Trying to photo the moon

David1961 said:

Kobie M-C said:

... Another issue is some lenses just struggle with focusing against a strong backlight which is what you're essentially doing.

Click to expand...

A full moon is not backlit. The moon is being lit by the sun infront of it. If the moon was backlit, the face of the moon we see would be in shadow.

Click to expand...

I know that. But that's not how the camera interprets it. The camera sees it as light coming towards it, hence the same as backlit. The light is still in front of the lens shining towards it. That's how a camera sees it. And that's all I was talking about.

No different than taking a flashlight and putting it between you and the camera. Just for fun, throw a subject between you and the camera. The source of light location is the same, in front of the lens shining into it.

No problem. I was just clarifying what you posted.

@LordKOTL,What exactly is meant by 'AF on a limb'?
And, 'Phase Detect' Auto Focus?
By lens AF calibration, my camera has lens peripheral illumination correction enabled if that's what you mean?
I'll try a lot of shots at F11 and auto focus next time, see how that goes.

@DJMusic, I shall try hanging something from the centre column, good idea if it helps make it more stable.

@KobieM-C, Yes, I'm on spot metering. I'll put the camera into shutter or aperture priority.

@David1961, Yeah, I'm shooting in Raw. I'm not really sure yet how to read the histogram for clipping, so I'll do some googling. But I'm guessing it mustn't be spiking on the left and right sides.

Merlin5 said:

DJMusic, great photos.

I shot in manual focus for the ones I posted. I'd love to buy a teleconverter or a 600mm+ lens and get better detail but can't afford them after just buying the gear I now own. I'm definitely going to attempt a waning moon this week if the cloud cover stays away, but I'm in London, shocking for weather! I'll focus on the edge of the moon to try and pick up crater detail.

Click to expand...

Regarding focus, the best and most reliable way to achieve good focus on the Moon is to use the camera's autofocus. If I'm recalling correctly, you shoot with Canon gear. One Shot AF is the way to go.

Good luck.

Kobie M-C said:

David1961 said:

Kobie M-C said:

... Another issue is some lenses just struggle with focusing against a strong backlight which is what you're essentially doing.

Click to expand...

A full moon is not backlit. The moon is being lit by the sun infront of it. If the moon was backlit, the face of the moon we see would be in shadow.

Click to expand...

I know that. But that's not how the camera interprets it. The camera sees it as light coming towards it, hence the same as backlit.

Click to expand...

That's not what "backlit" means. When the sun or primary source of light is behind the subject and in front of the camera, the subject is said to be backlit. Another way of thinking about it, is that the subject is between the primary light source and the photographer. There is a potential the subject will be seen in silhouette. Being backlit, the side of the subject facing you and your camera appears to be in shadow. If the primary light source is especially bright (e.g. the Sun), glare from that source can wash out or add unwanted flare artifacts to a photo. It can also look pretty cool. Here's an example of a backlit Moon as a photo subject:


2017 "Great American Eclipse". The Moon is between the Sun and Earth. It is backlit and seen in silhouette.

In the case of a full or gibbous Moon, the Moon is frontlit or mostly frontlit. Earth is between the Moon and Sun. The Sun's light directly illuminates the lunar hemisphere facing Earth. The primary light source (e.g. the Sun) is behind or only slightly off to the side of the camera and photographer. Here's last night's frontlit Moon:


The craters along the right lunar limb can be described as "sidelit". The primary light source (the Sun) is off to the side. The shadows they cast are visible in the photo and add interest to the image...at least, to that part of the image. Most of the visible lunar surface - the left side - is totally frontlit. There is very little shadow to add definition or character.

During a new or crescent phase - the Sun rises or sets at the same time as the Moon (new), or shortly before or after (crescent) - the Sun can be said to be behind or mostly behind the Moon. In this scenario, sunlight will reflect off Earth's atmosphere and illuminate the lunar hemisphere in shadow. Especially during the crescent phases, it's pretty easy to adjust your exposure settings to capture the shaded side of the Moon, which is visible due to earthshine...sunlight reflected off Earth's atmosphere.


The thin bright crescent is directly illuminated by the Sun. The darker, shaded portion of the lunar surface visible in this photo is front illuminated by sunlight reflecting off Earth's atmosphere; earthshine.

Kobie M-C said:

The light is still in front of the lens shining towards it. That's how a camera sees it. And that's all I was talking about.

Click to expand...

Portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, sports, street and other photos made during the daytime using ambient sunlight as the primary source of illumination are mostly frontlit. Just as when photographing a full Moon, sunlight reflects off the subject, is collected by the lens and focused on the sensor to make an image. The subjects in this scenario are not in any way, shape or form, backlit. These are frontlit subjects. For example...



Here, are a few examples of backlit landscapes with the primary light source behind the subject, the subject in silhouette or the light source visible in the photo.

Kobie M-C said:

No different than taking a flashlight and putting it between you and the camera. Just for fun, throw a subject between you and the camera. The source of light location is the same, in front of the lens shining into it.

Click to expand...

If you were making a photograph of the flashlight shining into your lens, that's not a backlit subject. Being backlit refers to a subject illuminated by an outside source. The flashlight is the light source and is emitting light directly into the lens. It's neither frontlit nor backlit. It's the source.

Turn the flashlight around and shine it onto a vase of flowers on a table. If you make a photograph of the flowers, they are frontlit. While the light source is not "behind the camera," the light source is emitting light in the same direction as the lens is pointed. Light reflects off the flowers and vase and enters the camera lens. This is a classic frontlit subject situation.

--
Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ
http://www.billferris.photoshelter.com

Bill Ferris said:

Kobie M-C said:

David1961 said:

Kobie M-C said:

... Another issue is some lenses just struggle with focusing against a strong backlight which is what you're essentially doing.

Click to expand...

A full moon is not backlit. The moon is being lit by the sun infront of it. If the moon was backlit, the face of the moon we see would be in shadow.

Click to expand...

I know that. But that's not how the camera interprets it. The camera sees it as light coming towards it, hence the same as backlit.

Click to expand...

That's not what "backlit" means. When the sun or primary source of light is behind the subject and in front of the camera, the subject is said to be backlit. Another way of thinking about it, is that the subject is between the primary light source and the photographer. There is a potential the subject will be seen in silhouette. Being backlit, the side of the subject facing you and your camera appears to be in shadow. If the primary light source is especially bright (e.g. the Sun), glare from that source can wash out or add unwanted flare artifacts to a photo. It can also look pretty cool. Here's an example of a backlit Moon as a photo subject:


2017 "Great American Eclipse". The Moon is between the Sun and Earth. It is backlit and seen in silhouette.

In the case of a full or gibbous Moon, the Moon is frontlit or mostly frontlit. Earth is between the Moon and Sun. The Sun's light directly illuminates the lunar hemisphere facing Earth. The primary light source (e.g. the Sun) is behind or only slightly off to the side of the camera and photographer. Here's last night's frontlit Moon:


The craters along the right lunar limb can be described as "sidelit". The primary light source (the Sun) is off to the side. The shadows they cast are visible in the photo and add interest to the image...at least, to that part of the image. Most of the visible lunar surface - the left side - is totally frontlit. There is very little shadow to add definition or character.

During a new or crescent phase - the Sun rises or sets at the same time as the Moon (new), or shortly before or after (crescent) - the Sun can be said to be behind or mostly behind the Moon. In this scenario, sunlight will reflect off Earth's atmosphere and illuminate the lunar hemisphere in shadow. Especially during the crescent phases, it's pretty easy to adjust your exposure settings to capture the shaded side of the Moon, which is visible due to earthshine...sunlight reflected off Earth's atmosphere.


The thin bright crescent is directly illuminated by the Sun. The darker, shaded portion of the lunar surface visible in this photo is front illuminated by sunlight reflecting off Earth's atmosphere; earthshine.

Bill Ferris said:

The light is still in front of the lens shining towards it. That's how a camera sees it. And that's all I was talking about.

Click to expand...

Portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, sports, street and other photos made during the daytime using ambient sunlight as the primary source of illumination are mostly frontlit. Just as when photographing a full Moon, sunlight reflects off the subject, is collected by the lens and focused on the sensor to make an image. The subjects in this scenario are not in any way, shape or form, backlit. These are frontlit subjects. For example...



Here, are a few examples of backlit landscapes with the primary light source behind the subject, the subject in silhouette or the light source visible in the photo.

Bill Ferris said:

No different than taking a flashlight and putting it between you and the camera. Just for fun, throw a subject between you and the camera. The source of light location is the same, in front of the lens shining into it.

Click to expand...

If you were making a photograph of the flashlight shining into your lens, that's not a backlit subject. Being backlit refers to a subject illuminated by an outside source. The flashlight is the light source and is emitting light directly into the lens. It's neither frontlit nor backlit. It's the source.

Turn the flashlight around and shine it onto a vase of flowers on a table. If you make a photograph of the flowers, they are frontlit. While the light source is not "behind the camera," the light source is emitting light in the same direction as the lens is pointed. Light reflects off the flowers and vase and enters the camera lens. This is a classic frontlit subject situation.

Click to expand...

Uhh, okay. I know what the technical meaning is, but last I checked, this is the beginner area. I was only trying to explain (as I said) in the simplest terms possible how a camera sees things (which is not how we see things).

This isn't about the technical attributes of backlit, front lit, side lit, split lit. This is about how the camera itself interprets light, regardless if it's the subject or not. It's the source of the brightest spot being illuminated and where that source is actually facing/coming from. The moon beams light down to the earth (regardless of it being reflected from the sun) the only difference is there's nothing between the lens and the moon except the air. Throw a plane between the lens and the moon, yes the plane is now the backlit subject, but why? Because the moon is still beaming light down in front of your lens. That's all I was saying. Physics is physics, it's not going to change just because you put a subject (as long as the light intensity remains the same) between your lens and the light facing your lens, or remove the subject. The light is still facing into/towards the lens. Same thing as being lit. But I digress. I've said what I said to help keep this as simple as possible for the person who needed the help. Not get into a debate about technical terms and the applications of the specifics surrounding them. I hope the OP can now get some killer moon shots with all the suggestions offered in this thread!

Merlin5 said:

DJMusic, great photos.

I shot in manual focus for the ones I posted. I'd love to buy a teleconverter or a 600mm+ lens and get better detail but can't afford them after just buying the gear I now own. I'm definitely going to attempt a waning moon this week if the cloud cover stays away, but I'm in London, shocking for weather! I'll focus on the edge of the moon to try and pick up crater detail.

Yeah, I'm shooting in RAW. I just think my main problem is not getting sharp enough focus as can be seen in my unedited images, and I don't know how to improve that.

Using the LCD screen, I tweaked the focus ring on the Tamron 70-300mm lens to what looked like the most in focus. When I zoom x10 on the screen to focus, the moon shakes around, so I had to steady the camera to reduce the moon shaking all over the place while turning the focus ring. I was on a tripod. Most of the images I took were using the 10 second timer. I found that after half pressing the shutter button to focus, I was able to take the shots with only the mildest press. It felt like I hadn't pressed it enough but it worked. I hoped that would have reduced any vibration. Or maybe it doesn't matter if the camera shakes a bit when pressing the shutter button once it's on a self timer?

Click to expand...

If the adjustment knobs on the tripod are all tight and your view through the viewfinder is still moving enough that you can't find proper focus while on a tripod, I'd say you probably want to invest in a more sturdy tripod.

Even a very sturdy tripod can benefit from a bit of weight on the center column. I didn’t used to believe this. But even my Manfrotto 190 and my heavy Benro tripods benefit from this, especially when using very long lenses.

A quality tripod is a great investment, as is a good head. I bought two lesser quality tripods early in my photographic journey-not such a good idea. This is a case where you pay now, or pay later.

Cheers.

I'm wondering if I should buy a remote button. Wouldn't that eliminate any micro movements from a tripod? I tried the moon again tonight using auto focus in Av and manual. I didn't use liveview this time, I focused through the viewfinder. But because I'm focusing on such a distant object at 300mm it's easy to notice the most minor shakes through the viewfinder when pressing any buttons. Even though I used the 10 second timer, I'm wondering if pressing the back button to focus which causes minor shake and then the shutter button which also causes minor shake is enough to throw off pin sharp focus.

Anyway, how did I do this time? I think it's a better effort than my full moon. I had a few shots wide open at 5.6 which were similar to this, but this f10 one seemed to come out the best.

Merlin5 said:

I'm wondering if I should buy a remote button. Wouldn't that eliminate any micro movements from a tripod? I tried the moon again tonight using auto focus in Av and manual. I didn't use liveview this time, I focused through the viewfinder. But because I'm focusing on such a distant object at 300mm it's easy to notice the most minor shakes through the viewfinder when pressing any buttons. Even though I used the 10 second timer, I'm wondering if pressing the back button to focus which causes minor shake and then the shutter button which also causes minor shake is enough to throw off pin sharp focus.

Anyway, how did I do this time? I think it's a better effort than my full moon. I had a few shots wide open at 5.6 which were similar to this, but this f10 one seemed to come out the best.

Click to expand...

You're getting there. Your image looks fairly sharp. But you need to figure out why this image is so noisy. You said the wide open shots looked about the same. Did you use the same shutter speed? They shoud have less noise. Maybe you could share the best of the wide open images.

A lot of making good Moon photos is post-processing, and you need a clean image to do that.

David

Merlin5 said:

... Anyway, how did I do this time? I think it's a better effort than my full moon. I had a few shots wide open at 5.6 which were similar to this, but this f10 one seemed to come out the best.

Click to expand...

You did pretty good

Did you apply any noise removal?

Just about everyone's sooc raw or jpeg will need some cleaning up and enhancing.

Your image comes up pretty good, at least I would be very happy with it, after I applied some noise removal, a bit of extra contrast and slight sharpening.

David 1961, thanks. Very nice I can see the difference between your edits and mine. Yours is easier on the eye, smoother and less harsh, more natural looking. Most noticeable on the darker grey patches of the moon. It's great how you smooth it all out yet keep sharpness. When I edited I added a little sharpness but it starts to highlight noise. But then If I use the masking slider in the Detail/Sharpening tab, it sort of reduces the noise but also the sharpness, so I don't know what it is you're doing to get noise reduction and keep sharpness. Is there a slider in lightroom I'm not using/overlooking specifically for noise removal?

DavidWright2010 said:

DavidWright2010 said:

You're getting there. Your image looks fairly sharp. But you need to figure out why this image is so noisy. You said the wide open shots looked about the same. Did you use the same shutter speed? They shoud have less noise. Maybe you could share the best of the wide open images.

Click to expand...

A lot of making good Moon photos is post-processing, and you need a clean image to do that.

David

Click to expand...

Thanks David for your observations. Yeah I guess still too much noise. I can only guess that my images aren't clean enough. And the only reason I can think of might be that I need a remote button to take photos of the moon. Camera was on the tripod, I used spot metering, auto focus and put the centre focal point on the right side edge of the moon.

Here's two unedited photos at f5.6, one with the same shutter speed and ISO as my f10 image. You can see that there really isn't sharp focus on the majority of the moon, it's kind of blurry, and I'm guessing that's the reason why noise shows in post? And I'm guessing there isn't sharp enough focus because perhaps of micro movement when focusing or when pressing the shutter to take the photo. Other than that, I have no clue.

Merlin5 said:

photos at f5.6, one with the same shutter speed and ISO as my f10 image. You can see that there really isn't sharp focus on the majority of the moon, it's kind of blurry, and I'm guessing that's the reason why noise shows in post? And I'm guessing there isn't sharp enough focus because perhaps of micro movement when focusing or when pressing the shutter to take the photo. Other than that, I have no clue.

Click to expand...

If...

• You were outside...
• The Moon was well up in the sky...
• You were not shooting above roofs that may have been radiating heat...
• The camera and lens were on a tripod...
• You focused using the camera's AF and...
• You used a timer to delay the exposure by 6-10 seconds after pressing the shutter release...

I would look into the source of the vibration in the second image. I'm assuming you did not change focus or the camera's set up between the two photos. If so, there must have been an environmental factor that intermittently introduced vibration.

Was it windy? Were you near a road with heavy traffic? Was there foot traffic near you? If so, were you set up on the ground or on a constructed platform of some sort? Sometimes, vibration from vehicle or foot traffic is strong enough to translate through the ground, a bridge or other elevated platform and up through the tripod legs to introduce subtle vibrations that will be captured during an exposure. If your tripod has a center column with a hook at the bottom, you might try hanging your camera bag on the hook to add some mass and stability to the tripod.

Does the 5D MarkII have a mirror up function? In this mode, the mirror goes up and a there's a timer delay of 5-10 seconds before the curtain actuates and an exposure is made? This combined with an exposure timer delay can help eliminate any vibration induced by the mechanics of the camera.

--
Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ

Merlin5 said:

David 1961, thanks. Very nice I can see the difference between your edits and mine. Yours is easier on the eye, smoother and less harsh, more natural looking. Most noticeable on the darker grey patches of the moon. It's great how you smooth it all out yet keep sharpness. When I edited I added a little sharpness but it starts to highlight noise. But then If I use the masking slider in the Detail/Sharpening tab, it sort of reduces the noise but also the sharpness, so I don't know what it is you're doing to get noise reduction and keep sharpness. Is there a slider in lightroom I'm not using/overlooking specifically for noise removal?

DavidWright2010 said:

Merlin5 said:

You're getting there. Your image looks fairly sharp. But you need to figure out why this image is so noisy. You said the wide open shots looked about the same. Did you use the same shutter speed? They shoud have less noise. Maybe you could share the best of the wide open images.

Click to expand...

A lot of making good Moon photos is post-processing, and you need a clean image to do that.

David

Click to expand...

Thanks David for your observations. Yeah I guess still too much noise. I can only guess that my images aren't clean enough. And the only reason I can think of might be that I need a remote button to take photos of the moon. Camera was on the tripod, I used spot metering, auto focus and put the centre focal point on the right side edge of the moon.

Here's two unedited photos at f5.6, one with the same shutter speed and ISO as my f10 image. You can see that there really isn't sharp focus on the majority of the moon, it's kind of blurry, and I'm guessing that's the reason why noise shows in post? And I'm guessing there isn't sharp enough focus because perhaps of micro movement when focusing or when pressing the shutter to take the photo. Other than that, I have no clue.

Click to expand...

Your 2 results here are very different, even though the only difference in the exif is that the second is a longer exposure. (I try to take at least 2 exposures for every change I make, in case I inadvertantly bumped the tripod or something.)

Here I show todays result: 1/160th sec, 1/100th sec, and then yesterdays (at 400%)



The 1/100th sec (center) is more blurred, but to me it looks more like an air turbulance problem or a focus problem rather than bumping the tripod. (I like to look at bits of a crater wall light by the rising sun - beyond the terminator on the far right - since motion blur (shake) will look a lot different from other types of blur.)

But the 1/160th (LHS) is almost as sharp as the f/10 photo from yesterday (RHS). And it has much less noise. I would try closing down 1 stop from f/5.6 and see if that sharpens up things more. (And take several exposures for each setting.)

Looking at the CA at the bottom for today's photos, did you re-focus between them? The LHS image show no fringing while the center one does.

Merlin,

First, wow, what dramatic improvement. You should be very proud of just how far you've taken your images!! You've upped your game an order of magnitude.

I have read other posters, and there is some good advice. Noise is likely not an ISO issue since you're shooting at ISO 200. It looks like there are a couple of "camera" things, and maybe a couple of outside influences.

1. Shutter speed - 1/160 is quite slow for a 300mm lens. With the crop factor, 1/500 is probably a better speed to take a moon image. As a general rule, shutter speed should be 1/focal length.
2. Your aperture is maybe a bit wide at f5.6. Believe it or not, even with such a distant subject, f8.0 is probably going to give you a slightly sharper image. I'm not sure how much of this is the actual increase in depth of field and how much might be that f8.0 is typically a sweet spot in a lens. Y'know what they say about the rule of landscape photography--f8 and be there. =)
3. With 1) and 2) above, let your ISO be the variable for brightness. Most modern cameras can handle at least ISO 800 with little noise. I expect your noise is from cropping and/or a bit too much contrast or clarity. Your software cannot create pixels that are not there, and a heavy crop will always make your images a bit more sensitive to apparent noise due to processing.
4. One of the respondents talked about wind. Even one a good tripod, the idea of hanging your camera bag from the tripod will help give just that little bit of extra stability, and thus sharpness.
5. A remote shutter release can help, and the mirror-up functionality also helps. Typically in mirror-up mode, you press the button once to raise the mirror, then press again to capture the image. Just give it a few seconds after the first press to allow the camera to become completely still. No need to spend a fortune on a release, just find one that is well-rated. I think I got mine for around $20US (brand is Pixel). If your camera can be controlled by your phone, you might get off for free!

There is a bit of chromatic aberration in the images, and this is easily corrected in most any image editing software.

Again, congratulations, and happy shooting.

DJ- I don't mean to offend, but some of the photographic rules you quoted to Merlin are not appropiate to astrophotography.

DJMusic said:

Merlin,

First, wow, what dramatic improvement. You should be very proud of just how far you've taken your images!! You've upped your game an order of magnitude.

I have read other posters, and there is some good advice. Noise is likely not an ISO issue since you're shooting at ISO 200. It looks like there are a couple of "camera" things, and maybe a couple of outside influences.

1. Shutter speed - 1/160 is quite slow for a 300mm lens. With the crop factor, 1/500 is probably a better speed to take a moon image. As a general rule, shutter speed should be 1/focal length.

Click to expand...

He's using a tripod. Without tracking, you can go as short as 1/50th for a 300 mm lens. The Moon image I showed down-thread, taken with a 600 mm lens, was 1/80th sec.

Crop factor is meaningless in AP. What matters is 'pixels across the target'. Whether your 300 mm lens is on an aps-c camera, or a full-frame camera, you will have the same number of pixels across the Moon if both sensors have the same size pixels.

DJMusic said:

1. Your aperture is maybe a bit wide at f5.6. Believe it or not, even with such a distant subject, f8.0 is probably going to give you a slightly sharper image. I'm not sure how much of this is the actual increase in depth of field and how much might be that f8.0 is typically a sweet spot in a lens. Y'know what they say about the rule of landscape photography--f8 and be there. =)

Click to expand...

The conventional wisdom is a reasonable starting point, but it's better to find out for youself what works best for a particular lens. With my Sigma 150-600 mm lens, I shoot the Moon wide open (f/6.3).

"Depth of field" is meaningless in AP. Even for the Moon, everything is effectively at infinity.

DJMusic said:

1. With 1) and 2) above, let your ISO be the variable for brightness. Most modern cameras can handle at least ISO 800 with little noise. I expect your noise is from cropping and/or a bit too much contrast or clarity. Your software cannot create pixels that are not there, and a heavy crop will always make your images a bit more sensitive to apparent noise due to processing.

Click to expand...

Cropping does not increase noise.

DJMusic said:

1. One of the respondents talked about wind. Even one a good tripod, the idea of hanging your camera bag from the tripod will help give just that little bit of extra stability, and thus sharpness.
2. A remote shutter release can help, and the mirror-up functionality also helps. Typically in mirror-up mode, you press the button once to raise the mirror, then press again to capture the image. Just give it a few seconds after the first press to allow the camera to become completely still. No need to spend a fortune on a release, just find one that is well-rated. I think I got mine for around $20US (brand is Pixel). If your camera can be controlled by your phone, you might get off for free!

There is a bit of chromatic aberration in the images, and this is easily corrected in most any image editing software.

Again, congratulations, and happy shooting.

Click to expand...

Just trying to help.

David

Thanks @Bill. The moon was in my line of sight from my kitchen door that leads to my garden. So fortunately I was able to set the tripod up in my kitchen right where the door is and kept the door open of course. It was quite a cold night so it was nice I didn't have to stand outside. I had the tripod legs fully open but kept the centre column retracted. The tripod was standing on tiles over a concrete floor. Yes, there's a plastic hook under the centre column, I always wondered what it was for, now I know! So no, there wasn't wind or vibration from any traffic. It's not an expensive tripod but it seems pretty solid to me. Not so sure about the camera mount on top though. It holds the camera very well and the camera isn't going anywhere but there is some minor movement when pressing buttons. But I've no experience of expensive tripods to compare if they do the same.

I must admit, I'd completely forgotten to lock the mirror up! I'll remember that for next time.

I did press the back button focus again to focus for the second shot as I'd changed the shutter speed. The first image is 1/160th and the brighter blurrier one is 1/100th.

@David, thanks, I like your forensic observations!

Yes, Bill mentioned in an earlier post a few days ago about air turbulence as well, so maybe that really is what's happening. I'm pleased you think it might not be a camera shake issue. Though in most photos I took, after I'd positioned the focal square where i wanted it, when I then pressed the focus button it ever so slightly moved the camera and the focal point, and slight movement again when pressing the shutter button, so I'm wondering if that threw off the focus.

Yes I re-focused between the first and second photo after changing the shutter speed. I placed the focal point on the right side edge of the moon, sort of half of the little focal square on the moon edge and half of it on the black. But thinking about it now, that was probably silly. I guess I should have had the whole square on the edge of the moon. Nevertheless, the second image is blurrier than the first. If it was down to movement when pressing buttons, then it might have moved a bit more when I took the second photo.


I don't mind buying a remote button. I presume I can focus and take the shot just with the remote and thaat means the camera would have zero movement. Wouldn't that determine once and for all if it's camera shake or not?

Merlin5 said:

Thanks @Bill. The moon was in my line of sight from my kitchen door that leads to my garden. So fortunately I was able to set the tripod up in my kitchen right where the door is and kept the door open of course. It was quite a cold night so it was nice I didn't have to stand outside. I had the tripod legs fully open but kept the centre column retracted. The tripod was standing on tiles over a concrete floor.

Click to expand...

With the warm air from your house escaping and mingling with the cold outside air, this created turbulence in the air through which your lens was seeing the Moon. Undoubtedly, this prevented the lens from delivering a steady image to the sensor. It explains the softness of the second image and a general lack of sharp detail in the first.

DJMusic said:

Merlin,

First, wow, what dramatic improvement. You should be very proud of just how far you've taken your images!! You've upped your game an order of magnitude.

I have read other posters, and there is some good advice. Noise is likely not an ISO issue since you're shooting at ISO 200. It looks like there are a couple of "camera" things, and maybe a couple of outside influences.

1. Shutter speed - 1/160 is quite slow for a 300mm lens. With the crop factor, 1/500 is probably a better speed to take a moon image. As a general rule, shutter speed should be 1/focal length.
2. Your aperture is maybe a bit wide at f5.6. Believe it or not, even with such a distant subject, f8.0 is probably going to give you a slightly sharper image. I'm not sure how much of this is the actual increase in depth of field and how much might be that f8.0 is typically a sweet spot in a lens. Y'know what they say about the rule of landscape photography--f8 and be there. =)
3. With 1) and 2) above, let your ISO be the variable for brightness. Most modern cameras can handle at least ISO 800 with little noise. I expect your noise is from cropping and/or a bit too much contrast or clarity. Your software cannot create pixels that are not there, and a heavy crop will always make your images a bit more sensitive to apparent noise due to processing.
4. One of the respondents talked about wind. Even one a good tripod, the idea of hanging your camera bag from the tripod will help give just that little bit of extra stability, and thus sharpness.
5. A remote shutter release can help, and the mirror-up functionality also helps. Typically in mirror-up mode, you press the button once to raise the mirror, then press again to capture the image. Just give it a few seconds after the first press to allow the camera to become completely still. No need to spend a fortune on a release, just find one that is well-rated. I think I got mine for around $20US (brand is Pixel). If your camera can be controlled by your phone, you might get off for free!

There is a bit of chromatic aberration in the images, and this is easily corrected in most any image editing software.

Again, congratulations, and happy shooting.

Click to expand...

Thank you DJMusic, that's very nice of you to say, it's encouraging!

Important points that yourself, David Wright and Bill Ferris mentioned in these last few replies that I'm noting for next time:

* Mirror lock up

* Weighting the tripod centre post

* A stop or two down from f5.6m

*Try a faster shutter speed around 1/500th

* Allow the moon to be as high up as possible to avoid air turbulence.

I kind of know what chromatic aberration is but not noticing anything in my images. Is it possible for you or someone to post a magnified photo of it so I can see what it looks like?

I don't know if I'm allowed to post amazon uk links so I won't. But I'm going to buy a remote called Ruili LCD Timer Shutter Release Remote Control Button for Canon 7D, 1D, 1DS, 5D, 5Ds R, 5D II, 5D III, 6D, 50D / 40D / 30D / 20D / 10D

I think it should work fine, looks pretty cool and it's only £12.99.

Merlin5 said:

I kind of know what chromatic aberration is but not noticing anything in my images. Is it possible for you or someone to post a magnified photo of it so I can see what it looks like?

Click to expand...

It's color fringing. Look at the bottom edge of the center and RHS images you previously posted, and compared here:



center image shows red-yellow fringing on the bottom edge, RHS shows re-blue fringing. The observation that the fringing changed between the first photo (LHS) and second photo (center) is what made me think that you had re-focused between those 2 shots.

Based on what you told Bill about your photo setup, air turbulance is the main problem. Sorry, but you have to go outside. Don't shoot over a big slab of asphalt or concrete. It's best to have grass or bushes in front of you, not the neighbor's house.

David