Another Moon

ian408 · April 1, 2004

After reading everyone's advice, I finally got it.

If I were more together, I would have taken the shot exposed for the sky
and for the moon and combined them. Maybe tomorrow.

Thanks everyone for sharing!

Ian

pathfinder · April 4, 2004

Here's another moon shot

dugmar · April 5, 2004

ian408 wrote:

After reading everyone's advice, I finally got it.

Ian

Please direct me to that posting with the advice.

Thanks,

-Doug

ian408 · April 5, 2004

dugmar wrote:

Please direct me to that posting with the advice.

Thanks,

-Doug

You can find most of the hints here.

Ian

pathfinder · April 6, 2004

ian408 wrote:

After reading everyone's advice, I finally got it.

If I were more together, I would have taken the shot exposed for the sky
and for the moon and combined them. Maybe tomorrow.

Thanks everyone for sharing!

Ian

Good job Ian. How about a look at Orion too!

pathfinder · April 6, 2004

And another full moon

ian408 · April 6, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

Good job Ian. How about a look at Orion too!

That's beautiful. The light is too bright here for a shot like that.

How are you tracking the stars? Are you piggy-backing the camera on
a scope?

pathfinder · April 9, 2004

ian408 wrote:

That's beautiful. The light is too bright here for a shot like that.

How are you tracking the stars? Are you piggy-backing the camera on
a scope?

For the picture of Orion I just mounted my 10D on a tripod and used a 28-75 zoom at 28mm , f 5.6 for 30 seconds in my front yard. I did not use a star tracking tripod and if you look at the image at the pixel level you can see the star movement.

I thought at first that I moved the camera, and then realized all the frames I took had the same angle and direction of movement and that it had to be star movement. I did not really think that for a 30 second exposure I would pick up movement, but I certainly did as you can see in this crop of Orion at 100%....

I will have to learn how to set up a star tracking tripod next I guess.

wxwax · April 9, 2004

I've read a couple of times that 20 seconds is that max exposure before the stars begin to blur. Looking at your shot, even 20 seconds sounds too long.

ian408 · April 9, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

I will have to learn how to set up a star tracking tripod next I guess.

If you get one, look for a German Equatorial Mount. Once you get the hang
of it, it's pretty easy to set up.

30" is a long time to have the shutter open. To get an idea, try setting up
on the moon and watching for a few seconds.

I bet 10' would give you a really interesting shot.

Ian

ondrovic · April 9, 2004

Moonrise at Myrtle Beach
I shot this with a Nikon D1X, 400mm, in the late afternoon just as the moon was rising.

rutt · April 10, 2004

"Shooting the moon" is a good challenge.

I tried to shoot the moon the other night and got very inferior results
compared to Pathfinder. I'd like to blame this on the light and air pollution here
in the Boston suburbs, but I suspect something else is going on. Next month,
I think I'll travel a little to try to get a clearer shot. You'd think it
would be easy, no depth of field issues, plenty of light for a fast shutter.
I even tried RAW, but that solved nothing. Pathfinder, what lens did you use?

This is the best one I got, the best of about 20. Most of the others were much worse, and I don't know why.

I used my 10D + 200mm f2.8 L + 2x extender. I used a tripod. One possible problem, the moon wasn't very high in the sky yet.

wxwax · April 10, 2004

Could the extender be softening the shot as well?

Seems reasoanble that atmospheric haze could be a factor if the moon was still relatively low on the horizon and you were shooting through more of the atmosphere. Maybe a combo of different things? Just having fun guessing.

ian408 · April 10, 2004

rutt wrote:

"Shooting the moon" is a good challenge.

I tried to shoot the moon the other night and got very inferior results
compared to Pathfinder. I'd like to blame this on the light and air pollution here
in the Boston suburbs, but I suspect something else is going on. Next month,
I think I'll travel a little to try to get a clearer shot. You'd think it
would be easy, no depth of field issues, plenty of light for a fast shutter.
I even tried RAW, but that solved nothing. Pathfinder, what lens did you use?

This is the best one I got, the best of about 20. Most of the others were much worse, and I don't know why.

I used my 10D + 200mm f2.8 L + 2x extender. I used a tripod. One possible problem, the moon wasn't very high in the sky yet.

What you're seeing might be atmospheric aberration caused by the
fluctuation in temperature. When things are nearer the horizon, the
effect is greater.

Here's a shot taken during a recent eclipse. The moon was very near the
horizon. I also used my coolPix 950 to shoot through the eyepiece of the
scope--not the best shot.

ian408 · April 10, 2004

ondrovic wrote:

I shot this with a Nikon D1X, 400mm, in the late afternoon just as the moon was rising.

Nice!

ian

rutt · April 10, 2004

wxwax wrote:

Could the extender be softening the shot as well? Seems reasoanble that atmospheric haze could be a factor if the moon was still relatively low on the horizon and you were shooting through more of the atmosphere. Maybe a combo of different things? Just having fun guessing.

Those are my gueses as well. I did some tests with the extender and perhaps it does lose some sharpness, but it's pretty good. Take a look at this web page by someone who iis making a case against the extender. I'd be very happy if my moon shot were as sharp as his heron picture with extender.

ian408 · April 10, 2004

I missed that you were using the tripod. Is the lens IS? If so, is it off?

rutt · April 10, 2004

ian408 wrote:

I missed that you were using the tripod. Is the lens IS? If so, is it off?

No IS. I think it's just the atmosphere.

pathfinder · April 10, 2004

ondrovic wrote:

I shot this with a Nikon D1X, 400mm, in the late afternoon just as the moon was rising.

What was your f stop? Pretty small f11, f16 maybe? I think I see dust motes on the filter in front of your light sensor. Those blotches in the sky look like dust motes on the sensor to me. Usually they are not visible unless at larger f-number aperatures. I get them in my 10D sometimes too, but so far have resisted cleaning my sensor as the worst of the alternatives.

pathfinder · April 10, 2004

wxwax wrote:

I've read a couple of times that 20 seconds is that max exposure before the stars begin to blur. Looking at your shot, even 20 seconds sounds too long.

I learned something - I did not really think that 30 seconds would show up with motion, but it is there. I will have to try again with shorter exposures and see what results I get. Thanks wxwax.

fish · April 10, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

I think I see dust motes on the filter in front of your light sensor. Those blotches in the sky look like dust motes on the sensor to me. Usually they are not visible unless at larger f-number aperatures. I get them in my 10D sometimes too, but so far have resisted cleaning my sensor as the worst of the alternatives.

Yup, they sure do. I got one of those Giottos rocket blowers and that has worked pretty well for me. My eyes suck, so I have to clean it, go take a pic of the sky and repeat until I don't see the spots anymore. I don't have the cojones to actually touch the sensor, but so far, everything is just blowing off of it.

pathfinder · April 11, 2004

pathfinder wrote:

I learned something - I did not really think that 30 seconds would show up with motion, but it is there. I will have to try again with shorter exposures and see what results I get. Thanks wxwax.

Rutt -
My first image of the 3/4 moon was shot at 600mm -- 300mm +2x telextender - the moon was fairly high in the sky and it was a cool dark evening. I live outside the city in a suburban area with limited light at night and the air was quiet and cool. Shooting near the horizon introduces much more airspace for the light to pass through. I was using a 300mm prime and I suspect it accepts the 2x telextendr with less flair than the zoom

The full moon shot was shot with a 400mm prime only, again high in the sky. I was actually trying to get a frame of the moon and Jupiter I believe when they were close together, but I found that difficult as the exposure for the moon and Jupiter to be so disparate.. This is the only frame I got that was evenclose at capturing both items simultaneously with the 300 prime.

All my astro shots were shot with a fixed tripod and with IS activated.

fish · April 11, 2004

nice contrast.

ondrovic · April 11, 2004

You're correct about the dust on the sensor - it needs a good cleaning (it has been about a year!). It is dirty enough at this point to warrant a cleaning. Usually I just remove them with the healing tool in Photoshop but I didn't notice these until after I posted it.

pathfinder wrote:

What was your f stop? Pretty small f11, f16 maybe? I think I see dust motes on the filter in front of your light sensor. Those blotches in the sky look like dust motes on the sensor to me. Usually they are not visible unless at larger f-number aperatures. I get them in my 10D sometimes too, but so far have resisted cleaning my sensor as the worst of the alternatives.

pathfinder · April 11, 2004

ondrovic wrote:

You're correct about the dust on the sensor - it needs a good cleaning (it has been about a year!). It is dirty enough at this point to warrant a cleaning. Usually I just remove them with the healing tool in Photoshop but I didn't notice these until after I posted it.

All us SLR users have some or will have some. Kind of like bikers have fallen down off their bikes or will fall down off their bikes. I have both.

Another Moon

Comments