In case you didn’t look, or guess:
- Canon 80D, ƒ/3.5, 2 sec, 18mm, ISO 3200, 6000x4000 pixels
- Samsung S21, ƒ/1.8, 1 sec, 5.4mm, ISO 1600, 4032x2268 pixels
I took lots of other shots with both cameras, but selected these two as the best comparison pair.
My fastest lens for the Canon is the 3.5 18-200mm used here, whereas the phone’s lens is 1.8, 2 stops faster. OTOH, the phone’s max ISO is 3200, where 80D goes beyond 12,800. The Canon obviously has much better resolution, but that’s hardly a major concern when shooting the aurora.
You know how they say that generals are always preparing to fight the last war? I think that’s what was responsible for my initial impulse not to take the DSLR on this trip. A year and a half ago I was planning a three-week trip through the Adriatic, and asked for advice about whether to take the DLSR.
The advice of many there confirmed my decision not to take it, and I think that was the right choice. We were walking around a lot, the weather was broiling hot for most of the time, and lugging the Canon would have been a major pain for a relatively small improvement in image quality. The phone was simple, easy, and good enough.
So I headed into this trip with a bias toward that decision. But even a few minutes’ testing with the Canon in the dark the other night highlighted some major operational advantages, entirely apart from image quality.
First, the 80D’s screen is flippable and rotatable, which means that when the camera is tilted up on the tripod, I can adjust the screen to look down at it. This is much more comfortable than having to crouch down to peer up at the phone’s screen when it’s tilted up.
Second, although the 80D has a touch-screen, you can also make all necessary adjustments using its wheel and buttons, whereas touching the screen is obviously the only option for adjustments on the phone. (Except for taking the shot: I have a Bluetooth remote for the phone. I also have a wired remote for the Canon.) In the cold of the Norwegian night, keeping gloves on will be a big advantage.
The Canon has far more flexibility in terms of settings than the Pro mode of the phone, and more importantly for these old eyes, the display for those settings is more readable than the tiny icons and text of the phone’s display.
Finally, WRT the lugging issue, on this trip, my main (perhaps only) use of the DLSR will be on the two bus excursions we’re taking to see the Northern Lights. We’ll do a little hiking to get to good viewing areas, but once we find a place, I expect we’ll be staying there. So it’s not like I’ll be walking for miles with the camera around my neck. For the rest of the time, I can use the phone, just as I did in Europe in 2023.
In short, I’m taking the DSLR.
So I have a few additional questions, especially for @ZonexandScout. The shots above are just the night sky above Swampscott, MA, as seen across Nahant Bay, i.e., light spill from a suburban town on a clear night. Are the aurora going to be dimmer than that? I assumed they would be brighter, and that a shorter exposure than these would do.
In light of that, how important do you think having a faster lens would be? Is the 3.5 really too slow? I’m not going to buy a $400-500 lens just for this trip (I’m not likely to have any desperate need for it in the future), but I can rent an ƒ/1.4 24mm Canon for about $180. It would obviously be better. But better enough?
I’m also considering a new carbon fiber tripod that would be better for the 80D than the cheapie I got from Amazon for my phone. That’s another $120, and I think it’s a priority over a faster lens. What do you think?
Thanks again to everyone for their advice, particularly @ZonexandScout.