posted on Sep, 14 2012 @ 09:11 PM
Originally posted by zayonara
For artistic purposes, I can do way better than my OP. This is about the "things you catch" in the sky.
That's my point. For artistic purposes, you would want to close down your aperture a little to help correct aberrations such as coma and vingeting,
at the expense of light gathering ability.
Using high ISO (above 800/1600) will make up for smaller aperture/slow lenses to some degree, but going for fast lenses (faster than f2.8), or opening
up the lens aperture would allow you to capture even fainter/faster moving objects.
There is a balance to be struck between light gathering ability, field of view (which is also linked with resolution), and cost when choosing a lens
for this type of work. Unless you have cash to burn, there will usually be tradeoffs, and (in reply to wmd_2008's post), I don't think buying wide
lenses is necessarily a good tradeoff unless you can afford "speed" too.
50mm f1.8 lenses are fast and cost effective, but the field of view is less than ideal, especially when used on a cropped-sensor DSLR.
Something like a 24mm -35mm f1.4, if you have cash to burn, makes more sense.
I'd go for either of the above two options before I went for something like 18mm f2.8, based on nearly one and a half decades experience of trying to
photograph meteors (mostly) with all kinds of lens/camera combinations.
At the end of the day people should use what they have, but some combinations will work better than others.