Shooting the moon!

[Quadna71]

I thought I'd weigh in with my attempt. T3i, 200 f/2.8L, two-legged tripod (broken) with timed shutter - can't find my remote

Exposure 0.003 sec (1/400)
Aperture f/2.8
Focal Length 200 mm
ISO Speed 100
Focus Manual


Moon by Quadna71, on Flickr

[ohata0]

Originally Posted by dfinn

first attempt. t2i + 70-200 f4L

I ended up google searching your image and found your flickr (and thus your exif settings for that picture). On a side note, I don't seem to be able to do that (google search to find my flickr) with my pictures, so I guess it has something to do w/ the fact that I can copy and paste your html/bbbc code for your images, but I don't have that option, when I'm not logged in, for mine. Not sure if you want to change it or not...just letting you know about it.

Your picture seems a little bit noisy. Was the moon underexposed and you had to push the exposure in post? Or did it become noisy because of your post processing (contrast and or sharpening)?

According to your flickr, it says you shot that at f/14. Probably didn't need to stop down that far...f/5.6 or f/8 should be ok. 1/60 is fine on the shutter speed...I shoot at 400mm w/ 1/60s and that works well enough for me (although I think I depending on where in the sky the moon is, I may have to up the shutter speed a little because of my cheap tripod).

My tip would be to shoot to the right as much as possible, trying not to blow out the white spots, and then lower the exposure in post to have as little noise as possible. Since I like to add contrast, that ups the noise as well. My recent moon shots have been around ISO 200 f/6.3 1/60s and the moon wasn't completely full.

Still, it's a great first attempt, it's in focus and well exposed.

[Medevack1]

Here is Mine.

[dfinn]

Originally Posted by ohata0

I ended up google searching your image and found your flickr (and thus your exif settings for that picture). On a side note, I don't seem to be able to do that (google search to find my flickr) with my pictures, so I guess it has something to do w/ the fact that I can copy and paste your html/bbbc code for your images, but I don't have that option, when I'm not logged in, for mine. Not sure if you want to change it or not...just letting you know about it.

Your picture seems a little bit noisy. Was the moon underexposed and you had to push the exposure in post? Or did it become noisy because of your post processing (contrast and or sharpening)?

According to your flickr, it says you shot that at f/14. Probably didn't need to stop down that far...f/5.6 or f/8 should be ok. 1/60 is fine on the shutter speed...I shoot at 400mm w/ 1/60s and that works well enough for me (although I think I depending on where in the sky the moon is, I may have to up the shutter speed a little because of my cheap tripod).

My tip would be to shoot to the right as much as possible, trying not to blow out the white spots, and then lower the exposure in post to have as little noise as possible. Since I like to add contrast, that ups the noise as well. My recent moon shots have been around ISO 200 f/6.3 1/60s and the moon wasn't completely full.

Still, it's a great first attempt, it's in focus and well exposed.

Thank you. I honestly don't remember what ISO setting I used but if I had to guess I was probably at 100. Any noise is most likely from post but I really didn't do a ton of post on this. It could be over sharpened. I have since drastically changed the post I do and have also been playing with different software.

I'll go out and give this a try the next time we have a clear sky and full moon. I have since upgraded from a t2i to a 5d2 so the results may be a bit different.

[BigRedNole]

This was my first attempt. I woke up and the moon was out bright and shiny at ~5:30AM this morning. I quickly read some of the settings to use. This was done hand held with about 60s of prep on how to take a pic of the moon. I did not have too much luck this go around, but it got me a start. I only have a 70-200mm lens. No tripod today and I need to learn what "mirror lock" is and how to do it.


Cropped and some PP in Photoshop from info on another site on how to do it.

[dhanson]

This is what the moon looks like through a small astronomical telescope. In this case, a Celestron C90 spotting/Astro telescope. It has a 90mm objective, f/10, focal length 1250mm. This is a cheap scope, selling for around $175. It was mounted on my inexpensive camera tripod. The camera is a Canon 60D, using a 'prime focus' mount (i.e. no lens on the camera, with the scope focusing its image right on the camera sensor).

This was shot by mounting the camera directly onto the back of the telescope using a 'T Adapter'. Then I aimed the scope at the moon, and focused using the telescope focuser and 'live view' on the Canon 60D, with max magnification. Then I slowly focused the telescope for the sharpest image in the magnified live view. I still didn't get it perfect, but pretty close.

The shot itself was taken at ISO 200, with a shutter speed of 1/50s. A better tripod would have been helpful here.



On Edit: That doesn't look as sharp as it does in Photoshop on my computer. I think the Razzi service I'm using must be doing a lot of compression on those images.

Here's a 100% crop of the top quarter:

[TeleFragger]

^^^ nice i did the same..

however.. my t2i requires a 2x barlow to be able to focus on my telescope.. thus what you have in your crop picture is what i get in a full picture... i just havent had time but i need to stitch pics together to get a full moon pic now... using my 55-250mm the moon doesnt even take up 1/10th of the picture.!!!!

[dhanson]

Here's a different version of the moon image, reprocessed a little better:



I believe the reddish tinge at the bottom and the bluish tinge at the top are due to atmospheric prismatic distortion - the moon was quite low in the sky when this was taken.

[TeleFragger]

Originally Posted by dhanson

Here's a different version of the moon image, reprocessed a little better:

I believe the reddish tinge at the bottom and the bluish tinge at the top are due to atmospheric prismatic distortion - the moon was quite low in the sky when this was taken.

wonder if you use the red green blue siders in you editing software of choice if you can lighten the colors of the distortion?

[canadave]

Originally Posted by dhanson

This is what the moon looks like through a small astronomical telescope. In this case, a Celestron C90 spotting/Astro telescope. It has a 90mm objective, f/10, focal length 1250mm. This is a cheap scope, selling for around $175. It was mounted on my inexpensive camera tripod. The camera is a Canon 60D, using a 'prime focus' mount (i.e. no lens on the camera, with the scope focusing its image right on the camera sensor).

This was shot by mounting the camera directly onto the back of the telescope using a 'T Adapter'. Then I aimed the scope at the moon, and focused using the telescope focuser and 'live view' on the Canon 60D, with max magnification. Then I slowly focused the telescope for the sharpest image in the magnified live view. I still didn't get it perfect, but pretty close.

Thanks very much for telling us how you did these pics. Would you mind posting a picture, or describing in more detail, how the C90 mounts onto your tripod? Is there some kind of ring encircling the OTA of the scope that mounts onto the tripod? How do you maneuver the scope up/down/left/right?

[dhanson]

The C90, being a 'spotting scope', will mount on a standard camera tripod using the standard mounting screw. My tripod has a quick release plate, so I just screwed the plate to the bottom of the scope, and snapped it onto the tripod.

However, it's a pretty lousy setup. My tripod is a middle-range Velbon with a fluid head that I bought years and years ago for video work. The scope is really too heavy for it, so you get lots of vibration if you touch the setup even slightly, and I also get backlash when trying to aim the scope. If I manually aim the scope so that the target is in the frame and then tighten down all the head nuts to fix it in place, it will drift just enough to take the moon right out of the frame before it really locks in to place. This is a royal pain. I have to guess how much backlash there will be, aim the scope above the moon, then let it settle into the frame. I have no tracking, so when I do get it right, I have only a few seconds to get everything set and stabilized before the moon drifts out of frame.

My next investment will be either a decent equatorial mount with a motor drive, or I might build a 'scotch mount' and see how that works out. I got one good picture of the moon which I posted here, and about 100 other photos where the moon was out of focus, or partially out of frame.

[gratchie]

Hi, anybody used this opteka lens for astro/moon shots? I'm thinking of getting one

http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-650-260...teka+zoom+lens

[VaiFanatic]

This is what I managed to get with my shakey hands (no tripod around)

Not the best, but not bad for my second night with my new camera. Still getting used to things like aperture and exposure.

[Ace_Club]

Just took this tonight. My second time trying to snag a good shot of the moon.

T2i with EF-S 55-250mm
ISO 100, F11, 1/100, 250mm
Tripod mounted, no IS, and used mirror lock with timer.

[NCHANT]

The 55-250mm isn't a bad lens for this could do with more reach but oh well. All handheld

Once in a Blue Moon by Mikey Mack, on Flickr


Shoot the moon! by Mikey Mack, on Flickr

Full moons just aren't as interesting though.

Full Moon by Mikey Mack, on Flickr