Do you need a fast lens for astrophotography?
Asked 12/23/2017
2 views
2 answers
0
I'm getting into astrophotography and often see advice to use a “fast” lens. Most of my lenses are around f/4–5.6, so I'm wondering what practical difference a faster lens makes.
For shooting stars on a regular tripod, is there any special benefit to fast glass beyond simply letting in more light? Or is it mostly a tradeoff between aperture, ISO, shutter speed, and camera low-light performance? For example, can a slower lens on a better low-noise camera give similar results to a faster lens on a weaker low-light body?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
8y ago
2 Answers
4
Depends what sort of AP you're talking about. And whether you're using a standard photo tripod or a proper astronomical tracking mount.
For a standard tripod, you're limited in exposure by star trailing; as the earth rotates, the stars appear to move across the sky. Unless you're intentionally after star trails, with a fixed tripod the length of time you can expose for is determined by focal length (and whether you're aiming near the celestial equator - stars there appear to move faster than ones near the celestial pole). Longer focal lengths have a larger image scale, so stars will drift across the field of view faster. as a rough guide, something like 400/focal length is a ballpark limit for exposure times (people use different numbers depending on how picky they are).
For longer exposures, you need a decent equatorial tracking mount (especially with longer lenses and telescopes) although a "Barn Door" DIY mount can (with practive) give you decent results at shorter focal length.
The problem with quite a few lenses - especially very fast ones - is that they're not optimised for infinity focus - so you may need to stop down by a few stops to reduce lens aberrations. Some lenses perform well wide open and are good for AP as a result. Others - including older 50mm fast lenses from the film days - have problems wide open for AP, so that although they're OK for normal use, there's not much point in buying one specifically for AP since by the time you stop them down enough to get decent quality for AP you might as well have gone for the cheaper, slower versions.
So what you want is not so much a fast lens in terms of maximum aperture, but one that's still fast when stopped down enough to give good quality results.
For long exposure astrophotography of deep sky objects with a telescope, the most important thing is a good equatorial mount (There's a saying that the three most important things for AP are the mount, the mount, and the mount :) ).
It doesn't matter how good your optics are if the mount can't track the target accurately for the whole exposure time.
Once you can do that, how fast your optics are becomes less of an issue - though since it can take hours of total exposures for a good image, fast scopes still have an advantage (though slower ones give you a larger image scale), so you see a wide range of telescope f-ratios used - mostly in the f4 to f8 region, but going down to around f2 (Celestron SCTs with Starizona's hyperstar) and up to f10 (native SCTs) or f13 or so (Maks).
Planetary and lunar imaging is different - they're bright enough that you can capture images at video rates so a long focal length (for the bigger image scale) and large physical aperture (i.e. lens/mirror diameter) for higher resolution are more important (top planetary imagers use large (9-14") SCTs with 2000mm+ focal lengths).
To reduce thermal noise, some DSO images use specially cooled astronomical CCD cameras - reducing the temperature of the sensor (down to well below freezing point, in some cases) dramatically reduces the thermal noise.
Combining ("stacking") multiple images in free software like Deep Sky Stacker can also dramatically reduce overall noise - random noise tends to average out while wanted detail remains present.
Originally by user61668. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user61668
8y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For basic night-sky shooting on a fixed tripod, a fast lens helps mainly because it gathers more light in the limited exposure time you have before stars start to trail.
There isn’t really any special “fast lens magic” like portrait bokeh. The key issue is that shutter speed is constrained by Earth’s rotation, especially with longer focal lengths. Wide lenses are often kept around roughly 8–25 seconds to avoid obvious trails, so aperture becomes very important.
A faster lens lets you:
- use a lower ISO for less noise, or
- keep the same ISO and get a brighter exposure within the same short shutter time.
With a slower lens like f/4–5.6, you’ll usually need higher ISO, longer exposures, or both. Longer exposures can produce star trails on a normal tripod.
So yes, a better high-ISO camera can partly offset a slower lens, since exposure is always a balance of aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. But for untracked astrophotography, faster glass is still a real advantage because shutter speed is the least flexible setting.
You can absolutely shoot with what you have and improve technique first; a faster lens just gives you more room to work.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI8y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Larger sensor or faster lens for equivalent low-light performance and depth of field?
Do very fast SD cards help in a camera that doesn't support UHS?
What lens characteristics matter most for astrophotography and star shots?
What sensor characteristics affect digital image quality, and how do they appear in real photos?
How can I compare two cameras objectively for low-light performance?