What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Started Mar 6, 2014 | Discussions
Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Did anyone try taking a picture of the moon with the SX50 on 3/5/2014. I was unable to get a good shot. I think it was due to a halo. I tried 3/3/2014 and 3/4/3014 and moon looked a lot different. I'm trying to find out if this was due to a halo, clouds or something else.

gloaming Veteran Member • Posts: 3,679
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014
1

Your question is going to have a local answer, and it might be best to pose it to a local meteorological expert, say a TV station meteorologist or a local environmental institution.  I had complete cloud and heavy rain, so the impediment that a halo of some description might have imposed on my own view is immaterial.   Somewhere, someone saw the Moon clearly.

OP Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Gloaming I live in the Louisville, KY area and my brother lives in Vincennes, IN area. We both got the same results moon was to bright and would not focus. I don't know if a TV station would know about this or not. Unless they tried taking a picture. Just looking at the moon seemed about normal. Was real bright thru view finder of the SX50.

(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,073
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014
1

Maybe if you posted one of your photos with your settings someone could guess what happened?

We had a heavy rain followed by an ice storm in SE Texas on 3/4/14 so no moon to see here.

Murry

-- hide signature --
OP Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

MurryG

MurryG here is one of the pictures I took last night. I said camera did not focus but I don't think that is really right. The focus box turned green and I used tripod and remote shutter release. It just seemed so bright to me. Very much different then the other 2 nights.

OP Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

MurryG

This picture was taken 3/3/2014 not a good picture for sure but still a lot better than 3/5/2014. I noticed the one last night was ISO 1600 which is not good. I was using Av camera on auto.

VisionLight
VisionLight Veteran Member • Posts: 4,544
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014
1

Frank Malone wrote:

MurryG

MurryG here is one of the pictures I took last night. I said camera did not focus but I don't think that is really right. The focus box turned green and I used tripod and remote shutter release. It just seemed so bright to me. Very much different then the other 2 nights.

Frank,

It may seem counter intuitive, but shooting close-ups of the moon is the same as shooting any subject in daylight and requires similar exposure. This is because both situations are being lit by the exact same lighting condition - bright direct sun. Your blooming effect above is basically due to overexposure at ISO 1600. A typical moon image that retains detail and contrast in the lit area from the terminator to the edges only needs about ISO 100 - ISO 200 and f5.6 at 1/60 - 1/125 second, give or take depending on conditions. For handheld images, a higher ISO would be required to produce a higher shutter speed. Here is an example similar to yours that was tripod mounted at a lower ISO and lower shutter speed, but in the same area of EV:

I hope this helps.

Ed

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Samsung NX1 Canon EOS M5 Samsung 16-50mm F2.0-2.8 Samsung 50-150mm F2.8 S Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +5 more
VisionLight
VisionLight Veteran Member • Posts: 4,544
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Frank Malone wrote:

MurryG

This picture was taken 3/3/2014 not a good picture for sure but still a lot better than 3/5/2014. I noticed the one last night was ISO 1600 which is not good. I was using Av camera on auto.

Going back to my other reply, here you used a much lower ISO than in the first image you posted, so you didn't get as much blooming. But all detail in the lit area was lost due to the very slow shutter speed. Around 1/60 second would have captures that detail, the same as if you were shooting a subject on the ground in daylight. On the other hand, the slower shutter does pick up the glow of the full orb against the night sky and would be lost with the faster shutter. It's give or take in this situation.

Ed

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Samsung NX1 Canon EOS M5 Samsung 16-50mm F2.0-2.8 Samsung 50-150mm F2.8 S Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +5 more
Augustin Man
Augustin Man Veteran Member • Posts: 7,871
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Excellent Moon, Ed!

Congratulations,

Augustin

 Augustin Man's gear list:Augustin Man's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Nikon Coolpix P900
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,073
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Almost looks to me like the lens fogged up?  Did you go from a warm house to outside and start taking photos right away?  You wouldn't see it through the EVF.

Murry

-- hide signature --
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 3,073
And what Ed said (nt)

Murry

-- hide signature --
wacka2007 Regular Member • Posts: 352
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

i noticed this myself now you mention it.

I saw the moon and thought , mm , that looks good tonite , can see a bright small crescent but still the main disc is visible , so i get my camera and take a few shots , when i looked at them i was like , what the hell ?

IT seemed like the camera had failed to focus on anything and the crescent looked like it was NOt atually part of the disc , like it sat a fraction below it .

I put it down to high level hazed causing diffraction and juts deleted them ALL.

I have taken LOADS of fotos of the moon so its very strange when it comes out "fogged"

#confused

threed123
threed123 Senior Member • Posts: 1,158
This is the scientific explanation...
1

Here's the scientific reason for halo around the moon or fuzziness. High thin cirrus clouds drifting 20,000 feet contain ice crystal and diffuse the light from the moon. Typically means rain coming soon. The clouds are so high and thin you can't see them, but the camera lens can.

Frizzen Regular Member • Posts: 198
Re: And what Ed said (nt)

Here's mine from two nights ago. I just use "Auto"  on my SX 50.

OP Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

Ed since MurryG and Frizzen agree with you that must be the main problem. I will not use Auto ISO on moon shots from now on.

Wacka2007 mentioned high cirrus clouds. The weatherman on TV said last night there were high clouds.

Thanks everyone for the help very appreciated.

Hinder Contributing Member • Posts: 819
Re: What Was Going On With The Moon 3/5/2014

I usually try ISO 100 or less, fastest shutter possible, 250 or higher, 5.6 and 1-2 stops low.  You can always make it brighter in PP.

 Hinder's gear list:Hinder's gear list
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM Canon PowerShot S100 (2000) Canon PowerShot SD500 +21 more
Frizzen Regular Member • Posts: 198
Re: And what Ed said (nt)

Went out again tonight. Had camera on tri-pod.  Auto mode. ISO 500 Shutter 160. The only

processing I made was just a tad of sharping.

ISO 500 Shutter 160. Auto Mode

OP Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: And what Ed said (nt)

Frizzen this is mine from tonight 3/6/14 illuminated 36%. The only thing I did was crop to 8x10.

OP Frank Malone Regular Member • Posts: 477
Re: And what Ed said (nt)

I adjusted levels on the last one I posted. Do you think this is now to bright.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads