• Reza

    Great read. Thanks for sharing. I am seriously thinking of getting either a 35mm f1.4 II or 16-35 f2.8 II USM. Very difficult decision. I do landscape photography and panoramas mostly , and some night sky. I heard very positive feedbacks for 35 mm f1.4, but am afraid the closer objects (lakes , grass) will show too soft at f1.4-f1.8 (which is the main pint of buying this lens.) What is your experience?
    (I use a EOS 5D MKIII)

    February 14, 2016
    • Hi Reza, I wouldn’t be too bothered about objects close to the lens, they are going to be soft. You’ve got to focus at infinity. My personal preference would be to go with the faster lens and shoot wide open, although 35mm is a bit limiting in field of view compared to a 24mm. The shorter your exposure the more of the vertical curtain effect of the auraora you’ll pick up which make better photos. Longer exposure will just produce a green blur effect. I’d also go for a manual (not autofocus) lens if it’s good shots of the aurora you want. The reason being is that they stop exactly on the infinity setting. Autofocus lenses can rotate past the infinity setting and although it’s marked it’s incredibly difficult to set it exactly, especially in the dark. I’ve heard some photography workshops get their participants to set their lenses to infinity in day light and then tape the setting with gaffer tape. I also found the infinity mark on autofocus lenses is seldom precise, and it could be just behind or ahead of the mark. Hope rthis helps.

      March 05, 2016
  • Oh, my word – looks like you hit the mother lode!

    May 04, 2014
  • Pete Hyde

    An interesting and informative read, John and some wonderful images. I had exactly the same problem with a UV filter when in Norway. Fortunately I saw the effect after our first aurora shoot and we were blessed with a second one.

    January 26, 2014

Leave a comment

Copyright © Dandelion by Pexeto