[axle01 (Alan)]

Originally Posted by Meru

Try looking at pixelpeeper.com. They have really good sample images and you can choose lens/body combo and see what others have taken. If it's purely for stars and nothing else, just check out reviews and see the edge sharpness fully open since in the center they'd be similar.

The 24mm does have a bit of vignette and you might find yourself hard-pressed trying to lighten the edges up without showing too much noise from the ISOs needed for night shots. And if the stars are distorted at f/1.4 (Chances are they will be) and you end up shooting at f/2.8 or higher, not much gain from having such a fast prime in the first place. I find that shooting at f/3.2 on my 35mm + D800 is good enough, but if I was getting a dedicated lens for stars, I'd get a cheap 2nd hand zoom.

From my experience it makes life easier being able to zoom in and out when in the dark (Coming from a guy who shoots with nothing but his 3 primes!) and a cheaper lens means any dew or fungus damage will be easier on your wallet. Plus you probably won't need super wide apertures given the ISO performance of the D3S so another reason why a cheap, light f/3.5 zoom will be just fine. If I had the money to spare and would be shooting during the day too, then I'd vote for a 14-24. If you're still really keen on a fast prime, go wider than a 24mm and then that way you can always crop if needed. My 2c

Meru

Appreciate that Meru