Is this lens good for night sky photography?
1311664
Yes its ideal for landscapes because of its wide angle and moderate distortion the f/ 2.8 aperture is good for low light but if you want everything in the foreground and background sharp you'll want to stop it down. If thats the case youll need a tripod so you can shoot at a low ISO and keep ur noise minimal. Also cheaper lenses can do this, you are mostly paying for the 2.8 aperture with this lens. Also if you want to shoot the moon you might wana zoom in so there are other good options.
1311665
Assuming you mean the Milky Way, here's a good article : http://www.lonelyspeck.com/lenses-for-milky-way-photography/ and it shows you the field of view you can expect with the lens.
1311666
It is good for night photography above f/5.6. Not that sharp edge to edge below f/5.6. Also, light sources will have six pointed stars, which look unnatural. The 16-35/2.8II has 14 pointed stars.
1311667
This is one awesome lens. No barrel roll distortion. You could get quite a landscape view, but remember, all things in the shot will be very small because there's such a wide angle of view.
1311668
The lens is actually ideal for getting huge expanses of the Milky Way. The Milky Way is fairly thick in parts (especially the best parts) and requires the extreme wide angle to reveal the structure and detail. I've tried using 24mm on a full frame body and it's not even close, but this lens really does a great job on the night sky. Now all you need is a great dark sky location where the night sky isn't washed out by light pollution and you can still see structure in the Milky Way. Those are getting really hard to find anymore.
1205528
With a tripod and a remote release, you can take night shots of non-moving subjects with very low light. If you have a DSLR you can increase the "iso" to take photos in low light but this introduces "noise" into the picture. Also this lens has a very shallow depth of field. For its price I find it worth the investment. You can get as close as 6 ft. From your subject. Almost a closeup lens. Good for tiny subjects. Good luck.
1619210
I'm not sure it'll be the best lens but it's pretty sharp so I'm guessing it would do well. Here are some shots I took with it. Unfortunately, some are with an infrared conversion camera and none of astrophotography. https://www.flickr.com/photos/95942445@N06/sets/72157646972522711/
808855
I wouldn't think this would take photos at night. This filter demands long shutter speeds and alot of light to render it's unique look. I haven't tried it at night though.
2102763
I use Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 for general purpose (also at night). I love its sharpness. It is also suitable for portraits. For the professional portraits, look at prime lenses with f1.4 or f1.8.
346746
F1.4 is a fast lens that's great at night or dark spaces. Good for capturing fast motion, very sharp. But my main reason was low lit area because I don't need flash.
171789
Most Nikons have standard fitting parts so this should work in terms of that. But it doesn't really magnify all that well. At least not on night shoots.
1069238
I can't speak to that, but I'm fairly finicky about the glass I use (I mostly shoot olympus m4/3 primes), and I really like this 75-300 lens. With good light, you can get some stunning images of wildlife, landscapes, and the moon! I've even used it indoors (with the olympus 600r) and gotten some fantastic shots as well. Olympus used nice glass in this lens. While it's not going to be on my camera every day, it's great for specific applications.
1619212
If you're asking about photographing the stars, then (in my opinion) it doesn't have enough magnification. It's a "normal" lens, not a telephoto which is typically used for that. If you're asking if it's good in low light, then the answer is yes, sort of. For the price it's great. It's sharp wide open (at f2.4). Some faster lenses that go down to f1.4 aren't sharp at that aperture, so they end up being usable only at f2.4 to f2.8. Dollar for dollar this is a very good lens.
1546869
I would say no. The focal length won't let you get enough magnification to get good pictures of distant nebula or things like that. I'd recommend something a little bigger like a 8 inch. Plus you'd probably want something with a motor drive so you can have long exposures, without distorted images.
1333593
This is primarily a Macro lens, for shooting tiny things. It would work for northern lights, but there are probably better choices out there, depending on your budget and camera type.
876255
You are not looking at very expensive optics here, and you can't compare the performance of this lens to one costing thousands of dollars. That being said however, this lens will perform pretty well shooting the moon. You will find it hard to get perfect focus on infinity. If you have the extender, which will double your length, you will get even closer shots. Also, some people can't stand that this lens is all mechanical, just like the old 35 MM lenses. I love shooting with this thing. You can actually hand hold to get some very good bird shots. I hope this answers your question. Good luck. For the price, you should do okay!
1205534
No. This lens only works well in sunny and bright days, unless you are trying to take photos of the moon. I don't recommend this lens, it is not very useful. If its zoom that you are looking for, and you are limited with money, I would recommend a teleconverter instead. This lens is very inconvenient, and difficult to focus
416864
Like others who have answered, yes its awesome for night shots and its not ridiculously expensive like the Nikon and Canon options. This is a manual focus lens vs. the Nikon/Canon but you will have to focus manually anyways since your AF won't work at night. That said, the full benefit of this lens requires a full frame sensor but I have used it on the crop sensors and its great there too, just not as wide a field of view but wide enough in IMO.
1324234
Hi Brian....I have used the SLY358C for both star trails as well as All Sky Photography, meteor showers, and the Lunar Eclipse. It works perfectly for these uses though I might go with longer focal length and smaller F ration next time I purchase a lens.
330542
I have a V 1 so I am not sure, the lens is wonderful my night moon pictures came out great!
1476725
I'm using this lens for long range stills... like a shot of a full moon I have it mounted on a Nikon D3100 with a doubler 2X making it a 1000mm Zoom lens. The first thing I noticed was that I couldn't hold it still enough to take a picture without some sort of stabilizer (recommend a tripod), the second thing is the light was really low, which for my purpose was perfect. I haven't tried it for any moving objects.