Topics covering photography and videography of the flora, fauna and landscape of the Sierra Nevada mountains. Show off your talent. Post your photos and videos here!
Fish wrote:
For really nice night skies, I'd prefer a 24mm f/1.4 but that's even heavier, I think.
Nikon 620g $1929
Rokinon 552g $314
Not only heavier, but $$$$$$.
the last thing I'd do with my money is buy a 24mm f/1.4 G lens from Nikon. I was referring to the Rokinon 24mm f/1.4 which is still missing in my bag, because I just can't find it under $550, and other than for nice stars, I don't really need it.
The 24mm Rokinon is heavier than the 14mm - 680g for EOS
For comparison, my 20mm f/3.5 barely weighs 250g and is just plain excellent in every respect except for the wide open night stuff.
I don't give out specific route information, my belief is that it takes away from the whole adventure spirit of a trip, if you need every inch planned out, you'll have to get that from someone else.
Have a safer backcountry experience by using the HST ReConn Form 2.0, named after Larry Conn, a HST member:http://reconn.org
Funny, I've been debating the 14 2.8 vs the 24 1.4. I am looking for a lens specifically for night shots. The 14 seems more popular for a few reasons, cost being the primary one I'm sure.
24 seems like it might not be wide enough for some milky way shots.
The folks who specialize in night time time lapse seem to prefer the 24mm f/1.4 over any 14mm by a good margin. For best results you need to record as much as possible in less than 20 seconds, otherwise you will get earth rotation issues (few will carry an astro-tracker to compensate for that into the backcountry).
Best setup is a camera that can shoot high ISO at low noise, and a lens that is sharp at f/2.8 or faster. At f/1.4 you get twice as much light on the sensor compared to the f/2.8, and even stopped down to f/2.0 you are still 50% ahead. When it comes to recording faint light, that's a pretty big deal. Also, not shooting super wide increases the size of the stars on the sensor surface, increasing their visibility. 24mm on a full frame camera is still almost 90 degrees FOV, so you do get a large chunk of sky. The 14mm has a field of view of 114 degrees, which is rather extreme.
Yes, the highest scoring lens is the 24mm/1.4 which offers the best mix of field
of view and aperture size. But the Canon ver II is $1700 ($1500 after $200 rebate),
quite expensive unless your really into night photography and/or make good sales
on your night photography prints.
Professional Sierra Landscape Photographer
I don't give out specific route information, my belief is that it takes away from the whole adventure spirit of a trip, if you need every inch planned out, you'll have to get that from someone else.
Have a safer backcountry experience by using the HST ReConn Form 2.0, named after Larry Conn, a HST member:http://reconn.org
