# camera and lens wont focus on the Moon



## zapman29 (Aug 1, 2009)

Ok, i speant like 2 hours trying to shoot the moon, with my camera... Its a canon 40D with a canon 2.8 Lens 70-200... I tried to set it some of the specs i have seen on line and it wouldn't focus so it could take the shot.... I tried in AV. manual.. manual and it was still blurry.. Can some one give some idea of what I am doing wrong... it was really frustrating...


----------



## Overread (Aug 1, 2009)

Hmm was the lens and camera just hunting the whole while or did it look as if it had locked onto the moon? Also you say you tried manual is that manual metering or manual focusing?

A point to make is that the camera will often lock onto the moon, but it will expose it badly - this is because the moon is very bright lightsource, but the black sky around it tricks the camera meter into overexposing the moon - so you have to underexpose the shot in order to get the details in the moon to show


----------



## musicaleCA (Aug 1, 2009)

Er, just set it to manual focus, and focus at the hyperfocal distance (infinity). Presto, sharp moon, at the aperture of who cares.

Note, better to get a T adaptor and stick your camera on a telescope to get such a shot. 300mm just isn't going to cut it for a close-up of the moon.


----------



## UUilliam (Aug 1, 2009)

musicaleCA said:


> Er, just set it to manual focus, and focus at the hyperfocal distance (infinity). Presto, sharp moon, at the aperture of who cares.
> 
> Note, better to get a T adaptor and stick your camera on a telescope to get such a shot. *200*mm just isn't going to cut it for a close-up of the moon.



fixed 

300mm doesnt cut it either... I use my 75-300mm to take a shot of the moon (with my canon 450D which is a 1.6x sensor therefore the 300mm was essentially 480mm... you need about 600mm + to get a decent picture.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 1, 2009)

70-200s are not the best choice, that is true... but mine did OK, and in autofocus too:







Its not the best... but it worked.  I think we all go through that phase where we want to shoot the moon and I found the exclipse especially fun to try.


----------



## zapman29 (Aug 1, 2009)

JerryPH said:


> 70-200s are not the best choice, that is true... but mine did OK, and in autofocus too:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


thanks jerry then what was the specs on the shot? I must be doing something wrong... it wont lock on it in auto to take a shot.....

a freind of mine was shooting it freehand with his nikon d90 and 70-200 no problem... dont know what is up..


----------



## UUilliam (Aug 1, 2009)

wait... are you using Auto focus point?
if you are change to Manual focus point (still in auto focus, just allows you to choose what you want to focus on...)
to do this you should see a button with the symbol of a rectangle with dots inside it (fro my canon 450D as an example.)





 (not my image)
the button for me to change my focus point is the + button (it doubles as the zoom in / out button when reviewing images)
click that then press SET and you should see a grid like this 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



you use your arrow keys to change which point you want it to focus on ( you can see where it is focusing on via the viewfinder as the dot lights up red.)

just place that dot on your moon and it should work 


as you see here: 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 the 40D uses the same button for this, i am pressuming the little dial under it is a scroller? if it is then im guessing you would scroll that to get your desired point


----------



## table1349 (Aug 1, 2009)

Exact setup, did you use a tripod? exif data might be helpful.  At a distance of 238,857 miles, the slightest movement is going to magnified by the distance to target.  

My moon shoots were all taken from a good tripod for stability.


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 1, 2009)

I've shot 90% of my moon shots w/o a tripod and my amateur eye couldn't tell a difference from the ones I shot with a tripod and a wireless shutter release.

Not be able to auto focus on the moon isn't related to using a tripod, there's something else going on... shouldn't be an issue focusing at all.

Not award winning, but handheld:

Nikon D90 with Sigma 18-250 at 250mm f/8 and 1/500 shutter.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 1, 2009)

zapman29 said:


> thanks jerry then what was the specs on the shot? I must be doing something wrong... it wont lock on it in auto to take a shot.....
> 
> a freind of mine was shooting it freehand with his nikon d90 and 70-200 no problem... dont know what is up..



Oh heck, I lied, it wasn't the 70-200... lol
The shot was taken with my D200 and the 18-200 lens. This was taken with a tripod at 9:00PM on September 21, 2007.  Camera was set to manual at 1/30th of a second and f/20.  VR was turned off on the lens and the focal point was set to 200mm.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 1, 2009)

Sunny 16 applies to the moon. Well almost. If the aperture is at f/8 are below you can easily snap it handheld without issue. Well unless you have Parkinson or too much caffeine.

f/20? Holy diffraction man.


----------



## musicaleCA (Aug 1, 2009)

Garbz said:


> f/20? Holy diffraction man.



Indeed! Meep. >.<


----------



## table1349 (Aug 1, 2009)

> N0YZE said:
> 
> 
> > I've shot 90% of my moon shots w/o a tripod and my amateur eye couldn't tell a difference from the ones I shot with a tripod and a wireless shutter release.
> ...


----------



## Big (Aug 1, 2009)

What were the chances this guy was doing the same exact thing I was at the same time (shooting the moon) Guess your info helps two people... And it works!


----------



## dhilberg (Aug 2, 2009)

Have you checked to make sure the focus limiter of your 70-200 isn't preventing the lens from focusing to infinity?


----------



## PhotoXopher (Aug 2, 2009)

gryphonslair99 said:


> The 400 f2.8 is not normally on my handheld list.



Original poster wasn't shooting with a 400mm lens.


----------



## table1349 (Aug 2, 2009)

N0YZE said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > The 400 f2.8 is not normally on my handheld list.
> ...



Didn't say they were.   Point is, do you really think you are more stable than a good tripod properly used?   If you have the tools, use them.  By doing so you eliminate one of the variables that can contribute to a problem.


----------



## zapman29 (Aug 3, 2009)

well i figured it out... i did not have set to single foucs point... i was able to take it at f2.8 and 1/500sec and it started locking in... but this was at 12 am.. so shots are very distant I am going to do it about 9 pm when the moon is lower  and see what happens... thanks for the help people......


----------



## Plato (Aug 4, 2009)

musicaleCA said:


> Er, just set it to manual focus, and focus at the hyperfocal distance (infinity). Presto, sharp moon, at the aperture of who cares.
> 
> Note, better to get a T adaptor and stick your camera on a telescope to get such a shot. 300mm just isn't going to cut it for a close-up of the moon.



Hyperfocal distance is not infinity.  It's the distance at which the far end of the DoF is infinity.  The hyperfocal distance varies with lens aperture and lens focal length.  It's just about impossible to set the hyperfocal distance unless the lens in use has DoF markings.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 5, 2009)

Actually for people with internet on their phones, or a bit of maths knowledge they could calculate it. Online Depth of Field Calculator

For everyone else you could print out one of the many hyperfocal charts:
http://www.vividlight.com/pdf/hyperfocal.PDF
Hyperfocal Distance Chart - DOFMaster

For those who don't understand hyperfocal read this:
Also there's a hyperfocal chart generator on the bottom of this page, which you can customise to your camera and your standard on circle of confusion.
Understanding the Hyperfocal Distance


----------



## Dao (Aug 5, 2009)

And there are few Dof calc apps for mobile phones as well.


----------



## KmH (Aug 5, 2009)

zapman29 said:


> ......but this was at 12 am.. so shots are very distant I am going to do it about 9 pm when the moon is lower and see what happens... thanks for the help people......


The Moon is the same apparent size when it's higher in the sky. There's just nothing near by to compare it's apparent size to.

The closer to the horizon the Moon is, the greater the thickness of the atmosphere (x3 at the horizon) and turbulence in the atmosphere can make your images look very soft focus wise. The least atmospheric turbulence occurs when the Moon is directly overhead and there is only 1 thickness of atmosphere.


----------



## Stosh (Aug 5, 2009)

Exactly.  Moon does not get bigger at the horizon.  It's an optical illusion.  In fact it's slightly smaller vertically because of the refraction of the atmosphere at that extreme angle.  That's why it appears to sometimes be compressed at the horizon.

If you're trying to get your best shot of the moon, always take it when it's at its highest in the sky.


----------



## Plato (Aug 9, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Actually for people with internet on their phones, or a bit of maths knowledge they could calculate it. Online Depth of Field Calculator
> 
> For everyone else you could print out one of the many hyperfocal charts:
> http://www.vividlight.com/pdf/hyperfocal.PDF
> ...



True but it's not as practical as having the DoF settings on the lens.


----------

