Go Shoot the Moon!!!

Hey, don't want to be too silly, but could a few of you go shoot the moon out tonight? I want to see the results on different lenses. It's clear here in my area.

Thanks.

Canon 70-300mm DO IS @ 300mm 1/100 f5.6? Handheld!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Here's mine.. shot at 10mm f22. There's 3,126 images put together. Took a while!

Adam

wow, very very nice pic hicks. how long did it take for you to piece all that together?

stei, very impressive for being handheld Try it with a tripod!

Adam,

my gosh, where did you shoot that from? That's fantastic. You don't work for NASA do you? Hehe.

You said you shot that at 10mm? Im confused How did you manage that?

K.

You never said you were on the shuttle! How about a recent one?

khiemluu wrote:
Adam,

my gosh, where did you shoot that from? That's fantastic. You don't work for NASA do you? Hehe.

You said you shot that at 10mm? Im confused How did you manage that?

K.

I would like to know too. Nice shots guys.

OK, I ran outside and shot this one just a few minutes ago. Handheld with my Canon 100-400mm IS USM L. 400mm f5.6 1/250 sec ISO 1600:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Bright and sharp! Thanks.

How about anyone with a 2x extender want to give it a try at 600-800mm? How about those low cost mirror 500mm, or a Sigma 50-500 on the long end?

Try again, but put some -EC at about 2 stops and see what it does. That one is WAY overexposed... I shot this one during the last eclipse at about the same settings with the same lens... not perfect but decent for a little zoom lens (this one is overexposed as well, but it was my first attempt.)

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Adam, did you put your thumb over the bottom left of the lens there ? My Mum does that sometimes

Hicks, don't you have a tele-converter? At least give that 100-400L a dance and show us how to set the camera correctly.

The moon is really just grey, isn't it after all. Just a little spec of blue here and there.

Remember that the fullish moon is a sunlit object, and exposes similarly to a daylight exposure.

A new Moon is not as reflective and requires more exposure. The cool thing about digital is that you can see if it worked. It's quite hard to meter the Moon.

I shot this one at 1/125 at f/5.6. ISO 400. I shot it in JPEG format and this shows very little processing. I was using a 70-200/4L with a 1.4 teleconverter, so the focal length on this is 280mm. The image only shows the center quarter of the frame, or thereabouts. This is at 100% resolution. Note that I shot this without a tripod, by leaning up against a fencepost. There is still a bit a motion blur.

I have a 500mm lens and a 2x converter (for medium format) that would have worked better. But I can hardly lift that sucker let alone handhold it at the resulting f/11 and 1/30 exposure, so I'd have also needed the big tripod.

Rick "no astrophotographer" Denney

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Wow, this was an unexpected experiment for me. I tried my 75-300 IS handheld auto-focus with similar settings and got the blurry before image. Then only with a tripod and manual focus was I able to get similar quality to my 70-300 DO IS handheld. The new third gen IS rocks!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

That turned out nice. I wonder where that brownish tinge comes from?

It was a different night, in a different place. I was in Pasco, Washington, right after a minor-league baseball game, waiting for my wife's nephew to come out from the locker room. This is southeast Washington, and it was two years ago during a record-setting heat wave and drout. There was dust in the air aplenty. Plus we were close to Umatilla, so who knows what was floating in the air around there, heh, heh.

And, new moons are closer to the horizon. This was no more than an hour after sunset, as I recall.

Rick "thinking the color is most affected by the first 1000 feet in that 250,000-mile distance" Denney