# Supermoon this Sat.  Beginners who like to shoot full moon, get ready.



## Dao (May 4, 2012)

'Supermoon' Science: Why Saturday's Full Moon is Biggest of 2012 | Space.com

If you have questions about taking photos of the full moon, ask now.


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 4, 2012)

Thanks for the post.  I posted the same thing earlier this week but I'd like to hear your thoughts on getting a really good shot. 

My post:  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ing-supermoon-shots-how-do-you-get-these.html

My approach was going to be as follows:  Try to get out at least an hour early to set up. Get my tripod set up, mirror locked up and be ready to go. Then when the moon starts to rise, take a bunch of shots and hope to get a gold nugget.

What are your suggestions?

Thanks.


----------



## Bolthead (May 4, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:


> Thanks for the post.  I posted the same thing earlier this week but I'd like to hear your thoughts on getting a really good shot.
> 
> My post:  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...ing-supermoon-shots-how-do-you-get-these.html
> 
> ...



Is it necessary to lock up the mirror?


----------



## o hey tyler (May 4, 2012)

Bolthead said:


> jwbryson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for the post.  I posted the same thing earlier this week but I'd like to hear your thoughts on getting a really good shot.
> ...



If you want optimally sharp photos. 

Also, S-S-S-SUPERMOON!!!


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 4, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> Bolthead said:
> 
> 
> > Is it necessary to lock up the mirror?
> ...




This was my understanding as well.  I have also heard to use the self-timer (2 seconds, etc.) to take the image to prevent even the slightest camera shake from pressing the shutter release button.


----------



## Dao (May 4, 2012)

Check the moon rise time from here
Sun or Moon Rise/Set Table for One Year: U.S. Cities and Towns &mdash; Naval Oceanography Portal


Here is what I will do for moon only shots

- Camera with telelphoto lens on Tripod
- Mirror lockup or Liveview
- Aperture set to sweet spot (It depends on the lens.  Usually maybe f/8 to f/11.  Check Lens reviews site that has MTF chart to find out.  i.e. photozone.de)
- Spot meter the moon and see a rough setting. (for f/8, it could be around 1/200 to 1/400).  EDIT:[I usually shoot with manual and just starts with f/8 and 1/200 with iso100 and go from there.]
- With Liveview, I will digital zoom in all the way and find the craters.  Because it is a full moon, you can only see the craters with shadow at the top, bottom or sides.  I will manual focus based on them.
- Remote shutter or 8 secs delay.   I found that 8 sec delay is better.  If you zoom in and using digital zoom on the liveview screen, after you adjust the focus manually and click the shutter button, you will see the moon is still shifting up and down on the screen.  8 secs is enough for the shifting stop. 
- Review the photo and adjust shutter speed if needed for the next shot.


For Moon rise shot that has foreground objects.  I have not done that before, but I think I will bracket the shots and merge them in post.  In that case, I can expose the foreground as well as the moon.


----------



## MReid (May 4, 2012)

Fine line between sweet spot and the moon movement blurring details and ISO.
Definitely use a tripod.

I believe high mm combined with foreground objects (makes the moon look even bigger) taken just before rise or set would be a good combination.
Not an expert at moon photography, just relaying my plan. Supposed to be cloudy here so may not happen anyway.


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 4, 2012)

Dao said:


> Spot meter the moon and see a rough setting. (for f/8, it could be around 1/200 to 1/400)



On the image below that I took a few weeks ago on the Eastern shore (Ocean City, MD), I was spot metering and had my D90 on a tripod.  I kept having problems, however, with the camera auto-focusing which I did not understand since I was zoomed in to nearly 180mm and the moon appeared large in my viewfinder.   It auto-focused maybe 1/2 the time.  But you can see in the image that the focus in not perfect.  *I did not lock up the mirror and I did not use time-delay.  *This time I will.


*Question -- if I want to manually focus on the moon, is it appropriate to have the focus set to infinity?


*







[/URL] Moon Close Up 2 by jwbryson1, on Flickr[/IMG]



Thanks.


----------



## Dao (May 4, 2012)

Since I will use liveview and digital zoom in on the screen and adjust the focus that way, so I do not set focus to infinity.  I remember I saw it somewhere (maybe from forum member Astrostu) that focus to infinity may not be the best.


----------



## KmH (May 4, 2012)

[





jwbryson1 said:


> *Question -- if I want to manually focus on the moon, is it appropriate to have the focus set to infinity?
> *
> Thanks.


Since the moon is about 250,000 miles away, yes infinity is a good focus setting to use. However, most lenses don't have a clear indicator of where infinity focus is on the focus distance scale. Just turning the focus ring to it's extreme of focus range is often a bit past or in front of infinity focus.

For the same reason, 250,000 miles away that is, DoF also matters little. Use the lens aperture that delivers the sharpest focus your lens can produce.

Turbulence in the atmosphere will soften focus somewhat depending on how much it is moving about.

To minimize the amount of atmosphere you are shooting through, shoot when the moon is as close to straight overhead as possible.


----------



## Ballistics (May 4, 2012)

moon

Here's a pretty good write up.


----------



## pgriz (May 4, 2012)

The moon is much more interesting when it is just at the horizon, and you can arrange to have an interesting foreground object (foreground as in "on earth" as opposed to "within 10 feet") within the field of view.  A useful tool that I have mentioned in the past is The Photographer's Ephemeris | Plan your shoot.  By moving the cursor, and scrolling in/out, you can see where you need to locate yourself to get the rising moon to be close to a landmark or interesting object.  Happy Shooting!


----------



## LINYBIMMER (May 4, 2012)

*Question -- if I want to manually focus on the moon, is it appropriate to have the focus set to infinity?

Or Beyond?


*






[/URL] Moon Close Up 2 by jwbryson1, on Flickr[/IMG]



Thanks.[/QUOTE]


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 4, 2012)

KmH said:


> [
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks.  I agree with PGRIZ that I find moon shots at the horizon to be more interesting and more colorful for that matter.


----------



## pgriz (May 4, 2012)

The simplest way, if your camera has "live-view" capabilities, is to focus on the moon that way in magnified live-view mode.  Much more precise than doing it from the distance scale.  Many lenses have their "infinity" stop beyond the infinity point, to allow for expansion and contraction of the lens due to temperature.


----------



## 480sparky (May 4, 2012)

pgriz said:


> ......... Many lenses have their "infinity" stop beyond the infinity point, to allow for expansion and contraction of the lens due to temperature.



And all these years I thought is was because infrared has a different focus point than visible light.


----------



## pgriz (May 4, 2012)

That too,  but the camera had to be film to accomodate IR film.  Not as useful with digital, unless you have a specially-modified camera.


----------



## TCampbell (May 4, 2012)

Shooting the moonrise about a day (or 2) *before* the full moon will give you a richer bluer sky.  On the night of the full moon, the moon is opposite the sun.  The moon only rises once the sun is set and the background sky will pretty much just be black.  The day before the full moon the moon will visually "appear" to be full (although technically it's not) but it rises early enough that you get the moon rise with the sun near enough to sunset that the sky has that rich blue tone that you get up to about 20-25 minutes after a sunset.


----------



## orb9220 (May 4, 2012)

Can get handheld Moon shots. D90-Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D with Tamron 1.4x




October &quot;Harvest Moon&quot; 3 of 3 (Full Crop) by Orbmiser, on Flickr

As didn't have a tripod at the time. Tho setting up with one will get you best results. 
Or shooting moon during daytime hours can get some interesting shots.




Moon over Belfry 2 by Orbmiser, on Flickr

Might try tomorrow night myself but only have the 55-200vr now so not expecting much. As before was the Nikon 80-200 f2.8 AF-D and tamron 1.4x.

Tried once before with the 55-200vr and wasn't too happy tho again also handheld.


June Moon on the Half - Test by Orbmiser, on Flickr


.


----------



## HabanoLover (May 4, 2012)

Is it even worth attempting with the kit lens?


----------



## pgriz (May 4, 2012)

HabanoLover said:


> Is it even worth attempting with the kit lens?



Why not?  What's the absolute worse that could happen?  And on the plus side, you could get a sweet shot!  And if not, you'll still learn something.


----------



## HabanoLover (May 4, 2012)

pgriz said:


> HabanoLover said:
> 
> 
> > Is it even worth attempting with the kit lens?
> ...



Very true!


----------



## flowness (May 4, 2012)

So, my camera doesn't do the mirror lock. Is there any reason long exposure, on tripod, set off with remote, is not sufficient? Why is the mirror lock better?


----------



## 480sparky (May 4, 2012)

Mirror lock-up helps because when the mirror moves up, it can cause the camera to shake.  If that happens, the camera will still be moving when the shutter opens.  Result..... camera blur.  Having a mirror-up option allows you to manually raise the mirror, then wait until any camera vibration is stopped, then you can open the shutter.

Having a good, heavy tripod will really help (notice 'cheap' is not included in that list!), as well as a remote (touching the shutter button on the camera can also cause it to move!).  








To further reduce camera shake, try adding some weight to the tripod if possible.  I just use my pack.








If you have a laptop computer or a smart phone, you may want to look into shooting 'tethered', so you only need to touch the camera to compose & focus.... the entire exposing process is 100% hands-off.


----------



## TCampbell (May 4, 2012)

If you can't get a sharp image of the moon, it may not be your fault... astro-photos are subject to a problem called "seeing".  Atmosphere turbulence creates distortions making images slightly wobble and blur.

By way of analogy:  imagine you've got a penny laying on the bottom of a swimming pool.  You are trying to read the date on that penny by looking at it through a powerful scope.  If someone starts splashing in the pool to create lots of waves it will be EXTREMELY difficult for you to get a sharp image of the penny.  But if the pool is completely calm, it'll be much easier.

You can use this website to check the "seeing" conditions where you live (this website is very popular among amateur astronomers... especially if they are imagers):  Clear Sky Chart Homepage

The factors listed are cloud cover (which is obvious), transparency (the transparency of the air usually attributed to the amount of water vapor in the air), "seeing" (the turbulence), and "darkness" (light pollution from ground-based light sources -- which doesn't matter a whole lot when you're trying to look at the brightness of the full moon.)

Special lenses are typically NOT required to photograph the moon.  If you think about it, the Sunny 16 rule should apply to the moon (Sunny 16 says that when shooting a subject in full-sun, you can set the f-stop to 16 and set the shutter speed to the inverse of the ISO speed.  E.g. if using ISO 100, then set the shutter to 1/100th).  While the moon is "technically" in full sunlight, I've never been able to expose it at the Sunny 16 exposure... usually I'm 2 stops down from that (I could shoot at f/16, 1/100th, and ISO 400).  

BUT... if the "seeing" conditions are not favorable (and they're usually even worse when shooting objects near the horizon because you're looking through a lot more atmosphere) then even with a fast shutter speed and a solid tripod and a remote release and all the other tricks to avoid shaking the camera, you'll still struggle to get a sharp image of the moon.


----------



## nmoody (May 4, 2012)

Also in the same boat as you with not having mirror lock.

The mirror moving can cause a very small amount of movement.


----------



## Ballistics (May 4, 2012)

TCampbell said:


> If you can't get a sharp image of the moon, it may not be your fault... astro-photos are subject to a problem called "seeing".  Atmosphere turbulence creates distortions making images slightly wobble and blur.
> 
> By way of analogy:  imagine you've got a penny laying on the bottom of a swimming pool.  You are trying to read the date on that penny by looking at it through a powerful scope.  If someone starts splashing in the pool to create lots of waves it will be EXTREMELY difficult for you to get a sharp image of the penny.  But if the pool is completely calm, it'll be much easier.
> 
> ...



Awesome post.


----------



## flowness (May 4, 2012)

The movement thing makes sense. I guess I thought they moved pretty much simultaneously so it wouldn't affect anything...
If I can escape the kiddos for a little while, I'll still give it a try  Tried it with an eclipse several years ago (different camera) and they came out in the OK-not-great category.


----------



## JonathanNYC (May 5, 2012)

really excited to try this tonight!


----------



## Josh66 (May 5, 2012)

480sparky said:


> pgriz said:
> 
> 
> > ......... Many lenses have their "infinity" stop beyond the infinity point, to allow for expansion and contraction of the lens due to temperature.
> ...


I don't think it has anything at all to do with temperature.  And it's not IR either.  IR focus is on the near side of infinity, not the far side (look at your lenses if you don't believe me).

My theory is that the over-travel allows the AF mechanism to overshoot it a little, then come back.  (To avoid damage from the lens slamming into infinity.)


Just a couple observations - every AF lens I have used will go past infinity.  Every MF lens I have used has a hard stop at infinity.


edit
In case anybody is wondering about the different focus point for IR - that's what the red dot is for.  When you're shooting IR, use the red dot instead of the line.
And if that still doesn't make any sense to you, you probably don't have any lenses that have distance scales on them.


----------



## pgriz (May 5, 2012)

Sorry Josh, while your theory is reasonable, Canon disagrees with you. In the Canon EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM lens manual, page 10, section 8, it states "To compensate for shifting of the infinity focus point that results from changes in temperature".  Same verbiage for my 24-105mm f.4 L IS USM lens, page 8, section 5.  In both manuals, the next sections deal with the infrared marks.


----------



## 480sparky (May 5, 2012)

O|||||||O said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > pgriz said:
> ...



I recall my 35mm film camera lenses saying in the instructions that's the reason the lens goes past infinity.  And none of them were AF.


----------



## cgipson1 (May 5, 2012)

Damn.. It's raining.. and very cloudy! NO MOON!


----------



## pgriz (May 5, 2012)

Managed to get a few.  We've got a high-pressure system over us and this has given us clear skies.  

For this series, I decided to go to the waterfront and try to catch the moon rising over two of our bridges connecting the Island of Montreal to the south shore of the St-Lawrence.  In retrospect, not the most scenic of views, but until you try, you just don't know what you will get.


----------



## MTVision (May 5, 2012)

Here is my first attempt at shooting the moon   Unfortunately I forgot all about the moon until about 10pm - I wanted to catch it rising.


----------



## yipDog (May 5, 2012)

From Mesa, AZ
5D mkIII, 70-200 f2.8L USMII, 2.0 Extender III
ISO 160, 380mm, f11, 1/25


----------



## rebelred (May 5, 2012)

Here is one I got. Forgot about the moon till I saw it peeking through the clouds and thought I would grab the camera. My bonehead didn't think to grab the tripod though .


----------



## Demers18 (May 5, 2012)

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> Damn.. It's raining.. and very cloudy! NO MOON!



I'm in the same boat... Really sucks as I was looking forward to it


----------



## Demers18 (May 5, 2012)

pgriz said:
			
		

> Managed to get a few.  We've got a high-pressure system over us and this has given us clear skies.
> 
> For this series, I decided to go to the waterfront and try to catch the moon rising over two of our bridges connecting the Island of Montreal to the south shore of the St-Lawrence.  In retrospect, not the most scenic of views, but until you try, you just don't know what you will get.
> 
> ...



Is the first shot Le Pont Champlain?

Did you get any du Pont Jaques Cartier?


----------



## pgriz (May 5, 2012)

No, that was the railway bridge between Lasalle and Kagnawaga, with the Mercier bridge behind it.  I was in Parc Réné Levesque, which is at the west end of Lachine Canal.  I was thinking that Jacques Cartier would be more interesting, but couldn't find a good vantage point given where the moon was going to rise.


----------



## inaka (May 6, 2012)

My first attempt at shooting the moon.
Honestly, it didn't seem that "super" to me at all and I had to really focus in since it wasn't that large compared to the horizon.




Oakland Supermoon by InakaMike, on Flickr

Ah well, it's a learning experience.
I shot it manual with a high ISO and f16.


----------



## RxForB3 (May 6, 2012)

Well I managed an attempt.  Unfortunately it was with my new-to-me Sigma 50-500mm.  I say unfortunately because it didn't come with the tripod collar and was WAY too heavy for my tripod.  So I had to handheld by propping myself on the car roof.  Here is the result, in any case...what do you think for my first attempt at the moon?




Supermoon! by RxForB3, on Flickr


----------



## nmoody (May 6, 2012)

Here is my attempt:


----------



## bernesoftware (May 6, 2012)

Hi to all... I sure was excited shooting the Super Moon... with my D90. Sure enough, never done it before. So I hit the web, forums, wiki... and most recomendations in between.
So even after almost 30 shots with different settings, I can not get passed the fuzzy white ball. No features... and defffinitly overexposed look. Here is range os settings I have tried:
Manual
Focus to infinity
F/16 or 11 or 8 (some 5.6)
ISO 1 or 200, 400
Shutter 1/125, 250-400
Pause 10 sec.
Menu/Custome Setting Menu/ (d)(Shooting/display)/ (d10) Exposure delay mode/on
Meetring 10

Please help.

Here is a link to all MOSTLY failed shots:  Flickr: sanelbabic's Photostream


----------



## nmoody (May 6, 2012)

Here is the EXIF data from my shot:
Date Time Original: 2012:05:05 20:32:01
Exposure Time: 1/100
F Number: f / 11
Exposure Program: Manual
ISO Speed Ratings: 100
Metering Mode: Pattern
Flash: Flash did not fire
Focal Length: 300mm
White Balance: Auto white balance
Make: NIKON CORPORATION
Model: NIKON D3100
LensInfo: 700/10 3000/10 40/10 56/10
LensModel: 70.0-300.0 mm f/4.0-5.6
Lens: 70.0-300.0 mm f/4.0-5.6

Like you I tried really long shutter times and they failed. My more successful shots were around 100.


----------



## Desi (May 6, 2012)

bernesoftware said:


> Hi to all... I sure was excited shooting the Super Moon... with my D90. Sure enough, never done it before. So I hit the web, forums, wiki... and most recomendations in between.
> So even after almost 30 shots with different settings, I can not get passed the fuzzy white ball. No features... and defffinitly overexposed look. Here is range os settings I have tried:
> Manual
> Focus to infinity
> ...



I also shoot with the D90.  Here are a few things that I found helpful:

Put focus point on single point focusing (pick the center point).  Then, when your are happy with the focus, switch to manual so that the camera won't mess with the focus again.

Put the metering mode on spot metering, then meter off the moon.  Since the moon is still a very small spot, you'll still have to adjust the shutter speed a bit.  Keep your aperture to f8 or f9 as that is supposed to be the sharpest.

Set your ISO to 200 and pick an aperture.  Get your focus.  Then the only variable to play with regarding exposure is your shutter speed.  

Don't forget to sharpen the image in post.

Don't expect to see many craters in a full moon.  You need tangential light falling on the craters to create shadows that will give it a 3 dimensional look.


----------



## Dao (May 6, 2012)

Cloudy


----------



## SoCalTiger (May 6, 2012)

My first attempt ever. I probably should have captured these RAW but I didn't.

Canon T2i, M mode, 1/640sec, F/14, ISO400


----------



## rexbobcat (May 6, 2012)

Super Mooooooooon!







Canon EOS 60D
0.008 sec (1/125)
f/25.0
800 mm
ISO 500


----------



## Robin Usagani (May 6, 2012)

sigh.. i had to pick up my parents at the airport.  It was super big!  By the time I got home, cloud everywhere!


----------



## pgriz (May 6, 2012)

bernesoftware said:


> Hi to all... I sure was excited shooting the Super Moon... with my D90. Sure enough, never done it before. So I hit the web, forums, wiki... and most recomendations in between.
> So even after almost 30 shots with different settings, I can not get passed the fuzzy white ball. No features... and defffinitly overexposed look. Here is range os settings I have tried:
> Manual
> Focus to infinity
> ...




Your image (DSC_0174) Has an iso speed of 400, an aperture of f/5.6 and an exposure time of 1/30, and appears over-exposed by one stop.   In contrast, the previous image (DSC_0173) has similar settings except for an iso of 3200.  That is three stops of exposure more than you ended up needing in the image DSC_0174.

When I shoot the moon, I ignore the meter and autofocus.  If you have live-view, focus on the moon with the magnified live-view (which means VR should be off, and AF should be off), and set the exposure manually.  I prefer to use the lowest ISO (100 in my case, 200 in yours), an f/stop which is the sharpest for your lens (usually 2 stops from wide open), and a shutter speed in the 1/30 to 1/125 sec.  Then you examine the image  if too dim, reduce your shutter speed and try again.

The histogram is usually useless because the moon makes up such a small part of the overall image (unless you are using a lens in the 1000mm range).  But the basic rule is that if the details of the moon are washed out, reduce your exposure, and keep reducing it until you have the level of detail you want.

Of course, other things also help ensure a sharp image  a solid tripod, mirror-lockup if you have it, a remote shutter, and a shutter-delay will all help to eliminate the camera shake vibrations that can blur the detail.

When you shoot the moon in context (ie, low on the horizon and you want to see the foreground), then timing is critical.  The full moon occurs just when the sun sets, and the illumination level falls rapidly.  At the same time, the moon tends to be dim when just on the horizon, due to the amount of atmosphere that the moon light has to go through.  So the brightness difference (dynamic range) between the moon and the surroundings is low at the beginning.  As the moon climbs upward, it becomes brighter (less atmosphere), and at the same time the landscape becomes darker (as the twilight progresses to night).  So within minutes the brightness difference between the moon and the detail on earth become sufficiently strong as to exceed the dynamic range of the camera.

What this means is that if you want to shoot a "full" moon with foreground detail, it is best to do this one or two days BEFORE the actual full moon, as the moon will already be in the sky before the sun sets, and the dynamic range difference between the moon's brightness and the earth will be low.  This is what TCampbell noted in another post.


----------



## PixelRabbit (May 6, 2012)

pgriz said:
			
		

> What this means is that if you want to shoot a "full" moon with foreground detail, it is best to do this one or two days BEFORE the actual full moon, as the moon will already be in the sky before the sun sets, and the dynamic range difference between the moon's brightness and the earth will be low.  This is what TCampbell noted in another post.


Would the same apply one or two days after?


----------



## KmH (May 6, 2012)

No. The moon comes up close to 52 minutes later each day.


----------



## PixelRabbit (May 6, 2012)

Ah thanks, that makes sense. 
When I was googling trying to figure that out I came across an article that said the next full moon will only be a couple % smaller than this one was so since I failed to get the shot I wanted this time round I'm going to give it another go then


----------



## KmH (May 6, 2012)

Why are people using lens apertures like f/25, f/11, f/14, f/16?

There can be no DoF benefit from a small aperture since the moon is about 13.2 *billion* feet from the earth (about 250,000 miles).

Use your lens 'sweet spot' - sharpest focus lens aperture and avoid any chance of softening focus from diffraction. 

You're already battleing having to shoot through 50 miles worth of moving atmosphere that is going to soften your focus to some extent. That's why they put a telescope in earth orbit, to get it above the sharp image killing atmosphere.


----------



## luvmyfamily (May 6, 2012)

KmH said:


> Why are people using lens apertures like f/25, f/11, f/14, f/16?
> 
> There can be no DoF benefit from a small aperture since the moon is about 13.2 *billion* feet from the earth (about 250,000 miles).
> 
> ...



I read an article on shooting the moon. When shooting a BRIGHT moon, the sunny 16 rule applies, especially when shooting at a focal length of 300mm or more. So that is probably why they are using fstops so low. I only have an 18-55mm lens, I shot RAW, so I wasn't able to get the detail, but here was my 1st attempt at the moon. because I didn't have the lens, I didn't need to use a low aperture. I shot RAW and at least it doesn't look like a white glob. Wish I would have had a better lens!
ISO 100
A 4.0
SS: 1/250


----------



## enzodm (May 6, 2012)

SoCalTiger said:


> My first attempt ever. I probably should have captured these RAW but I didn't.
> 
> Canon T2i, M mode, 1/640sec, F/14, ISO400



You have the "My Photos Are  NOT OK to Edit" sign, so I cannot upload my version of your moon. But, please increase sharpness and contrast, and result will be more pleasant, even starting from JPEG.


----------



## TCampbell (May 6, 2012)

It was such a busy day -- lots of household chores, and of course it was Derby Day, Cinco de Mayo, and Super-moon day simultaneously!  

This meant I was obliged to drink at least 1 mint julep, 1 margarita, and take at least 1 photo of the moon.  It turns out I only did 2 out of those three things.  

I actually was thinking that I'd take the moon photo.  It was forecast to be mostly cloudy, but the skies were starting to clear.  I thought I was going to get lucky.  But as the sun started to set, the clouds rolled back in and all I'd have ended up with is a very nice photo of the bottom of some cloud.


----------



## nmoody (May 6, 2012)

KmH said:


> Why are people using lens apertures like f/25, f/11, f/14, f/16?



F/11 was apparently my sweet spot after some quick research, I really need to do my own testing at some point.


----------



## PixelRabbit (May 6, 2012)

Here are my best shots.  Totally missed the shot I wanted because I was in entirely the wrong spot so worked with what I had.


----------



## pgriz (May 6, 2012)

TCampbell said:


> It was such a busy day -- lots of household chores, and of course it was Derby Day, Cinco de Mayo, and Super-moon day simultaneously!
> 
> This meant I was obliged to drink at least 1 mint julep, 1 margarita, and take at least 1 photo of the moon.  It turns out I only did 2 out of those three things.
> 
> I actually was thinking that I'd take the moon photo.  It was forecast to be mostly cloudy, but the skies were starting to clear.  I thought I was going to get lucky.  But as the sun started to set, the clouds rolled back in and all I'd have ended up with is a very nice photo of the bottom of some cloud.



Tim, I think you have your priorities straight.  The Moon was there before we existed, and will still be there long after we are gone.  Living, on the other hand, needs to be experienced in the moment.  Cheers.


----------



## pgriz (May 6, 2012)

Judi, nice shots.  To continue the conversation about photographing the full moon, you can also catch it setting, AFTER the full moon, and therefore in daylight.  Unfortunately, this means that you have to be out there at or shortly after dawn, and have a good view of the western horizon.  I'm not much of an early morning person, so dragging myself out of a warm and comfortable bed to get that shot usually doesn't appeal to me.  Usually.  But I have been known to endure some discomfort for the art.  Just not very often.


----------



## SoCalTiger (May 6, 2012)

SoCalTiger said:


> My first attempt ever. I probably should have captured these RAW but I didn't.
> 
> Canon T2i, M mode, 1/640sec, F/14, ISO400


 


KmH said:


> Why are people using lens apertures like f/25, f/11, f/14, f/16?



I had seen someone in this forum say to use the Sunny 16 rule? I think it is in either this thread or the one about "NIGHT NOISE".



enzodm said:


> SoCalTiger said:
> 
> 
> > My first attempt ever. I probably should have captured these RAW but I didn't.
> ...



I just updated my setting so my photos are all okay to edit now. 

Here is my attempt at increasing sharpness and contrast. To be honest, I never figured out how best to increase sharpness on pictures without making it look unrealistic. Could you show me your version too and tell me what you did?


----------



## Demers18 (May 6, 2012)

pgriz said:
			
		

> No, that was the railway bridge between Lasalle and Kagnawaga, with the Mercier bridge behind it.  I was in Parc Réné Levesque, which is at the west end of Lachine Canal.  I was thinking that Jacques Cartier would be more interesting, but couldn't find a good vantage point given where the moon was going to rise.



Okay I wasn't sure which one it was. Haven't been back home in a while. For the Jaques Cartier bridge do you think you could get a good vantage point from l'île St.Helene?


----------



## jwbryson1 (May 6, 2012)

My best shot.  Taken with my 18-200mm lens.  Not enough reach for craters.  We also had serious cloud cover and rain all day, then at the last minute, the skies opened and I RAN for my tripod.  No time for setup with foreground objects like a tree.  Owell.  There you go.








[/URL] Super Moon May 5 2012-1 by jwbryson1, on Flickr[/IMG]


----------



## rexbobcat (May 6, 2012)

pgriz said:


> bernesoftware said:
> 
> 
> > Hi to all... I sure was excited shooting the Super Moon... with my D90. Sure enough, never done it before. So I hit the web, forums, wiki... and most recomendations in between.
> ...



I wouldn't go as slow as 1/30. If you have a long enough lens you can actually see the moon slowly moving across the sky. I think that 1/30 would cause very little smearing lowering resolution.


----------



## rexbobcat (May 6, 2012)

SoCalTiger said:


> SoCalTiger said:
> 
> 
> > My first attempt ever. I probably should have captured these RAW but I didn't.
> ...



Some of those apertures are caused by teleconverters. With a 2x teleconverter your lens is 2 stops slower. That means that if you're lens goes to f/5.6 then with a 2x teleconverter it will be at f/11. That means that to get the best resolution from your lens you'll have to stop down to f/16.


----------



## JonathanNYC (May 6, 2012)

I have a couple of shots. first one is unedited. second one is edited. what do you think?

View attachment 7880


----------



## yo13dawg (May 7, 2012)

I was in the wrong spot when the moon was rising so had to settle for a quick snap over some trees and cars:


----------



## BigDaddy1970 (May 7, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Mirror lock-up helps because when the mirror moves up, it can cause the camera to shake.  If that happens, the camera will still be moving when the shutter opens.  Result..... camera blur.  Having a mirror-up option allows you to manually raise the mirror, then wait until any camera vibration is stopped, then you can open the shutter.
> 
> Having a good, heavy tripod will really help (notice 'cheap' is not included in that list!), as well as a remote (touching the shutter button on the camera can also cause it to move!).
> 
> ...



I really like that idea...  What tripod is that?


----------



## groan (May 7, 2012)

I'll throw one into the pile.
I kept the wide blackness to give the impression of wide blackness ;-)


----------



## edouble (May 7, 2012)

It was ridiculously cloudy here in north east PA.


----------

