Best tools for the job

[poider]

Curious to know members experience,
I have a Nikon D7000 and various lenses, longest being Sigma 150mm - 500mm Fastest being Tamron 90mm f/2 and Nikon 50mm f/1.8.
should i go for
1, Full Frame Camera and get a telescope
2, stay with cropped sensor and get Tamron 150mm - 600mm
or
3, stay with cropped sensor and get telescope?

[pauld]

I wouldn't have bought a Full frame camera, But I was given a Nikon D610 for my birthday and love it, because it is better in low light and has better detail. but I now find I cant afford any new lenses as they are much more expensive. My advice is unless u can afford a new set of lenses, stay with the D7000.

[loose cannon]

What issues are you having with your current set up?

What are you trying to achieve by changing to FF.

What's the telescope for? Astrophotography?

Needs lot more detail.

[Isac]

Just a short word to welcome you back Poider - long time no see

[poider]

Thank you Isac, I have been getting to grips with emphysemia and anaphalaxis and have had little time to ponder the world through the lens, but now I am getting on with it and living and learning once again, I have taken a few astrophotography shots of milky way and a few of planets and moon but would like to get better clearer shots, I see plenty of astro on internet and some are with telescopes some with tracking mounts and some just with stacking etc, I am just wondering what is the least expensive way to get good shots
Peter

[loose cannon]

The Rokinon 24mm f/1.4 is a lens that comes highly recommended (assuming FF camera) by those who dabble in astrophotography.

That's for wide sky shots of the milky way, if you want to shoot planets and the like then you're entering the serious end of town money wise and really require specialist advice. The POTN Canon forum has a dedicated Astronomy forum with some highly skilled and experienced people and a visit to that forum may give you the info you seek.

I've had a few goes at wide sky stuff but only have a crop camera (Canon 7D) and a 17-55mm f/2.8 and the results are pretty average.

You need fast glass first and foremost and the Rokinon is cheapish, somewhere around the $400 mark from memory but it's been a while since I looked into all of this.

I think they also do a 14mm if you only have a crop but the important aspect is the fast glass. Full Frame gives you better control over noise I've been told.

A f/2.8 lens will not cut the mustard really.

Hope this helps, I claim no real knowledge in this area.

[poider]

Thank you Loose cannon, I will look into a faster lens then maybe go for a tracking mount
Peter

[poider]

What is the primary reason a glass is termed as fast glass? is it that the aperture can open wider, thus allowing faster shutter speeds?

[seaslug]

What is the primary reason a glass is termed as fast glass? is it that the aperture can open wider, thus allowing faster shutter speeds?

Yes they do allow faster shutter speeds for a given exposure, but my understanding is that there is less light lost through the lens elements, it’s not that they open further. All lenses open fully to my knowledge, but for an average long zoom, fully open might give a F. Stop of say F6.1 a faster zoom with the same range may well be F4.

[Isac]

Adding to Greg's expalnation, a lens with a larger maximum aperture (eg: f1.8) is called a "fast lens" because it can achieve the same exposure with a faster shutter speed.

[poider]

I ask because I have a Nikkor 18 - 300mm f/3.5 - 5.6, they have introduced a new version that is f/3.5 - 6.3 and they claim it is better?

[seaslug]

I ask because I have a Nikkor 18 - 300mm f/3.5 - 5.6, they have introduced a new version that is f/3.5 - 6.3 and they claim it is better?

You can usually find on line reviews of lenses. It’s clearly not faster at the long end, but that doesn’t mean it’s not better in other ways. Eg sharper corner to corner or less chromic aberration. I’ve not used either so I can’t comment further.

[poider]

so if a 24 - 70mm lens is really a 36 - 105mm lens on a nikon 1.5 x crop sensor, does this also mean the 24 - 70mm f/2.8 is really a 36 - 105mm f/4.2?

[poider]

And when they talk about a certain camera or lens not performing well in low light, wouldn't a flash solve this?