Milky Way: What should I look for when planning a shot using Stellarium?

Okay went out last night to capture the Milky Way on Oahu, HI and it was a total bust. I figured out how to see the Milky Way using Stellarium (increased brightness in the setttings), and I'm seeing faint traces of what I'm guessing is where it should be, but when I drove out to the spot and took a few photos I got absolutely no traces of the MW in my photo.

Exposure on 5D Mark II: 16mm, f/2.8, 25", ISO 3200

Total darkness, very little light pollution, some clouds but not heavy. All I see are a handful of stars, quite boring from the 16mm perspective.

Can anyone tell me what I should be looking for or what I'm doing wrong here? I'm positive I was facing the direction of where the MW should be. I'm guessing there are times of the month it is simply not visible? Any help will be appreciated!

Around 4:30am CST it will be way S>E> of you . Probably reason your not seeing it is cause it's below your horizon until near midnight . How late are you staying out ?

j-mar wrote in post #15938662
Exposure on 5D Mark II: 16mm, f/2.8, 25", ISO 3200

At f / 2.8 you won't be getting anything more than 10 feet in front of you. You need to go up to at least f /12 to get anything as far as stars. You can also bring your iso down too. Long exposure shots doesn't need high iso.

^Really? Every tutorial I have ever seen says to use a wide aperture, high ISO. Anything longer than 30" and star trails start to emerge. But what do I know. I'm not that interested in the foreground so DOF is not an issue. I focused on the moon so pretty sure my focus point is not an issue.

I think Celestron hit the nail on the head and it was probably below the horizon that day/time I was out. I was out at 9pm HST, looking Southwest; I also tried southeast to no avail. I'll give it a shot again next time the conditions are right and Steallarium shows the MW higher in the horizon. Thanks!

awesomeshots wrote in post #15938844
At f / 2.8 you won't be getting anything more than 10 feet in front of you. You need to go up to at least f /12 to get anything as far as stars.

I am no expert, but I disagree completely with this statement, but you are welcome to experiment. Take two identical exposures, with a different aperture, one at f2.8 and one at f12, and judge for yourself what produces better results. You will see quite a difference with the 2.8 setting.

If you were shooting a daytime image, you may lose a lot of depth of field, but it isn't an issue with astrophotography. You need to let in as much light as possible.

awesomeshots wrote in post #15938844
At f / 2.8 you won't be getting anything more than 10 feet in front of you. You need to go up to at least f /12 to get anything as far as stars. You can also bring your iso down too. Long exposure shots doesn't need high iso.

For night sky shooting you can go wide open, because the camera sees the night sky as a flat field, so there's no depth of field issue from aperture. And it helps to use a higher ISO for the night sky because it'll give you the ability to get a brighter shot without seeing star trailing errors. The only way to compensate for the earths rotation is with a tracking mount, without a mount you need high ISO and wide aperture to get anything decent without the stars becoming elongated...


As an example: ISO1600 and f/2.8...

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/katodog/6989728​579/

awesomeshots wrote in post #15938844
At f / 2.8 you won't be getting anything more than 10 feet in front of you. You need to go up to at least f /12 to get anything as far as stars. You can also bring your iso down too. Long exposure shots doesn't need high iso.

This is completely false and horrible advice, sorry.

Keep at ƒ2.8 and make sure your ISO is as high as your body and preference can tolerate.

Ron's point about it not being up yet, is most likely the issue here.

If you're on an iOS device, check out Sky Safari. The MW is very well defined and hard to miss in that app. It's what I use.

Good luck!

Sorry Awesomeshots, you've got the wrong end of the stick somehow.
I have Hawaii setup in my planetarium program as we're planning to go there around Xmas, so it's easy to check. Ron is right. The milky way is all the way around you just at the horizon at 9pm.
If you can hang out until about 11 or 12 tonight, the moon will set and the milky way will be right across the eastern sky. And the good bit of it too.

awesomeshots wrote in post #15938844
At f / 2.8 you won't be getting anything more than 10 feet in front of you. You need to go up to at least f /12 to get anything as far as stars. You can also bring your iso down too. Long exposure shots doesn't need high iso.

Uh ... What ? Sorry but you can't be anymore wrong than that, at least without a tracking mount.

Here are some samples I shot :

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623131239346

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623131239346

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623006482443

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623131239346

j-mar wrote in post #15938929
^Really? Every tutorial I have ever seen says to use a wide aperture, high ISO. Anything longer than 30" and star trails start to emerge. But what do I know. I'm not that interested in the foreground so DOF is not an issue. I focused on the moon so pretty sure my focus point is not an issue.

I think Celestron hit the nail on the head and it was probably below the horizon that day/time I was out. I was out at 9pm HST, looking Southwest; I also tried southeast to no avail. I'll give it a shot again next time the conditions are right and Steallarium shows the MW higher in the horizon. Thanks!

If there was a moon for you to focus on then you're not really shooting in conditions that are ideal, either. Shoot on a new moon, the next one is June 8th, I believe.....going off memory. Even if the moon is below the horizon it can still pollute the sky to the point that it kills the Milky Way.

Use live view, zoom in to 10x magnification and manually focus on a star.

You need to get a better quality moon. Our sky goes black when the moon sets.

TC_Fenua wrote in post #15939510
Uh ... What ? Sorry but you can't be anymore wrong than that, at least without a tracking mount.

Here are some samples I shot :

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623131239346
5DmkII, Samyang 14 f/2.8 @ f/2.8, ISO 3200, 30 seconds exposure

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623131239346
5DmkII, Samyang 35 f/1.4 @ f/1.4, ISO 3200, 10 seconds exposure

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623006482443
5DmkII, Samyang 14 f/2.8 @ f/2.8, ISO 3200, 25 seconds exposure

And finally a mosaic of 53 single shots with a 450D/XSi, 85L @ f/1.2, ISO 3200, 5 seconds exposure for each frames :

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/in/set-72157623131239346

And I think I know what I'm talking about

@ J-mar : Here a link to a small guide I wrote some time ago, just take a look if you want LINK

TC , great images ! Don't believe I remember you posting these before ? Killer shots !

I've always heard Hawaii had great observing skies especially around Mauna Kea Observatories . I've seen some killer shots and scenes of that place . Just wish I had a chance to go !

SteveInNZ wrote in post #15939707
You need to get a better quality moon. Our sky goes black when the moon sets.

I'll work on that.

As Todd says the MW is very distinct in viewing especially in dark skies ! It's a beauty to see and no mistake about that . Also like SteveNZ mentioned about it being low on the horizon after 9pm . In your area it's best to stay up late if your trying to get it right now . Other than that later in the season it will be up higher earlier for you . The way I found out is I use Cartes Du Ceil Planetary program . I googled Hawaiis' Latitude and Longtitude and I placed the settings in the Observatory in CDC and I couldn't see it so I worked the animation part and soon as it raised above the Horizon I stopped it and checked the time it had advanced to and it shows better sighting of the MW around midnight and after . And also Awesomeshots needs to do more night photography cause any of us old timers and newtimers that have been photographing the night sky for a period of time knows that wider aperture is better and necessary in dark skies but if your in LP then you may need to stop down to 4.5-6.3 . Gotta remember the night sky is usually dark enough and you have to open wide to capture light . And on the ISO if your on a guiding platform and doing very long exposures with digital you need to be around ISO 800 and above . Old film users like me have used ISO 100 and 200 but exposures were like 60-mins ++ and usually stacking two or more images was required to get really good images . One other thing i'll mention . If you use f/8 and lower , your stars will usually end up with some ugly spikes because of aperture blades . That can ruin a good image . Good luck and just keep trying . Sooner or later your going to see that MW and your jaws will hit the ground !!