Hello all.

I was wondering if some of the more experienced astrophotographers here could recommend a couple of good lenses for a Canon EOS 300D (Digital Rebel). Right now I'm using the stock lens that came with the camera (EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 lens) and I'm still somewhat learning the ins-and-outs of lenses (aperture, ISO speed, etc.), so it's difficult to know what exactly I should buy for what I'm looking to do--which is primarily fixed photography (non-telescope) for now.

I thought it would be good to start with a lower-end lens, perhaps in the $300-$400 range until I become good enough to move up to the more advanced ones, which typically go for $1,000+. I've asked around a little bit at some of the camera shops and I tend to get mixed responses on what lenses are best, since there typically isn't anyone on staff that has experience with astrophotography. Going through some of the Canon tutorials, however, it seems like the best lens is the Canon Wide Angle EF 24mm f/1.4L USM Autofocus Lens [seen here]. Unfortunately, that's a little too pricey for me ($1,100.00), although it takes wonderful pictures [seen here]. That being said, I was looking at the Canon Wide Angle EF 24mm f/2.8 Autofocus Lens [seen here], which is ~$800.00 cheaper.

So anyway, these are my specific questions:

1. What is the big difference between the Canon Wide Angle EF 24mm f/1.4L USM and EF 24mm f/2.8 Autofocus Lenses?
2. What other lenses should I look into, keeping in mind that I want to take "landscape" style shots with stars in the background, as well as close up shots of the Moon, planets, nebulae, etc?

I'm still very much a beginner, but I plan to do as much astrophotography as possible this year and onward. If anyone can make a few recommendations, I'd greatly appreciate it--and thanks in advance.

P.S. Attached are my first recent attempts, using my stock EF-S 18-55mm. Not much compared to what I've seen around here, but I think it's a decent start.

Attached Images

	3115_processed.jpg (101.9 KB, 32 views)
	2968_processed.jpg (117.4 KB, 34 views)

__________________
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." - Carl Sagan

Spice up your web pages with free DHTML:
- modal dialogs [more]
- contact forms [more]
- image galleries [more]

Beautiful images of my favorite Constellation! I love the one of Orion setting in the West with Taurus and Sirius! The building on the horizon adds to the beauty of the image. But..... I cannot advise you on lenses! Sorry.

Phil

__________________
If at first you fail, you're running average

Hey thanks.

I was a little discouraged at first, but then I did some reading on image processing and was able to really bring out the constellation. I'm looking forward to going back out next weekend when I'm hoping the conditions are more favorable (was very windy when I took those, so exposure times were limited).

__________________
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." - Carl Sagan

Spice up your web pages with free DHTML:
- modal dialogs [more]
- contact forms [more]
- image galleries [more]

The lower the f/number, the "faster" the lens, meaning that you get more light with the same length of exposure time.

__________________

"Why do something now when you can put it off 'til later?" -- me :)

I'll probably end up getting a f/2.8 lens (f/1.4's are very pricey), so I need to know a few other things such as:

• What focal length range would be good to start with?
• Ultra-Wide, Standard, or Telephoto Zoom lens?

At this point any lens recommendations would be helpful. It's a pretty big learning curve for me, so whatever other advice could be offered is appreciated.

__________________
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." - Carl Sagan

Spice up your web pages with free DHTML:
- modal dialogs [more]
- contact forms [more]
- image galleries [more]

It all depends what you are looking for and where you interest lay.

I have a Canon D60 which is similar to the original Rebel

For phographing aurora I bought a good used Sigma Aspherical 20mm f1.8 prime and for the eclise photos I got a good used Sigma 500mm f7.2 prime. I also have a Sigma 75-300mm 1:4-5.6 zoom and a Canon 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 zoom and a slection of old 42mm screw thread lenses that I use with adaptor rings on manual - one of which is a super fast 50mm f1.4!
I find the biggest problem with night time photography is getting pin sharp focussing. Digital viewfinders are artrocious and I'm looking to get a used laptop/notebook PC so I can focus, remove the memory card, check on the PC and then replace it and adjust as required. It is really anoying to do a 100mile round trip for dark sky to then come home and find the pics are unusable.

I would also say get the heaviest tripod you can carry!

__________________
By asking questions we sometimes get the wrong answers, from wrong answers we learn to ask the right questions.

Howdy MoMo...while I don't do a lot of astrophotography at the moment, I am a Canon shooter.

Considered Canon's pro line, the L series lenses stand apart (arguably) from the rest of Canon's line in optical and build quality...and of course, cost. After all, the L purportedly stands for "luxury". When used with the appropriate body, many are weather sealed. Zooms like my EF 24-105 f/4L are usually fixed aperture.

While the 24mm f/1.4L is top drawer, the f/2.8 is a fine lens for the money. I don't really think you'd be disappointed with it. The slight decrease in aperture shouldn't matter much in your astrophotography since you'll be shooting on a tripod and stopping down from your maximum aperture (to a point) will increase sharpness.

You might find the lens reviews at FredMiranda.com helpful.

Thanks a bunch.

I don't think I mind spending more for a very good lens as long as I know that I'm getting the right lens. Being that I'm somewhat of a beginner, I was afraid to get one of the "L" lenses because I wasn't sure if it was complete overkill or not.

__________________
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere." - Carl Sagan

Spice up your web pages with free DHTML:
- modal dialogs [more]
- contact forms [more]
- image galleries [more]

That's a good philosophy. Good glass is a good investment. Most L lenses hold their value very well should you ever decide to sell one for another.

I don't know if you're also considering zoom lenses but if you want a wider lens, you might also look at the EF-S 10-22 f/3.5–4.5 USM. When it comes to APS-C sized sensors, there aren't many choices out there for a rectilinear extreme wide angle lens and this one's a doozy. It's on my list of future purchases. Even though the maximum aperture isn't anything to crow about, many of the opinions and reviews I've read rate the image quality very highly...right up there with L lenses.

I've had the 10-22mm EF-S lens for a year or so, and I've never tried it out with astrophotography, however i can say it is an incredibly quality lens for day to day shooting. I have a 28-105mm EF-S and it the photo quality is no where near that of the 10-22mm EF-S. I would highly recommend this lens.

I decent lens with a wide aperture is the 50mm f/1.8 lens. Its the cheapest lens Canon makes at 70$, and the quality of photos are decent. However its construction leaves a lot to be desired. The kit 18-55mm lens looks like an L series in terms of construction. But you can't go wrong with this lens because of the price.

Hi Mo-Mo, I now have a few lenses for my 300D, and like you and many others, I like doing the widefield (non telescope) stuff. As has been explained, the canon 'L' lenses are top quality lenses, but of course cost a lot!

As a general rule for astrophotography, 'prime' or non-zoom lenses are best, the zoom lenses just don't do it as good, unless they are of 'L' quality glass. I can personally recommend these -

1. Best value canon lens - the 50mm f1.8 II lens will cost about 100 us dollars I believe, it's a fantastic lens !!!!! here's an example:
http://www.irishastronomy.org/user_r...20Scorpius.jpg

2. Also the Canon ef 85mm f1.8 USM lens - about 400 us dollars, I use this the most!
http://www.irishastronomy.org/user_r...01.04.2006.jpg

Keith..

Canon's 100mm Macro is great. It's very sharp wide open and is a prime.

Canon's 50mm F1.8 isn't that great. The optics are, but the plastic mount would turn me away from it. Nikons 50mm F1.8 is much better and can be found for only $30 more, and it comes with a Metal mount.

Metal mount shmetal mount, big whoop. Considering it's a cheap lens, I'd go glass quality over mount quality any day.

If you were to hold onto the lens at all with the body attached, I can see it breaking. Especially if you are using bodies such as a 1DmkIIn.

__________________
Nikon D200
Nikon D50
Nikon 300mm F4D ED-IF AF-S
Nikon 50mm F1.8
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8EX DG Macro
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8EX DG Macro

Well, since the camera in question is a Canon, I'd say that's good for you but useless to the OP.

But...I did opt for Canon's 50mm f/1.4. More expensive, sure but not enormously so...and the build quality is far and away the better. I demand too much of my gear to be comfortable with a plastic mount. Others do just fine and get great results with the 1.8 model.

Yeah, Canons older 50 1.8 had a metal mount. I think they just took it off to beat the price of the Nikon 50 1.8.

The 50 1.4 is a nice lens though

__________________
Nikon D200
Nikon D50
Nikon 300mm F4D ED-IF AF-S
Nikon 50mm F1.8
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8EX DG Macro
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8EX DG Macro