Hot answers tagged

38

but why i can see little bit of orange color with shutter speed 1/400 ? My best guess is that you had the camera set to automatic white balance (AWB). In the 1/200s shot, the moon was bright enough to easily be the brightest thing in the frame, and the white balance algorithm decided that that object was most likely to be white. In the 1/400s shot the ...


34

What makes the difference on partially and fully visible moon? In a word: shadows. I cannot understand why the IQ is extremely diminished when doing the same with an almost fully visible moon. The second image does appear to suffer from lower sharpness and overall quality. However, even if the technical image quality factors were equal, most importantly,...


17

The "ray" effect is known as sunstar. There are 2 conditions to achieve sunstars : use a narrow aperture (like f/16). point camera to small and bright light source. You achieved that effect very well. However, it doesn't serve the photograph. In the photo, the subject seems to be the moon. However, it is hard to tell it is the moon by looking at it only. ...


16

Your exposure settings will grossly overexpose the moon. Remember, the illuminated parts of the moon are in direct sunlight! Allowing for the moon's albedo, start with about ISO 200, f/8, and 1/125 second or equivalent. Similar to the 'Sunny 16' rule of thumb, the 'Lunar 11' rule of thumb says to use a shutter time of 1/ISO with f/11. In reality, about one-...


15

I can't speak for all manufacturers, but can answer your point 2. Canon does. Their higher end models on the top mode wheel (e.g. auto, P, aperture priority/shutter speed priority and manual etc), also have from one to three C modes. These allow you to register and save settings, be it shooting mode (manual, aperture priority etc) down to their relevant ...


13

Assuming both lenses are being used on the same size sensor, the area in the frame with a 600mm lens should be one quarter the area in the frame with a 300mm lens. The linear dimensions should change by a factor of two, the areal dimensions should change by a factor of the square of two, which is four. If you are not seeing the same object shot from the ...


13

Some possible reasons, arranged in the likely order of influence, for the lack of clarity in the example photo: 1) The optical limits of your lens. The EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 was released as a budget telephoto zoom lens in 1990 at the dawn of the EOS era. Compared to the current EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 STM, at the longest focal lengths and widest apertures ...


12

The best method I have found is to shoot the moon when there is still enough light in the sky to narrow the dynamic range between the Moon's surface and the surrounding sky. A moon just a little past new can be shot shortly after sunset and exposed so that details are visible from the earthshine reflecting from the dark part of the new moon. Shooting an ...


11

I agree with what Hermann said, but have a different answer as to how to avoid this. Expose properly. Notice that the blue smudge is much dimmer than the moon, which is so bright that it is totally blown out and even has a quite visible halo around it. Some of that may be caused by atmospheric effects, but I also suspect blooming due to extreme over ...


11

With an image like this, the best and easiest solution is probably manual exposure fusion. It's easy enough to do in any raster graphics editor (GIMP, Photoshop, etc.). For example, here's what I managed to produce from your original images in a few minutes in GIMP: Here are the steps I used: Open both images as layers in GIMP, with the darker image (moon ...


11

I have found these lens Nikon AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6G in a very good price. I am planning to use them mainly to take pictures of the moon. I am aware that this lens does not have image stabilisation. Is this a major drawback ? If you plan on shooting a full moon on a clear night, handheld, it shouldn't be, because you can easily get shutter speeds faster than ...


11

It looks like lens flare. It is an internal reflection inside the lens. It is caused by off axis light allowed to fall on the front surface if the lens from outside the field of view. For an example of such flare when the exposure is brightened please see: Can you photograph the milky way with a full moon out? It might also be sunlight reflecting off dust ...


9

Like comedy, it's in the timing. Shoot earlier in the day. This was taken in Southern California in December around 5:00pm. Moon. Blue sky. No need for HDR or exposure fusion or masks and layers. The moon is a very bright directly-sun-lit object. Treat accordingly. Canon XT/350D. EF 400mm f/5.6L USM. iso 100, f/11, 1/20s. Tripod and cable release.


9

The best time to shoot Earthshine is when the Moon is practically new, because the illuminated portion of the Moon's arc must be completely and utterly blown out in order to capture detail in the part of the Moon not illuminated by the Sun. You will need to use a tripod and cable release. Mirror lock up may not be a necessity depending on your shutter ...


9

I bracketed mine between iso 800 - 1600 to be safe. I was using a Canon 650D (crop sensor) with a 55-250mm STM lens on a tripod. My favorite picture ended up being at iso 1600 @ 1/2 second. Since the lens I was using isn't very sharp @ 250mm I figured I could get away with the slow shutter speed. I set my color balance for daylight and cropped in. Going ...


8

To do astrophotography with a 70-300mm lens using a film camera is a challenge, but is possible. One of the limiting factors is the speed of the film you use. In general you need a very fast speed film to do astrophotography, especially with longer focal lengths such as 300mm. This is because as the Earth rotates on its axis, the stars appear to move across ...


8

The moon is a fairly easy object to photograph. There are a few things that are helpful to know up front. As no specific lens example or photographic example was offered, I can only offer general thoughts based on many of the sample photos that I've seen from those who are new to astrophotography (specifically lunar imaging). Experience Everyone starts ...


8

Opening your aperture fully, so the actual aperture opening is circular, will get rid of the sunstars - but can give just too much of a halo (even more with a fast prime lens than with a small zoom!). The optimal choice of lens for your intent would be one that maintains a very near circular aperture no matter what aperture setting you choose - such will be ...


7

Within the constraints you have specified, GIMP would be the best way to go. It is completely free and entirely Mac compatible. You do not need 'full' HDR software, you just need to be able to composite a properly exposed moon with a properly exposed foreground. Given the sharply defined edge of the moon, this is simplicity itself in GIMP. Simply take the ...


7

The problem is that you are trying to take a photo way outside the dynamic range of your camera's sensor, but within the (very wide) dynamic range of human vision. The moon is lit by full sunlight, but the sky by only a low level of diffuse light. You could try shooting earlier, when there is more light remaining in the sky, giving a narrower dynamic range ...


7

A 300 mm lens is not so very much yet. So that you know what to expect, here is my shot of the planet Jupiter with four of its moons. My lens is a Sigma 70-300 mm cheap lens, but for this sample it does not matter, the 300 mm focal length is in question here: ^^ Jupiter and moons cropped to show 100% pixels inline. ^^ Here the full resolution photo. ...


7

More on the star effect...The aperture is created inside of your lens by overlapping petals, like this: The following is pulled from BH Photo Video's article on the subject (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/create-compelling-star-effects-sun-stars-starbursts-photos) The arms of the star are created from light ...


6

This is lens flare in the best case and a mirrored ghost image caused by the UV filter in the worst case. Or the other way around because you could fix the one of them by removing the filter. But obtaining a better lens is more expensive. :-) Ghosts caused by filters are typically exactly opposed of the light source that is mirrored. In the event that ...


6

I shot the above sequence with settings that varied from: f/4 to f/8 1/2s to 1/160s ISO 400-3200 You are right that the moon is moving quick, but unless you are using a very high focal length lens or planning to view/print the image at a very large size, the blurring may be completely acceptable at speeds significantly slower then 1/125s. In the image ...


6

This is done but most photos do not advertise their technique. If you search for moonscape on Google you will see lots of examples, mixed with some other artwork. The most common technique to include the moon though is not HDR. It is double-exposure. Unless the moon intersects something else in the scene, there is no need to use HDR and risk blurring from ...


6

You did not post your moon images; however, you should know that shots of a full or nearly full moon are frequently disappointing. This is because the moon’s craters are ringed by mountains. At the time of the full moon, it is high noon on our nearest neighbor. That means the sun is directly overhead and the mountains cast no shadows. We need to see the ...


6

It could be that the atmosphere or the "seeing" in your part of the world is creating the loss in sharpness. Or it could just be your lens. Super-zoom lenses like your 28-300 are notorious for not being good optically. Or, maybe your lens is just fine. Maybe you're shooting in RAW and you're not adding sharpening to the image? You mention your exposure ...


6

I don't think you need to spend more money. The moon is pretty easy to shoot, although a 600mm lens does require care in setting up. The tripod and head you have should work for lunar shots. Some tips: Mind your shutter speed. My starting point for moon pictures is using manual mode, ISO 200, 1/160 shutter speed, f/8.0 aperture. Adjust parameters as ...


5

It should be possible for you to photograph at least Venus and Mars. If you use a sky map, it becomes lots easier to prepare the shooting. http://www.space.com/16149-night-sky.html There you can find the current possitions of the planets and genereal tipps for astro-photography


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible