Milky Way Exposure Calculator


Use this simple calculator to determine the best exposure to start with for photographing the Milky Way.

This tool was most recently updated May 2, 2017. I’ve updated the ISO calculation and shutter speed calculation to try and maximize dynamic range and minimize star trailing. Now a warning appears if an exposure is too dark.


It’s not perfect for all situations or gear but the calculator here should give you a good place to start with your settings for shooting the night sky. If you’re new to night photography, you can start with the recommendations here and adjust to your preferences.

There are a few things that guide most astrophotographers when deciding which exposure settings to use for photographing the Milky Way. Astrophotography has a lot of variables that will affect what determine the best exposure. Some of them are from the environment: light pollution, moonlight, clouds, etc. and some are in the hands of the photographer: lens focal length, sensor size, minimum f/number, etc.

The calculator here tries to achieve an exposure of -8 EV, which is what I would recommend starting with for most astrophotography in dark sky locations with a regular camera/tripod setup and no fancy tracking equipment. Assuming you don’t have a lot of light pollution or moonlight to deal with, these are very good exposure settings to start with. This calculator was originally featured in my recently updated How to Photograph the Milky Way article for a more complete explanation of the methods I use to make astrophotos.

Making Exposure Adjustments

This calculator is that it’s a one-size fits all solution (which is never perfect) so you may need to adjust based on your results. The calculator tries to determine the best settings to produce a neutral-ish exposure. Usually, this means the resulting image may look unnaturally bright (because you expect an image of a dark sky to look dark) but don’t fret, you can reduce the exposure brightness in post processing which also often reduces noise in the image.

If your exposure is unusably noisy, you may be limited by your equipment or need to enable your in-camera Long Exposure Noise Reduction. If the stars are still streaking as star trails, you may need to reduce your shutter time. Light pollution and moonlight can also make the exposure too bright and a slow lens (high f/number) will result in noisy images. While the settings suggested by the calculator are what I would use in 90% of my astrophotos, you’ll probably need to make some small adjustments. In order to develop a deeper understanding of how successful the exposure is, we usually cannot rely entirely on what the photo looks like on the back of the LCD.

I recommend enabling the histogram view on your camera. Every digital camera is different, but all of them feature a way to view a graph of the exposure. The histogram is usually available by pressing “INFO” or “Display” or the Up/Down arrows when reviewing photos. It really depends on your camera so check your instruction manual.  Typically we will desire a histogram that shows peaks toward the center of the graph from left to right. Sometimes this is not possible if you are using a relatively slow lens and you may be forced to expose to the left. Try to avoid underexposure at all costs. Exposure to the right is generally safe but is uncommon unless there is substantial light pollution in your photograph or if the moon is brightening the sky.

See below for examples of histograms for various exposures of the Milky Way, and how to adjust for them.

how to read your camera's histogram

Understanding how to read your camera’s histogram will help you get the best results from your astrophotography.

Try to push your camera to the limits of its light gathering capability without compromising quality. Check and re-check your image review, zoom in on the LCD to check focus, review the histogram for exposure information and re-compose your frame often. Once you find an exposure you like, you can usually maintain the same exposure throughout the night. If you’re consistently exposing to the left or underexposing, you may need to look for a better lens for astrophotography. Check out my guide on How to Pick a Lens for Milky Way Photography or see my best lens lists for Canon, Nikon and Fuji cameras. You can also print out this histogram guide along with the rest of my Nightscapes Quick Guide to Astrophotography.

About the Calculator:

The calculator uses the exact guidelines that I use to figure out my exposures. Here’s what’s happening in the background for all you math-heads.

Shutter Speed

The shutter speed is calculated based on the focal length of your lens and the size of your camera’s sensor. Longer focal lengths and smaller sensors require shorter shutter speeds to prevent star trailing. This particular calculator uses the equation:

recommendedShutterspeed = 500/(focal length)/(crop factor)

Where (focal length) is your lens focal length (I recommend using your shortest focal length lens) and (crop factor) is the crop factor of your camera’s sensor relative to a full-frame 36mmx24mm sensor. For full-frame sensors it’s 1, APS-C sensors it’s 1.5 and 4/3 sensors it’s 2. I limit the maximum focal length to 300mm because it’s unlikely that you’ll be photographing through a longer lens without an equatorial mount anyway, at which point this calculator becomes useless because you would be able to take much longer exposures.

The calculation is based on the so-called “500 Rule” which many astrophotographers use to determine the shutter speed they should use to maximize light gathering without being long enough to make the stars trail across the sky. Your results will also vary depending on where you’re pointing your camera where photos near the celestial equator will show more star trailing for any given shutter speed.

Finally, I don’t account for your camera’s sensor resolution but that’s intentional. At standard sizes and normal viewing distances, an 8 megapixel image can look the same as a 36 megapixel image. After all, most of us can’t look at photos on any more than an 8 megapixel screen anyways so those extra 28 megapixels aren’t making a difference. (4K UHD 16:9 television is 3840 × 2160 = 8.2 Megapixels.) If you’re a pixel peeper you might disagree with me here. It is possible to achieve sharper pinpoint stars with shorter shutter speeds or tracking mounts but this calculator is made for simple, untracked astrophotography with beginner accessible equipment in mind. All told, this number is, as with all the numbers on the calculator, just a suggestion. I recommend trying it out and adjusting to your preference.

A More Accurate Shutter Speed Calculator

One of our readers and fellow astrophotographers, Thomas Leber, has made an excellent calculator that can more accurately account for your sensor’s pixel density and output a recommended shutter speed bases on your personal threshold preference, in pixels, of how much star trailing you can accept. See his excellent writeup of the methodology and use his shutter speed calculator here.


The f/number should generally be set to the lowest possible number, preferably f/2.8 or lower if your lens supports it. The calculator just uses the minimum f/number rating that you specified for your lens. Lenses with f/numbers of f/4.0 or higher are not recommended because they will not collect enough light for the target exposure value, resulting in noisier images. If you anticipate stopping down to reduce comatic aberration or astigmatism, enter the f/number that you plan to stop down to. Lenses with lower f/numbers are generally better for photographing the Milky Way. For fast 35mm and 50mm prime lenses, particularly when performing panorama stitching, the best combination of brightness,  reduced vignetting and low aberration levels is generally f/2.8.  Check out my article on How to Pick a Lens for Milky Way Photography for a more complete explanation.

f/number = minimum lens f/number


The ISO is calculated based on your aperture and shutter speed both. It’s extrapolated in stops from a “standard” (-7 EV) Milky Way exposure of: 30 seconds, f/2.0, ISO 1600. (There’s no standard actual standard, I just made this up from experience. Think of it like the sunny-16 rule for shooting the Milky Way.) For each stop of variation in the f/number, the ISO is adjusted reciprocally one stop to compensate for the change in brightness but with limits at ISO 800 for lenses f/1.4 and lower, ISO 1600 for lenses f/2 and lower and otherwise generally suggesting ISO 3200 for slower lenses. Additionally, variations in shutter speed away from the “standard” 30 seconds will adjust the ISO based on an “ISO factor” where the factor is 0 near 30 seconds, drops to -1 above 60 seconds, and increases to 1 below 15 seconds. These aren’t discreet stops, but ranges that have worked well form my personal experience. The resulting factor is applied as an exponent to 2 and multiplied by the ISO. The calculation stops at a maximum ISO of ISO 6400 for rather long or slow lenses. Beyond the suggestion of the calulator, ISO 3200 is about the maximum gain you should generally use on most contemporary digital camera sensors in order to achieve a decent balance between amplification (brightness) and dynamic range. ISOs higher than 3200 are OK but often result in overly bright star exposures. To retain the most star color, ISOs between 800 and 3200 are recommended.

recommendedISO = IF (fnumber<=1.4 THEN 800, ELSE IF(fnumber<=2 THEN 1600, ELSE 3200))

Where isofactor = IF(recommendedShutterspeed>=60 THEN -1, ELSE IF(recommendedShutterspeed>=15 THEN 0, ELSE IF(recommendedShutterspeed>=8 THEN 1, ELSE 1)))

Finally, the exposure value is calculated with the equation for exposure value. Our target exposure for shots of the night sky  is -7 EV. This calculation will tell you the actual exposure value of the calculated exposure settings. It might differ from -7 EV because of the “stopped” nature of the calculator but it should be pretty close to -7 EV if you’re not equipment limited. If your lens is too slow, your max ISO too low or your lens too long, you’ll end up with a lower EV, often resulting in a noisier picture.

EV = log2(fnumber^2/recommendedShutterspeed)

If you have any questions about the calculator or astrophotography in general, please feel free to comment below or contact me!

71 Responses

  1. Claire Shickora November 1, 2017 / 12:33 pm

    I’ll be trying my calculated settings at the first opportunity – thanks for all the info!

  2. Tom H. October 22, 2017 / 4:51 am

    Your calculator has problems.
    Setting FF, max ISO 12800, 16mm lens, f/2.8
    Your calculator says 31s at 3200 ISO.

    Change to f/4.0 and leave the rest the same and the calculator returns 31s at 3200 ISO.
    That is definitely wrong.

  3. Dean July 11, 2017 / 2:06 am

    Just a pity not everybody has a “modern camera” I have a old camera per say (canon 400D) fastest iso is 1400 I attended a astrophograpghy course recently whihc had me trialing what i already kind of know.

    so 1400 iso wide open F3.5 30 seconds to 60 seconds appear to work tad noisy but way it is – suggestions welcome and winning lotto numbers are ?

  4. PEF March 23, 2017 / 5:17 am


  5. Wesley October 19, 2016 / 1:35 pm

    Just found your site – this is really helpful. Could you tell me if this method is translatable to film photography?

  6. Matt August 10, 2016 / 4:24 pm

    Hello Norman. Big Fan. I was wondering why the Leica 25mm 1.4 scores so much higher than the Rokinon 12mm f2.0. Its not all that much slower, and you should get a longer exposure with the rokinon. Which do you recommend? They are both close in price, because a friend is selling me the leica, plus I think its more versatile. Thanks!

    • d3photography August 11, 2016 / 9:54 am

      Because of his formula.

      500/25/1.4 = 14.29
      500/12/2 = 20.83

  7. E.Kargar August 2, 2016 / 4:20 am

    Thank you so much for your very helpful tutorials.

  8. Mark Buchholz April 14, 2016 / 9:06 am

    Thanks for the info. But I do have an ISO question. I will have to try the EV settings. I know this is meant for MW shooting. I usually set ISO to 100. Is that way wrong and why? I seem to get really good results. Sony A6000 with SEL20F28. Please tell me more about low ISO. I hate noise and can’t imagine going higher than 800… ?

    • Ian Norman April 15, 2016 / 12:21 pm

      It’s a common misconception that increasing ISO increases noise. In manual mode shooting, for a given shutter time and f/number, higher ISO will actually often show less noise than a lower ISO. You can see an example of this on the a6000 in my a6000 Astrophotography Review under the ISO Invariance section.

  9. Auke March 25, 2016 / 4:06 am

    Thanks for writing this article, it is very helpfull. I took some nice pictures from the aurora boralis with some nice stars in the background.

    Please add the Mitakon Speedmaster 35mm f/0.95 lens

  10. Matt January 12, 2016 / 7:03 pm

    You should add the new Rokinon 21mm F/1.4 to your spreadsheet!

  11. David January 8, 2016 / 7:03 pm


    Great site & tutorials!

    I’ve been looking for a handy tool like this to avoid star trails, which I even tend to get @ 30 seconds. Is there any chance of reducing the minimum ISO to 400? I have an M43 & really don’t like the noise produced @ 1600 on this smaller sensor. I purchased the Voitlander 10.5mm 0.95 lens to minimise high ISO, so was hoping to calculate on 400.

    • David January 8, 2016 / 7:11 pm

      Sorry, just realised the calculator says max not min ISO, so don’t worry about my previous question.

      Out of interest – does the calculator recognise 0.95 (or 1.0) as a legit value?


  12. Gery December 23, 2015 / 11:17 pm

    i live in the middle of cities. i’ put the ISO 1600, and the result are not good ( really bright) even i try to adjust my image inside lightroom. but yesterday i’ve tried to put the ISO 200, f3,5 and i just got a view stars. any solutions?
    Thank you!!

  13. Clint December 18, 2015 / 12:43 pm

    Is it better to shoot with the new sigma 20mm f/1.4 on a full frame or it it better to use a speedbooster with a .71x increase in speed and field of view with the same sigma 20mm f/1.4 on an asp-c making it a 14mm f/1?

    • Ian Norman December 18, 2015 / 5:09 pm

      Neither, it should be identical in total light gathering capability.

  14. TerryW November 26, 2015 / 10:45 pm

    Hi Ian,

    I’m really enjoying your articles and I would love to get some of these great Milky Way shots, I live out in the desert and have lots of good opportunities but my photography budget is limited. I have a Canon Xsi and the ISO only goes up to 1600. I was looking into getting a Rokinon FE14M-C 14mm F2.8 Ultra Wide Lens but am wondering if I will be able to get good Milky Way shots with this lens on my camera?

  15. Will Milner November 17, 2015 / 2:35 am

    Hi Ian,

    First let me say that this is a fantastic resource and very well written, thank you so much for sharing your experience and providing us with this tool.

    I have a question that may seem a little odd…. I have a problem with what I can only perceive as sharpness. In that my shots are over sharp… I know right… First world problems. It just seems to give my shots less of a dreamy feel… Am I just being weird??

    Here is an example of what I mean. Gear used: Nikon D5300, Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM. It is a blend of two exposures, one for the house and then the Milky Way. Not sure you can help… Am I being too fussy ?

    Many thanks,


    • David Sargent March 24, 2016 / 7:51 am

      Your post says you sharpened with a high pass filter. I know this can be a very effective sharpening method, but perhaps was what gave you too sharp of an image. I see why you’d be concerned though. The sharpness in the stars is just a bit overwhelming upon first glance. Try using a different sharpening method or just lowering the opacity on the layer that you applied the HP filter to.

  16. Vitaly November 12, 2015 / 4:30 am

    Hello Ian,
    Can you show a couple of photos of the same place taken with different lenses?
    e.g. between your favourite 24mm f1.4 and something like 8mm/f2.8

  17. Rico October 21, 2015 / 9:16 am

    Hi, is there any tweak to the formula if your using a lens converter? For example, the Sony A6000 is great for buying converters to use older lenses like Minolta MD/MC, I have a Boyer 14MM that was for a micro 3/4s with a converter to e-mount. Does that make focal change like to 16 or 18mm, or is it a factor change like 1.75 vs 1.5 for the aps-c?

    • Ian Norman October 21, 2015 / 12:52 pm

      The best way to look at use of adapted lenses is to just enter the actual focal length of the lens (the one written on the lens, so in your case 14mm) and the proper sensor size.

  18. Andrew September 30, 2015 / 1:34 pm

    Hello Ian, what about Nikon 15mm f/3.5? Is this a good lens for astrography?

    • Ian Norman September 30, 2015 / 4:34 pm

      On a full frame camera it should be just fine. It’s a littler underwhelming in APS-C however as many kit lenses are already similar.

  19. Keith August 14, 2015 / 7:42 am

    Ian, any chance of adding APS-H as a sensor size option to this please?

    Great stuff as always and thanks for sharing.


  20. Mike Aubrey June 4, 2015 / 9:13 am

    So this calculator is based on the assumption of using a rectilinear lens. How would things change when a fisheye lens comes into play?

  21. Alex May 15, 2015 / 8:11 am

    Hi Ian
    Thanks for the calculator! It helps a lot…
    I think in the script is also a mistake.
    You can’t put the iso over 3200. If I take 6400 the text below says 3200!?!?

    • Ian Norman May 22, 2015 / 2:12 pm

      The calculator usually will not suggest ISOs higher than 3200 in order to maximize dynamic range.

  22. Dave M. April 19, 2015 / 9:06 pm

    For EV-6.4 EV (Target is -7 EV)
    does that mean on manual exposure you want to shoot to underexpose by 6.4 stops? Thanks.

    • brad May 10, 2015 / 3:14 am

      i think the sense is that if your camera “light meter” said the exposure was Ok, you’d actually want to “underexpose” by 6 or 7 EV in order to compensate for the camera attempting to expose the 99% fully black night sky area as “18% grey”

      Similar to how you’d underexpose a photo of a singer on stage under very bright lights against a dark background – IE to stop the face from blowing out to solid white…..

      (or at least that’s how it seems to me!!!!)

    • Ian Norman May 22, 2015 / 2:54 pm

      -7EV is just indicating that this is an exposure for dark conditions. For comparison, a daytime sunlit exposure is about 15EV.

  23. Schorsch March 26, 2015 / 2:39 pm

    Great website with great informations.
    Thanks for sharing this.

    One Question: Is it possible to calculate the right time for a fisheye lens?
    The time for a 16mm fisheye lens must be less than a normal 16mm lens.


  24. NahStep March 17, 2015 / 5:32 pm

    I put these formulas in Excel but I’m getting EV -2.8. What am I doing wrong?
    f = 1.4
    focal length = 24
    crop factor = 1.5

  25. JS March 7, 2015 / 2:29 am

    I’ve really enjoyed your site and have used it extensively as a reference for educating, refer other to it, bought my first astro lens from your link, etc. so first and foremost, thank you!

    I’ve used with some success the Rokinon 16mm f/2 lens in a cropped sensor camera, enjoyed it, got great results, but astro and night photography. I’ve since moved to a Nikon D750 to get into a full frame camera. I was hoping I could get your thought on the Samyang / Rokinon 14mm f2.8 for astro photography. Yes, the NIkkon 11/24 is a great option, but it’s also $1200 🙂
    Any thoughts on the 14/2.8?

    Much thanks!

  26. Jackie February 5, 2015 / 9:25 am

    Thanks for really useful article and nice to have the pdf download. Is it possible to put it up a copy without the blue background – it trashes my colour printer cartridges.

    Thanks again!

  27. Thomas Leber January 9, 2015 / 7:09 am

    Thx for this great tutorial and the nice calculator! I used it a lot and it helped me to make nice pictures for myself and my blog.
    After reading of the post I was all the time thinking that the rule of thumb for the shutter speed is a bit in accurate. I tried an other approach on my blog.
    Maybe you can find the time to review this approach.


    • Ian Norman January 9, 2015 / 2:41 pm

      Thomas, I read your article and liked it a lot. I think it makes a lot of sense. Taking into account the pixel density of the sensor is definitely a great way to back calculate the shutter time. I also like that you can use a threshold variable to give some leeway for movement. It’s the threshold that interests me more: what threshold values relative to the whole image size (in percentage perhaps) is acceptable for normal viewing? I think that being able to suggest a commonly accepted threshold level for standard viewing distances would be helpful. Especially with some of these new very high resolution sensors (like the Nikon D810 or Sony a7R), there almost always will be some star trailing, even at very short shutter speeds.

      I think that’s why the one-size-fits-all method of the 500 rule is OK as a best fit guide. A test shot, check and re-adjustment is then all that’s necessary.

      Also, I like your assumption of the sky as a cylinder but I’m wondering if we can do it one step greater and actually assume it’s a sphere. This would require inputting the latitude of the framing of the center of the image, and basing the calculation on the arc sweep of that particular latitude. In this regard, shots made closer to the poles will be able to use longer shutter speeds (just like in real life). This, however, would only be most useful for longer lenses where more of the whole of the image is on a similar latitude so maybe it’s better to just assume a cylinder. Just a thought…

      Overall, I really like it. I’ll link to your calculator in the article above.

    • Thomas Leber January 18, 2015 / 4:11 am

      Hi Ian!
      Thx a lot for the feedback and the link!

      A general percentage would be nice, but I think there is a lot of personal meanings about that, and it is heavily depending on the targeted end size of the picture.
      The idea I had was that you choose the threshold, and then the minimum mega pixel value you can life with. Let’s say you have a Nikon 810 and you targeted MP are 20. Then the calculator will give you a worst case value. As you said, the factor where you pointing at (north, south) influences the maximum time too. So the calculator ensures that, no matter in which direction you point, the shutter speed is not to low.

      But i’ll keep an eye on that and will play a bit with the thresholds. 🙂

      Your idea of a sphere is nice. In the beginning I thought also about a sphere, but since the exact coordinates and the pointing direction is not so easy to put in an web calculator, I used the cylinder.. :
      But, a friend of mine is programming an Open-Source Android App right now, there may will be the sphere implemented.

      Thanks a lot again! And continue with this really nice work here! After your review, i ordered today the Samyang 24mm 1.4. Hopefully mine will be ok a the first shipping. I also will go with an Focus Chip. Let’s see!

      Best Thomas

    • Thomas Leber November 29, 2015 / 9:38 am

      Hi Ian,

      it’s some time ago that I talked about an android app for my calculator, and finally i had enough time to realize this. 🙂
      If you want have a try, i’m glad to get some feedback about the look and feel!

      Night Fox – Night Sky Shutter Speed Calculator


  28. Dale January 6, 2015 / 8:50 am

    Calculator’s not working anymore. Also, there’s a javascript error “TypeError: image is undefined” at scripts.js: 73.

    • Ian Norman January 6, 2015 / 11:13 pm

      Dale, I think I found the javascript error and fixed it. Seems to be working fine on my end. Might require a cache clearing on your browser but I hope it’s fixed for you too.

  29. Krzysiek December 18, 2014 / 2:32 pm

    How come, this calculator shows that i need shorter exposure for APSC sensor than Full Frame with the same other settings?

    • Ian Norman December 21, 2014 / 11:05 pm

      The calculator figures shutter speed based on effective focal length. The longer the effective focal length, the smaller the field of view and the shorter the exposure needed to reduce the effect of star trails. This is, of course, just a starting guideline.

  30. James April 24, 2014 / 2:08 am

    Off to Boa Vista later on this year which has very dark skies. Taking my 6d to hopefully capture some great shots of the Milky Way. Thank you so much for this great guide!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *