FEChariot wrote in post #18064407
So what if 24mm is not wide enough to capture the scene as you want it framed? Do you just stitch more images together? Then why stop there? Why not just buy a 600/4 IS II to get the maximum clear aperture available and just stitch 87 images together or whatever the math works out to be?
There is some point where too much is too much. Otherwise every macro shot short of this:http://petapixel.com …captured-microscope-lens/
Would be considered "miss information"?
Also, tracking is great, but be prepared to do some PS work if you want to include a stationary foreground while you are tracking the sky. Then again if someone doesn't want to do a multi shot panorama would you consider it "miss information? doing it wrong?
The difference between 24mm and (say) 14mm is not significant, you really have trouble stitching images? 24mm is pretty dang wide and the time you save by taking shorter exposures means you can take more exposures and cover way more sky. Of all the steps in post processing, stitching probably takes the least amount of time. You're making WAY too much out of this and the 600mm "metaphor" is a real eye roller, nice exaggeration to try and prove a point. This is a stitched image with my D600 and 24mm lens on the iOptron skytracker, 1 row of 6 images wide for the sky, 1 row of 6 images for the foreground which covers almost 180 degrees:
Took 15 minutes to stitch both rows of shots and layer the rows in photoshop to get get the final image (prior to my main post processing steps). It adds virtually no extra time to do the stitching of separate rows with the tracker on and off and then aligning in Photoshop versus, say, masking a foreground in a shot and editing it separately from the sky.
This is a "single" exposure, one for the sky, one for the foreground with the 24mm:
You're telling me that's too narrow?
Hell, this is a "pano" shot with my 85mm, 3 rows (one for sky, one for mountains, one for reflections) of 3 shots wide each:
This is another pano with the 85mm, 3 rows (2 for the sky, 1 for foreground) of 4 shots each:
Again, the misinformation I'm talking about has to do with ISO (and color balance which I'm not even going to bother mentioning); the points about focal length are personal preference, but the best astro lenses on the market are the Rokinon 24mm f1.4 and Sigma 35mm f1.4.