Moon with 100-400 + 4x TC

The skies were clear last night over Manila, so I pushed my 100-400 beyond its comfort zone and stacked a couple of doublers to make 1.6 meters focal length.

Resized to fit postable limits (pardon the artifacts):

Very nice!

Very nice photo.

delightful. simply lovely. nice romy.

liquidstone wrote in post #5693046
The skies were clear last night over Manila, so I pushed my 100-400 beyond its comfort zone and stacked a couple of doublers to make 1.6 meters focal length.


I'm curious to see what the much sharper 400 5.6L can do at moonshots....

We all should be so lucky as to have all these lenses at our disposal.

Yeah Romy, what is up with the artifacts? Couldn't you have posted something a little nicer.

I am always amazed by these moon shots you guys get. Don't own a long zoom like a 100-400, but will be giving such shots a try one day.

liquidstone wrote in post #5693046
I'm curious to see what the much sharper 400 5.6L can do at moonshots....

Sure man ... if I had 10 copies of each straight out the boxes I would take that challenge and expect a clear overall result for the prime

I'm surprised it took you this long to try this combo, Romy...

Damn Rommy, you have a fine 1-4 copy!!! (I'd like to see a 100% of that shot tho )

How about the x4 on the Monster

Wow. Just, you know... wow.

Thanks all for the comments.

evandavies wrote in post #5696749
Damn Rommy, you have a fine 1-4 copy!!! (I'd like to see a 100% of that shot tho )

How about the x4 on the Monster

Sorry, it seems I don't have a shot online with the Sigmonster + 4x TC.

I do have one with a 2.8x TC (100% crop)

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

wow ...
amazing photo

can i ask why u use iso 400 ?
is it because of the teleconverter stacking to get more light in ?

i use 400d + 70-200 2.8 is + 2x @ 400mm
iso 100, EV -4 (achievable using -2 bracketing) and get this result:
http://www.flickr.com …dovic/251166707​9/sizes/o/

Hopefully not a stupid question, but why was it shot at f/16? Was this the smallest focal ratio available with the 4x TC? It seems to me you could have shot at, say, f/11 to avoid diffraction effects and get a faster shutter speed for uber sharpness. I've never tried this type of photography so excuse my stupid questions, you obviously know what you're doing. Fantastic shots BTW.

Edit - talking about the 100% cropped moon shot here. Same question applies to the f/28 moon shot originally posted.

Any shots of the ISS? How about of the lunar rover?

iamaelephant wrote in post #5698564
Hopefully not a stupid question, but why was it shot at f/16? Was this the smallest focal ratio available with the 4x TC? It seems to me you could have shot at, say, f/11 to avoid diffraction effects and get a faster shutter speed for uber sharpness. I've never tried this type of photography so excuse my stupid questions, you obviously know what you're doing. Fantastic shots BTW.

Edit - talking about the 100% cropped moon shot here. Same question applies to the f/28 moon shot originally posted.

Here are the wide open AVs of the posted combos:

1. 100-400 + 4x TC = f/22 wide open, shot made at f/28

2. Sigmonster + 2.8x = f/16 wide open, shot made at f/25

3. Sigmonster + 5.6x = f/31 wide open, shot made at f/51

From my tests, the as-shot AVs are the combos' sweet spots as far as IQ is concerned.... this is normally where the IQ is optimized (increase in IQ due to stopping down minus diffraction effects).

Romy