Michael is presumably quite correctly referring to the inverse square law whereby as the moon moves further away the observed brightness will fall fall off as 1/(distance^2) because the radiated light is spread out as hits us over a larger area here.
Apparently, “The tribes of what is now the northeastern United States called this the Snow Moon or the Storm Moon because of the heavy snows that fall in this season."
To put what you are saying into more quantitative terms, the further away the moon is, the less the light that hits the aperture of your lens, and the number of photons falls off proportional 1/d^2. But the size of the image on your sensor also decreases proportionately to 1/d^2 so the brightness remains constant since the less light is concentrated on a smaller area.To be clear, the amount of light the moon casts will follow that law, but the observed or photographed surface brightness doesn't change. Only the size changes. So the exposure doesn't change, only the size of the moon in the image.
If in doubt, imagine traveling to the moon. You'll see the disc get larger and larger, but the surface won't get brighter.
Right, that's very specialised equipment. 1/500s is probably too fast, 1/250 or 1/125 will probably do as well so ISO 400 should probably work with f/10. At some point you'll see the blur in the moon...
Canon's dedication to strong anti aliasing filters will continue, I'm sure.
canon doesn’t need to dominate FF MILC sales to remain on top, it’s a tiny segment of the market. The vast majority of consumers are buying APS-C cameras and canons M50 is killing it in sales in Japan. APS-C sales with the M and Rebel line is what keeps them on top, not $3k FF bodies and $3k RF lenses,
As a scientist, I do regret the paucity of scientists in newsrooms, parliaments etc. However, I am not sure that a science degree is essential for the study of history. The ability to use Ngram viewer does help though. Here is the frequency of occurrence of "snow moon" in books. It appears to go back for a couple of centuries. I am not going to read all the books to look at the context.That's what the clickbait media seems to have agreed upon. You can tell when everyone is quoting each other. Not a science degree in those newsrooms.
Once or twice every year, like clockwork, the full moon is at perigee. Not too many years ago, the media hypesters made up the term "supermoon" to sell advertisements. For a couple months before and after it's visually virtually identical in appearance.
There has been considerable discussion/guesstimates/speculation about possible R5 and R6 pricepoint earlier in this thread as well as in the huge and ongoing R5 thread.gp^ Pricing?
Ok, what are some of your estimated prices for these new releases that are potentially coming that have been rumored?
The r6 based on speculated features is how much? That r5? Anyone? Anyone want to play that game?
Interested because, quite frankly, the regular consumer who is always looking for a cool new advancement camera is going to be highly interested. And with the higher fps, ibis, card slots etc., if it's a significant upgrade to the EOSR, I'll be shooting for that. Also, I'm not a video guy, are those advancements really worth it for me or people who are just still photo person? Heck, the EOS r may drop in price and we can jump on one of those or a 2nd body.
Because at its current price point, the EOS R is a helluva camera. At a lower price... even greater. And I'm not keen on spending almost 5k for a mirrorless camera, and that RF glass, for a "newer" camera that may not fit all my needs and have bells whistles I don't need.
Of course you are joking. But I personally would love to see some more computational photography features build into the cameras.Apparently the #1 feature we need in the R5 is not megapixels or dynamic range or IBIS or even sweet 4k video specs. It's automatic stacking of moon exposures.
Yo davo, CR is a rumours site. We also talk about our gear, and what works best in certain situations. Some of us are afflicted with GAS, and not the hot air you are spewing. You joined on Jan 11, with your trollish negativity you are welcome to leave at any time. You've probably already been banned at different sites under different names. Get a life. All this is just my humble opinion.Welcome to CR Moon Talk.
Ok, mine isn't quite that luminous or sharp but I've only taken a couple whacks at this. I totally get the point about full images being less interesting than phased of pleasing foreground shots.Yo davo, CR is a rumours site. We also talk about our gear, and what works best in certain situations. Some of us are afflicted with GAS, and not the hot air you are spewing. You joined on Jan 11, with your trollish negativity you are welcome to leave at any time. You've probably already been banned at different sites under different names. Get a life. All this is just my humble opinion.
View attachment 188597
I took this on Dec 3/17 with my old 5D MKII and 100-400Land 2xTC. I took over 200 photos and stacked the best 150 or so of them. It is my best moon photo so far. I hope to do better with my 5DsR some day.