looking for a new camer lense

[notvincent]

I am a starting photographer and im trying to take photos of the stars up at my cottage. I currently have the standard lense that comes with the Canon xs and when i take pictures with a f/3.5, maximum iso and 30 second exposure i only get some of the brightests stars and the picture has alot of sound. I was thinking of getting the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II lense and was wondering if that will enable me to take pictures of the stars and if its a good overall lense. I would also appreciate it if someone could tell me what it means when a lense has 6 elements in 5 groups

[Twocoda]

take longer exposures to get the dimmest stars to illuminate....Try Brandon Broderick ...he is a Canon man and he was/is selling a few lenses....dont know if he still is or not but worth a shot in the dark (so to speak)

[Stef]

take longer exposures to get the dimmest stars to illuminate....

 

Good advice. A different lens won't help you much with the star shots you are trying to get. Besides making your exposure longer (using a tripod I hope), bring your ISO down (decrease the speed) to around 800 at maximum and set your apperture up (close the iris) to about 5.6, that way you will get pretty well the best clarity, speed and noise reduction your camera will be capable of. You could also adjust your noise filter up, see how in your manual. The stars (actually, the earth) are moving so you will start to get star trails or streaks of light rather than a pinpoint when your exposure times are long. The extra speed of the lens you mentioned isn't enough to make a great deal of difference.

 

Six elements in five groups is the way the lens is constructed. It has 6 pieces of ground optical glass in five different spots inside the lens, meaning 2 pieces of glass are positioned together in one of those 5 spots.

 

Elements and groups are not something I would think about as a new photographer as they won't have much meaning to you. Concentrate on lens speed, type (fixed prime or zoom) and the range you want (wide angle, standard or telephoto) for the types of shots you want to do and don't buy anything until you can't do something you want with the equipment you have. Generally, if you take a lot of pictures inside or in confined areas of things like people or perhaps wide landscapes you will probably next buy a wide angle. If you take pictures of things farther away and want to bring them closer such as birds, wildlife or such you will probably want something telephoto. Practice with what you have first..... enjoy!

Edited November 3, 2011 by West Arm Rider

[notvincent]

Good advice. A different lens won't help you much with the star shots you are trying to get. Besides making your exposure longer (using a tripod I hope), bring your ISO down to around 800 at maximum and set your apperture up to about 5.6, that way you will get pretty well the best clarity, speed and noise reduction your camera will be capable of. You could also adjust your noise filter up, see how in your manual. The stars (actually, the earth) are moving so you will start to get star trails or streaks of light rather than a pinpoint when your exposure times are long. The extra speed of the lens you mentioned isn't enough to make a great deal of difference.

 

Six elements in five groups is the way the lens is constructed. It has 6 pieces of ground optical glass in five different spots inside the lens, meaning 2 pieces of glass are positioned together in one of those 5 spots.

 

Thanks Ill try using the bulb exposure mode and lowering my iso

[BillM]

A tripod, ISO 100 and the largest aperture you got. A 15 second exposure should get you something like this as long as you have no light pollution. This was taken at f/3.5, ISo 250 15second exposure.

 

Night sky. by billmarz, on Flickr

[brandon]

As was already mentioned, the lens won't make that much of a difference. Most of my star shots are at f/2.8 and ISO 3200 with a 30 second exposure. Lower ISO's will show you some stars, but a higher ISO will show you all the stars! Just play around with your camera and find out the limits of the ISO. Since you are using an XS, 800 may be your max so in that case, switching up to the 50 f/1.8 lens may make a bigger difference in allowing more light into your camera, however a fixed 50 won't be great for nightscapes. Typically the wider the better when it comes to shooting the stars. Hope this helps.

This was a 30sec exposure @ ISO 3200, f/2.8.

 

The Milky Way Over Lower Buckhorn Lake by bbroderick86, on Flickr

Edited November 3, 2011 by brandon

[BillM]

Brandon, awesome tips! The only reason I was using a low ISO was to reduce noise (which it didn't, lol)..

 

High ISO next time for me!

[notvincent]

As was already mentioned, the lens won't make that much of a difference. Most of my star shots are at f/2.8 and ISO 3200 with a 30 second exposure. Lower ISO's will show you some stars, but a higher ISO will show you all the stars! Just play around with your camera and find out the limits of the ISO. Since you are using an XS, 800 may be your max so in that case, switching up to the 50 f/1.8 lens may make a bigger difference in allowing more light into your camera, however a fixed 50 won't be great for nightscapes. Typically the wider the better when it comes to shooting the stars. Hope this helps.

This was a 30sec exposure @ ISO 3200, f/2.8.

 

The Milky Way Over Lower Buckhorn Lake by bbroderick86, on Flickr

 

Thanks for the help and thats a great picture.