Half Moon - 3 versions

[stevelee]

And just for grins, this is what Mars looked like that night through the 400 mm lens. It was closer than usual. Again, a 100% crop.

 

[AlanF]

And just for grins, this is what Mars looked like that night through the 400 mm lens. It was closer than usual. Again, a 100% crop.

View attachment 189589

The newspapers claim that the decrease in pollution is a boon for astronomy. And that is really a neat one of the red planet. For the fun of it, I gave the vanilla shot of the moon a dose of DxO's Clearviewplus. It really does bring out a huge amount of detail.

 

[AaronT]

The newspapers claim that the decrease in pollution is a boon for astronomy. And that is really a neat one of the red planet. For the fun of it, I gave the vanilla shot of the moon a dose of DxO's Clearviewplus. It really does bring out a huge amount of detail.
View attachment 189604

Some might call it over processed but I like that version. BTW, what lens did you use?

 

[stevelee]

The newspapers claim that the decrease in pollution is a boon for astronomy. And that is really a neat one of the red planet. For the fun of it, I gave the vanilla shot of the moon a dose of DxO's Clearviewplus. It really does bring out a huge amount of detail.

That is lovely, and doesn't seem to have as many artifacts as your earlier processed versions. I like the detail.

I live in a metropolitan area north of a good-sized city. So light pollution is more of a factor than anything else. I have never bothered to get my telescope out since I've lived here. We certainly couldn't see any deep sky objects. The moon and Mars were both to my south, of course, toward the city, but bright enough for that not to matter, and high enough in the sky to be above the crud near the horizon.

I did take some pictures of the moon and of Jupiter through my telescope back when I lived in the country south of town, and I was still shooting film. The telescope itself is OK, but the clock drive is probably not very accurate, and the angle is hit-or-miss, and I really couldn't see through the camera well enough to focus at night. I would set it up during the day and focus on something far away. If I lived in a less light-polluted area, I would be tempted to buy a new telescope with all the computer aiming and tracking controls. But it is too easy just to go look though others' telescopes on viewing nights.

Given all those limitations, my pictures of Jupiter are at least recognizable. I could see four of its moons through the telescope, but none of them showed up on the slide. The moon pictures are not as good as what I get handheld at 400 mm.

 

[Maximilian]

... I've re-processed this so many times my Wife is starting to call me Moon Boy. The first is the original and the second is my new favourite, which changes by the day, or hour. ...

I like both. No real favorite.

 

[angrydog]

Here is a cropped JPEG SOC I took last week. EOS R, Sigma 150-600 & 1.4 TC, 840mm, 1/50 sec. f/11 ISO 100

 

[AaronT]

View attachment 189635

Here is a cropped JPEG SOC I took last week. EOS R, Sigma 150-600 & 1.4 TC, 840mm, 1/50 sec. f/11 ISO 100

Great photo angrydog!

 

[AlanF]

Shots of the half moon this week to see how the 200-800mm on the RF performed at 800mm and 1600mm with the 2xTC. Plenty of detail, and a bit more with the 1600mm, seen at the pixel level. Little processing apart from tweaking up the contrast.

 

[Click]

Impressive details. Very nice shots. Well done, Sir!