Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I use a Nikon D70 with a Nikon DX 18-70mm lens. I had to go manual focus as there was nothing for the auto to work from staring at the dark sky. Set on 18mm, I put the ISO on 1600 (had no idea the option was there until I started shooting). I took one shot which seemed to take about a second for the shutter. I could see the lights in my little screen which was good enough for me. So I just started shooting. It was blowing a good 20mph so I had to lean on the truck which was moving a little in the wind. I just really need to sit down and read the manual! The pictures are grainy. So I'm close (lucky) and with a little playing around I'm hoping I can dial it in. You reckon my ISO should be lower? Mostly it will depend on seeing them this brilliant again. It's hit and miss. And sometimes it can be a week or two between seeing them.
Must have been very cold, eh? Don't forget that after you shoot, you should place the camera in a sealed zip lock bag before you bring it inside. That way you won't get condensation in the camera. Don't open the bag until the camera warms up to room temperature.
If you cut your ISO in half, you'd need to double the length of your exposure to get those shots. So ISO 800 would have required a 2.6 second exposure for those shots. ISO 400 would require 5.6 seconds. All of those combinations would give you the same exposure of the scene. The lower the ISO setting, the less grain in the shots. However, if the light pattern is changing quickly, the long shutter opening would blur the shot.
Or just remember that doubling ISO is equivalent to opening the aperature by one full F stop. Doubling shutterspeed also equals one full F stop. Here are the full F stops that probably apply to your lens. f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22. The smaller the F stop number, the larger the aperature, hence more light. (It's kind of like wire guage in that the smaller the number, the larger the wire.) Note that your camera probably has partial stops inbetween those settings. But for the sake of determining the effect of ISO on shutter or aperature, it's easiest to think in terms of full stops.
ISO is simply a setting which increases or decreases your cameras sensitivity to light. F stop is the size of the aperture of your shutter. And shutterspeed is the amount of time the shutter stays open. You can balance those parameters any way you want to get the right exposure. Just remember that larger apertures give you shallower depth of field. And higher ISO gives you more grain. It's actually all quite simple.
Well...I highly appreciate the help kdog. I will have a look at that photonhead link. And now that I have 2 weeks off I will sit and read all 228 pages of the manual! Thanks for the help!
Location: Monterey Bay, California -- watching the sea lions, whales and otters! :D
1,918 posts, read 6,783,209 times
Reputation: 2708
Thanks for the photos, Rance! I sure miss the Northern Lights!! As a kid when we'd go camping we'd often sit outside and gaze for hours at them in wonder. Brings back great memories!
Well done, Rance. The lights look like giant green tornados in those shots.
Judging from your long exposure and wide-open fstop, I'm guessing you used a lower ISO this time, although it's not in your EXIF info for some reason. I'll bet you had a tripod this time as well. The shots look cleaner this time, although it's hard to tell at this small size. Can you repost these shots larger? These are great shots and deserve a larger size.
If you click on the thumbnails they enlarge. Just doing my part saving bandwidth! Yes I used 800 and 600 ISO rather than 1600. And I did not have a tripod. These are the result of about 20 shots...most which had blurred stars. The lights on the horizon had a funny look due to temp inversion/mirage effect and still look blurred. Next hitch I will have a tripod. A remote control would be nice also!
If you click on the thumbnails they enlarge. Just doing my part saving bandwidth!
Well, duh! I know they're thumbnails, but the expanded images are only 640 pixels wide. Those shots should be BIG -- at least 800 pixels. These are really special shots and deserve to be seen!
Quote:
Yes I used 800 and 600 ISO rather than 1600. And I did not have a tripod. These are the result of about 20 shots...most which had blurred stars. The lights on the horizon had a funny look due to temp inversion/mirage effect and still look blurred. Next hitch I will have a tripod. A remote control would be nice also!
I'm amazed you were able to hold the camera that still, as these were 2.5 second exposures as indicated in your EXIF data. You either have an extremely steady hand, or were frozen solid. (My bet is on the latter )
This time I stayed in the truck for all but one or two. I shut the truck off and leaned against the window frame. I have just ordered a remote for 21 dollars and free shipping! So next hitch I'll bring a tripod and see if I can improve just a tad. I can sit in the truck and push the remote every now and then. Roger WILCO on the uploading in a bigger size. I'll do that next time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know they're thumbnails, but the expanded images are only 640 pixels wide. Those shots should be BIG -- at least 800 pixels. These are really special shots and deserve to be seen!
(My bet is on the latter 
