Moon Photography Using EOS R5

[mastermanphoto]

I've attempted multiple times to capture the full or near-full moon using the following gear:

• Tripod
• Canon EOS R5
• Canon RF-EF adapter
• Sigma 1.4x TC
• Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm f/5.0-6.3 DG OS HSM lens

Also note:

• I was in manual focus on the moon, which seemed to focus just fine in the moment
• I had lens OS (Optical Stability) off, but still had the camera's IBIS system on
• I was shooting in RAW mode
• I was at the max zoom of the lens, which realistically means I had a focal length of 840mm
• I was using the Canon "Camera Connect" app on my iPhone 12 Pro to do live shooting
• I was still using the old 1.5.1 Canon firmware at the time (I don't believe that matters much)
• The Sigma lens firmware was verified as up to date

I usually crop my images of the moon to fill the full frame, and I figured by using this stackup my images would be even sharper, given the much higher megapixel count of the R5 compared to my old 6D MkII and due to the longer reach of the lens using the teleconverter. Understand that the TC brings the new min f-stop to f/9, but that's more than enough for a full or near full moon.

Unfortunately, when I zoom in and crop the images, the moon still looks a bit blurry, especially when compared to images taken using the same method and same lens on my old DSLR but with no TC. Even when trying to sharpen them in post-processing they still don't look very good. To reiterate, there didn't appear to be any issue manually focusing on the moon in real time.

Does anyone know what I may be doing wrong? Do I need to turn IBIS off on the camera itself? Is it the remote shooting from my phone that's the problem?

 

[Thor1]

Wow, those are all great moon shots !!!

Any one ever captured Armstrongs USA Flag and tire tracks?

Mike

 

[J.K.T.]

Note that the atmosphere is usually the limiting factor when taking lunar photographs. On bad nights even images taken with a measly 135mm lens will be distorted by turbulence.

True. I was using the best case for the three resolutions, so I would not loose available resolution by inappropriate settings. There is not much I can do with the atmospheric disturbance, so I used the mentioned best case value for that. As the time won't be a limiting factor, I don't need too realistic value for the atmospheric limit.

I really do hope it turns out to be the real limit. The first test with 400mm DO II + EF 2x III + RF 2x wasn't exactly promising. Admittedly the moon was low and yellow with Sahara sand... I still suspect that single 2x on APS-C is about the limit for that lens. 2x + 1.4x might work on RP. I'd really love to compare result with the FDn 500m L, but neither EF nor RF TC fits directly.

 

[Suman Vajjala]

I've attempted multiple times to capture the full or near-full moon using the following gear:

• Tripod
• Canon EOS R5
• Canon RF-EF adapter
• Sigma 1.4x TC
• Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm f/5.0-6.3 DG OS HSM lens

Also note:

• I was in manual focus on the moon, which seemed to focus just fine in the moment
• I had lens OS (Optical Stability) off, but still had the camera's IBIS system on
• I was shooting in RAW mode
• I was at the max zoom of the lens, which realistically means I had a focal length of 840mm
• I was using the Canon "Camera Connect" app on my iPhone 12 Pro to do live shooting
• I was still using the old 1.5.1 Canon firmware at the time (I don't believe that matters much)
• The Sigma lens firmware was verified as up to date

I usually crop my images of the moon to fill the full frame, and I figured by using this stackup my images would be even sharper, given the much higher megapixel count of the R5 compared to my old 6D MkII and due to the longer reach of the lens using the teleconverter. Understand that the TC brings the new min f-stop to f/9, but that's more than enough for a full or near full moon.

Unfortunately, when I zoom in and crop the images, the moon still looks a bit blurry, especially when compared to images taken using the same method and same lens on my old DSLR but with no TC. Even when trying to sharpen them in post-processing they still don't look very good. To reiterate, there didn't appear to be any issue manually focusing on the moon in real time.

Does anyone know what I may be doing wrong? Do I need to turn IBIS off on the camera itself? Is it the remote shooting from my phone that's the problem?

Hi,

Apart from the issues with lens + TC, atmospherics (which is the most important factor), another thing that might play a role is the stability of your tripod and/or the ground on which it rests. If the tripod is not stable and/or the ground on which it rests transmits vibrations then you might end up with slightly blurry shots.

Regards

Suman

 

[BobKnDP]

Thank you all for the answers! Those should give me enough to derive the formulas I need. I'm used to photographing somewhat closer objects, so my resolution has always been measured in micrometers, not arcs. :-D

Angular movement is often measured in degrees per unit of time.

The sun and moon moves about 15 degrees per hour (360 degrees : 24 hours).

One degree = 60 arc minutes, one arc minute = 60 arc seconds (or 1/3600th of a degree).

That leaves me with an angular speed of about 4 arc seconds per second.

The great advantage of measuring movement in degrees, arc minutes, or arc seconds per unit of time is that we get an absolute measure.

Take images of a fast car moving across your field of view at 100 mph. If the car is close the angular speed is high. If far away the angular speed is low. The measure 100 mph in itself tells us nothing about how fast the car moves across the frame. The angular speed do.

Convert movement into angular speed and you can easily calculate movement blur.

360° is 1,296,000 arc seconds. (360 X 60 X 60)

One day is 24 hours, or 86,400 seconds (24 X 60 X 60).

On the celestial equator, a star appears to move 1,296,000 arc seconds in 86,400 seconds. That's 15 arc seconds per second.

 

[davidwien]

Moon 14. Feb 2922

Not wishing to suggest that this casual shot is in the same league as the earlier submissions in this thread. Just to show what results can be obtained handheld with little effort and some post processing. I aim to improve this result, as the moon is an obliging and regularly available model!

David

 

[mastermanphoto]

Some other details since people have been asking:

• I was shooting in Page AZ on the night of March 18, 2022. It was about 50 deg F and clear.
• I wanted to catch the moonrise over the canyon walls of Lake Powell so the moon at this point was only ~20 degrees above the horizon, but I've also had these same "blur" issues when shooting in Denver and with the moon at its highest point in the sky
• The tripod I use is a Vanguard Alta 2 Pro+, which is pretty sturdy

I varied my exposure settings during the shoot, but the example image below (1:1 crop) was at f/11, shutter 1/250, iso 1600. The lens was at its full 600mm length with the 1.4x TC, making it an 840mm focal length. You can see how relatively poor quality the image is in comparison to previously posted images (and in comparison to my own lunar images in the past with my DSLR).

Note: I don't usually shoot the moon at iso's this high, and don't recall ever even going this high, but this is what this photo's info recorded. I believe this was because it was still relatively low on the horizon and/or because I was probably compensating for slower shutter speeds thinking this might help get rid of some of the blur issues.

 

[davidwien]

Surely, the moon moves more than 360° in 24 hours with respect to a stationary observer on our planet. Dont we have to take into account the 360°/28.xxx that it moves backwards, accounting for it rising later every day and showing different phases?

David

 

[Tristimulus]

Thank you all for the answers! Those should give me enough to derive the formulas I need. I'm used to photographing somewhat closer objects, so my resolution has always been measured in micrometers, not arcs. :-D

Angular movement is often measured in degrees per unit of time.

The sun and moon moves about 15 degrees per hour (360 degrees : 24 hours).

One degree = 60 arc minutes, one arc minute = 60 arc seconds (or 1/3600th of a degree).

That leaves me with an angular speed of about 4 arc seconds per second.

The great advantage of measuring movement in degrees, arc minutes, or arc seconds per unit of time is that we get an absolute measure.

Take images of a fast car moving across your field of view at 100 mph. If the car is close the angular speed is high. If far away the angular speed is low. The measure 100 mph in itself tells us nothing about how fast the car moves across the frame. The angular speed do.

Convert movement into angular speed and you can easily calculate movement blur.

360° is 1,296,000 arc seconds. (360 X 60 X 60)

One day is 24 hours, or 86,400 seconds (24 X 60 X 60).

On the celestial equator, a star appears to move 1,296,000 arc seconds in 86,400 seconds. That's 15 arc seconds per second.

My bad.

15 degrees per hour, 15 arc minutes per minute, 15 arc second per second it is.

Must have been somewhere in outer space when missing this. No funny fungus or colorful medicine either.... :-D

 

[BobKnDP]

Surely, the moon moves more than 360° in 24 hours with respect to a stationary observer on our planet. Dont we have to take into account the 360°/28.xxx that it moves backwards, accounting for it rising later every day and showing different phases?

David

You're correct, except that you have the sign wrong.

The Moon moves East against the stars due to its orbit, while the stars appear to move west due to the Earth's rotation. The Moon is moving slightly slower than the stars, for an Earth based observer.

Consider a geostationary satellite. It appears fixed in the sky, although it is moving East against the stars. The Moon is farther away, so the effect of its orbit is reduced.

 

[Brian D3300]

I get sharper pictures with electronic shutter. I usually get my focus and hold the shoot a bit and use one of the middle images as the act of depressing and release I assume moves the camera some.

R5 with RF100-500 ISO 320 using the 2x teleconverter f/14 at 1/125 seconds electronic shutter mode. Cropped down to 2048x2048 from original 8192x5464 file. Cleaned up in photoshop and very slight Topaz denoise/sharpen (can't recall which one or maybe both).



--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/134376641@N08/
https://www.instagram.com/briankrippendorf/

 

[Brian D3300]

Older shot with the Sigma 100-400 (might have used a 1.4tc) adapted to the R5. Probably was over processed.



--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/134376641@N08/
https://www.instagram.com/briankrippendorf/

 

[drsnoopy]

The effect of seeing (atmospheric turbulence) is one major effect on sharpness. But something generally not considered by photographers is cooling down of the optical system used - when the lens is warmer than the outside air, there are convection currents in the air inside the lens. This is well known to astronomers who always allow the telescope to cool down to ambient temperature to get the sharpest images. Lenses of > 500mm are effectively small telescopes, and definitely benefit from being allowed some time to cool down before imaging. Meanwhile, mirrorless cameras (and dSLRs in live view) are producing heat which accumulates as the processor and screen are active. This could possibly affect the resolution too, so maybe it would be a good idea not to leave the camera active continuously. A dSLR, once focused, and then not left in live view, would not accumulate so much heat.

 

[davidwien]

Surely, the moon moves more than 360° in 24 hours with respect to a stationary observer on our planet. Dont we have to take into account the 360°/28.xxx that it moves backwards, accounting for it rising later every day and showing different phases?

David

You're correct, except that you have the sign wrong.

Yes. I wrote it down wrong -- sorry!

David

 

[Kokopelli_Rocks]

My first moon shot. I took this from the side of the road (HW 20 in Utah) late at night coming back from a photo shoot in N AZ. I was not planning on stopping but I had my 800 f11 on my R5 sitting in my back seat. I pulled over and was amazed a the moon, even if the night was a little hazy. The spot was a between 7-8K feet in elevation. One of the really dark sky areas of the State. I did not have a tripod out and it was really cold so I hand held the shot bracing the camera on the luggage rack. I thought my first effort worked out.

I was surprised how well the shot turned out. The elevation and the dark sky helped really enhance the brightness of the moon.

Canon EOS R5 • Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM @800mm • 1/8000 • f/11 • ISO 6400


My first M==moon shot

 

[Brian D3300]

"Canon EOS R5 • Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM @800mm • 1/8000 • f/11 • ISO 6400"

You should mess around with shutter speed. You should be able to go way lower than 1/8000 which will drop your ISO a lot. Also electronic shutter will remove any shutter shock. For example my shot above at 1000mm was R5 with RF100-500 ISO 320 using the 2x teleconverter f/14 at 1/125 seconds electronic

 

[flyinglentris]

I would suggest shooting photos of the moon when it is at or near perigee and avoid trying to photograph it at apogee. Perigee is when the moon is closest to the Earth and apogee is when it is farthest away.

How can you schedule a day to capture the moon at perigee? Google "Moon Perigee 2022." Note that the full moon perigee was just March 18th. So,, if you missed that, you'll have to wait to catch the optimal moon shot till next month, Note that the moon orbits the Earth every 27 days, not 30.

I assume that your recent shot attempt was around March 18th, so the focus issue is likely related to your camera/lens setup. I don't have enough info to comment on that.

I would suggest you find a good photographer's astronomy calculator to determine and plan for your shots. Photopills makes a wonderful versatile all round photography calculator for cell phone which is free. You might take a look at it.

The only other issue that might affect your moon shots, besides camera/lens and perigee, is atmospheric blur which can be quite bad at times due to humidity and pollution. The best conditions are dry high pressure nights, away from city lights.

 

[flyinglentris]

Some other details since people have been asking:

• I was shooting in Page AZ on the night of March 18, 2022. It was about 50 deg F and clear.
• I wanted to catch the moonrise over the canyon walls of Lake Powell so the moon at this point was only ~20 degrees above the horizon, but I've also had these same "blur" issues when shooting in Denver and with the moon at its highest point in the sky
• The tripod I use is a Vanguard Alta 2 Pro+, which is pretty sturdy

I varied my exposure settings during the shoot, but the example image below (1:1 crop) was at f/11, shutter 1/250, iso 1600. The lens was at its full 600mm length with the 1.4x TC, making it an 840mm focal length. You can see how relatively poor quality the image is in comparison to previously posted images (and in comparison to my own lunar images in the past with my DSLR).

Note: I don't usually shoot the moon at iso's this high, and don't recall ever even going this high, but this is what this photo's info recorded. I believe this was because it was still relatively low on the horizon and/or because I was probably compensating for slower shutter speeds thinking this might help get rid of some of the blur issues.

So, as I suspected, you did shoot March 18th.

Looking over your comments, my concern regards your attempts to fully extend the power of your lens to its max and using a TC. I would back off trying to use that lens fully telescoped as the optimal response of telephoto lenses drops off markedly at their full extent.. Lens focal performance drop off at ends is true of almost all lenses. You should avoid trying to get too much out of your lens and back off. You'll have to test and evaluate to find acceptable focal performance for your lens, backing off as needed.

Not all photographers are aware of the focal drop off in lenses toward lens ends.

--
"If you are among those who believe that it has all been done already and nothing new can be achieved, you've murdered your own artistry before ever letting it live. You abort it in its fetal state. There is much that has yet to be spoken in art and composition and it grows with the passage of time. Evolving technologies, world environments and ideologies all drive change in thoughts, passion and expression. There is no way that it can all ever be done already. And therein lies the venue for the creative artist, a venue that is as diverse as the universe is unmapped and unexplored." - Quote from FlyingLentris
~
flyinglentris in LLOMA

 

[BobKnDP]

I would suggest shooting photos of the moon when it is at or near perigee and avoid trying to photograph it at apogee. Perigee is when the moon is closest to the Earth and apogee is when it is farthest away.

(snip)

The apparent diameter of the Moon at perigee is 1.14X what it is at apogee. For me, it wouldn't be worth waiting perigee.

I think it could be more important to have the moon high in the sky. Unfortunately, the full moon would be at its highest Northern declination near the Winter solstice.

 

[mastermanphoto]

I can try backing off on my zoom, but I will note that I didn't have this same issue with my Canon EOS 6D MkII (a DSLR), where I also had my lens at full zoom and on the same tripod, but without the teleconverter. I also DID experience these same issues on my R5 but without the teleconverter, so less overall zoom.

 

[mastermanphoto]

I tried shooting the moon from my balcony here in Denver a few weeks ago when it was at its first quarter and was much higher in the sky than it was when I was in Page AZ, and yet I ran into the same issues (although I'd forgotten to turn off Optical Stabilization on my lens). I don't plan on waiting for Perigee "super moons" this summer so I'm going to give it another shot next month.