Initial attempt at a moon shot!

[Mystery Machine]

Technically this my second shot of the moon (the first being an even poorer attempt a couple of days after getting my camera! See HERE (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3213/2875748976_5ebcb8b118_o.jpg)) but it was my first proper attempt to capture it!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3191/2936294980_e30f31d444_o.jpg

Taken with a 450D @ F/13 for 1/10th sec and ISO 100.

The image in the viewfinder was a lot clearer than the photo came out. I tried different speeds/apertures/ISO's but nothing got any better!

Is the lack of clarity down to a poor lens? (Tamron 70-300mm @ 300mm) or because I live in the city (too much light) or just bad focus??

Any tips on how I might be able to get a more defined shot would be really appreciated.

This is 100% crop BTW.....

Many thanks,

Bruce.

[markjpcs]

Your shutter speed is way too low. That being said it's a really good result for such a slow shutter speed.

I was getting blur last night with the big Mak at 1/125. I had to use between 1/180 and 1/250 shutter speed to stop the blur from the seeing conditions.

Try ISO 400 f5.6 - f8 or so and 1/125 shutter speed minimum.

[ebann]

Since shooting the Moon is considered like shooting during daytime, i.e. Sunny 16 rule, you can definitely use faster shutter speeds, because good light on the subject is not a problem.

[Nighthound]

It looks mainly like you missed focus a bit and slightly overexposed. But really very good for your second attempt.

Light pollution won't be a factor in Lunar imaging. It could be optics or vibration but I'm betting you just missed focus. Something I still manage to do from time to time after 6 years of doing this. Use a hands off approach to exposing if at all possible, i.e. shutter release to avoid shake.

Be sure that your dioptric adjustment is set for your vision in your camera viewfinder before you begin to focus. It will be different than daytime use due to the fact you're focusing at infinity when shooting the Moon. I use a bright star to get my dioptric set.

With practice you'll get the focus down, so keep shooting and posting.

[Mystery Machine]

Many thanks for the comments and feedback.

By the sound of it, it's probably a combination of poor focus and wrong exposure (my bad on both counts)

I was using a remote to fire the camera (RC-1) and had already selected mirror lock-up to minimise movement.

I will await another 'bright' moon and give it another go with faster shutter/higher ISO etc....

Thanks again,

Bruce.

[ebann]

Hey, the 450 has Live View right? Use it at 10x and you should nail focus every single time!

[Mystery Machine]

Hey, the 450 has Live View right? Use it at 10x and you should nail focus every single time!
Many thanks for that. I hadn't thought to use the live view to focus.

I had a go last night and managed to get the focus right, also using the settings suggested (1/125 and even 1/250 in ISO 400) but the results were much the same as the above image! I'm beginning to think it is the lens quality after all....

I'll see if I can borrow a better quality lens from someone to see if the results are any better from that. I did bid on a 100-300mm F/5.6L lens but got outbid. If I can pick one of those up for similar money to what this went for then I might just take the plunge - after all, a Canon L lens is going to be a better bit of glass than the £100 Tamron which came with the camera and will hopefully prove to be better all round for more than just lunar shots?

The focus ring on the Tamron is fairly 'loose' compared to my other lenses and can imagine the vague focusing isn't helping either?

Fingers crossed.....:D

[ebann]

Try focusing on the craters near the dark/light area. It's very unusual not to get a sharp picture at f/8-16 because the center of the lens is usually the sweet spot. If it was shot wide open, then I would understand the certain softness it would produce. FWIW I like Canon's 400mm f/5.6L being an extremely sharp prime lens.

edit: try setting the sharpness of the in-camera settings to a higher setting, or sharpen it more in Photoshop.

[Mystery Machine]

Thanks Ebann,

I did used the craters on the lower left edge (approx 7 O'clock) to get the focus point. Aperture was F/8 and the shutter speed 1/125 - 1/250. The photos I got with these settings are actually worse than the one above.

Camera settings were at their sharpest too!

There is no way I can afford a 400mm F/5.6L unfortunately....I'd love to have one, but at £800+ it's way out of my league!

The 100-300mm F/5.6L (2nd hand) is probably about 1/4 the amount but still a stretch for me!

I'll keep trying in the meantime.

[ebann]

You may want to consider a 4" reflector telescope with an SLR adapter. It should run around US$150-200. Good brands are Celestron, Orion, and Meade.

[gjl711]

There is no need to go that high with the f/stop. The moon for all intents and purposes is flat. Look at the MTF chart for you lens but I’m guessing that at 6.3 it’s going to be pretty sharp. That’s two stops you can add to the shutter speed right off. Also. Kick it up to ISO 200, and that gets you another stop or two. Then up your shutter speed another stop for good measure. The full moon should be exposed pretty well a ISO 100/ISO 200 f/6.3 at 1/500 of a sec.

[Adrena1in]

I did used the craters on the lower left edge (approx 7 O'clock) to get the focus point. Aperture was F/8 and the shutter speed 1/125 - 1/250. The photos I got with these settings are actually worse than the one above.

Perhaps it is the lens then. I've got, (actually had, but have given away), a cheap Canon EF 75-300mm lens, and that never gave sharp images of the moon. I couldn't get them as good as your second attempt.

Something I have heard before...cheaper lenses aren't great at their most extended. Try zooming out just a little and see if it makes any difference.

Failing that, get yourself a cheap telescope...you'll want to at some point anyway! ;) I bought a 600mm scope for £120 and a 1200mm for £150, and this is what the 1200mm can do at prime focus.

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/471/img3211ppsmallym8.jpg

[ebann]

One more tidbit... a super solid tripod is a must! Some people's tripod costs more than the telescope itself! Every little bit of wind current will shake a flimsy tripod. And when I say solid tripod, I mean those weighing in the 10-20 Kg! For the cheapos, try putting sandbags (weights) on the central part of the tripod to firm it well to the ground.

[Mystery Machine]

Wow - thanks for all the input guys!

Adrena1in, thanks for the reassurance about the lens - nice to know it's not just me who couldn't get the focus that sharp! I've kept trying to improve it, but to no avail!

The telescope idea sounds cool, but would be limited to taking astro pics and perving on the neighbours GF (which I can assure you would be no bad thing!) and would also end up being 'something' esle to clutter up my already small study!

If possible I'd rather try and put the money towards a better telephoto lens - I'm hoping to pick up a 100-300 f/5.6L for under £200 which should have a far superior IQ to the Tamron I've got (my dream would be a 100-400 f4.5-5.6L but @ £750+ second hand that ain't gonna happen!!)

In the meantime I'm just gonna keep plugging away with what I've got.

Ebann, I hear what you're saying about the tripod. Mine is quite a good one that I 'inherited' from my old job. It's not in the same league you're talking about, but I know it cost over £150 when new and is pretty solid.

My shots are taken indoors where the tripod is on a solid floor and about 3ft back from a skylite window, so no wind interference. I also set the shutter with the remote from outside the room so I know that even my movement can't affect it.

It's cloudy/wet/miserable for the next few days, so it gives me a chance to research lenses etc....rather than peering out the window each night in the hope of a good shot!

Thanks again for all the help.

[ebann]

Wow - thanks for all the input guys!

[snip]

and would also end up being 'something' esle to clutter up my already small study!

[snip]

Thanks again for all the help.

You're welcome!

Take a look at Meade's ETX table-top series. I had the ETX-90 with the Astroguider. Very portable unit and doesn't clutter the study! I sold it to fund a nice German Equatorial Mount for my camera and TeleVue Ranger refractor.