Shooting the moon?

[MPimagery]

Absolutely massive full moon lastnight, absolutely beautiful....my photos did it no justice..

Anyone got any ideas on shooting the moon, optimal settings, framing techniques, etc...

[Wired]

Biggest lens your've got! (looked awesome through a 600mm last night!!)
Spot meter off the moon and you should have a pretty fast shutter speed.
Probly only need like F5.6 odd too :)

[MPimagery]

Cool... I'll give that a try..

I've got the 70-200mm f/2.8L with the 2x extender, that gets me to 400mm which hopefully will be enough.. Might drag out the 350D to shoot it with instead of the 1DmkIIn to take advantage of the 1.6 crop factor..

[Wired]

Well i shot the moon a while ago with just the 200mm on my 350D and while it didnt go anywere near filling the frame i got a great amount of detail and sharpness.
Also try, if you have it, the 1.4X converter instead of the 2X. I find the 2X softens the image, and may be a reason your not getting the sharpness your after ;)

[arthurking83]

I remember coming across a site that had a calculator for taking pics of the moon, and it calculated the exposure for ya!

Something like 1/250 at f/8 or so... I can't remember really??

But here's a small quote from a site I found...


If you wish to photograph the moon itself, the exposure is much different. The moon is an object reflected in sunlight, so the rule-of-thumb is to use the "Sunny-16 Rule". This says, for an object in direct sunlight expose at f/16 and time is 1/ISO. So for 100 speed film, your exposure would be 1/125.
***reference mkaz.com

Use that, use a reasonable ISO, and then experiment lots! :D

Also the brightness of the moon is determined by it's elevation(azimuth in degrees) too!

Higher is brighter, lower is obviously not as bright! :action5:

[arthurking83]

MOON EXPOSURE CALCULATOR (http://www.shaystephens.com/moon_calc.php)

Remember it's only a rough guide, and you have to compensate for azimuth anyhow, but it gives you a good idea!

Also, I tend to underexpose a bit(not too much) for more contrast, once again... experiment a lil bit :)

[thing]

Well it's out there now glaring at me....

So I'm off to have a go. I'll post the results up here later along with exposure details.

[Wired]

Spot meter off the moon and you should have a pretty fast shutter speed.
Probly only need like F5.6 odd too :)

:o My bad! Must have had a brain snap earlier.
Just went out shooting and using P you'll blow out everytime.

What i actually did last time, and this time is switch to MANUAL mode.
I shot at 250th @ F5.6 and came out pretty good.
Tryed a stop or two above and below but the 1/250th @5.6 worked best for me.
Also tryed the extreme of 2.8 @ 1/1000th and lost the edge detail and sharpness. Funny, the same happened at F16 @ 1/30th?
F5.6 gave me the best sharpness and edge detail.
Just uploading pics now and il post it up :)

[Wired]

Heres mine:

200mm
F5.6 @ 1/250th

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v355/racr20/_MG_7882resize.jpg


This is what i see through the veiwfinder at 200mm :laughing1: :(
I need a 600mm

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v355/racr20/_MG_7882resize2.jpg

[MPimagery]

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/220/482502749_28102e4115.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mpimagery/482502749/)


Exif from flickr..

Camera: Canon EOS-1D Mark II N
Exposure: 0.006 sec (1/180)
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 400 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Exposure Bias: 0 EV


And yeh, the 2x Extender is a bit soft from what I've seen in my own shots.. Really need to get my hands on the 1.4x soon for 'not as long' stuff and from there some how I need to get the missus to approve of the 600mm f/4..,,, :(

[thing]

OK went by Arthurs website suggestion but no good. Shot @200mm + 1.7 converter (all at iso 100). 1. f8 1/320 2.f16 1/160 3. PS edit of #1.

[Ronbo]

I'm thinking the Nikons you will have to do some exposure compensation

[MPimagery]

That last shot of yours Thing is quite good, plenty of detail in there..

We all need 600mm f/4's with 1.4x Extenders... We all need to be richer too..hah

[bundybear]

Cool... I'll give that a try..

I've got the 70-200mm f/2.8L with the 2x extender, that gets me to 400mm which hopefully will be enough.. Might drag out the 350D to shoot it with instead of the 1DmkIIn to take advantage of the 1.6 crop factor..

what advantage?

[MPimagery]

what advantage?

The Canon 1DmkIIn that I mostly shoot with has a crop factor of 1.3x, 400mm x 1.3 = 520mm effective focal length, while the 350D has a crop factor of 1.6x, 400mm x 1.6 = 640mm effective focal length..

Both cameras are similar in the pixel count, 8.2 vs 8.0, and image quality but because of different sensor sizes the 350D gets me a little closer, ie. the image takes up more of the sensor because the sensor is smaller..

I think that makes sense..

[Wired]

:laughing1: Yeah probly the only advantage the 350D has over the 1D's :p

I love how you can see crater like bits on the moon with the pail trailsspreading out from it. (top right)
The more i look at it, the more it looks like an orange :crzy:

[MPimagery]

Hey, how do you find your 24-104mm f/4? Was thinking about picking one up as a walk around lens for when I travel, might save my back ache a little..

[SSSchwing]

When shooting the moon, I have a big set up.... here is a diagram of my gear.






http://leav-www.army.mil/fmso/documents/mines/C11.gif

[Wired]

:laughing1::laughing1:
3000mm F1.2 lens :cool:


The 24-105 F4L is awesome!
I was tossing up between that and the 24-70 2.8L, but after playing with both i decided to go the 24-105, the extra range is VERY handy and it has IS as well. Iv found the extra 35mm and IS easily outweighs the 2.8 for an allrounder.

Also is suprisingly wide at 24mm,(well, for me) would be even moreso on your 1D ;)
I havnt even used my 17-55 since buying the 24-105 :)

Highly recommend it :)

[arthurking83]

Thing! how high in the sky was this moon :action5: of yours? :p

Higher more bright remember? If it was a bit lower, say 45° then it could explain the exposure a little.

MPimagery! The effective focal length regardless of the sensor size is still 400mm!
ie. you haven't resolved any more detail by getting closer to the moon as you would, if you were actually using a 500mm or 600mm lens.
All it does is to crop the sides of the image for less unwanted space!

So it's really only referring to equivalence of FOV FieldOfView., not any magnification benefit

eg. Olympus (and Panasonic, and whoever else) have the 4/3rds system, which has a 2x crop factor. Using a traditional 500mm lens doesn't give the same image(detail) as it does like when you use a 1000mm lens on a FF 1D. All it's done is to remove more of the black of space from the image.. the moon will still be the same size, and hence the same detail in the craters etc...

[RememberThis]

Try using a flash :D

:crzy:

[Ian]

Try using a flash :D

:crzy:

how about a ww 2 anti aircraft search light would that do the trick:D :crzy: ian

[Seesee]

how about a ww 2 anti aircraft search light would that do the trick:D :crzy: ian

Hmmmm...........good thinking fella...........might be wise to up the aperature setting by 1 or 2 stops though lol lol....and maybe bounce the light off something else up there to avoid glare, maybe Uranus lo lol

[Ian]

Hmmmm...........good thinking fella...........might be wise to up the aperature setting by 1 or 2 stops though lol lol....and maybe bounce the light off something else up there to avoid glare, maybe Uranus lo lol

lol probable would:D ian.

[SpaceJunk]

..................... I thought Uranus was another sort of moon ? ........................lol :action5:

[Seesee]

lol...........Uranus ???.......I'm not sure, dont think I wanna know lol

[Sammi]

Ok having a hubby thats an astrophysisist i kind of fell into astrophotography... heres some hints on shooting the moon.

1. use a lens that is 200mm or longer....
2. Aperture set to F/11 to start with... depending on your test then adjust or bracket your shot
3. shutter speed should be set to your iso. so if you are using an iso of 200 then you shutter should be 1/200 or there abouts
4. Always use a tripod and cable release (SLR).
5. Use the camera's highest resolution setting (Digital).
6. shoot while the moon is on the horizon, it looks much larger than it does in the sky...mainly because you have something to compare it too.

this is know as the loony 11” rule (f/11 at 1/ISO).
Photos of the full moon are flat, photograph the Moon when its at crescent or quarter phases when the mountains and craters are illuminated from the side and cast shadows this will give more interesting pictures.

unless you use a telescope like i do. you are not going to get a full framed shot no matter how hard you try... unless of course its cropped in PS or the like


Hope this helps
Sammi

[thing]

Ok having a hubby thats an astrophysisist i kind of fell into astrophotography... heres some hints on shooting the moon.

1. use a lens that is 200mm or longer....
2. Aperture set to F/11 to start with... depending on your test then adjust or bracket your shot
3. shutter speed should be set to your iso. so if you are using an iso of 200 then you shutter should be 1/200 or there abouts
4. Always use a tripod and cable release (SLR).
5. Use the camera's highest resolution setting (Digital).
6. shoot while the moon is on the horizon, it looks much larger than it does in the sky...mainly because you have something to compare it too.

this is know as the loony 11” rule (f/11 at 1/ISO).
Photos of the full moon are flat, photograph the Moon when its at crescent or quarter phases when the mountains and craters are illuminated from the side and cast shadows this will give more interesting pictures.

unless you use a telescope like i do. you are not going to get a full framed shot no matter how hard you try... unless of course its cropped in PS or the like


Hope this helps
Sammi

Thanks Sammi....off we go again........

[ving]

like this...

(hainzel)

[MagnusAgrenPhotography]

This is my attempt at the moon... though it was a while ago..

[Roof]

unless you use a telescope like i do. you are not going to get a full framed shot no matter how hard you try... unless of course its cropped in PS or the like

Sammi

Hey Sammi,

I might be going of the subject here but i have a Pentax K100D and a 1000mm Reflector with 130mm of apature. i've been trying to get shot's of the moon but i can't get it in focus.
I have used the camera on the scope and i have a extender tube but i can't reach focus even with a 20mm eyepiece.

Is there something that i could be doing wrong or is the extender tube too short. Would it be a lot of strain on the camera/scope if i extended the tube a bit more.

I hope you have some advise.

Cheers...

Roof

[davesmith]

Does anyone have any tips for post-processing the moon, I mean in terms of presentation rather than correction processing?

I've got some half decent shots of the eclipse the other night, and I'm fairly up with it when it comes to photoshop to process individual images. I can, and have, processed the eclipse as individual shots and they look fine on their own, but in the end it's really still just the moon.

Can someone point me towards a photoshop guide/walkthrough on how to do those montage jobbies that show the different stages of the eclipse in one image. I imagine it involves merging the multiple images/layers but I'm not real good at that bit and need a bit of a kick start.

Thanks guys.

[Mermaid]

Here's how I did mine Dave. There'll be lots of examples on the net (and in this forum) though.

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g58/melbournemermaid/MoonsAP.jpg

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g58/melbournemermaid/EclipseMoonposterAP.jpg

Those are smaller versions of my originals to give you an idea....


Basically I just grouped all my "moons" together, but in sequence of how I shot them.
In PS, you were right in saying you just have multiple layers (with this you just keep importing the next layer on top of the last) and then merge them all as one to save. Then you can add text if you want.....the choice is yours! There's not a "right" or "wrong" way of presentation, just what ever appeals to you personally which you think you would find compositionally appealing to others.

Good luck! The only limits are your imagination.

[davesmith]

Thanks Mermaid, they look great. I've got a few ideas on composition, it's just working with the multiple images I haven't really done before.

Before you import each image, do you crop it first (eg a crop around the moon itself) and then place it wherever you want it, or do you import each image in full, move that where you want and then do an overall crop of all the full images.

Is there a "best" way to do it?

[Mermaid]

Yep, I found that because my file sizes were fairly large I cropped each shot individually (and renamed saved the file ) before trying to layer them. This way they're much more manageable to work with and you can see where they're going a whole lot easier.

When I renamed them and saved a new file this was for two reasons. Firstly, so I was keeping the original file unaltered. (Insurance for mistakes! Plus you should always keep a copy of your original file anyway) And secondly, so I could rename the file to make it easier for what you're working on. Say, one, two , three etc....whatever works for you.

When you open each one though, open them on the same size/ratio. That way they're all going to look the same on the page (as in consistent noise, blur, focusing or whatever) and if you've taken them all at the same zoom setting (which you probably have) they'll all be identical in size so you shouldn't have to actually alter them.

It also helps if you've already decided how your layouts going to work, that way you can judge how much space you need.

Hope that made sense. :o