faster shooting. (This highly benefits AF-D primes through the FTZII adapter, and manual focus glass in general).

6. The high-speed frame capture function has been improved.
- [C15] option selection has been added to prevent unnecessary shooting. In addition, JPEG FINE selection has been enabled in the image quality setting, enabling high-quality images.

7. The N-Log View Assist gradation characteristics have been changed and improved.
- It is now possible to check with a more accurate specified color tone when shooting video. It has become possible to shoot video comfortably with a color tone that matches the user's intention.

8. Other updates
1) The maximum aperture focusing solves poor focus in low light when using strobes etc, where the camera would previosly shoot stopped down.
2) Date option added when playing back filters.
3) High-frequency flicker preset setting is now possible.
4) Nikon models can now be displayed when using the Final Cut program for ProRes 422HQ images.
5) The AF custom wide area has been expanded to a larger area.
6) External microphone support for shooting image voice memo has become possible.
7) Subject detection frame display is now possible when shooting with high-resolution zoom.
8) The white LED of Proforo A10 can now be used as an AF assist light.
9) Support for NX Field has been improved.

Black Linn Falls at the Hermitage, Scotland. Shot with Nikon Z8 and 14-24/2.8S

The Biggest Thing For Me In This Update Helps Me Use AF-D Glass On The FTZII

Apologies for the long subheading, but this one is huge! Manual focus subject detection is the biggest thing in this new firmware and it is actually superb. With any MF lens; simply enable the mode and it detects eyes across the frame even when they are out of focus (obviously). Following this, one button push allows magnification level of choice over either eye and then it is simply a case of pull to focus (or stay zoomed out and use the box going green to judge). No other manufacturer has taken MF this seriously in years, bar maybe Leica. This means nearly any lens ever made can be adapted to Z (due to that short flange distance) and they all benefit from this. Outstanding! And yes, it isn’t a proper FTZIII that keeps all lenses fully autofocusing as intended, but it is a huge step forward and enables me to use AFD primes faster, and with more confidence. I tested this with my fav old Nikon 50 1.4D and legendary 85 1.4D and it worked very well.

My Take

I am pleased to see these updates. Everyone will have their wants and needs. For me, it is about time that the feature ‘Manual Focus Subject Detection’ from the Zf finally made it into the Z8 and I am very much looking forward to using it. With this mode enabled, any manual focus glass, or crucially AF-D primes, will now get a superb update. As mentioned, with this mode enabled, the shooter will have the camera see faces and eyes, allowing focus to be punched in much quicker than it was able to be up until now. My only criticism is that it took them so long to bring it. This is a big thing for me, and will be for many users. Nikon is really taking manual focus implementation seriously on the Z8 (and Zf) with this. I have previously spoken about Nikon users’ call for a FTZIII that completes full autofocus support for all Nikon’s AF lenses back to the late 1980s. See here. This means that there is new life breathed into all AF-D lenses from Nikon, and indeed, a great ergonomic boon to all manual lenses now used on the Z8. I’ll say it again, this is very good news.

Next on my most want list was the maximum aperture focus thing which as above is long overdue and should have been implemented as the way the camera operates from day one. Some may not see the significance of this, so I will explain. Up until firmware 3.00, the Nikon Z8 camera uses an aperture of f/5.6 for focusing when shooting at f/5.6 or narrower (the aperture is only stopped down further once a picture is taken). I believe Nikon put this in to reduce the effects of focus shift; however most of their lenses are pretty free of this. In doing so, they caused a much bigger problem in certain situations, take studio shooters, working with speedlights or larger strobes. In these environments, the staple is shooting stopped down, at f8/f-16. Unfortunately, this meant that focus was erratic and unreliable, because the Z8 was autofocusing through an aperture of f/5.6. This has all changed now, because if you have an f/1.4 or f/2.8 lens, you are going to get focus happening at that aperture, and stopping down to the smaller aperture, only when the shot is taken. (Essentially, exactly the same as DSLRs work, Do’h Nikon - you should have known this, no?).

Still Missing

Unfortunately the good news ends here. There are still a great number of features, and frankly disparity across Z camera firmware. One I really expected to see by now on the Z8 and Z9 (again, it’s been in the Zf for over a year at time of writing), is the ability like Sony cameras, to use the back LCD to move the EVF focus point around. Do I have to wait another year for that Nikon?

The rest of these updates? I am pleased Nikon are doing them. Unlike idiot posters on photography forums, I never begrudge others’ updates that could potentially enhance their shooting practices. However I do wonder what Nikon is thinking by their continual ignorance of basic functions that should be in all of their Mirrorless cameras as standard. Yes folks, I’m going to complain about the lack of 4:5 crop mode again here, because it really is just stupid that we are still missing this. I even contacted Nikon about this several months ago. I thought - why not, they have a website which welcomes suggestions, so I suggested. I was surprized at the email I received in response to my enquiry. I was told that they “get asked about 4:5 crop mode being added to their cameras all the time, and further to this, they appreciate many other camera’s offer this mode, but they had no plans to add it” (I have kept this email, as it amused me so much). I mean how stupid is that? The mind boggles. Further to this, it was in some early mirrorless bodies, but the moronic thing is they actually took it out! I mean seriously, what is Nikon doing here? And this is where I come back to, while I absolutely do not begrudge any updates (even if they do not benefit me directly), I cannot help wondering why they petulantly do not fix a lot of low hanging fruit like crop modes and other items in their mirrorless line. I guess I will go on wondering…

NB: Nikon, it is beyond stupid that FW 3.00 isn’t available on Snapbridge until 27th October when it became available on your website on the 1st July! You need to wake up with this stuff - and this app in general is beyond atrocious and frankly an embarrassment). I've noticed a new standard Wifi connection is now available. Wont help for FW updates, however might work for image transfer to avoid Snapbridge? Yet to test…

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Orion Constellation over Scotland with the Nikon Z8 and 14-24/2.8S Lens — Orion over the Duncansby Sea Stacks, North Scotland. Shot with a Nikon Z8, 14-24/2.8 and star adventurer mount

Photography: Simplifying Composition

The Fairy Glen, Isle of Skye Scotland — The Fairy Glen on the Isle of Skye, Scotland

Introduction

The more I am part of the photography world, the more obvious it becomes to me that the best pictures are often intrinsically simple in their composition. This leads me to ask the question; can we learn something from the way amateur photographers’ take pictures? What do I even mean by this? Before you read this, you might want to read my previous article, which links into this topic nicely: ‘Shooting For Realism' Let’s discuss…

Simplify Your Images

For me, there is a sense of being careful that my pictures don’t become too “photographer-y”. (Stop me if I am getting too technical here). Of course, what I mean by this is, the pictures becoming too complex and technical feeling, predictable or forced in terms of their compositional makeup, or that they indeed follow trends or cliches. In essence, trying to be too clever can be to the detriment of the final result. I see this all the time especially in landscape photography. The picture is obvious and clear, but we have to put a large rock in the frame, or some other obstructive element in the foreground that simply doesn’t work for the scene; or worse, get’s the the way of viewing the landscape behind it. It can even be that the image becomes too “fore-groundy”. This becomes a counterintuitive process to creating a competent image with balance.

Gourock at Sundown, Scotland — Simple Compositions send a clear, undiluted message to the viewer about the landscape and what we wish to convey

Background

What caused me to notice this phenomenon? Although I have not done this for some-time (and I will tell you why later), I used to compare the pictures I had of locations to others on Instagram and the like. What I noticed, was that amateur’s pictures, whilst often having mangled colour, or large blown out highlights in places, their compositions were simpler, and worked better than some of the pictures I or other pros (or semi-pros) were taking of the same locations. I noticed this with other people shooting for instagram and the like. Sometimes the ‘uneducated’ travel photographer, who comes at photography from ‘this is a pretty place, I am going to try and become an influencer’ actually is making better pictures than the ‘trained photographer’ who aims to flaunt their compositional know-how at each scene; of course, save for the points about exposure, colour and the like made previously. Occam’s Razor suggests that the reason for this is simply because they don’t have all this ‘technical’ mumbo-jumbo in their head when they take a picture. They are clearly just wishing to have a captivating scene immortalised in front of them. In some way’s their intentions are simpler than us; they aren’t trying to be clever, like we sometimes get caught up in. Can we learn from this? I have discussed this topic with many prominent shooters and I think we can take something from this, and be mindful of it in our shooting.

That Annoying Foreground Object Craze

Believe me, this is a very real phenomenon, and most of us have been guilty of it at some time or another. For me, it began in the hayday of the website ‘flickr’ which I am very fond of until today, despite the horrid changes the current owner has made, (including max upload of 1000 images and prevention of downloading high resolution images). Often the most common culprit, is a small foreground rock, made to look large by shooting close with a wide angle lens. Take the picture at the start of the article. The craze states I would travel down to the rocky area in this scene, then place a random large boulder right in front of my lens, and shooting it that way (usually on a third). It feels clever, but is it? Isn’t the scene as I have shown, about the interplay of light and the place itself, rather than an arbitrary rock I found which I then place in the shot, blocking the view of the place? If we take this particular scene, I think it works best at elevation: looking down on the scene. That’s the shot here. A nice arrangement of the cloud around the scene aid’s composition here; there is a space around the rock formation on the right. The light is hitting the correct parts of the scene, nothing is blown out, colours look natural. I’ve ultimately avoided this ‘problem’ in this scene by keeping it simple, and also by my choice of focal length. I shot this with a 24-70/2.8S lens, at 24mm. A wide focal length, for sure; however not ultra wide. It is much easier to fall into the ‘too foregroundy’ trap with an ultra wide angle lens. I would urge you to think about what the scene requires before commiting to a focal length and foreground. Let’s look at the picture below and be critical with it:

Because I have shot this with too wide of a lens, there is far too much foreground for my liking. Also, the relationship between the size of the rocks in the foreground, and the size of the castle is exaggerated, making the castle appear extremely small in the frame. (This is a shot about a castle, right?). What do these rocks say about the image? Answer: nothing really. I just do not shoot like this now. To give you an idea, this was shot with a 20mm lens on 35mm format. My intention was to show some foreground. It would have been done better with a 35mm, and standing back from the shore much more. Or go telephoto. But this? It doesn’t work for my eyes now. NB: I intentionally left the distance to drift out of focus. In the below shot, the foreground makes sense to the overall image. I could however, chop through the water to produce a 4:5 picture also:

Wide Angle Lenses and Foregrounds

Some shooters get so excited about foregrounds they forget the rest of the scene; it becomes about the foreground only. This is a photographer phenomenon, amateurs generally don’t think like this. (It’s mostly a good thing too). This is a very easy trap to fall into in landscape / outdoor photography, or even astrophotography. I am of course not looking to shoot boring, uninteresting foregrounds either, however this becomes akin to the musician playing for the song, rather than to show off their technical virtuoso. It absolutely becomes about a balance of elements in the scene. The predominant place we want the eye to arrive at, and how it gets to that point is important. For the most part, the best images are inherently simple in their compositional makeup. I have pushed back from using ultra wides in recent years. Oh of course, I own them. but they are no longer the go to lens. I prefer shooting around 20-50mm for most of my landscape photography. 24mm is a favourite focal length of mine and has been for many years now; it gets used the most often (this has actually always been my favourite focal length for landscape, despite this noted phenomenon). In my shooting I do go as wide as 14mm, however I am careful of it’s use and when I do use this type of lens, my overriding aim is to produce a picture that has the feel of 24-35mm, without that distorted look that can occur due to this ultra wide perspective. This really is a trick to using focal lengths from 20mm and wider. Scene objects can get very warped when we take an ultra-wide view of the scene. Sometimes it is best to question our use of focal length in these circumstances. Sometimes it is best to take a slightly tighter slice of the scene. Photography is about what we don’t show, as much as what we do. Shooting a little tighter, with more normal and less extreme focal lengths, such as 20-35mm can aid a stronger composition, whilst reducing the ultra wide angle feeling in our images.

Make the Foreground Make Sense

If we are going to add in a foreground element, especially if it will partially obstruct a view or the like, we should make sure that it is warranted in the image. The feature should make compositional sense to be there; otherwise we are just sticking rocks in our images to fill spaces and satisfy our ego. When done correctly, and the image is about the rock formation, it makes complete sense to do. We need to think to ourselves “what is this addition saying in the context of our composition and image”.

Fionn's Rock at Glen Lyon, Scotland — When it makes sense to block some of the view. The picture is about the rock formation in this case

Final Thoughts

Despite the fact I added a few extra words to the dictionary today, it is my thought that we can learn something from the way amateurs take pictures. Don’t get me wrong here; we aren’t wanting to copy someone who can’t get the horizon level in an image, but in other aspects as we have discussed here, we might consider simplifying things. When we are shooting it is very useful to try and distill the scene down to it’s most basic elements, being very careful to exclude anything in the scene that does not add to the overall picture and make it stronger, compositionally. If we approach the scene as it it were the first time we have ever been there or shot it, will allow us to learn, develop and ultimately produce pictures with better meaning and flair.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Astrophotography in Extremely Dark Skies

Introduction

By far and away the biggest improvement we can make to our astrophotography is visiting the darkest skies possible. In Scotland, we are extremely lucky. If we move away from the central belt between Glasgow and Edinburgh, it is quite easily to find suitable skies in which to practice the craft; and the further we move from large towns and cities, the better it gets.

Glen Lyon - Nikon Z8 with 24/1.4 prime lens on a Star Adventurer Star Tracker Mount. Exposure is 3 minutes at f/3.5

The Bortle scale gives us a rough guide on what to expect with regards to night sky quality. From 9, being horrdenously bad inner city skies, where we are lucky to see the odd star, to Bortle 1, where we can see really faint and distant objects, some even with the naked eye. You might be surprized to learn that the above picture is Bortle 2; yes there are even slightly better skies than this! Anything between 1-3 is truly excellent however. At the lower end of the Bortle scale, we can also easily expect to discern individal star colours:

Cancer, Mars, Gemini - Shot with a Nikon Z8 and Tamron 35/1.4 lens wide open for 60 seconds

Gemini in particular, is a constellation I plan to shoot a lot more of. This was a fairly impromptu picture, as I had waited a little longer than I should have to shoot it, causing it to be a little low on the horizon this night. Of course, that horizon is in the hills of Glen Lyon, and just over that ledge is a massive drop into the glen. So it’s all about positioning here. Shooting constellations is a delight in astrophotography, however the pictures have to be given careful consideration.

Looking north into Kenmore, Scotland, sits a little fishing hut at Urlar Moor. It is the perfect subject to frame up the recognisable Cassiopeia constellation as I have done here. Consider the Bortle scale as a general guide of night sky quality. Remember that looking in certain directions will often yield lower light pollution. Here, looking North, means I am not fighting through light pollution from the centra belt cities in Scotland. However, when aurora shows up, as it has done in this image, for the most part it allows us to shoot in more light polluted skies anyway, because by it’s nature it tends to fill the sky with colour, in this case, purples.

I started taking pictures on my other camera whilst one was doing a tracked exposure quite some time ago. It keeps my mind on something whilst standing in the freezing cold, and often the different thought process that goes along with it, can allow for something unique to be had. Here, I didn’t bother to turn the tracker off to expose the foreground, because I was pressed for time to get back to what I was doing (ie, the headline shot of this article), and the fact that this image is about the sky, not the ground.

The plough really looks amazing in Bortle 1-2 skies when it is at Zenith (overhead).

Three in Line - 2 minute sky exposure at f/2,8. Six minute foreground, blended.

Lastly, here is a beautiful Glen in Perthshire which always brings me back, time and time again. The sky was pink with very faint aurora.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Nikon D700 Camera Deserves Its Legendary Status

Introduction

Until July 2008, Nikon only had what is known as DX crop sensors in a smaller format cameras like the D700; the D3, released the prior year was the first full frame DSLR that Nikon made. DX sensors are significantly smaller than full frame (FX) which matches 35mm film before digital took over. At that time, it was almost seen that Nikon were not taking full frame seriously. However, this all changed with the D3 camera which surfaced in 2007, and with the release of the D700 in July of 2008. The D700 was my second digital Nikon camera that I ever bought from new in 2010 (the D90 being the first). The D90 was not a bad camera, however I lusted after the ‘proper’ full frame format and the beautiful design and ruggedness of the already impressive status of the D700. I am sad to say I sold this body several years ago, and the quite ridiculous reason was that I felt that shooting alongside high megapixel bodies with a 12MP sensor made no sense. (I gave too much weight to marketing people talking about megapixels, instead of my own inner voice). I have since realised my mistake and have very recently taken ownership of a mint condition D700 with less than 1K shots on it’s shutter. Why you might ask? The predominant reason is that is produces a very unique ‘signature’ output that is easily recognisable. I honestly note that many of the older cameras have this, a unique signature of the sensor, akin to a film stock which means post processing is so simple to do. While it's not the latest and greatest in terms of megapixels or advanced autofocus features, it remains a very capable camera for various photographic genres. The images posted here are from my first time around with the iconic D700:

Some Specs

The D700 has a 12 megapixel sensor and a very capable 51 point autofocus system, straight from the D3. It also shares it’s 1,005-Pixel 3D Colour Matrix Metering II that provides good metering, enabling accurately exposed scenes off the bat. (The D700 runs a little hot on exposure, compared to modern sensors which higher dynamic range, clearly a design intention aimed at promoting good subject exposure at the potential loss of some highlights - this is the opposite to modern sensors which have meters which tend to underexpose a little more). It’s ISO range is a very usable 200-6400. It has a vibrant 3″ 921,000-dot VGA colour LCD monitor. It is capable of shooting at 5 FPS natively, or up to 8 FPS with a grip attached. In fact, the D700 inherited most things from it’s bigger brother, all wrapped into a small, solidly built package. And that package is just as you have heard. It has a rugged magnesium-alloy construction to it’s entire base frame where all important components are directly attached and housed within it.

You may read these specifications and baulk at them. Only 12 megapixels? It only does 5 FPS? No eye detection autofocus? How can we live with this? It’s quite simple to realise, that the strengths of this camera play to it’s simplicity in producing beautiful colour and tonality in the still image. Portraits don’t require eye autofocus. I have this ability in my Z8, and whilst cute and all, and perhaps it is even nice to have in some situations, it’s not helped me make any better images, not really, not if I am honest about it. 5 FPS? Well, if you need 20 FPS (clearly you are a sports shooter then, otherwise if you are shooting portraits at this speed you are seriously misguided), then simply buy a modern DSLR or mirrorless camera and be done with it, otherwise consider why you think you need 20, 30 or 100 FPS? Do you have any idea how painful it is to look through a few seconds of pictures shot at 30 FPS to see the scene barely change between them, and have to spend time culling them? I think I did this once by accident on a modern camera and I am never going to repeat it. Lastly, let us discuss the first ‘problem’ of resolution, I have left this to the end because it is absolutely the one that seems to get most gear heads so bent out of shape over. Frame properly with the correct lens, and the cropping problem (which is of course limited with a 12MP sensor) goes away. After we put that problem to bed, we are faced with 12 million gloriously large quality pixels in a properly composed scene. Further to this, consider that resolution importance is dramatically overplayed for printing. Unless we are talking about extremely large prints, which are viewed ultra close (aka, Billboards don’t apply to this situation), the D700 will be absolutely fine. Also, of course, it will be absolutely fine if you post on social media too. People won’t notice resolution issues at all; however they will notice the unique look to the files if you learn how to get the best out of the camera.

Nikon D700 classic camera — The Bride - D700 with 50mm f/1.4D shot wide open

The D700 camera was discontinued many years ago and replaced by the D750, (much to the disquiet of the D700 fanbase), a body that was much less solidly built; it had multiple recalls and issues with flaring due to the mirror box design. (The D700 didn’t have a single recall). The D750 didn’t have the pro level control system found on the D700 and ultimately just doesn’t have the classic output that the D700 can provide. Regarding the D700, many have called it the best camera in the world in terms of price to performance, and ultimately the output it can achieve so simply. This sensor really has a totally unique tonal colour palette that is unmatched. Many say that they can match this with any camera in raw processing; I have yet to see evidence of this in real world results. There are many reasons that this camera is still considered legendary.

Ergonomics

The D700 is a beautiful looking camera on the exterior, and is an ergonomic masterpiece in the hands to those that take it into their hands and shoot with it. The button layout is solid and logical, and no menu diving is required to operate the camera properly, just like a film camera. This is how it should be. I utterly detest some modern mirrorless cameras that have removed buttons to force me to menu dive for regularly required shooting functions. This is just plain stupid. We don’t have that problem here. The optical viewfinder is gorgeous, despite showing about 96% of the frame as we look through it, never causes a problem in the type of shooting I would use the camera for. Consider that mirrorless tech now is a ways away from the first major iterations: for example the Z7, in that camera’s like the Z8 have hardly any or no perceptible lag when shooting. Despite this, there is still a case to be made for a large and bright optical viewfinder as is found here. There are several things I would touch on here. There is absolutely zero lag with these designs; the subject comes in at the speed of light through optical finders. Secondly, in genres such as wedding / portrait and others that involve long staring contests of the photographer looking through the finder, optical finders are still relevant, and dare I say it, better. Think about this for a second. DSLRs do not need to power an electronic feed for you to see and compose your image. You can have your settings down and simply wait for the decisive moment. Doing this with mirrorless involves chewing through batteries simply waiting on the picture. This may or may not affect a shooter; however it is important to consider. The last advantage can also for some be seen as a disadvantage by some. For me, it is nice to observe subjects without any electronic representation. As long as one knows how to meter and understands exposure, this is generally not an issue. Shooters now are growing up in a world of smartphones, where they need to see what they are going to get on the mirrorless screen in order to make a picture. However, even things like brightness can throw people shooting like this off, so it is best for them to go back to basics and learn how to meter and use histograms. Of course, the other side of this coin is that in low light, mirrorless cameras can have the advantage in that they can electronically boost the signal. When you think about it, since DSLRs have live view, this should have been technically possible with DSLRs too, just not via the optical finder. The shutter and mirror in the D700 are iconically noisy. Birds can fly out of trees when you take image nearby; people can hear this camera in operation. Despite this, it is reassuringly solid and that’s-that. The strap is bold: proudly displaying you are shooting with a D700 and that it is FX (full frame). This was a badge of honour on it’s release. (This was the first time that Nikon showed it’s digital full frame prowess, along with the D3 camera).

Girl at Wedding - D700 with 24mm f/2.8D Nikkor

The Principals Behind The Colour

The D700 has a colour Sensitivity metamerism index (SMI) of 83 for daylight and low light tungsten conditions. This is very strong, and gives us information about how well the camera differentiates individual colours and their individual hues. Have a look at this image from dpreview.com which shows colour separation problems from other cameras, that the D700 does not have: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53185762?image=0. Here we can see four CMOS cameras. The D700 by far pulls out the gold tones the best. The D800 really skews this hue to yellow. The reason for this is that the D700 has a much stricter Colour Filter Array than the D800 does. The sensor doesn’t actually see colour at all without the CFA component. At the dawn of the digital camera age, many manufacturers kept the CFA very strict at differentiating individual hues and saturating them properly. As time went on, and the demand for cleaner high iso increased, they were generally weakened in order to let in more light. The D700 has a CMOS sensor; however you will hear most internet chatter about good colour belonging to cameras which have CCD sensors. This is a misnomer. The reason that this is happening it because people incorrectly assume the CCD is producing the unique, or better colour than the CMOS. The D700 is one camera to prove this to be inaccurate. It just so happens that the CFA sitting atop of the sensor of many early digital cameras was more strict. The CFA generates the colour, not the sensor itself. To read more about why the CFA is so intrinsic to camera colour see my other article here. Some state that it should be technically possible to create the D700 output in a modern high resolution camera. This would involve profiling for individual illuminants such a daylight, tungsten light, etc. I have not seen anyone do this that convinces me the files came from a D700. Further to this, it would be an absolute undertaking. Why not just, you know, own a D700? The D700's colour rendering is often praised for its ability to capture subtle nuances in skin tones, with reds and oranges rendered beautifully:

Rendering

I have spent a lot of time shooting people at weddings in particular, however also outwith those situations. I am a photographer who is able to light, however the way in which life works and presents itself to us, and the impromptu nature of situations, I prefer to find light than to carry lighting gear with me everywhere I go. Do not mistake this for a laziness to learn lighting, I often still at least take a speed light with me in case. In fact, I urge anyone that doesn’t know how to use a basic set of speed lights both on and off camera, to learn the lighting craft. Then go further with the multitude of light modifiers until they begin to understand light on a deeper level. Don’t be that available light shooter because you are afraid of flash. Be it because you understand flash and use it when it is needed, and because you have begun to truly understand the nature of light.

All Smiles at Wedding - D700 and 50mm f/1.4D

I have spent a great deal of time deciphering from people on what they actually want from portraiture of their child or family member. The answer is very obvious, however so many shooters are blinded to it by years of marketing brainwashing and internet forums that discuss gear all day long. I can tell you with absolute certainty that it is utterly simple what they want; to look good in the pictures we take of them. That’s it. Stripped back, this is the essence for portraiture, which if you think about weddings in particular, is just a continual one after other portraiture session with the element of continued surprise. The D700 directly links into this goal that people have for having their picture taken. Allow me to explain. The D700 has 12 megapixels, lower by today’s standards compared with monster megapixel cameras available now on 35mm format (at the time of writing 60MP). It also has a thick anti-aliasing filter in it’s design. Both of these combined leaves a subtle blur or softness to the images, of course that can be tailored a little in post processing, but it will never look as sharp and crunchy as a high megapixel camera, and that’s a good thing. (I can already hear people telling me that you can blur things in post. It doesn’t quite work the same as native output for me, and it also takes time to do per file, so consider this more deeply). Remember what I said. The D700 helps achieve that one goal that people have. To look good. No one over the age of 30 wants to see the wrinkles and the like on their face in a still image. Portraiture should capture the essence of a person. A singular image of them that tells a story. When we look at people, our brains tend to filter out some imperfections, we don’t remember that when they smile or scowl that their face is a bit wrinkly. If we show a picture of too much reality, it’s not going to go down well. This is not what people want to see in a portrait of themselves. There can be a huge task of fixing the sharp - crunchy look in an ultra high resolution camera. It takes me to the fact I am using mist filters on high resolution sensors, in a similar way that cinematographers are doing in film to make things look less sharp and crunchy. This is also, without knowing specifically how to achieve it of course, what people want. I don’t need any of this with the D700. So many shooters have listened to the internet and bought the marketing koolaid that they needed more megapixels to be a better photographer, without considering the essence of it, and what ultimately matters most. The D700’s rendering is just right for all of this. It’s just right for skin and people. Skin tones look amazing, as do colours and tones.

Onlooker - Nikon D700 and 135 F/2 DC Nikkor

Use Case

What do I consider the D700 good for so long after it’s release. Would I use it for sports? Perhaps, it depends on the aims, use case of the end result and many other factors. It’s not necessarily the first use case I would think of, despite the fact that we absolutely could make great pictures with it in that genre. What about landscape work? Again, many capable landscape images have been made with the D700. Landscape tends to favour higher resolution and dynamic range (although there are ways around this), however again, it is not necessarily the use case I would apply to this camera either. So where would I place the D700 now? This is an easy answer, and if you have been paying attention up until now you already know it; without a doubt anything that involves people. I’m talking professional portraits, weddings, photographing ‘stuff’ and ‘things’. The D700 clearly excels at getting skin tones just right, whilst leaving the rest of the scene looking beautiful colour and tonality wise. I can already hear people talking about the D700 and it’s lack of eye-autofocus, or dynamic range, or even resolution. Come on now! You don’t need eye-AF to shoot a portrait. Dynamic range? Still plenty. It has just over 9 stops which is more than film ever had. Resolution? I’ll bet you say this and you don’t even print anyway. I’m looking at my D700 files on a 32” 4K ProArt monitor and they look gorgeous. What is your problem that you need more than this? Most of this is simply marketing chatter to make the user feel inadequate and to get them to buy the latest camera and product. You aren’t a man unless you shoot 60MP! Marketing 101 attempts to destabilise the users confidence in what they do and convince them they need something else to continue doing it. Shooters that get past this and understand this concept, tend to grow artistically and technically faster.

D700 blooming problem — D700 high ISO image at ISO 1600. Shot hand-held with a 50mm f/1.4D wide open. (It’s best to stop this lens down a touch at night)

Problems

It’s not all sunshine and rainbows shooting with an older body. As you can see from this image, the D700 (and D3, D3s) all suffer from a problem now solved in modern Nikon bodies. Note the blooming from the strong light sources in this image, which causes light to draw across the image? This is particularly strong at high ISO, however it still present faintly when I shoot this scene at the camera’s base ISO of 200 on a tripod, This limits the push-pull we can do in processing to get the files to look how we want them to in certain situations. I have PP’d this file mildy which has brought them out more here. This particular problem is the only one that really faces this particular sensor. It’s caused by the pixel well filling and causes the charge to spill over onto adjacent pixels to draw right across the image as you can see here, known as blooming. Many of the older sensor designs did this, and it is something to be aware of if owning a D700. From what I have seen, some D700’s are better than others in this regard too. Either avoid these scenes, use a different camera, or get creative and use it as an effect.

Arran from Portencross - D700 with 24mm f/2.8D

When the D700 get’s it right, it really produces beautiful results with rich colour, with barely any effort required to inject atmosphere in post processing. This image remains to this day one of my favourite, taken in 2011 on Scotland’s west coast. I shot this one using a 3 stop graduated ND filter. (Back then I wasn’t so good with photoshop). I still think grads would be useful for simple scenes like this, and more complex scenes would lend themselves better to luminosity masking which I use more now. The point of this image is to provide proof that a camera is really a tool to an end goal. No camera has enough dynamic range to capture a contrasty sunset in one shot anyway, so we will always need to make technical allowances for this.

Portrait of a Boy - D700 with 85mm f/1.4D Nikkor

Even at ISO 1000, the D700 easily pulls of shots such as the above. Admittedly, this wasn’t really a light-starved situation. The ISO was selected in order to keep a useable shutter speed for a moving baby and an 85mm lens.

Food Source - Nikon D700 with 85mm f/1.4D

Punchy, vibrant colours are easy with the D700, and the body keeps those tones where they ought to be. Whether it is the most accurate or not, it is some of the most pleasing to be found in any camera.

Conclusion

If you read my articles, you already know I use a mixture of equipment. I do this partly because, even although I own the latest mirrorless tech and lenses, DSLRs are still excellent for producing beautiful pictures as I have shown, and they already team up perfectly with the lenses I have owned for more than a decade at the time of writing. Instead of deciding to ditch all my prime lenses I have for f mount and buy them all again on z (no thanks), I kept them and continue to use them. When I am shooting astro or landscape, you will probably find me with a Z8, or D810 body, otherwise I use what I have on f. I will admit some of this happened due to me being frugal (I’ve spent enough on photographic equipment over the years, and I am old enough to know that new lenses and cameras are a fallacy to improving one’s craft solely). It went further though, to the realisation that something is sometimes a bit off in modern ultra-sharp lenses and sensors. Call it whatever you want, but for the types of pictures I like to produce when I am not out shooting landscape or astro genres, the D700 produces magic unlike no other camera, and even despite it being well over a decade old, still sees strong usage. For this reason, I still highly recommend you try a D700.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

I have had so much positive response to this article, I am continuing to add to it. Stay tuned.

Steve

Aurora Lights Up the Northern Hemisphere

Aurora Borealis lit up the skies in the northern hemisphere last night in a stunning colour burst of pinks, purples and greens. The night started off as a simple excursion and I only expected to be out for an hour or so. That quickly changed and went on all the way until 3am, a little over six hours passed in the blink of an eye. Here are some pictures I made in rural Perthshire, Scotland (I will add more to this article later). If you are here to look at the pictures, just ignore the photography detail aimed at improving amateurs’ shooting techniques and enjoy:

The headline shot is one of the last shots of the evening, before I left at about 3am, of the classic location, at the Frandy tree in Glendevon. In this exposure, I used a Sigma 14mm f/1.8 prime and when doing the long exposure foreground (at f/5.6), the red glow of my headtorch caught the area under the tree. Although I took another without this, I left this in because it just works visually here.

During the night there was a thin veil of high cloud, causing the stars to glow in many exposures, ideal for this type of shooting:

I feel it is important not to be afraid of shallower depth of field in daytime and nightime landscapes. Everything doesn’t need to be in the focal plane. The above picture is shot at f/4 for the foreground (focused on the boat), and f/1.8 on the sky. You can notice the very front of the picture is outwith this plane of focus. It leads us into the picture. I don’t want the viewer gazing into the dark foreground corners. Consider this when shooting your own pictures. Focus stacking is over-rated when you know your own end goal with regards to a picture. Notice the lack of noise, even on a compressed web resolution image? This is what taking care and being precise at the scene looks like. You gotta work to make it as best as it possibly can be. Quality over Quantity.

The following shot is made with a Sigma 14mm 1.8 lens. I also have a tracked panorama of this scene which will show even more detail. I’ll post that after I get a chance to look at it. This picture here shows constellations Auriga with Jupiter below it (left side), and centrally, Perseus. The far right is Cassiopeia. All shrowded in faint auroral glows of greens, pinks and purples:

Aurora and Auriga, Perseus and Cassiopeia. Sky shot at f/1.8, foreground at f/5.6 for higher image fidelity. (Sky was not tracked in this example).

Then came the strongest aurora of the night:

The thing about shooting aurora is that is it nearly always different. Provided we can find the right scene, it it ever changing and the patterns create a uniqueness to each picture. Below is probably my favourite from the night, just because it is so unique:

This image was a complex one to blend the foreground to the sky to create; trees can be a real stumbling block because selecting fine branches is extremely difficult. I used a luminosity selection using Jimmy McIntyre’s ‘Lumi32’ (highly recommended) in order to get a finely detailed mask, then I used brushes at low opacity to ensure every fine branch matched to create this seemless result. I also recommend Jimmy’s Raya Pro suite.

Even as the aurora slowly faded from a period of high activity, it is still easy to make a beautiful picture. A definitive image is much more than sky colours! We could shoot aurora over bins and washing lines, we could shoot it from laybys and other ugly places, however that is not going to produce a memorable picture. Who would want to hang something like that on their wall? My best advice summarised is as follows: Find a suitable location, or better locations. Use fast primes of decent quality, and ideally a full frame 35mm camera. When proecessing, do not forget it is dark at night. I know, seems obvious right? However it seems like it is not to the folks on instagram or facebook these days who seem obsessed with making night look like day with their unnatural shadow pulling. Keep it dark, and balance this by not burning out black areas unless doing so intentionally. Watch the highlights. Where possible, do a long exposure of the foreground right after. This means we can blend it and get rid of noise. It’s also why it is ideal (when you get more advnaced) to shoot with two cameras at the scene, then you are less likely to miss anything as the aurora waxes and wanes. To begin however, you don’t need much of any of this. You just need to get out there with a camera and tripod to get started. As the night went on and the temperature, which had plummeted well below zero causing ice to form on all of the equipment; I switched on my lens heaters as they began to form ice crystals. The aurora finally died away and the hours of being in the punishing cold began to affect me, I finally called it a night.

If you want to learn how to do this, see my tutorial here. If you want to know the gear I use to produce these pictures, see here.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

The Mirror Man (Still), Loch Earn - Scotland

Still by Rob Mulholland. This is a huge mosaic using a Tamron 35mm f/1.4 and a Nikon Z8 camera and Star Tracker

Introduction

Recently a stunning sculpture by Artist Rob Mulholland has returned to Perthshire’s Loch Earn after an absence of eight years. It remained in the loch from 2014 until 2017 when it was removed. ‘Still’ as it is formally known, is a 2.7 metre sculpture, covering it’s surface are hundreds of tiny mirrors. It is designed to reflect man’s relationship with the natural world. The return of the artwork is thanks to a fundraising campaign led by local community groups ‘Take a Pride’ and ‘St Fillans in Bloom’. We hope it remains here for many years to come. When I noticed Still had returned to the loch, I set out to photograph this unique sculpture under starlight.

Still with the glowing Orion constellation behind

How I Photographed ‘Still’

In order to make a memorable and cohesive picture, it takes time and effort, both in terms of capturing the best data, using the best techniques and also in processing to bring that data out faithfully. Firstly, I mosaiced the sky using a Tamron 35/1.4 prime lens. (Basically I made a huge panorama style jigsaw puzzle of the sky to gather as much detail and light as possible). I took a singular row with the camera in vertical orientation, then did another of the sky higher up, and ran across the sky. I used a Star Adventurer star tracker in order to be able to do 30 second exposures at f/1.4, ISO 800. This makes for a very clean image, with exceptional light gathering. You can see the dusty dark lanes in the milky way, and good star colour in part due to this. I then switched the star tracker off and pano’d the foreground in the same way. I took double exposures for the bright lights centre left, and horizon right. Without doing so, these areas would be blown out white, and would become very distracting in the final image, leading the eye away from the sculpture centrally.

Loch Earn from above as Orion and Taurus set in the distance

On the first night, I hiked up to this viewpoint over Loch Earn with Martin from Light, Land and Sky. This gave us a fantastic vantage point to watch the constellations set in the west. I used a 20mm to mosaic the sky here, however I am annoyed that I didn’t use a 35 or 50 in order to give more detail. Next year, we will do differently, however for now it is a nice reminder of the night under the stars, especially since it was bearable-cold, and Loch Earn was completely still for two nights. (Did you see what I did there…)

On arriving for a second night to photograph Still, aurora appeared as I attemped to photograph the sculpture. Unfortunately it was much stronger whilst getting my gear out and preparing to shoot, however you can see the glow of pink in this image. This image is an ultra wide panoramic, shot quickly using a Sigma 14mm f/1.8 lens to collect the light as fast as possible. This panoramic is built from six vertical images to give what you see here.

Finally, here is another picture I made of Still at Loch Earn showing the major winter constellations; Gemini, Orion, Taurus, Auriga and Perseus:

Still - The Mirror Man, Loch Earn — Still @ Loch Earn by Rob Mulholland

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

The Best Lenses for Astrophotography

Perseid Meteor Shower: Aperture matters! Sigma 14nn f/1.8 and Nikon D850

Introduction

Astrophotography is one of the most demanding applications we can put optical equipment through; it is in fact a torture test for any lens that has to balance aberrations across a large sensor such as APS-C or full frame, considering that a large part of the focused image will contain pin point light sources (stars). In this article I am going to detail some of the best lenses for these purposes, looking at lenses that are built to handle a wide spectrum of shooting cases. This means they will all have large apertures, to be able to deal with low light levels. In astrophotography, maximising the signal achieved from the night sky is one of the most pressing concerns when shooting, so we will be looking at lenses that function on and off of a star tracker to produce stellar results. A shooter needs to consider how they work and their goals when choosing suitable lenses / equipment. For example, if we are shooting aurora, aperture matters much more as star trackers don’t help much to gather additional signal. If we are shooting the milky way, we can use a slower lens (or a fast lens stopped down) on a star tracker. If we are shooting combinations of different items, well, this is where it starts to get tricky…

14mm and the Super Ultra Wides

Fast aperture ultra wide lenses are the lens of choice for most when they consider capturing the night sky with their camera. Ultra wides are sometimes looked down on from experienced astrophotographers, who tend to do a lot of mosaics with longer focal lengths; however I still really enjoy using them for their field of view, aperture and sheer simplicity etc. Lenses like these are excellent for strong, sky-filling aurora storms, expansive milky way views, or collective constellation shots. They are good for times when you want an expansive field of view, however do not wish to resort to a longer lens to build a pano. There could be many reasons for this, weather, time, scene geometry and more.

Sigma 14mm f/1.4 DG DN (mirrorless)

A recent design which was designed for astrophotography from the ground up. Sigma states this new optic was born from their engineers’ passion for capturing the widest, brightest, highest-resolution, and most captivating starry sky images possible. This lens is one of the best rectilinear ultra wide angle - fast aperture lenses available. It has excellent centre sharpness at f/1.4, corners are somewhat softer. It is completely useable at f/1.4, but the stars improve best at around f/2.5-2.8, with only small deformation to star shapes on the periphery and corners of the full frame image. Wide open it pretty well controlled coma and sagittal / tangential astigmatism. This lens has a massive vignette wide open (-2.5 EV corners), so you are only getting the f/1.4 advantage centrally really. It is usefully-so, quite resistant to flare compared to the Sigma 14/1.8 lens I own. It includes useful features such as a built in lens collar, and a hood which prevents lens warmers slipping into the field of view when shooting; this in combination with a manual focus lock switch, means focus stays where it was set. This lens has a rear filter slot which can be useful. It comes in at 1,170g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts.

Sigma 15mm f/1.4 DG DN Fisheye (mirrorless)

Another superb modern optical design is this. This lens is actually arguably better than any rectilinear lens when it comes to star shapes into the distant corners. It easily beats the Sigma 14/1.4 and 14/1.8 rectilinear lenses, because a fisheye lens by design does not have to bend light as much as a rectilinear lens. The result is that the corners are just better all round. It has excellent centre and corner sharpness even wide open and is useable from f/1.4 with no real problems. Wide open it has well controlled coma and sagittal / tangential astigmatism, and stars stay as tight little round circles. It includes the usual useful Sigma features, focus lock and a hood that prevents migration of any lens warmers into the field of view. This is a lens that up until recently I probably would have instantly discounted with it being a fisheye design. However, from what I have seen with this lens, it is too good to ignore. You can always get creative with those distorted foregrounds too, so give it consideration. It includes useful features such as a built in lens collar, and a hood which prevents lens warmers slipping into the field of view when shooting; this in combination with a manual focus lock switch, means focus stays where it was set. This lens has a rear filter slot which can be useful. It comes in at 1,360g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts.

Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM (dslr or mirrorless)

I have owned this lens since 2019 and it has been used to create many astrophotography pictures the length and breadth of Scotland. This lens has very good centre sharpness wide open, but soft corners, similar to the 14/1.4 lens described above. Wide open it has noticeable coma and sagittal / tangential astigmatism, giving little wings to the stars. I use this lens wide open, and on pixel peeping we can see these aberrations clearly. Stopped down they improve quickly however, and get close to the newer sigma 14mm 1.4 design at 2.8 (this is a consideration when using a star tracker of course, we can stop down to improve star sharps and vignette’s etc). This lens is no slouch, even in comparison to the newer 1.4 design. (For example, mid-frames actually favour the 14mm f/1.8 Art slightly). Like most fast ultra wide lenses, this lens has some noticeable field curvature to it’s design. This means that we have to be careful focusing centrally. If we choose a focal point 2/3 out from the centre frame, we can get a better sharpness balance and control some of the corner aberrations (and sharpness), much better. This lens like the others, is large and heavy, and still fairly expensive despite being older. This lens comes in at 1,120g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts. It has one advantage over the others, in that it can be used on DSLR and Mirrorless cameras, if that matters to you, which for me does. It is available for Nikon F or Canon EF mounts, and can be adapted to any mirrorless system with the usual adapters. I use it on DSLR and on Nikon Z mount via the FTZII adapter.

Sony 14mm f/1.8 GM (mirrorless)

And here we come to a real surprise. Optically speaking, for astrophotography, I have to hand it to the Sony 14/1.8 mirrorless lens for E mount cameras, it is very good optically and much smaller than the others. I have seen some places state it is the best 14mm in terms of overall performance. It’s a great lens, however it is a little more nuanced than this. It does have clean, and fairly most pinpoint stars into the corner frames, yet of course it’s not a 1.4 like the Sigma mirrorless option, but it is much lighter (460g!). It tests slightly less sharp in the mid frames and corners than the other options, however it proves that testing for the intended subject and not relying solely on MTF charts and resolution figures is the most sensible approach when evaluating a lens. What is most astounding is this lens is about half the size and weight of the other options mentioned here at just 460g. It also includes an aperture ring which is very nice to have, usual full weather sealing and as mentioned it is tiny relative to the other options. This is a huge boon for this level of performance. If shooting Sony, it is probably a no-brainer, I would potentially choose this over any of the Sigma designs. Then again, I am a bit of an aperture nut so, maybe that f/1.4 would entice me, for Aurora. It can be adapted to other mounts, eg Z, however I caution you on doing so. Often we cannot achieve the right back focus due to different sensor stack thickness. The end result is the corners seem to play much better on the native mount when it comes to mirrorless lenses. For use on Sony E mount.

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8S (mirrorless)

Ah, the famous ultra-wide zoom. This is probably the best one out there due to it’s relatively small size and weight compared to lenses in it’s class. At just 650g, it is well built, works extremely well on the Z mirrorless system, and it is optically the best fast ultra-wide angle zoom that I know. It even closely matches with the best sigma prime at f/2.8, no mean feat! This said though, it is a f/2.8 lens. This is the minimum I want out of an astro lens, and luckily, we get this here (forget about f/4 glass). Optically this lens is superb, even on starlight. It is best with regards to star performance at 14mm, however most of the range is good. It is weakest at 24mm, however even at it’s weakest it is still strong when it comes to astro. If you can handle the slightly slower aperture than the primes, this lens is arguably a lot more flexible. There is also of course the option to use it on a star tracker to negate the aperture difference for certain shooting. However, when shooting Aurora or meteor showers etc, we actually want the large apertures of f/1.4-f/1.8 to draw in that light. So choose wisely, based on what do you. I’ve got this lens and the 14/1.8 for that reason. It makes a big difference! I have been doing this for some time now, so have amassed different equipment for each application. See here for more. This lens is made for Nikon’s Z mount and it really is as good as I am stating here.

Orion over the Duncansby Sea Stacks, 14-24/2.8S with a Nikon Z8

20mm

20mm is a classic astro focal length, it is perfect for singular fields of view that include a good amount of foreground (remember we have access to vertical shooting), and it also works well on a tracker. Their field of view, whilst expansive, ‘chops off’ some of that really distorted look we can find at 14mm.

Sony 20mm f/1.8 FE (mirrorless)

This is a great choice if shooting Sony. It is pretty much a class leading lens for a 20mm design, and it’s only real competitor would be the Sigma 20mm f/1.4. However, this lens simply sharper across the full frame at any shooting distance than the Sigma, but it has a little more coma and corner aberrations relevant to astrophotography. These are not severely worse than the sigma, but worth noting. These two are very close in terms of performance otherwise. The main difference is the slower aperture of the Sony, however for that we get a smaller and lighter lens. It’s a case of make your choice as to what matters for you. (The sigma does have that cool lens heater retainer that I like)…It includes useful features such as an aperture ring, and full weather sealing. This lens is tiny, and it comes in at just 375g in weight. Sony have really nailed a balance between optical performance and weight, even despite the fact they have the most restrictive (narrowest throat) mount out there. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. Designed for use on Sony E mount.

Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG DN (mirrorless)

Here is a class leading lens for astrophotography. This lens wins out over the Sony f/1.8 mirrorless version because it has better star performance in it’s corners over it (think coma, astigmatism, CA etc). This has a nice little ‘lens heater retainer’ at the end of the barrel to prevent it slipping into the field of view. Great ergonomics are found here. It includes useful features such as a built in lens heater retainer; a hood which prevents lens warmers slipping into the field of view when shooting; this in combination with a manual focus lock switch, means focus stays where it was set. This lens has a rear filter slot which can be useful. It comes in at 635g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts. It is larger and heavier than the Sony, however if I owned a Sony body, this would still be a strong contender as my lens of choice due to the expansive feature set and optical performance.

Nikon 20mm 1.8S (mirrorless)

Contender for one of the ugliest and most basic lenses I have ever seen on it’s exterior, the Nikon 20 1.8S is quite similar performance wise to the Sony and Sigma in most aspects, with regards to corner aberrations. (And yes, it easily beats the 20mm 1.8G on F mount). This lens has strange ergonomics and I am not the first to comment on it; it has a focus ring that would make a toddler blush at it’s size, making it easy to knock focus unintentionally in the dark. It is also physically very long, which is certainly a design to combat focus breathing for video. If you don’t care about video, you’d prefer the Sony over this (if you could have it for Z mount natively). It has no focus lock, and has only one lens switch on the barrel to switch focus from manual to auto, which means more menu diving (boo). A small plus to the fact it has a distal barrel design which should stop lens heater migration towards the front element. As mentioned, it bests the 20mm 1.8G for F mount, however if using it during the day, it has worse sunstars. It has a reasonably low weight of 505g and belongs only on Z mount for shooting.

Loch Tummel, Scotland. 20mm Mosaic Image

24mm

24mm is an astro focal length that can begin to isolate a deep sky object or constellation, whilst still leaving some foreground in shot. It can also be used to construct mosaics, producing ultimately more detailed views of the cosmos than using a lens such as a 14mm prime.

Sony 24mm f1.4 GM (mirrorless)

Here we have a clear class leader if you shoot on Sony E mount. This lens has basically no coma or astigmatism wide open. Very impressive, considering the lens is an f/1.4. This enables it to be used for aurora to collect the best light, and stop motion. It is of course excellent on the milky way, constellations, and any other starlight scene we can throw at it. It does have some CA wide open, with the effect disappearing around f/2. (This is an aberration which is very easy to clean in post processing anyway). It includes useful features such full weather sealing and comes in at a paltry 450g in weight, making it great for carrying. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all Sony lenses for astro, keep them in E mount land.

Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG DN (mirrorless)

The Sigma 24mm doesn’t beat the Sony here in terms of outright astro shooting, however for me, it is a clear winner over the Nikon option listed below, since it has both an f/1.4 aperture, and a better control of corner aberrations than it. It has other advantages too. This lens keeps it’s switches and focus lock like the others and shouldn’t allow lens heaters to migrate into the frame when using the hood. It has great ergonomics in fact, also sporting an aperture ring like the other Sigma lenses in this new range, along with full weather sealing. It comes in at a very reasonable 520g in weight. It can be used on Sony E or Leica L mounts with no issues.

Nikon 24mm 1.8S (mirrorless)

At present, this is the best Nikon 24mm for astro on Z mount. It has much less astigmatism (aberration causing winged stars) and coma than the old f mount 24/1.4G and 1.8G lenses, however curiously it is still not perfect, and not as good as the Sony. Again, Z mount advantage? What is going on here Nikon? I do wish it had an f/1.4 aperture however. I do not own this lens, and still use the 24mm 1.4G as I tend to use that lens between dslr and mirrorless cameras. One thing I dislike slightly about some of Nikon’s prime lenses is this simplistic approach in their ergonomics. Like the 20mm 1.8S, there are hardly any switches on the barrel; no focus lock like Sigma, a little area at the end of the lens to prevent migration of a lens heater maybe, but still…Why are the focus rings on Nikon’s wide prime lenses seemingly designed for toddler’s fingers? They are massively oversized, making it easier to knock focus by mistake at night. This is a definite downside to Nikon options I am finding, in particular for astro as it can really affect things. This along with the lack of a lock switch, means you really need to be careful of accidentally ‘adjusting’ focus when you don’t wish to at night.

Meteor Spears Auriga. 24mm f/1.4G shot at f/5. Separate 24mm shot for ground with star tracker off. 24mm is a very useful astro focal length

35mm

35mm is not often considered an astro focal length, particularly to beginners. This is because many beginners are stuck on the ‘you need to go wide’ thing for astrophotography. 35mm lenses are great for light collection (they collect vastly more light than a 14mm 1.4 lens - remember that aperture is a ratio of focal length, see the rest of the blog for more detail on this). 35mm lenses are also superb for constructing detailed sky mosaics on a star tracker.

Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD (dslr or mirrorless)

Hands down, this one is the best 35mm optic for 35mm format across all brands. See here and here for more on this lens. I do not say this lightly, however there are a number of factors that bolster this statement. One is aperture. Even at f/1.4, this lens can be used with considerable confidence, and is pretty close to perfect right out to periphery of the frame and corners. Stars stay tight and rounded with very minimal problems. This is a optical feat in itself at such a fast aperture of f/1.4. This lens is extremely well built and feels great in the hands (fighting a ‘that’s what she said’ here; I took the moral high-ground). Total weight comes in at 805g and it has a sole MF / AF switch on the barrel of the lens along with the dslr standard window to see focal distance. The hood is excellent and locks into place, the lens has full and extensive weather sealing also. This lens can be found for Nikon or Canon dslr mounts, thus it can be used easily with adapters on their respective mirrorless systems. It does get a little long (dammit, twice in one paragraph!), however it really is no problem if you are out there for optical excellent, I highly recommend it. I use it directly on F mount or on the Z system via the FTZII.

Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar II (mirrorless)

Another class leading 35mm prime lens, the Voigtlander has the large advantage that it is smaller and lighter than the Tamron. However, it does lack weather sealing, which is a big minus point considering dew formation and inclement weather conditions we sometimes face in the field. This lens is well corrected (it is an APO design), however the 50 is a tad more controlled in the corners when it comes to the biggies like astigmatism and coma that affect our domain. The other problem is that it is ‘only’ an f/2, and Tamron has shown that we can beat this performance at f/1.4. This is still an excellent lens, well build, light at only 420g and comes with a beautiful manual focus ring to get that focus just right. It has been officially licenced and is available on Nikon Z mount directly, and it is also available on E mount.

Planetary Parade over Rural Scotland March 2025. A huge mosaic shot with a Tamron 35/1.4 lens and Nikon Z8 Camera

Milky Way over Dunnet Head, Scotland. Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art on a Nikon Z8. Notice the lack of astigmatism in the corners? I used post processing to fix this optical defect that renders stars into ‘seagul’ shapes. This is still a functional lens, however has been replaced by the Tamron 35.

50mm

50mm lenses are even less thought of as astro lenses compared with 35mm primes. I will admit it is my least used lens for astro-landscape style shooting. However, this is simply down to the numbers. I simply shoot many more views with wider lenses. There is one exception. Every year I use a 50mm lens in order to create a milky way core mosaic as it rises in late March - early April around 4am.

Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-Lanthar II (mirrorless)

A class leading 50mm prime lens, the Voigtlander has the large advantage that it is smaller, lighter, better built and optically trumps the competition. However, it does lack weather sealing, which is a big minus point considering dew formation and inclement weather conditions we sometimes face in the field. This lens is extremely well corrected and can be used wide open. The star shapes are great into the far periphery and corners on full frame. This lens does have a huge vignette wide open, and it does mean that the collected signal in the corners is significanty poorer than it could be. I assume this is due to the fact the lens was designed to fit not only the Z mount (which it of course does easily), but also the significantly narrower E mount diameter. The other ‘problem’ is that it is ‘only’ an f/2, and Tamron has shown that we can beat this performance at f/1.4 if we have the design intention to do so. This is still an excellent lens, well build, light at only 370g and comes with a beautiful manual focus ring to get that focus just right. It has been officially licenced and is available on Nikon Z mount directly as well as Sony E.

The Milky Way Rises over Dunnottar Castle - Stonehaven, Scotland. Made possible with a 50mm lens on a star tracker.

The Milky Way Core over a secluded Beach. A huge 50mm mosaic bringing out fantastic sky details with no distortion.

Then after we have considered all this, we can use many of these lenses in a deep sky style of shooting. Here are some pictures I have made over the last few years with a star adventurer and dslr / mirrorless lenses:

Mars and Pleiades Conjunction. The first deep sky astro image I ever took. Nikon D850, 70-200/2.8E. 20 Minutes total exposure

Cygnus. 50mm f/1.4G at f/4. About 2 hours total exposure

Comet C/2023 A3 Tsuchinshan-ATLAS over Loch Earn

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.
I will leave this article open and come back to add additional lenses over time.

Last Updated 10th March 2025.