Smartphones will kill off DSLR's soon/

[Andysu]

not good picture used telephoto lens i think focus is fraction off a bit , was awkward tonight . tried the wide angle lens wasn't getting good picture .
i forget what ISO and shutter speed i used here ? but still couldn't see a flag or alien on the moon ?

 

[Andysu]

ISO i think 1600 and shutter speed 30" second .

ISO i think a bit higher and shutter speed 30" second , exposure shows the blue atmosphere .

 

[Andysu]

smart phone colour of blue atmosphere that circles the planet looks bit blue

Canon 750D DLSR colour of blue atmosphere looks tonally correct the smart was adding like with these rubbish 4k movies boosted colours , i prefer laserdiscs . smart phone is meh okay snapper camera with cheap plastic tiny lens plus i saw some step edging in the few smart phone pictures and none with DLSR .

 

[majingotan]

not good picture used telephoto lens i think focus is fraction off a bit , was awkward tonight . tried the wide angle lens wasn't getting good picture .
i forget what ISO and shutter speed i used here ? but still couldn't see a flag or alien on the moon ?
View attachment 218335

Is this with tripod? It took a few tries for mine too with 5x live view zoom to truly get that tact sharp photo. With my EF 35mm f/1.4 II lens, I shine a green laser light somewhere far on the ground and let my camera manually focus on that one with live view to get that tact sharp milky way photos

 

[Andysu]

Is this with tripod? It took a few tries for mine too with 5x live view zoom to truly get that tact sharp photo. With my EF 35mm f/1.4 II lens, I shine a green laser light somewhere far on the ground and let my camera manually focus on that one with live view to get that tact sharp milky way photos

yeah , tripod mounted walked up down the road generally night time photography .

 

[Rednaxela]

I have an old Sony P&S camera somewhere that uses a red laser for focus in low light.

A Sony DSC-V3?

 

[rdenney]

It is a bird photo category... I guess you can show us the moon, ball game players on the field, polar bears in action, etc. categories too.

Well, versatility was the original selling point of SLRs. Leica came up with an SLR mirror box attachment to their rangefinder camera to permit the use of long lenses (>180mm) and macro focusing. Those were unmanageable on a rangefinder.

The critical distinction there is not just a viewing system that works for lenses outside a range of limitations—cell phones view through the lens, too. The important point is the ability to cheaply (as possible) and practically interchange lenses outside the narrow normal range with mechanical rigidity, dust and moisture protection at some level, and exact centering. This is not possible with cell phones, even with some of the attachments I’ve seen, not all of which are cheap. People use those things to prove it can be done but I’ve never seen one that was as practical or effective as a cheap SLR and the right lens.

Rick “who does own and use 400 and 500mm lenses” Denney

 

[mansr]

A Sony DSC-V3?

Its predecessor, the DSC-V1.

 

[Prana Ferox]

I suspect the "laser for focus" part and the "put your focus point on the subject's nearer eye" part made for a poor combination

 

[mansr]

I suspect the "laser for focus" part and the "put your focus point on the subject's nearer eye" part made for a poor combination

It produces a grid pattern. The laser intensity at any point is far too low to be dangerous.

 

[mhardy6647]

It's not a good photograph (if for no other reason than a long exposure coupled with a fixed mount, so the stars are all curved... but there are other reasons, too ) but I still like it.

 

[Doodski]

It's not a good photograph (if for no other reason than a long exposure coupled with a fixed mount, so the stars are all curved... but there are other reasons, too ) but I still like it.

It looks like home under the stars.

 

[mhardy6647]

It looks like home under the stars.

with the Milky Way comin' out of the chimney.

Unusually, that photo was taken in the middle of summer -- usually it's freezing cold when we get good views of the Milky Way.

 

[Doodski]

Yes, I saw the mily

with the Milky Way comin' out of the chimney.

Unusually, that photo was taken in the middle of summer -- usually it's freezing cold when we get good views of the Milky Way.

Yes, I saw the Milky Way coming out of the chimney.

 

[Blumlein 88]

with the Milky Way comin' out of the chimney.

Unusually, that photo was taken in the middle of summer -- usually it's freezing cold when we get good views of the Milky Way.

Yeah the Milky Way is what makes it.

I've not done this specifically, but maybe a one minute video would work and then use each frame (60 for a minute) with some of the Astronomical photo stacking software would work nicely on something like this. Human vision has resolution of 1 arc minute so while the stars move you probably could not see that it had happened.

There are a few DIY trackers that aren't too hard to make which can have a DSLR or even smartphone strapped to it so you can get longer exposures.

 

[majingotan]

with the Milky Way comin' out of the chimney.

Unusually, that photo was taken in the middle of summer -- usually it's freezing cold when we get good views of the Milky Way.

At least where you live you don't have to go to dark places to see the Milky Way. I have to travel all the way to Joshua Tree National Park just to see once myself

Mine would be on top of the tree and it's a large one due to 35mm lens

Yeah the Milky Way is what makes it.

I've not done this specifically, but maybe a one minute video would work and then use each frame (60 for a minute) with some of the Astronomical photo stacking software would work nicely on something like this. Human vision has resolution of 1 arc minute so while the stars move you probably could not see that it had happened.

There are a few DIY trackers that aren't too hard to make which can have a DSLR or even smartphone strapped to it so you can get longer exposures.

500 rule works pretty well on most cases. A solid wide open aperture at around f/1.8 or larger work really well to get enough light without cause stars to trail

35mm at f/1.4 at 13 seconds with ISO 3200 is absolutely more than enough light for milky way

 

[Andysu]

At least where you live you don't have to go to dark places to see the Milky Way. I have to travel all the way to Joshua Tree National Park just to see once myself

Mine would be on top of the tree and it's a large one due to 35mm lens



500 rule works pretty well on most cases. A solid wide open aperture at around f/1.8 or larger work really well to get enough light without cause stars to trail

35mm at f/1.4 at 13 seconds with ISO 3200 is absolutely more than enough light for milky way

i like your picture . oh and the other ASR member above . i try those settings on my Canon next outside .

 

[majingotan]

i like your picture . oh and the other ASR member above . i try those settings on my Canon next outside .

Thanks! If you do have a smaller aperture than f/2.8 IMO (full frame sensors), it's going to be a matter of trading details for ISO. For crop sensors, definitely f/1.8 would be the smallest recommendation so that ISO isn't too high while avoiding star trail. Then again, if you have a star tracker tripod, ISO 100, multiple exposures of 1 minute intervals (to avoid long exposure artifacts) is all one needs

 

[Andysu]

Thanks! If you do have a smaller aperture than f/2.8 IMO (full frame sensors), it's going to be a matter of trading details for ISO. For crop sensors, definitely f/1.8 would be the smallest recommendation so that ISO isn't too high while avoiding star trail. Then again, if you have a star tracker tripod, ISO 100, multiple exposures of 1 minute intervals (to avoid long exposure artifacts) is all one needs

i can't get the Canon 750D DLSR to same settings some are near but the F i can only get that as low as 5.0 . i had ISO up and down from 3200 down to 800 , shutter speeds from 30 sec to 13 secs and getting pictures that i ended up deleting .

 

[majingotan]

i can't get the Canon 750D DLSR to same settings some are near but the F i can only get that as low as 5.0 . i had ISO up and down from 3200 down to 800 , shutter speeds from 30 sec to 13 secs and getting pictures that i ended up deleting .

The F value can only go as low as your lens allows it unfortunately. You would need to get a lens that can go to f/1.4 in order to get those ISO values lower for the same amount of shutter speed. I specifically use this lens for the setting