one issue you'll have is reciprocity failure. I've never done this on film for that reason. I can give you an example in digital. This is really unedited:
Exposure is ISO 800, ƒ8, 2min 7 sec. If you go wide open on an ƒ4 lens you gain 2 stops, so 2min drops to maybe 30 seconds, which will have less reciprocity failure. The glow in the distand are the lights from Moab, and the light under the arch was somone else doing light painting while I was shooting. (sorry for posting digital, but if this camera--Pentax K1ii--is accurate on ISO setting it would give a starting point to get similar results.)
View attachment 379088
I would add that a) you need to do some tests, and b) after researhing films, mu understanding is that while 100 ISO seems bad, Provia has the same resistance to reciprocity failure that Acros has. So it MAY not require much more time than another film with significant failure.
I've done some astrophotography, tracked & untracked, film & digital.
A decent base exposure on digital would be f2.0, ISO 1600, 30s. But even that gives faint pictures, and you need to stack multiple frames to get good detail. And 30s is about the max you can expose on a wide angle to avoid star trails.
I've used Fuji 400H and Acros II, which have good reciprocity characteristics, with claimed effective ISOs of 200 and 50 for long exposures. But to get good detail like that of a stacked process you need to exposure more than that. Most other films are much worse for reciprocity.
With ISO 200 (400H) and f2.8, you would need a minimum of 8 min exposure. Tracking is the only option for film. I did a 30m tracked shot on 400H, Pentax 6x7 at f/4 and the negative was workable. I would guess that a 2h exposure would have been fine, it's pretty dark up there
In the past I built a DIY tracker. Needs a motor, 3D-printed gears and hardware store parts. About $30.
With a star tracker, you have to shoot only stars anyway, because it will blur the landscape, right? In my opinion, most of the "Wow!" landscape + many stars photos one sees on the internet are composites - they may be composites of two real photographs, but they're composites.
For untracked, untrailed images, you're limited by the max exposure time to avoid trailing, which as others said is pretty short (30 sec?), so that limits the significance of reciprocity failure.
If you have an interesting foreground, which of course you should be able to find at Arches, then long exposures with the foreground and star trails can be really nice. Depending on the amount of ambient light or moonlight, you can do something simple, like: set camera up, open shutter, leave for 15-60 minutes, come back and close shutter. That can also avoid trying the patience of your travel partner.
Mamiya made a couple of infrared remote systems that may work RS401 and RS402. If you can dig up a manual for your camera, it should tell you which accessories are designed for it. The 2 systems both seem bulky to me, and in other threads, people seem to recommend the old-school Kopil, polaroid, etc self-timer devices that thread into the shutter release button.
I think the RS402 was designed for the 645AF series, so I have no idea if the interface cable socket is the same as the 645Pro-TL.
I perhaps do not understand the question. I don't have a Move Shoot Move mount myself. The current Nomad, as far as I can tell, is just a continuous star tracker - you align it properly and it counteracts the rotation of the earth. You can put an analog camera on this and take as short or long an exposure as you can stand, using a normal cable release. However, if you have landscape in the foreground, the landscape will get blurred by motion for any fairly long exposure.
If you had an intervalometer and autowind, you could take a timed series of exposures, but a film camera can only take a small number before running out.
I think the previous Move Shoot Move mount had a timelapse mode, where you could connect the camera to the mount (via the PC sync), use an intervalometer to set up a sequence of many exposures of modest length, and have the mount track during each exposure, then move back to the start position for the next exposure. If you take a whole sequence of exposures like this, you can then turn them into a timelapse movie, where I guess the foreground blur isn't noticeable because each exposure is fairly short, but the stars visibly rotate over the course of the night. Obviously, this is really intended for a digital camera.
In my head, I see double exposures as a friend here along with a soft gradient ND filter perhaps? Get a "blue hour" exposure of the scenic or important background, then get setup on the star tracker and get the sky exposed. Possibly flipping the grad nd filter for the second half?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?