Hi,I'm going to do a 12 day Norway coastal / fjord voyage with Havila (same route as the more famous Hurtigruten), starting on Sept. 30th. There is a certain chance to catch northern lights, esp on the way up, since there's no moon then and nights are already 11-12 hours long then. If I get to see them,I'll be on the moving boat most of the timeor in a city for 2-3 hours at most, too short to do a meaningful car trip to escape light pollution. I haven't got much of an idea how much the boat will be rocking, my impression is that it's rather stable if there isn't a storm. But it will be moving anyway, not too slowly at that, mostly in a straight line. Could be okay for those 2+ seconde exposure times one seems to have to expect at f/2.8, maybe even add some nice dynamism with moving land/sea vs a stable sky. Provided the ship doesn't actually vibrate too much.I'll bring myZ6 and a tripod. I'm not too much into UWA photography usually, so I don't have such a lens. Would love a small and affordable 16 or 18mm 2.8, but Nikon refuses to make one. My 24-120/4 and 50/1.8 certainly aren't the right tools for the job - so what do you think I should bring?I guess the main options are buying a Samyang 14/2.8 MF for around €400(which I think is justifyable for the trip and infrequent further use, given it's rather sharp)or renting the Nikon 20/1.8 for €170.I could rent the Nikon 14-24/2.8 for €290 as well plus there's the Laowa 15mm/2.0 MF for €900. But honestly - both of the latter options are too expensive.Would you go for shorter shutter speeds or wider FOV?Thank you for your opinions and best regards, Martin

Martin Datzinger wrote:rent.. the Nikon 20/1.8

Martin Datzinger wrote:I'll be on the moving boat most of the timeI have not done this type of trip though in the UK we are quite near to where you are going.The consensus from those who have been is that even with a very fast aperture lens good shots are very difficult from a ship because ships are never completely still and long shutter speeds are needed.The consensus also seems to be that 24 mm is usually wide enough.Digital can be extremely good at recording detail almost too dark for the human eye to perceive. Many northern light shots are taken at very low light levels

Wahrsager wrote:Martin Datzinger wrote:rent.. the Nikon 20/1.8This. It’s such a great lens and I got really good image quality when I shot the auroras in September last year on the Lofoten islands and on Senja. I used it mostly at f2.2 to improve the image quality even more but we had some bright auroras so wide open wasn’t even needed.Maybe it is cheaper to buy a used Z 20/1.8 and sell it afterwards than to rent one. Or maybe you will want to keep it after you’ve seen the results.I can’t say much about shooting auroras from a moving ship though but I guess what works best on land will probably also work best on a ship.

Hi!Thank you for your answer. No used Z 20/1.8 available in my wider area sadly. From the feedback so far I guess I'll be renting it, the cost is okay within the bigger picture, less than the typical excursion Havila or local services offer.Where do you find those IQ gains from stopping down? I usually crop 16:9 or 4:3 - so I won't be looking into the extreme corners of the sensor for coma anyway.I'm wondering if it's better to use exposure stacking rather than long exposures to counter ship rocking. But then, aurora is moving itsself so I'd risk stepping artifacts?Best regards, Martin

Martin Datzinger wrote:Hi!Where do you find those IQ gains from stopping down? I usually crop 16:9 or 4:3 - so I won't be looking into the extreme corners of the sensor for coma anyway.It gains exactly in the corners. Less vignetting and less coma although the latter is on a relatively low level even wide open. I would not hesitate to use the lens wide open if the auroras were less bright than in my 2 sample pictures.But with such bright auroras I was able to keep the ISO and shutter speed relatively low. Probably in most cases one would have to use ISO 6400 and f/1.8 to make the auroras better visible in the picture. I think it’s key that you keep the shutter speed high because the faster the shutter speed the more defined the auroras get. That‘s why I would always use a fast prime instead of a zoom, even if it was an f/2.8 zoom.I also found that 20mm work really well in the latitudes of Lofoten and Senja. Further in the south you might get decent results even with a 50/1.8 although it would make things probably worse in your case with a moving ship.

Leonard Shepherd wrote:Martin Datzinger wrote:I'll be on the moving boat most of the timeI have not done this type of trip though in the UK we are quite near to where you are going.Leonard, which map did you look at...? The northern tip of Scotland is at about the same latitude as the southern tip of Norway. The northern tip of Norway is on the 71N latitude, that's VERY far north. Kirkenes, where the trip normally ends, is south of that but that's after rounding the most northern parts of mainland Norway since it is on the east side, near the Russian border. UK is nowhere "quite near"...

Thank you so much for your detailed answer! 20/1.8 it is, then.

You’re welcome. My fingers are crossed that you will witness a strong aurora. After all it’s a lot of luck involved with the intensity of the lights and the weather. But when everything comes together it’s majestic like nothing I have seen before or after.

Martin Datzinger wrote:Hi,I'm going to do a 12 day Norway coastal / fjord voyage with Havila (same route as the more famous Hurtigruten), starting on Sept. 30th. There is a certain chance to catch northern lights, esp on the way up, since there's no moon then and nights are already 11-12 hours long then. If I get to see them,I'll be on the moving boat most of the timeor in a city for 2-3 hours at most, too short to do a meaningful car trip to escape light pollution. I haven't got much of an idea how much the boat will be rocking, my impression is that it's rather stable if there isn't a storm. But it will be moving anyway, not too slowly at that, mostly in a straight line. Could be okay for those 2+ seconde exposure times one seems to have to expect at f/2.8, maybe even add some nice dynamism with moving land/sea vs a stable sky. Provided the ship doesn't actually vibrate too much.I'll bring myZ6 and a tripod. I'm not too much into UWA photography usually, so I don't have such a lens. Would love a small and affordable 16 or 18mm 2.8, but Nikon refuses to make one. My 24-120/4 and 50/1.8 certainly aren't the right tools for the job - so what do you think I should bring?I guess the main options are buying a Samyang 14/2.8 MF for around €400(which I think is justifyable for the trip and infrequent further use, given it's rather sharp)or renting the Nikon 20/1.8 for €170.I could rent the Nikon 14-24/2.8 for €290 as well plus there's the Laowa 15mm/2.0 MF for €900. But honestly - both of the latter options are too expensive.Would you go for shorter shutter speeds or wider FOV?Thank you for your opinions and best regards, MartinIn October the windy season starts. If you are lucky you will be fine, but even if the sea looks or feels calm, it is never calm. I would not count on the possibility of taking 2+ second shots, but if you are a bit out then the movement might not be noticeable, quite the opposite, some ship detail in focus can give a nice effect to the image, but anyway, the distance and the sea might help "reducing" the motion blur.I can't help with the lenses, since I don't have any UVA, but in my opinion the rental is ridiculously expensive. Personally I'd buy the 14-30S, or the 20S and sell it after the trip. I mean, after two weeks of light use, there shouldn't be any damage to the lens and should give you more than the new price -170€. But I have no idea how easy it is to sell lenses where you live, so take my words lightly.BTW, higher ISO would also be an alternative, not just slower shutter speed.

I‘ve got bad experience with selling (even lightly) used lenses, so I rather go with the rental. It‘s a third of what our cabin costs for a night, so I won‘t complain.I expect high ISO+long exposure times - we‘ll see!

your main problem could be the vibrations from the ship engines and not the rocking.the engines may be running even in port to supply power and heat.i once tried a tripod on a cruise ship for a night shot without success.

Yeah, that‘s a concern for me as well. Maybe gas engines run smoother than the typical heavy oil burning ones - or it migh switch to battery electric even. Anyway, I try not to expect too much and hope I can concentrate on soaking up the live experience rather than stressing out to generate usable images. Plenty great ones to find online, but I’ve never seen it in person, so I guess that sets the priorities.

Martin Datzinger wrote:I‘ve got bad experience with selling (even lightly) used lenses, so I rather go with the rental. It‘s a third of what our cabin costs for a night, so I won‘t complain.You should try the Ice Hotel in Jukkasjärvi... 5* + price and no TV, no toilet in the rooms... also no heating...I expect high ISO+long exposure times - we‘ll see!Enjoy the trip. However, my choice of lens would be the 14-30, not the 20. Those ships are too near the cost some times, so there is a risk for the 20 not being wide enough, and with the 14 you always have the option of zooming in if you need to. I think the 20 might be OK if you are standing on a hill top, but on a ship at sea level, looking up at the coast line... I don't think it will be optimal.

Martin Datzinger wrote:Thank you so much for your detailed answer! 20/1.8 it is, then.That will be a mistake, I'm sure. I live in Northern Norway and have done my share of Northern lights photography, so I can tell you that for the auroras, a 20mm will bewaytoo long.You need as much angle of view as possible and as fast a lens as possible. Ideally, a 14mm f/1.4 lens, if such a lens existed. For reference, I had the AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 and later the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 that I used for shooting the auroras, and both were used exclusively at the widest setting, at least when there was a usable amount of lights.The reason is that, in Northern Norway,the aurora borealis willshow up directly above youas well as in the horizon, since the aurora follows a circle around the North Pole. In addition, you will want to have some landscape in the bottom of the frame to get the auroras in context. For these reasons, a 20mm will becropping the Northern lightsheavily.Even a 14mm will crop, but there are no wider lenses available that are fast enough, so a fast 14-15mm lens is the best available.I would recommend the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 Art if you can rent it (or buy used and sell later). The Laowa 15mm f/2.0 is another good option. While the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 historically has been used by many aurora hunters, it is not a lens I would recommend. One of the issues it has is anextremelevel of vignetting, which is bad when you are already using very high ISO.

After my post above, I think, as you and others have already mentioned, that photographing the auroras from a ship will create some problems: the ship will tip up and down, motor vibration etc. You will need to check the forecast and be ready with camera on tripod when the Northern Lights show up. If you see them and then go to get your camera, they may be gone when you get back with your gear. For these reasons, it may be too frustrating getting usable images of the Northern Lights on a ship.Perhaps it's better to just enjoy the auroras if and when they show up?

I beg to differ: I don’t think that getting everything in the frame will automatically result in a better aurora picture. it’s the same with landscape in general. Many people think that the wider the lens the better when it comes to landscape. But you can have great landscape photos even with a tele lens.I found the 20/1.8 to be a good compromise. But of course this is a also matter of personal taste.

quintana wrote:I beg to differ: I don’t think that getting everything in the frame will automatically result in a better aurora picture. it’s the same with landscape in general. Many people think that the wider the lens the better when it comes to landscape. But you can have great landscape photos even with a tele lens.I found the 20/1.8 to be a good compromise. But of course this is a also matter of personal taste.As I said, I used zooms for auroras for several years without one single shot zoomed in a bit. Have you been North of the Polar Circle when shooting the auroras? If not, then he can disregard your input, in my experience.EDIT: I could add, that I have several times wanted a wider angle, even when having a 14 or 15mm lens on my FX camera.My points, I should add,apply to North of the Polar Circle, where we have the auroras regularly, and not the Southern Norway for instance. As stated in my first post, it has to do with the aurora often being right above us in Tromsø, while the same view from Bergen  will have the auroras much nearer the horizon (towards the North).

OTOH I‘d probably blame myself for all eternity if I hadn‘t even brought the tools along on such an expensive trip. Worst that can happen is losing a few seconds when picking up the tripod and the camera. What‘s happening on deck depends on the circumstances. If there‘s a massive show it would be stupid not to take pictures.

I could rent the Sigma 14/1.8 - ain‘t cheap anymore, though.