# Photographing the stars/sky at night



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

I finally had a go at doing this last week when I was away. The problem I think I'm having is none of them are in focus or they might possibly be starting to trail.

Conditions were very calm and it was reasonably dark, very little light pollution. I used my 35mm f1.8 lens on a Nikon D5000, mounted on a tripod and using a remote. In manual mode, aperture wide open and started with a 30 second exposure. To focus I was auto-focusing on the brightest planet/star and then manually tweaking it using the live view by zooming in.

I think I have either focused incorrectly, what is the proper way to do it? Or my exposure was too long and the stars started to trail. From what I have read since, I think for the lens I used I should have used a 15 second exposure instead.

I will post an example photo later.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

From my reading iso 1600, 30 secs (max) and f 2 - 2.8 should net some half decent results


----------



## buckas (Jun 13, 2008)

http://www.detailingworld.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3254080&postcount=7


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Pezza, as you know i have the D5000 and its pretty hard to get focus in low light and i find live view is bloody useless when magnified in these conditions. The way i do it is to either get someone (or yourself if you have an IR remote) to stand a few meters away with a torch on, acquire focus then switch to manual focus. Brazo, iso 1600 is nee good on the D5000, i find that even on 800 its a pure noise fest :/ This is why i want a new camera as it hampers me in low light. 
Phil


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

First of all forget trying to autofocus, you'll never get a lock on something that is millions of miles away, just set the focus manually to infinity and you're all set.

If you're doing a 15 seconds plus exposure you need to keep the iso as low as possible. I'd also suggest keeping it at your camera's base iso (should be 200) and closing down the aperture a bit too, rather than shooting wide open, adjusting the exposure time to compensate. It'll be a case of trial and error but a few goes should see you arrive at a combination of settings that work.

Remember to turn on Long Exposure Noise Reduction too. You'll find that the shot takes twice as long with LENR enabled, but don't worry, it's just the camera working its magic


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

Cheers guys :thumb:



buckas said:


> http://www.detailingworld.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3254080&postcount=7


I forgot about your website, will have a read of that 



GIZTO29 said:


> Pezza, as you know i have the D5000 and its pretty hard to get focus in low light and i find live view is bloody useless when magnified in these conditions. The way i do it is to either get someone (or yourself if you have an IR remote) to stand a few meters away with a torch on, acquire focus then switch to manual focus. Brazo, iso 1600 is nee good on the D5000, i find that even on 800 its a pure noise fest :/ This is why i want a new camera as it hampers me in low light.
> Phil


Cheers Phil, I didn't realise this camera struggled to focus in low light. I'll have to try that with the light and see what happens. I was using ISO 200 to start with but nothing really showed up, when I switched to 800 or 1600 there were alot more stars in the photo.



Glaschu said:


> First of all forget trying to autofocus, you'll never get a lock on something that is millions of miles away, just set the focus manually to infinity and you're all set.
> 
> If you're doing a 15 seconds plus exposure you need to keep the iso as low as possible. I'd also suggest keeping it at your camera's base iso (should be 200) and closing down the aperture a bit too, rather than shooting wide open, adjusting the exposure time to compensate. It'll be a case of trial and error but a few goes should see you arrive at a combination of settings that work.
> 
> Remember to turn on Long Exposure Noise Reduction too. You'll find that the shot takes twice as long with LENR enabled, but don't worry, it's just the camera working its magic


How do I know where infinity focus is on my lens? What does this mean as well, that everything will always been in focus no matter what the distance?

I have seen the setting for LENR but didn't turn it on, I will next time I try this. Like you say I guess it will be trial and error until I start getting something I'm happy with.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

First thing I turn off on a new camera is long exposure noise reduction.

Disadvantages of using it are it doubles your exposure time and doesn't do as good a job of noise reduction as you can in post processing. Its kind of the 'auto' setting on a camera.

To ensure starts don't start to trail you must keep shutter speeds short, aim for 30 seconds but you want to maximise light hence why I suggested shooting wide open and at iso1600.

infinity focus is found from the symbol '8' but on its side. If you check the www.500px.com logo you will see it!


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

Ramping the iso up on long exposure shots is a classic newbie mistake - using a high iso just introduces noise, the whole point of Long Exposure Noise Reduction is, well, to get rid of that noise.


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Pezza4u said:


> How do I know where infinity focus is on my lens? What does this mean as well, that everything will always been in focus no matter what the distance?


Switch off autofocus and turn the focussing ring to the "infinity" symbol "∞". If your lens has no ∞ symbol, you can find which end of the focussing adjustment is infinity by manually focussing on a distant object and then turning the focus ring beyond that as far as it'll go.


----------



## Scotty B (Jul 1, 2009)

Base ISO is a must for long exposure.

What I do is set up the shot on the tripod, 'M' mode, F8, 20 seconds, NR off, use a remote of self timer of fire the shutter and then work from there.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Guys, the lens Pezza is using has no focusing scale on it and i know my mate tried using the same lens for star trails and had a mare lol. Pezza, if you try in daylight and turn it the opposite way from it going out of focus that will be infinity. I tried with mine after my mates plight as i had thought about using this lens for aurora shots  As i say the easiest method is using to a torch to acquire AF then switch to MF. We use this method when light painting 

Phil


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

GIZTO29 said:


> As i say the easiest method is using to a torch to acquire AF then switch to MF. We use this method when light painting
> 
> Phil


Do you generally light-paint objects hundreds of millions of miles away? If not I puzzled as to what you'd shine the torch on to get af lock.....


----------



## Buck (Jan 16, 2008)

My foray into night shots:-

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=278146


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

Brazo said:


> First thing I turn off on a new camera is long exposure noise reduction.
> 
> Disadvantages of using it are it doubles your exposure time and doesn't do as good a job of noise reduction as you can in post processing. Its kind of the 'auto' setting on a camera.
> 
> ...


Cheers mate, seems to be mixed opinions about this so I'll try both and see what I prefer.



DW58 said:


> Switch off autofocus and turn the focussing ring to the "infinity" symbol "∞". If your lens has no ∞ symbol, you can find which end of the focussing adjustment is infinity by manually focussing on a distant object and then turning the focus ring beyond that as far as it'll go.


As Phil said this lens doesn't have any markings on it. When I focused on a star I turned the ring until it was a small dot. Turning it either way would blur it so how do I know which is the right way to turn it for infinity?

Maybe I would be better off using the kit lens, 18-55mm?



Buck said:


> My foray into night shots:-
> 
> http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=278146


They look great for a first attempt :thumb:


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Pezza4u said:


> As Phil said this lens doesn't have any markings on it. When I focused on a star I turned the ring until it was a small dot. Turning it either way would blur it so how do I know which is the right way to turn it for infinity?


As I said before use your lens (in daylight) - manually focus on a fairly distant object, that way it will be obvious which direction on the focussing ring focusses the lens on close and distant objects. Once you have established which direction is distant, turn it as far as it goes and you have infinity - simples.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

Glaschu said:


> Ramping the iso up on long exposure shots is a classic newbie mistake - using a high iso just introduces noise, the whole point of Long Exposure Noise Reduction is, well, to get rid of that noise.


I feel we are talking cross purposes here.

The OP asked about star shots where they 'don't' trail. Base ISO is fine for the majority of long exposure photography but where you wish to avoid movement the iso must be ramped up.

Have a look here at the non trailing star shots, click on the images and check the iso's! http://500px.com/search?utf8=✓&q=stars

This photo in particular is a stunner http://500px.com/photo/12083391, the sky section was taken at iso 6400.

Have a look on the BBC website today at the star shots you will see some image noise inevitable with using high iso but essential if you don't want the stars to 'move'. If you do want the stars to move then by all means use base iso!


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

Brazo said:


> I feel we are talking cross purposes here.
> 
> The OP asked about star shots where they 'don't' trail. Base ISO is fine for the majority of long exposure photography but where you wish to avoid movement the iso must be ramped up.
> 
> ...


Umm, that's a composite shot that has been photoshopped to within an inch of its life, even then the "6400 iso" section was a 15 second exposure, are you saying an extra 5-15 seconds on the exposure would cause the stars to "move"?


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

It is a composite shot but to get the star section he had to use a high iso. Other examples I gave weren't composite shots but still used a high iso so composite isn't relevant here. Another 5-15 seconds 'probably' wouldn't cause movement but again it wouldn't give you base iso's either. Have a good look artound 500px at the star pictures and you'll see the ones that have the most stars have high iso's.

Also have a look on talk photography and you'll see some excellent star shots at base iso without movement but they use a computer controlled star tracker to move the camera or telescope in time with the stars to avoid star trails.


----------



## Buck (Jan 16, 2008)

I've read that the time limit for stars not to show as trails is 25s as an average.


A better ways is to use the "600 rule"

600/lens focal length = exposure in seconds

For example my 17-40 at 17mm works out at

600/17 = 35s

but at 40mm it reduces to 15s


----------



## Rich @ PB (Oct 26, 2005)

Pezza4u said:


> I finally had a go at doing this last week when I was away. The problem I think I'm having is none of them are in focus or they might possibly be starting to trail.
> 
> Conditions were very calm and it was reasonably dark, very little light pollution. I used my 35mm f1.8 lens on a Nikon D5000, mounted on a tripod and using a remote. In manual mode, aperture wide open and started with a 30 second exposure. To focus I was auto-focusing on the brightest planet/star and then manually tweaking it using the live view by zooming in.
> 
> ...


Certainly starting to trail; 30+ secs only works for full frame cameras. 20-25 secs max for APS and DX crops, even shorter for even smaller sensors. On my Canon 60D (1.6 crop), just over 20 secs is about the max. 



Brazo said:


> From my reading iso 1600, 30 secs (max) and f 2 - 2.8 should net some half decent results


See above for exposure length comments. 



Glaschu said:


> If you're doing a 15 seconds plus exposure you need to keep the iso as low as possible. I'd also suggest keeping it at your camera's base iso (should be 200) and closing down the aperture a bit too, rather than shooting wide open, adjusting the exposure time to compensate. It'll be a case of trial and error but a few goes should see you arrive at a combination of settings that work. Remember to turn on Long Exposure Noise Reduction too. You'll find that the shot takes twice as long with LENR enabled, but don't worry, it's just the camera working its magic


All untrue for astro work; ISO800 or more is required for decent shots if you want static stars with zero trails. The true gods of DSLR astro work tend to use 3200-6400 as standard and remove noise in post. 



Pezza4u said:


> Cheers Phil, I didn't realise this camera struggled to focus in low light. I'll have to try that with the light and see what happens. I was using ISO 200 to start with but nothing really showed up, when I switched to 800 or 1600 there were alot more stars in the photo. How do I know where infinity focus is on my lens? What does this mean as well, that everything will always been in focus no matter what the distance? I have seen the setting for LENR but didn't turn it on, I will next time I try this. Like you say I guess it will be trial and error until I start getting something I'm happy with.


My daughter has a D5000 and sometimes comes out with me to shoot the stars. She gets okay shots at ISO1600, largest aperture (f3.5 I think) and 20 sec max exposures, with noise reduction in post. However, focusing with her kit lens is a pain, as the live view quality isn't great. 



Glaschu said:


> Ramping the iso up on long exposure shots is a classic newbie mistake - using a high iso just introduces noise, the whole point of Long Exposure Noise Reduction is, well, to get rid of that noise.


It is not; it's a necessity, particularly if you want to shoot the milky way in static fashion with zero trails. 



DW58 said:


> Switch off autofocus and turn the focussing ring to the "infinity" symbol "∞". If your lens has no ∞ symbol, you can find which end of the focussing adjustment is infinity by manually focussing on a distant object and then turning the focus ring beyond that as far as it'll go.


Be careful; most electronic lenses these days focus beyond infinity (and continue turning after that point!), so using live view you do need to make very fine manual adjustments around the infinity mark. For example, on my 17-55 APS-C sharp focus on starts is found about 1mm of turn before ∞. 



Scotty B said:


> Base ISO is a must for long exposure.


As above, no it's not for static astro work. 



Buck said:


> I've read that the time limit for stars not to show as trails is 25s as an average. A better ways is to use the "600 rule"...
> 
> 600/lens focal length = exposure in seconds
> 
> ...


This works great for full frame sensors, but you need to use 400 instead of 600 for APS and DX crop sensors, and even less for sensors smaller than that. I use 400, which gives me 23.5 secs at 17mm on my 17-55 mm on my 60D body - any longer than this and I get trails.


----------



## rob3rto (May 23, 2007)

I wish I could get near to the quality of these photos.

m.gizmodo.com/5944871/these-are-the-best-amateur-pictures-of-space-this-year


----------



## S63 (Jan 5, 2007)

Further to the above, watch the enclosed video, simply jaw dropping.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19637073


----------



## EddieB (May 13, 2006)

Glaschu said:


> Do you generally light-paint objects hundreds of millions of miles away? If not I puzzled as to what you'd shine the torch on to get af lock.....


I would have thought Phil is referring to the art of hyper focal focusing.

http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html

I've started using this since Phil showed me the concept for my landscapes.


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

Thanks for all the comments, all helping me to learn :thumb:



DW58 said:


> As I said before use your lens (in daylight) - manually focus on a fairly distant object, that way it will be obvious which direction on the focussing ring focusses the lens on close and distant objects. Once you have established which direction is distant, turn it as far as it goes and you have infinity - simples.





Rich @ PB said:


> Be careful; most electronic lenses these days focus beyond infinity (and continue turning after that point!), so using live view you do need to make very fine manual adjustments around the infinity mark. For example, on my 17-55 APS-C sharp focus on starts is found about 1mm of turn before ∞.


Yes you are right, my focus ring just turns constantly although it gets to a point where it will stop focusing. I have tried to find infinity but not sure I'm doing it right. When set on infinity should everything be in focus no matter how far or near it is from you?

This is one I took last week manually focusing on the planet and then tweaking it with liveview. Does this look in focus or just trailing? It was a 30 second exposure.


----------



## Rich @ PB (Oct 26, 2005)

It's very clearly trailing, so your focus was probably good (poor focus on stars makes them look like soft round blobs rather than sharp points; in your image you can see some of the stars are stretched in small straight lines, i.e. trails). With regard to infinity, no, only objects in the far distance will be in focus, with the apparent sharpness of closer objects being governed by aperture and thus depth of field.


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> Do you generally light-paint objects hundreds of millions of miles away? If not I puzzled as to what you'd shine the torch on to get af lock.....


Not sure if youre being funny or inquisitive here.... when people go out at night taking photos (in the dark) the camera cannot acquire Auto Focus so the way around it is to stand a few meters from the camera and hold a lit torch. The camera can see the torch and acquires Focus then you switch to MF. You could also light up something in the foreground. Even bump the iso right up till the camera focuses. The D5000 even struggles with this method in comparison to my friends D7000/5D Mk2.
Light Painting....

A Room with a View by Phil Whittaker (gizto29), on Flickr



Pezza4u said:


> As Phil said this lens doesn't have any markings on it. When I focused on a star I turned the ring until it was a small dot. Turning it either way would blur it so how do I know which is the right way to turn it for infinity?
> 
> Maybe I would be better off using the kit lens, 18-55mm?
> 
> They look great for a first attempt :thumb:


Pezza, the 18-55 has no markings either so youre no further forward. Try my method with the torch on either lens 



Brazo said:


> I feel we are talking cross purposes here.
> 
> The OP asked about star shots where they 'don't' trail. Base ISO is fine for the majority of long exposure photography but where you wish to avoid movement the iso must be ramped up.
> 
> ...


As Brazo says everyone i know or in shots i have seen use high isos and fast lenses for astro/aurora shots so as to avoid movement in the stars. You will find that most people who are successful at these type of shots will be using Full Frame Nikons/Canons where this is possible without suffering from noise. You just cant do this on the D5000 as you will just get shots for the bin. Ive been to Sycamore Gap and tried and know from experience that even above 800 is a grain fest that cant be rectified by PP.



Buck said:


> I've read that the time limit for stars not to show as trails is 25s as an average.
> 
> A better ways is to use the "600 rule"
> 
> ...


I was gonna qoute the 600 rule but im still not sure if thats on crop or FF....



EddieB said:


> I would have thought Phil is referring to the art of hyper focal focusing.
> 
> http://www.dofmaster.com/hyperfocal.html
> 
> I've started using this since Phil showed me the concept for my landscapes.


Spot on Ed, as you know when we are doing seascape we would focus with our Sigma 10-20 on a foreground rock about 1 metre infront with say f11 and this would get everything in focus from just under 1 ft from the lens to infinity  
There are iphone apps such as iDof Calc for this 



Pezza4u said:


> Thanks for all the comments, all helping me to learn :thumb:
> 
> Yes you are right, my focus ring just turns constantly although it gets to a point where it will stop focusing. I have tried to find infinity but not sure I'm doing it right. When set on infinity should everything be in focus no matter how far or near it is from you?
> 
> This is one I took last week manually focusing on the planet and then tweaking it with liveview. Does this look in focus or just trailing? It was a 30 second exposure.


I dont think theyre out of focus mate, youve just caught trails here 

Heres the shot i was on about where my mate had probs with his 35mm f1.8 Nikon...

__
https://flic.kr/p/7583070674

Phil


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

GIZTO29 said:


> Not sure if youre being funny or inquisitive here.... when people go out at night taking photos (in the dark) the camera cannot acquire Auto Focus so the way around it is to stand a few meters from the camera and hold a lit torch. The camera can see the torch and acquires Focus then you switch to MF


A little from column A and a little from column B  I can't see the point in af'ing on something a few metres away in the first place and then refocussing manually, why not just focus manually in the first place?


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

I think Gizto29 is making the point that its too dark to focus even manually.


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

Brazo said:


> I think Gizto29 is making the point that its too dark to focus even manually.


That's what's puzzling me, because he's saying af and then mf. Surely if you can't mf you can't mf, af'ing first isn't going to make any difference...?


----------



## Serapth (Jul 4, 2011)

I found this really useful for taking photos of the stars http://digital-photography-school.com/how-to-photograph-the-stars


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

Glaschu said:


> That's what's puzzling me, because he's saying af and then mf. Surely if you can't mf you can't mf, af'ing first isn't going to make any difference...?


If you shine a light with a torch it will give the cameras af system something I.e contrast to lock onto. Then once the camera has focus you switch it to m/f and it keeps the infinity setting. You dont then use manual focus its just a way of keeping infinity focus. Unless of course your me and you keep accidentally touching the focus ring:lol:


----------



## Buck (Jan 16, 2008)

Phil

The 600 rule is for full frame

For crop sensors use 400 as Rich mentions (600 / 1.6 crop sensor = 375 but 400 is easier to remember/work with )

Adrian


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> A little from column A and a little from column B  I can't see the point in af'ing on something a few metres away in the first place and then refocussing manually, why not just focus manually in the first place?


Who said refocus?? Sorry if you were confused by my reply  
Set the focus with a torch using Auto focus and then switch to Manual Focus. If youve ever used a camera in low light or in the dark you would know that the AF 'hunts'. The camera tries to obtain focus but cannot as its too dark. This can be simulated by turning your camera on with the lens cap on. Half press the shutter and the focus ring will spin back and forth as the cameras AF struggles. By switching to Manual Focus the focus will not change as it has been over ridden manually. Its exactly the same practice as if you were doing long exposures with a 10 stop filter. Once focus is acquired you switch to Manual Focus then put the 10 stop (opaque) filter on. As i mentioned earlier when i go light painting (things on earth) we are out where there is pretty much no light so you have to use a torch to highlight an object close by or hold a torch so that the cameras AF can get a lock. Once this has been achieved you switch to MF and dont touch the focus ring again. Take your shots and theyre in Focus. Pretty straight forward really 
As i mentioned earlier the better the camera the easier it is to obtain AF in lowlight. I think the Nikon D4 can achieve it in just moonlit conditions! 
For example when i put my totally opaque Hoya R72 IR filter on my D5000 the AF has no chance whereas my mates 5D Mk2 has no problem :/

Phil


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

Brazo said:


> If you shine a light with a torch it will give the cameras af system something I.e contrast to lock onto. Then once the camera has focus you switch it to m/f and it keeps the infinity setting. You dont then use manual focus its just a way of keeping infinity focus. Unless of course your me and you keep accidentally touching the focus ring:lol:


Ahh, ok I get what your saying, you 're effectively just focussing on something 10ft away....


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

GIZTO29 said:


> Who said refocus?? Sorry if you were confused by my reply
> Set the focus with a torch using Auto focus and then switch to Manual Focus. If youve ever used a camera in low light or in the dark you would know that the AF 'hunts'. The camera tries to obtain focus but cannot as its too dark. This can be simulated by turning your camera on with the lens cap on. Half press the shutter and the focus ring will spin back and forth as the cameras AF struggles. By switching to Manual Focus the focus will not change as it has been over ridden manually. Its exactly the same practice as if you were doing long exposures with a 10 stop filter. Once focus is acquired you switch to Manual Focus then put the 10 stop (opaque) filter on. As i mentioned earlier when i go light painting (things on earth) we are out where there is pretty much no light so you have to use a torch to highlight an object close by or hold a torch so that the cameras AF can get a lock. Once this has been achieved you switch to MF and dont touch the focus ring again. Take your shots and theyre in Focus. Pretty straight forward really
> As i mentioned earlier the better the camera the easier it is to obtain AF in lowlight. I think the Nikon D4 can achieve it in just moonlit conditions!
> For example when i put my totally opaque Hoya R72 IR filter on my D5000 the AF has no chance whereas my mates 5D Mk2 has no problem :/
> ...


Yeah, I've used a camera in the dark, I've never found the need to do the focus/recompose thing though on the occasions I've done night sky shots ( not that I get much chance round here, there always seems to be a cloud in the way!) but,as you say, that might be down to my camera


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> Ahh, ok I get what your saying, you 're effectively just focussing on something 10ft away....





Glaschu said:


> Yeah, I've used a camera in the dark, I've never found the need to do the focus/recompose thing though on the occasions I've done night sky shots ( not that I get much chance round here, there always seems to be a cloud in the way!) but,as you say, that might be down to my camera


Yeh thats right  Cant beat a bit of foreground interest  Have you looked at Drews Milkyway shots on here? The one thing that still confuses me though is if you use f1.8 etc the dof should be shallow so how are the stars in focus.... hmm

Aayway guys heres a cracking guide for astro photography..
http://theamusing.com/photography/startrails.html/

Phil


----------



## buckas (Jun 13, 2008)

i caught the space junk the other night in my star trails seqeunce, lucky isn;t the word!

here's the back of the camera the other night


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/249443729474215936
full shots later today :thumb::thumb:


----------



## JoshG1992 (Aug 16, 2011)

GIZTO29 said:


> Who said refocus?? Sorry if you were confused by my reply
> Set the focus with a torch using Auto focus and then switch to Manual Focus. If youve ever used a camera in low light or in the dark you would know that the AF 'hunts'. The camera tries to obtain focus but cannot as its too dark. This can be simulated by turning your camera on with the lens cap on. Half press the shutter and the focus ring will spin back and forth as the cameras AF struggles. By switching to Manual Focus the focus will not change as it has been over ridden manually. Its exactly the same practice as if you were doing long exposures with a 10 stop filter. Once focus is acquired you switch to Manual Focus then put the 10 stop (opaque) filter on. As i mentioned earlier when i go light painting (things on earth) we are out where there is pretty much no light so you have to use a torch to highlight an object close by or hold a torch so that the cameras AF can get a lock. Once this has been achieved you switch to MF and dont touch the focus ring again. Take your shots and theyre in Focus. Pretty straight forward really
> As i mentioned earlier the better the camera the easier it is to obtain AF in lowlight. I think the Nikon D4 can achieve it in just moonlit conditions!
> For example when i put my totally opaque Hoya R72 IR filter on my D5000 the AF has no chance whereas my mates 5D Mk2 has no problem :/
> ...


But the OP isnt light painting, he wants to photograph stars, where there would be no reason to focus on anything other than infinity, in which case i would just switch to MF and turn the focus ring, if it doesnt have markings to determine which way infinity is, check it in daylight and remember! Its a bit of a time saver than bothering with torches and such.

For capturing foreground (light painted or not) and a starlit sky, learning hyper focal distances is the way forward, and the torch technique to focus comes into its own. I've also had good results focusing with a decent laser pen if the foreground object is a bit far away


----------



## buckas (Jun 13, 2008)

infinity doesn't resolve the stars sharp i'm afraid, it's slightly too far - for that the only answer is AF on a distant bright light source, or go into live view on a star and MF on full magnification

drew


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

JoshG1992 said:


> But the OP isnt light painting, he wants to photograph stars, where there would be no reason to focus on anything other than infinity, in which case i would just switch to MF and turn the focus ring, if it doesnt have markings to determine which way infinity is, check it in daylight and remember! Its a bit of a time saver than bothering with torches and such.
> 
> For capturing foreground (light painted or not) and a starlit sky, learning hyper focal distances is the way forward, and the torch technique to focus comes into its own. I've also had good results focusing with a decent laser pen if the foreground object is a bit far away


I didnt say he was, i offered a solution for taking pictures in the dark and just mentioned that when i went light painting we used that method, the same method a lot of people use for star trails also when having foreground interest. I actually did also mention i had the same lens and to just turn the ring to infinity and to turn the ring the opposite way to 'out of focus' and linked a friends shot who had the same issue.



buckas said:


> infinity doesn't resolve the stars sharp i'm afraid, it's slightly too far - for that the only answer is AF on a distant bright light source, or go into live view on a star and MF on full magnification
> 
> drew


Thanks Drew. As i mentioned the Live View isnt too clever on the D5000. When ive been out with a friend at St.Marys Lighthouse, Whitley Bay i was teaching him how to use his camera, a 550D and was amazed at how bad my Live View was in low light when trying to MF at magnification compared to his camera. This is why i was saying Pezza would struggle. Its one of the reasons i want a new body.



buckas said:


> i caught the space junk the other night in my star trails seqeunce, lucky isn;t the word!
> 
> here's the back of the camera the other night
> 
> ...


Fookin hell, a friend seen one over The Sage, GAteshead 

Phil


----------



## buckas (Jun 13, 2008)

GIZTO29 said:


> Fookin hell, a friend seen one over The Sage, GAteshead
> 
> Phil


http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=281281


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

buckas said:


> http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=281281


Brilliant! 
My mate Mike caught the meteor that went down the East coast when he was at Whitley Bay for the Laser Art exhibit a few months ago and he ended up having his shot in the local & national press


----------



## Pezza4u (Jun 7, 2007)

GIZTO29 said:


> Not sure if youre being funny or inquisitive here.... when people go out at night taking photos (in the dark) the camera cannot acquire Auto Focus so the way around it is to stand a few meters from the camera and hold a lit torch. The camera can see the torch and acquires Focus then you switch to MF.
> 
> Pezza, the 18-55 has no markings either so youre no further forward. Try my method with the torch on either lens
> 
> ...


How do you use a torch to focus when you're on your own? I will probably just go up onto the field after midnight (when the street lights are turned off) next to where I live to have a go first. I have a remote but I use back button focusing. If I switch it back to the shutter does it focus as well when using the remote?

Still confused where infinity is on this lens. Holding the camera and turning the ring anti clockwise puts it out of focus, then clockwise goes in focus before going back out. Then the ring just continuously turns until you turn it back again. Are you saying if I AF on something in the distance and then switch to MF this will be infinity like Brazo said below?

What's confusing me is if I'm standing in front of the camera with a torch to get focus, how can it then still be in focus when I point the camera to the sky? Or is the focus always in infinity once it's reached a certain point?



Brazo said:


> If you shine a light with a torch it will give the cameras af system something I.e contrast to lock onto. Then once the camera has focus you switch it to m/f and it keeps the infinity setting. You dont then use manual focus its just a way of keeping infinity focus. Unless of course your me and you keep accidentally touching the focus ring:lol:


----------



## GIZTO29 (May 8, 2009)

Pezza4u said:


> How do you use a torch to focus when you're on your own? I will probably just go up onto the field after midnight (when the street lights are turned off) next to where I live to have a go first. I have a remote but I use back button focusing. If I switch it back to the shutter does it focus as well when using the remote?
> 
> Still confused where infinity is on this lens. Holding the camera and turning the ring anti clockwise puts it out of focus, then clockwise goes in focus before going back out. Then the ring just continuously turns until you turn it back again. Are you saying if I AF on something in the distance and then switch to MF this will be infinity like Brazo said below?
> 
> What's confusing me is if I'm standing in front of the camera with a torch to get focus, how can it then still be in focus when I point the camera to the sky? Or is the focus always in infinity once it's reached a certain point?


You can light up something nearby or even put it on the floor infront of the camera (look at the comments by Ed & Me regarding focusing). I have an ML-L3 Nikon copy remote which cost £2 off Ebay. If you stand with the torch and press the remote it will Auto Focus. There is a ratio of what will be in focus for the given aperture and point of focus so hopefully if you go with the right setting both you and the stars will be in focus 
Phil


----------

