MkIII moon photo

[James Bond007]

Just for fun....

http://www.jerrygladh.se/galleri/bildvisa.asp?id=558&gid=78&sida=45&sortering=1

Xl H1 and 500 f4 eq 3600mm

Jerry

--
Bond, James Bond.

 

[Larry H. Smith]

The only test of the camera was the ease of using the live view
feature to assist focusing, and that worked very well.

It is encouraging to have field reports on the improved focusing using live-view,...Thanks.

Your comments, added to those of others including Dave Etchellsof Imaging Resource, (whose observation I mention in my post above), support the opinion that Live View is indeed an asset.

If I try to get the best possible moon picture, you are right -- I need to up the ISO, set the aperture to something like f11 - f16, and keep the shutter speed reasonable. Maybe I can try that tonight if I don't fall asleep before the moon rises. The moon is more interesting when it isn't so full anyway....

Right,...side-lighting brings out surface features.

Some other thoughts:

I assume you are using MLU, cable, self-timer, or other remote release.

Shooting when the moon is more nearly overhead insures less atmospheric pollution/turbulence interference (which is what one is actually looking through when enjoying a "big yellow moon" close to the horizon),...and the moon looks the same size to the camera when high in the sky, human impressions to the contrary not-withstanding. ;-)

 

[TimR32225]

If you ask me, the focus is pretty much always trial and error when shooting the moon. The darker the sky is, the tougher it is to focus. If you try taking the shot when the sky is still blue, you have several advantages. First, the moon is not so much brighter than the background that you get blown highlights like you do when shooting it in the dark. Most of the shots I see of the moon are blown out, and I think Bob's shots here fall into that category as well. To my eyes, they are either blown out or not focused precisely, or maybe both. And secondly, I think it's easier to get accurate focus because you can see what you are shooting, rather than just looking at a bright white blob against the black sky. And this usually allows you to use autofocus with decent results, instead of needing to focus manually.

I find that when shooting the moon when it's already dark and the background is black, you must always underexpose the shot by several stops, relative to what the camera would meter if you were shooting in some mode other than manual. If you use manual mode and a mid aperture like f8 or f11 and expose the shot for the highlights, you will probably get better results. You will need to brighten the shadows in post processing using the shadow/highlight tool, and it takes some practice.

I'm no expert at shooting the moon, and I've only attempted it on a handful of occasions, so I can't give any advice other than state what I have found works for me. There are some astrophotographers posting in these forums that have some wonderful results. They are the folks I would ask for advice, or direct my questions to.

The shot below was taken with my old 10d, and a 400 f2.8 with 2x extender: (1/320, at f9, ISO 400) with the sky still blue, as you can see:
It's either a 100% crop, or very close to it - I can't remember for sure...



--

Gallery at: http://www.pbase.com/tim32225

 

[BlueReptile]

f4 1/800 ISO200 560mm and cable release. I used Liveview to focus but any little turn on the focus ring are magnified 10x on the LCD. Should have turned on the IS. This was the first time I could see the moon moving when zoom at 10x. It was cool.

 

[PIXSurgeon]

...The final image looks blurry and has a sort of electronic-feel to it. That is because you have sharpening with overly emphasis on mid-to-high frequencies, where you need much more emphasis on low-to-mid range, for this particular image, and for the way the lens-combo+possible motion has blurred the image.

Just a suggestion.

--

TIP: If you do not like this post, simply press the 'COMPLAINT' button. Mommy/Daddy are just one click away.