Full moon harder to get detail from?

Vegetable Police · Jun 2, 2015

I don't really understand what's going on here, maybe someone can help.

I was able to get this image of the moon last week.

I got excited with the full moon tonight, and out of hundreds of shots, none had any sharpness and this was the best I could get. I didn't crop it, cause it was such a letdown of a photo.

I sent back my original sx50, because I found a refurbished one from the Canon estore for cheaper. Do I have a dud now, or is this normal?

--
Eat your fruits and vegetables!

RLBur · Jun 2, 2015

It is more difficult to get a good moon shot when the moon is full, you have all that light reflected back at you, you have no contrast.

Frizzen · Jun 2, 2015

Yes a full moon is harder. This is about my best with my SX 50. You ought

to try Saturn.

OzarkAggie · Jun 2, 2015

Frizzen said:
Yes a full moon is harder. This is about my best with my SX 50. You ought

to try Saturn.

Just had to give a try. A bit overdone, crunchy, but you have a lot of detail captured despite the luminance. I have a good spot for capturing a moon coming over the horizon. Guess I need an ephemeris.

User4286416121 · Jun 3, 2015

Full moon the light is coming more direct. With a partial moon, the sun is coming from an angle. Shadows giving contrast to the shapes. Something like that.

Great shot!

lanefAU · Jun 3, 2015

When light is grazing over a surface from a direction, it always reveals the texture and more details. It is called directional lighting.

Stephen McDonald · Jun 3, 2015

Yes, the detail from a full Moon is reduced over what you see from a partial Moon. It's because when it's full, the light is hitting it straight on and the edges of the craters have no shadows to define them. I prefer a Moon about 80% full, for the best effect.

Here's a shot from a few days ago with a Sony HX400V, to give a comparison to SX50 photos. This was done in the 7.5-MP mode, compared to a full 15-MP shot in the 16:9 aspect. This gives a 1.44X magnification effect and is equivalent to 1,728mm.

--
Steve McDonald

http://www.ipernity.com/home/305883

My Flickr Album
My Vimeo Video Album
My Places on Google Earth and Slam Code Directory on OneDrive:

https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=229807ce52dd4fe0

stevenic · Jun 3, 2015

Hi all, this is my moon shot with the sx50. cheers Steve.

Mark9473 · Jun 3, 2015

What everybody else said. Additionally, your Full Moon image is not precisely in focus.

Vegetable Police · Jun 3, 2015

That's the problem, I don't understand why it wasn't able to grab focus. It was in manual focus set to infinity just like my first picture.

Vegetable Police · Jun 3, 2015

Thanks for the comments everyone. Makes sense with the contrasting side light. Still not sure if there is a focus issue with my refurbished camera. I'll have to take it out in nature today and see what my bird photos look like.

filibuster · Jun 3, 2015

For a start, I would be dubious about the ‘infinity focus’ setting. You could be focusing beyond infinity! (Although I’m not entirely sure that applies to bridge cameras as with DSLR's - someone help me here).

Secondly, your full moon shot at 1/30th second is, I would suggest, not fast enough to freeze an object that is travelling in excess of 2000mph. (And that’s discounting the earth’s rotational effect too.)

To compound your problems, atmospheric shimmer of the night sky after a warm summer’s day, plus the pollutants in the atmosphere do nothing to help the cause. So take heart; there is probably absolutely nothing wrong with your camera. The night sky is probably one of the trickiest subjects to photograph and maybe you are diving in to this arena before you’ve really got to know the SX50.

Vegetable Police · Jun 3, 2015

Thanks for the reassurance

I think I got lucky with that first shot. There wasn't a cloud in the sky, and it was actually really cold for a spring night. Then I jumped to conclusions when I got the refurbished camera (hoping nothing was wrong with it) and couldn't get a clear shot. I'll keep practicing

Cjar · Jun 3, 2015

And of course, your shooting from Earth. It's much easier to photograph the moon from Mars, or so I've heard.

Cjar · Jun 3, 2015

Frizzen said:
Yes a full moon is harder. This is about my best with my SX 50. You ought

to try Saturn.

What are the details on your Saturn shot?

Vegetable Police · Jun 3, 2015

I'll take a lift if you're goin lol. I wonder when mars is coming back into view, would love to get a picture of it!

Frizzen · Jun 3, 2015

Here is Mars and Juipter for you with my SX 50. Also a moon shot

that is not full. You can capture a lot more detail

Vegetable Police · Jun 4, 2015

Wow nicely done

What were your settings for Jupiter?

User4286416121 · Jun 4, 2015

Vegetable Police said:
Wow nicely done What were your settings for Jupiter?

Tripod, delay, Hubble? No kidding really well done!

David Tallboys · Jun 4, 2015

I'm glad your shot was bad, because my one with SX60 was too, but even worse.

Mine was:

Auto

1/160

f6.3

ISO 500

I have now picked up some tips for next time so thanks for starting the thread.

Full moon harder to get detail from?

Forum Enthusiast

Community Leader

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Cjar

Guest

Cjar

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Keyboard shortcuts