The Moon

[jtimmons]

How do you photograph the moon so that the detail shows up. (Not just as a big white ball, but with craters and mountains and such. Any examples?

Thanks.

 

[0bli0]

use the sunny rule and then adjust based on size of moon, your lens, etc. start with f/16 or f/11 @ 125 with iso 100 or 200
then look at your image (histogram will be deceiving)

 

[Groucho]

My understanding is that you underexpose slightly (to keep from blowing out details), and it helps a lot if you get it halfway through the cycle - the sun being on the side makes lots of nice, sharp shadows across the face of the room.

I'm sure that it helps greatly if you go far away from any lights and shoot on a cloudy night.

I tried one night and got a few "OK" photos. I've been thinking about trying a telescope with a T-mount adapter hooked into my DSLR, which seems like a fairly affordable option (the adapters are pretty cheap), but the fact that so few people seem to do it makes me convinced that there's SOMEthing I'm overlooking, it can't be that easy. I do know that you'd have to shoot in full manual mode, and focusing is tricky, but that doesn't seem so bad in and of itself.

Too many other projects at the moment so that will have to wait until next year at least, anyway.

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I'm sure that it helps greatly if you go far away from any lights and shoot on a cloudy night.

Ok, this kind of struck me as funny. If it were a cloudy night how would you see the moon? Or were you referring to clouds on the moon?

Jeff

 

[Master Mason]

I think he meant so that the stars weren't too bright, but not so cloudy that you can't see the moon. If the stars are too bright, it might cause some issues with exposure etc.... but thats just a guess.

 

[handicap18]

I've found it very easy to photograph the moon. The piece of equipment that is THE most helpful is a tripod. Not because you want to do a long exposure, but because of the hand shake. If you have a camera or a lens that has IS/VR then you might not need a tripod. I don't have a lens with VR yet, so I use a tripod. I use the longest lens I have which is a 70-300mm and extend it out to 300mm which on a dSLR is film equivilent of 450mm. I also used spot metering. This puts the meter just about entirely on the moon itself and gets a very good reading with little interference from the surrounding black sky.

Here are a few I took earlier this year.
This one I'm not sure of the exif data right now, croped a bit:

This one back in Feb was a few days before the full moon, no crop: ISO 200, f/8, 1/400th (I had to shrink it so it would fit better on this board. A more detailed version can be found here: Moon with no crop )

This one was just after the full moon, croped to cut out some of the sky: ISO 200, f/5.6, 1/200th.

 

[pyrxtc]

here are some I got. I was very lucky since it was just me stepping outside on my steps and holding the camera in my hands on a cold night.

these are all SOOC. I didn't even crop so sorry they are so far away

 

[Groucho]

Actually, it was a simple matter of my fingers moving faster than my brain.

What I meant was far away from the lights of the city, AND a cloudless (not cloudy!) night. For the least amount of "junk" to cause distortion between your lens and the moon.

I apologize for being inscrutable. I hereby sentence myself to having to exclusively use a Kodak Disc camera for the next week.

(I used to have one of those, I wonder what happened to it...)

 

[Groucho]

For what it's worth, here's one of my moon shots. Cropped to 100%, tripod, Pentax *ist DL, old Quantaray 70-210mm manual focus at max zoom, from my backyard. Not spectacular but was my first try, and I'm sure I could do better with some more experimenting. A longer lens would help, too!

 

[Master Mason]

I apologize for being inscrutable. I hereby sentence myself to having to exclusively use a Kodak Disc camera for the next week.

(I used to have one of those, I wonder what happened to it...)

I have my grandma's old disk camera in a box in the garage... but they quit making disks for it, so your off the hook do to lack of supplies

 

[Groucho]

I have my grandma's old disk camera in a box in the garage... but they quit making disks for it, so your off the hook do to lack of supplies

Phew!

I even have one of the short-lived Kodak instant cameras somewhere, too... the ones that Polaroid forced them to stop making. I remember getting a check as part of a settlement... which really makes for mixed feelings when you're a kid, you want the camera but money's awful nice too!

I can't remember what my primary camera was before I got my K-1000... it seems like I must have had a PnS 35mm but I'll be darned if I can remember what it was.

 

[AZ JazzyJ]

I have a couple of pictures of the moon that was out when the plumber came over to fix our kitchen sink when it started to do it's Yellowstone Park geyser imitation. I think it would be best if I didn't post those as this is a family board. My eyes are still burning and I may have to replace my cell phone as I think the camera refuses to function after that sight.

Jeff

 

[Master Mason]

I have a couple of pictures of the moon that was out when the plumber came over to fix our kitchen sink when it started to do it's Yellowstone Park geyser imitation. I think it would be best if I didn't post those as this is a family board. My eyes are still burning and I may have to replace my cell phone as I think the camera refuses to function after that sight.

Jeff

Way way TMI

 

[Master Mason]

Phew!

I even have one of the short-lived Kodak instant cameras somewhere, too... the ones that Polaroid forced them to stop making. I remember getting a check as part of a settlement... which really makes for mixed feelings when you're a kid, you want the camera but money's awful nice too!

I can't remember what my primary camera was before I got my K-1000... it seems like I must have had a PnS 35mm but I'll be darned if I can remember what it was.

My first camera that was mine was a Mik o Matic.... it was a mickey head.... it took 110 or 126 can't remember and it is in that camera box in the rafters I keep talking about. With it is my dad's old Practicka which he bought new in 55 and I took when He finally upgraded to a Minolta SLR in the mid 70's.... I used that unill I was a Junior in HS and got the K-1000 as well.

 

[boBQuincy]

Our Moon has a reflectance of about 10% average. As 0bli0 pointed out, the "sunny day rule" is about right since it is designed for a reflectance of 18%. Bracket one stop around that and the results should be pretty good.

Our camera meters are about worthless for getting a reading of the Moon since there is so much dark sky in the picture (unless you're sporting a 1000+ mm lens).

Anyway, Moon shots are fun, the best days are supposed to be about two days before full, with the sky a nice shade of deep blue instead of black.

 

[JR6ooo4]

Our Moon has a reflectance of about 10% average. As 0bli0 pointed out, the "sunny day rule" is about right since it is designed for a reflectance of 18%. Bracket one stop around that and the results should be pretty good.

Our camera meters are about worthless for getting a reading of the Moon since there is so much dark sky in the picture (unless you're sporting a 1000+ mm lens).

Anyway, Moon shots are fun, the best days are supposed to be about two days before full, with the sky a nice shade of deep blue instead of black.

OT radio control huh? How many channels? can you control switch tracks, etc.? I have my eye on my dads 40 year old lionel set.

MIkeeee

 

[lovingmy2boys]

Here is my shot I took a few weeks ago. This is cropped.

 

[JR6ooo4]

I use the longest lens I have which is a 70-300mm and extend it out to 300mm which on a dSLR is film equivilent of 450mm

THis can be confusing. Because of the crop factor of some digital cameras the above relation is made. It is not untrue, but only in two dimensions. THe sensor in the back of a digital camera is smaller than the regular film negative. So the field of view captured with crop sensor digital cams is not as wide and not as tall as the old film. Like if you had zoomed the additional amount from 300 to 450mm. But you will not be any closer to the moon. If viewed actual pixels then the moon will be the same size and no greater detail. But since the digi capture is smaller it must be "stretched" to print the same size as the film negative. Therefore if you print two 8x10 prints the moon in the crop digi print will be bigger.

Handicap18,
I am sure you knew that. But there are so many new cam owners here every day, and since I have not typed this up in a few months I thought I would post it again.

Mikeeee

 

[boBQuincy]

Here's a composite of two exposures that were taken within seconds of each other. The sky was 1 S @f/4, the moon 1/20 @ f8, both at ISO 100 with a 70-200 set of course, at 200.

This is how our eyes would see the scene but the camera is far more fussy and needs a little 'range extension'.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I wouldn't worry about the exposure level. Just try a lot of different exposures and keep the one you want. Obviously, it's not going anywhere, so you have plenty of opportunities to get the shot.

For the best sense of depth, don't shoot the moon when it is full. You don't get any shadows.

THis can be confusing. Because of the crop factor of some digital cameras the above relation is made. It is not untrue, but only in two dimensions. THe sensor in the back of a digital camera is smaller than the regular film negative. So the field of view captured with crop sensor digital cams is not as wide and not as tall as the old film. Like if you had zoomed the additional amount from 300 to 450mm. But you will not be any closer to the moon. If viewed actual pixels then the moon will be the same size and no greater detail. But since the digi capture is smaller it must be "stretched" to print the same size as the film negative. Therefore if you print two 8x10 prints the moon in the crop digi print will be bigger.

This can indeed be very confusing. When you say that there will be no greater detail, you are making the assumption that the pixel density between the two sensors (full frame and 1.6x) are the same. However, if both sensors have the same number of pixels, the moon will cover more pixels and have more detail on the 1.6x camera rather than the full frame camera.

The subject gets really confusing really fast.