The moon at 500mm

[Bm7b5]

One of my better efforts at Lunar photography.

[Dave Humphries]

Very nice Rick,

May I ask; not only 500mm (but also a 1.6 crop factor?), plus a significant PP crop?

When I tried with my 300mm (equiv), I couldn't get anywhere near this big an image.

I guess it's true what they say; everything IS bigger in the 'states

Cheers,

[Colin Southern]

One of my better efforts at Lunar photography.

Great stuff - looks like it's hardly changed at all since I was last there

[Bm7b5]

Very nice Rick,

May I ask; not only 500mm (but also a 1.6 crop factor?), plus a significant PP crop?

When I tried with my 300mm (equiv), I couldn't get anywhere near this big an image.

I guess it's true what they say; everything IS bigger in the 'states

Cheers,

Nikon 1.5 crop so yes, effectively 750mm.

Not sure what you mean by sig PP crop ?

[crisscross]

Excellent Rick; much sharper than I can get with my D80+400mm; could also be you have pretty clear sky, as the craters with edges visible go a lot further in from the edge than on my efforts?

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Rick,

I mean that the height of the image I see now is less than the full height of the image as captured (at 4288 x 2848?), before downsizing? to post here at a height of 600 pixels.

Thus effectively representing a digital zoom/further magnification.

Or am I completely wrong? (it's been known )

[Bm7b5]

Hi Rick,

I mean that the height of the image I see now is less than the full height of the image as captured (at 4288 x 2848?), before downsizing? to post here at a height of 600 pixels.

Thus effectively representing a digital zoom/further magnification.

Or am I completely wrong? (it's been known )

It dawned on me after I posted that PP must obviously mean "Post Production"... duh

Curious, where did you get the 4288 x 2848 ?

I am not sure of the orig as all I have access to from work is the smugmug version which is 976 x 1221, but your numbers seem pretty close.

I can't recall exactly what I did now, as it was a while back.

I know I did crop out alot of sky to get the image to fill out the frame, and then when I exported I specified a resolution which is typicall 800 x 600, but I can't be sure.

[CNelson]

Very nice! Sharp and crisp.

Chuck

[atvinnys]

now, if you got a little closer, we could have seen the US flag...I am just saying...
really nice indeed....(and you took that handheld of course...)

[Bm7b5]

Very nice! Sharp and crisp.

Chuck

Thanks Chuck !

[Bm7b5]

now, if you got a little closer, we could have seen the US flag...I am just saying...
really nice indeed....(and you took that handheld of course...)

At full 1000mm, you could not only see the flag, but the beer cans.



That's why I backed off to 500mm.




Yes, it definitely WAS handheld.





I handheld the remote shutter release for the full 1/50th of a second...



Sigma 50-500 {Bigma} lens mounted on a Manfrotto 055XPROB and 486RC2 ball head, using mirror lock-up and remote shutter release to absolutely minimize vibration.

[Bm7b5]

Here are the other two that I like.

[Bm7b5]

And...

[Bill44]

BM, I can see from the reduction in the size of the moon that you have been nibbling at the cheese.

[Dave Humphries]

Bill (44),

You put me in mind of Wallace and Grommit's "Grand Day Out", anyone else see that (of those not living in the UK)?

Rick,

Thanks for the additional info.

I got tha 4288 x 2848 from a review of the D300 as the max resolution - which I figured you'd have used

I think with my 6MP, if I tried that level of digital zoom the moon would appear tiled , about 9 tiles I think

No wonder my geniunely handheld shots look rubbish, I did take them a while ago when I didn't know any better (that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it). Well, I thought, "it's a sunlit, light coloured object", I wouldn't use a tripod for that on earth.

Cheers,

[crisscross]

The 2 additional ones are superb aswell; can see why among favourites. I have tried for that early morning yellow and not got anything as vivid.

I am not going to post an image next to these superb shots, but here is a URL for comparison with 400mm edge of-window-cill supported shots
http://www.pbase.com/crisscross/image/107038568
Shows the value of a tripod - but also as I speculated before a location with very clear sky (yes/no Rick?) as I suspect our UK midlands one of being pretty full of water vapour

Dave: the pixel size of the moon depends partly on the lens as well as the sensor size; mine from 10mp 3872x2592 frame come out at 600pix diameter and no need to downsize, just crop

[Tareq Alhemrani]

I like the moon shots, i have enough of them, later when i will have 500 or 600 i will try again.

[shreds]

...a location with very clear sky (yes/no Rick?) as I suspect our UK midlands one of being pretty full of water vapour

Chris,

We do occasionally get clear shots, about four years ago I grabbed a quick series of shots of the moon one night whilst out camping in the Derbyshire Peak District (UK). A real compromise shot with my son's camera on the car roof, using a coat as a makeshift bean bag. Came out quite well (not good enough for here of course), but makes a neat screen saver with all the craters clearly visible.

Of course at certain phases and times, the earths atmosphere can make the moon look much bigger and I suppose these are the best times to grab it without huge lenses. (and of course the exposures need to be relatively short due to the movement and brightness of the moon, compared to other space objects).

Would be good replicating it with the D3.

[Bm7b5]

The 2 additional ones are superb aswell; can see why among favourites. I have tried for that early morning yellow and not got anything as vivid.

I am not going to post an image next to these superb shots, but here is a URL for comparison with 400mm edge of-window-cill supported shots
http://www.pbase.com/crisscross/image/107038568
Shows the value of a tripod - but also as I speculated before a location with very clear sky (yes/no Rick?) as I suspect our UK midlands one of being pretty full of water vapour

Dave: the pixel size of the moon depends partly on the lens as well as the sensor size; mine from 10mp 3872x2592 frame come out at 600pix diameter and no need to downsize, just crop

Well it was a relatively clear night for here, but where I live is a lot of air pollution as well as mist from the ocean, so it isn't as clear a sky as say Arizona, but yes the sky was clear.

I think that using a tripod is essential, but believe that locking up the mirror is probably the secret.

I also did a little some sharpening and contrast work in PP which also help put it over the top.

[Keith]

Bm7b5 (Rick)? Does your D300 use the title ' Exposure Delay' for your mirror lock up setting?
I have a D90 and its the only setting I can find that would relate to mirror lock up apart from mirror lock up for cleaning.
I have just purchased the Sigma 150-500mm lens, affectionately called my Sigzooka and I would like to have a try at photographing the Moon myself.
I have some half decent efforts using my 18-200VR lens on a tripod but not to your standards.
Very nice shot!