dinsy said:Just for a change of pace: last month's super moon behind Adelaide's St Peters Cathedral.
Very nice shot dinsy.
Upvote
0
dinsy said:Just for a change of pace: last month's super moon behind Adelaide's St Peters Cathedral.
jrista said:JumboShrimp said:Lunar eclipse from 2010. The resolution sucks, but I like the colors. Can't recall the exact equipment, but probably a Canon 5D2 with a 300/4L IS (?).
Very nice! Good color and shading. I like it.
It's tough to get better detail than that once you go into the umbra unless your tracking the moon. You lose spatial resolution at higher ISO, almost as much as you do with longer exposures at lower ISO due to motion. I did eclipse photography for a few years before I got my tracking mount, and most of my shots weren't any better than yours (many were worse! ) With a longer lens, it gets a little better, however you have to increase our shutter speed even more (to counteract the motion of the moon...it appears faster the longer the focal length) and use an even higher ISO.
You need a mount that can track at lunar rate (vs. just sidereal) to get anything like this:
JumboShrimp said:jrista said:JumboShrimp said:Lunar eclipse from 2010. The resolution sucks, but I like the colors. Can't recall the exact equipment, but probably a Canon 5D2 with a 300/4L IS (?).
Very nice! Good color and shading. I like it.
It's tough to get better detail than that once you go into the umbra unless your tracking the moon. You lose spatial resolution at higher ISO, almost as much as you do with longer exposures at lower ISO due to motion. I did eclipse photography for a few years before I got my tracking mount, and most of my shots weren't any better than yours (many were worse! ) With a longer lens, it gets a little better, however you have to increase our shutter speed even more (to counteract the motion of the moon...it appears faster the longer the focal length) and use an even higher ISO.
You need a mount that can track at lunar rate (vs. just sidereal) to get anything like this:
Exceedingly fine shot, jrista. I am now officially jealous.
procentje20 said:So, I promised to come back to this topic when my Kenko 3x extender got in. And its in. Its throwing lens errors however, so I had to fiddle around a lot before I could get it to make pictures.
When no lens is attached it errors, and with the Tamron 150-600 it errors. It does however work fine with the 85mm. So i'm not sure whats going on.
I ended up taping up all the pins on a 12mm extension tube, and put that between the body and the kenko.
The moon is still a bit low right now for the best shots (humid air and all that), but I shot a video to show what the field of view is on this combo.
Here is the link: http://youtu.be/Xhz4ux7F8BQ
:edit:
Moon is bit higher now. i did a shot with and without the kenko from the same position. Lens fixed on the tripod.
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/600mm.jpg
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/1800mm.jpg
The fringing on both setups is about the same. These shots were set to b&w because I like the moon best that way. Apart from that and cropping I did nothing.
jrista said:procentje20 said:So, I promised to come back to this topic when my Kenko 3x extender got in. And its in. Its throwing lens errors however, so I had to fiddle around a lot before I could get it to make pictures.
When no lens is attached it errors, and with the Tamron 150-600 it errors. It does however work fine with the 85mm. So i'm not sure whats going on.
I ended up taping up all the pins on a 12mm extension tube, and put that between the body and the kenko.
The moon is still a bit low right now for the best shots (humid air and all that), but I shot a video to show what the field of view is on this combo.
Here is the link: http://youtu.be/Xhz4ux7F8BQ
:edit:
Moon is bit higher now. i did a shot with and without the kenko from the same position. Lens fixed on the tripod.
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/600mm.jpg
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/1800mm.jpg
The fringing on both setups is about the same. These shots were set to b&w because I like the moon best that way. Apart from that and cropping I did nothing.
Just to point out...the moon is out of focus there. Which is expected, since you used an extension tube...that kills infinity focus in favor of closer focus than the lens' default MFD. You wont' be able to sharply focus the moon until you remove the extension tube.
bwud said:Recent supermoon. Kinda.
procentje20 said:jrista said:procentje20 said:So, I promised to come back to this topic when my Kenko 3x extender got in. And its in. Its throwing lens errors however, so I had to fiddle around a lot before I could get it to make pictures.
When no lens is attached it errors, and with the Tamron 150-600 it errors. It does however work fine with the 85mm. So i'm not sure whats going on.
I ended up taping up all the pins on a 12mm extension tube, and put that between the body and the kenko.
The moon is still a bit low right now for the best shots (humid air and all that), but I shot a video to show what the field of view is on this combo.
Here is the link: http://youtu.be/Xhz4ux7F8BQ
:edit:
Moon is bit higher now. i did a shot with and without the kenko from the same position. Lens fixed on the tripod.
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/600mm.jpg
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/1800mm.jpg
The fringing on both setups is about the same. These shots were set to b&w because I like the moon best that way. Apart from that and cropping I did nothing.
Just to point out...the moon is out of focus there. Which is expected, since you used an extension tube...that kills infinity focus in favor of closer focus than the lens' default MFD. You wont' be able to sharply focus the moon until you remove the extension tube.
I noticed twisting off the lens a bit also allows for shots to fire, as the lens error is no longer present.
What would you say should be my f stop on the lens with the 3x attached? I think I can go pretty low with the shutter speeds, about 1/160 to only counter the moons movement, as I have a pretty sturdy tripod.
yorgasor said:procentje20 said:jrista said:procentje20 said:So, I promised to come back to this topic when my Kenko 3x extender got in. And its in. Its throwing lens errors however, so I had to fiddle around a lot before I could get it to make pictures.
When no lens is attached it errors, and with the Tamron 150-600 it errors. It does however work fine with the 85mm. So i'm not sure whats going on.
I ended up taping up all the pins on a 12mm extension tube, and put that between the body and the kenko.
The moon is still a bit low right now for the best shots (humid air and all that), but I shot a video to show what the field of view is on this combo.
Here is the link: http://youtu.be/Xhz4ux7F8BQ
:edit:
Moon is bit higher now. i did a shot with and without the kenko from the same position. Lens fixed on the tripod.
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/600mm.jpg
http://blog.quicksetup.nl/images/1800mm.jpg
The fringing on both setups is about the same. These shots were set to b&w because I like the moon best that way. Apart from that and cropping I did nothing.
Just to point out...the moon is out of focus there. Which is expected, since you used an extension tube...that kills infinity focus in favor of closer focus than the lens' default MFD. You wont' be able to sharply focus the moon until you remove the extension tube.
I noticed twisting off the lens a bit also allows for shots to fire, as the lens error is no longer present.
What would you say should be my f stop on the lens with the 3x attached? I think I can go pretty low with the shutter speeds, about 1/160 to only counter the moons movement, as I have a pretty sturdy tripod.
I have a piece of black electrical tape that I put over the pins on the camera body. That let me use my Canon 1.4x & 2x III extenders on my Nikon 300mm AIS lens. I'd recommend something like that over loosely connecting the lens to the body.
Also, keep in mind that the higher the magnification, the faster the shutter speed you'll need. You might be able to get away with 1/160th at 100mm or 200mm, but at 600mm you'll need a lot higher. I went with 1/320th at 600mm, at 1800mm you may need 1/600 or 1/800.
niteclicks said:Anyone else get up early? I couldn't get anything very clear here, had to shoot though a veil of thin clouds.
niteclicks said:Anyone else get up early? I couldn't get anything very clear here, had to shoot though a veil of thin clouds.
Nice.... I am jealous of your weatherDylan777 said:niteclicks said:Anyone else get up early? I couldn't get anything very clear here, had to shoot though a veil of thin clouds.
I did...weather was nice in California this early morning
Don Haines said:Nice.... I am jealous of your weatherDylan777 said:niteclicks said:Anyone else get up early? I couldn't get anything very clear here, had to shoot though a veil of thin clouds.
I did...weather was nice in California this early morning