| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/12/2006 05:09:16 AM · #26 |
A couple more moon shots.
 |
|
|
|
02/12/2006 05:45:27 AM · #27 |
I was deceived by the amount of light coming off the moon at night. My first attempts were looonnng exposures but I found with this
that 1/80th at F8.0 was a huge surprise.
Brett |
|
|
|
02/12/2006 06:11:30 AM · #28 |
| marbo i love the first eclipse photo!! |
|
|
|
02/12/2006 08:20:39 AM · #29 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
I just shot this..
this is what the moon looks like in Iceland in the middle of the day...
EXIF
02-11-2006 17:23:04
Canon EOS 5D
shutter speed 0.5 sec
exp prog. manual
aperture f22
ISO 50
focal length 560mm
lens 70-200L f2.8 IS, Canon 1.4X II, Kenko 2X
Manfrotto CarbonOne tripod.
post processing.. Levels, Curves, resize, USM, save for web.
post your best moonshot, let's see how the moon looks like in your part of the world |
This is a cool shot. But, with the reach you have created with the two extenders, I'd imagine you could get much better results by shooting with a higher ISO, wider aperture, and faster shutter speed. At 1/2 sec exposure time, you're getting significant (I think) motion blur of the moon at 560mm.
Even if you really need the f/22 to minimize lens artifacts from the stacked extenders, try shooting at ISO 200-400. You'll get a sharper image from the 4-8x faster shutter speed.
I couldn't get as close with my 400mm solution, but I think these shots:
 
demonstrate what I'm talking about. |
|
|
|
02/12/2006 08:30:26 AM · #30 |
The moon from New Jersey, USA. Shot with a nikon coolpix 900 through a small telescope:
//jrpics.com/photol.asp?id=DSCN1084a&title=Moon
//jrpics.com/photol.asp?id=DSCN1077&title=Moon
Message edited by author 2006-02-13 13:42:10. |
|
|
|
02/12/2006 08:56:15 AM · #31 |
We like the moon
Oh, btw...I did take my first moon shot the other day...during the day. It's my PaD for last Thursday I think. :)
Message edited by author 2006-02-12 08:56:28.
|
|
|
|
02/12/2006 09:29:49 AM · #32 |
|
|
|
02/14/2006 04:36:00 PM · #33 |
Not nearly the quality and size of some seen here in this thread, but
considering this is at 100% and hand-held with 200mm, eh - it's Ok.
 |
|
|
|
02/14/2006 04:50:23 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by BradP:
Not nearly the quality and size of some seen here in this thread, but
considering this is at 100% and hand-held with 200mm, eh - it's Ok.
|
Pretty good shot Brad. I'm going to test out my new remote release I got today on some moon shots tonight with my ... OMG.... kit lens! ;-) |
|
|
|
02/14/2006 05:20:36 PM · #35 |
You guys need to get some telescopes! Shooting the moon with a long lens is very tough (though there are some outstanding efforts here). My portfolio has some of my better lunar shots (through a scope) as examples.
What your zoom lenses can do better than lunar shots is capturing some of the brighter deep sky objects, though you need a guiding scope as a tracking platform (to zero out the earth's rotation for long exposures). Here's a recent example taken with my 70-200L f/4:
The Orion Nebula (M42). It's amazing to many people that a common camera lens can capture a shot like this, but most people don't realize that many deep sky objects like this are large - larger than the full moon, but many, many times fainter. The above Orion Neb shot is the result of a two minute exposure at ISO400. Not bad for a hack. |
|
|
|
02/14/2006 05:33:40 PM · #36 |
No close ups here, but some scenic shots of the full moon on Feb 12th.
 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 11:11:24 AM EDT.
