# Another Moon photo



## Tailgunner (Dec 14, 2013)

It finally cleared up today, still cold but clear skies. So I tried my Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VR II w.TC-17EII out on the moon. 

Anyhow, let me what you think. 





D7100
Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 VR II
Nikon TC-17EII
290mm 
ISO 100
1/50s
F/14


----------



## amolitor (Dec 14, 2013)

It's pretty soft, but it's definitely the moon.

I'd try it without the TC and crop more. The 7100 is in the land of "pixels to burn" isn't it?


----------



## Aloicious (Dec 14, 2013)

not bad, it is soft, and f14? 1/50? your settings seem a little odd.  

try something closer to F8 1/500 or even f5.6 1/1000 all at ISO100. basically sunny 16 rule, since the moon is lit by the sun, just give or take a little bit depending on seeing conditions.

also tripod + remote release or timer is best. and manual focus using live view method to get the best results.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 14, 2013)

Aloicious said:


> not bad, it is soft, and f14? 1/50? your settings seem a little odd.
> 
> try something closer to F8 1/500 or even f5.6 1/1000 all at ISO100. basically sunny 16 rule, since the moon is lit by the sun, just give or take a little bit depending on seeing conditions.
> 
> also tripod + remote release or timer is best. and manual focus using live view method to get the best results.



Thanks, it looked a little soft to me as well but I wasn't sure if that was due to being a single photo or my settings. So can you create a sharper image without stacking?


----------



## Aloicious (Dec 14, 2013)

No need to stack anything for moon pics, its plenty bright.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 15, 2013)

Aloicious said:


> No need to stack anything for moon pics, its plenty bright.



OK, I'll try the above mentioned settings and see if I can get a sharper image.


----------



## amolitor (Dec 15, 2013)

Someone has mentioned a form of stacking which increases sharpness by selecting sharper sections from each picture. Sparky, maybe? Anyways, it compensates for atmospheric disturbances.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 15, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Someone has mentioned a form of stacking which increases sharpness by selecting sharper sections from each picture. Sparky, maybe? Anyways, it compensates for atmospheric disturbances.



I was looking around at moon photos and ran across some really sharp photos but a lot of them used something like 20-70 imagines stacked together.


----------



## amolitor (Dec 15, 2013)

Some astro guys use super-sampling techniques. I think you need a telescope, though, and an astro sensor. Not a DSLR. To make it work you can't have an AA filter in play, and you need a really large aperture (since diffusion is essentially an AA filter as well). So, it's like an Astronomer Thing, not a backyard DSLR owner thing. As near as I can determine.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 15, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Some astro guys use super-sampling techniques. I think you need a telescope, though, and an astro sensor. Not a DSLR. To make it work you can't have an AA filter in play, and you need a really large aperture (since diffusion is essentially an AA filter as well). So, it's like an Astronomer Thing, not a backyard DSLR owner thing. As near as I can determine.



I'm using a D7100 which doesn't come with an AA filter. 


Anyhow, Here is another Moon shot. This one was taken about the same time but is composed of 5 different images taken at different exposures and then merged. It seems a little blurry but not sure.


----------



## Aloicious (Dec 15, 2013)

trying to focus stack with atmospheric disturbance will be spotty at best, I doubt you'd get too good of results with it personally. and if you're taking different shots at different exposures, that kind of isn't going to help with focus stacking, just keep it simple, keep your settings for a proper exposure, and take various images and pick the best, then process that one alone.

that one still looks like your focus is off, how are you focusing?

you can get good single images of the moon, try shooting it when it's NOT full...full moons are flat lit, try 1/2 or even 1/4 moons, you'll be able to see much more surface details with some good sidelighting.

here's an example of a single moon image I shot about a year and a half ago, no stacking, etc, just one image....however I took quite a few and chose the best one. the 'boiling' effect of the atmosphere will cause a lot of non-keepers.


----------



## Aloicious (Dec 15, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Some astro guys use super-sampling techniques. I think you need a telescope, though, and an astro sensor. Not a DSLR. To make it work you can't have an AA filter in play, and you need a really large aperture (since diffusion is essentially an AA filter as well). So, it's like an Astronomer Thing, not a backyard DSLR owner thing. As near as I can determine.



some planetary imaging is done with video where they will film for a length of time and stack the more in focus frames, which works really well for more distant things, but they still only end up with a pretty small image at full size, but they're also using like hundreds of images for stacking, not just a few....


----------



## TCampbell (Dec 15, 2013)

Aloicious said:


> not bad, it is soft, and f14? 1/50? your settings seem a little odd.
> 
> try something closer to F8 1/500 or even f5.6 1/1000 all at ISO100. basically sunny 16 rule, since the moon is lit by the sun, just give or take a little bit depending on seeing conditions.
> 
> also tripod + remote release or timer is best. and manual focus using live view method to get the best results.



The moon uses the "Loony 11" rule rather than Sunny 16.  It's similar but the base aperture where the inverse of the ISO is used as the shutter speed is f/11 -- a stop brighter than Sunny 16.  The moon has extremely low surface albedo -- it's basically about as reflective as a black tire.   f/11, ISO 100, 1/100th sec... or any equivalent exposure.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 15, 2013)

Aloicious said:


> trying to focus stack with atmospheric disturbance will be spotty at best, I doubt you'd get too good of results with it personally. and if you're taking different shots at different exposures, that kind of isn't going to help with focus stacking, just keep it simple, keep your settings for a proper exposure, and take various images and pick the best, then process that one alone.
> 
> that one still looks like your focus is off, how are you focusing?
> 
> ...




Nice photo! 

So barring gear settings, you basically keep shooting away hoping for a clear spot in the atmosphere? 

As for my lens, it didn't seem to have any issues focusing, so I left it on auto focus. It could have been that or me manually pressing the shutter button. Next time I'll try it with manual focus and the cable remote. 




TCampbell said:


> Aloicious said:
> 
> 
> > not bad, it is soft, and f14? 1/50? your settings seem a little odd.
> ...



Sounds Loony to me but I'll give it a try 

Thanks


----------



## Aloicious (Dec 16, 2013)

Tailgunner said:


> Nice photo!
> 
> So barring gear settings, you basically keep shooting away hoping for a clear spot in the atmosphere?
> 
> As for my lens, it didn't seem to have any issues focusing, so I left it on auto focus. It could have been that or me manually pressing the shutter button. Next time I'll try it with manual focus and the cable remote.



sort of, but once you get the exposure and focus settings correct you'll get more good ones than you suspect. the atmospheric effect that is seen is amplified the longer the focal length, with just 290mm you shouldn't have too much to worry about, sure you'll get some issues, but the examples you're posting have other problems going on like missed focus, from what I see it's not due to various atmospheric diffractions...my image was taken at 1600mm, and out of maybe 40 images, I had maybe 10 or so usable ones without too many issues of one kind or another, and a few of those were the top examples. although you can't expect to get the same level of detail from a moderate telephoto vs a telescope though.  

autofocus isn't really great in instances like this, it could be back/front focusing (which is far FAR more likely with the TC on it if you haven't adjusted the AF tuning on your body for that focal distance), or any other anomalies. switch to manual focus, turn on live view, and zoom in to the highest magnification that you can in live view and manual focus using that display. then use your shutter release, and mirror up mode too. 

you can also get out of town to a nice dark and cool place that will give you the best seeing conditions. though first thing is first, get your focus issues corrected, get your exposure set up right, then worry about combating the other things.

+1 on loony 11, I forgot about that one, just knock the settings I recommended up by 1 stop, so f8 + 1/200 to 1/250 or f5.6 + ~1/400 to 1/500.


----------



## amolitor (Dec 16, 2013)

Stacking can compensate for boiling, to a degree. It picks the sharpest bits from every shot.

At least, I think that's what it does. Sparky talked about it a while back.

ETA: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-gallery/328496-tonight-s-moon.html


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 16, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Stacking can compensate for boiling, to a degree. It picks the sharpest bits from every shot.
> 
> At least, I think that's what it does. Sparky talked about it a while back.
> 
> ETA: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-gallery/328496-tonight-s-moon.html



Thanks. I read the thread and links, lots of good info for sure. 

I like the analogy of trying to photograph a penny at the bottom of a swimming pool. If the water is calm, you should be ok but if theres a slight wave, it's like the atmosphere boiling condition. Oh and did I forget the moon is bright and moving at 2,288mph :crazy: But it wouldn't be any fun if it wasn't challenging right?


----------



## Aloicious (Dec 16, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Stacking can compensate for boiling, to a degree. It picks the sharpest bits from every shot.
> 
> At least, I think that's what it does. Sparky talked about it a while back.
> 
> ETA: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/general-gallery/328496-tonight-s-moon.html



yes, you are correct, he does some focus stacking which can help, but the OP has other issues which need to be addressed before worrying about that sort of thing, focus stacking OOF images to begin with won't help. the reason I mentioned focus stacking will be spotty is that the OP is trying to stack just a handful of frames, when the effects of the atmosphere are unpredictable, and 5 frames really won't cut it for anything useful, sparky used 17, and quite honestly, even that is a quite a bit low...that's why some guys use video and then separate the frames, and stack them to get the best results since they can use hundreds at a time. 

here's an example using a cheap webcam for Jupiter:





the same idea would apply to the moon, although to a lesser degree since we're so much closer to the moon it wouldn't be quite as difficult to extract the details as it would be for Jupiter or other plantets, etc...

tailgunner you've got a good start, but once you get used to live view manual focusing, and can get at least a portion in sharp focus, that's when you'll want to start playing with stacking.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 19, 2013)

I haven't had much time to practice my moon shots, either been busy or it's been cloudy. Anyhow, I figured i would play around with the moon and some clouds.


----------



## Josh66 (Dec 19, 2013)

Aloicious said:


> and f14? 1/50? your settings seem a little odd.


Keep in mind that the moon is lit by direct Sunlight, so exposures will be fairly close to daytime settings.  Also, the moon is moving, pretty quickly too - just over 1000 m/s.  So it wouldn't take much to start to see motion blur.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 20, 2013)

O|||||||O said:


> Aloicious said:
> 
> 
> > and f14? 1/50? your settings seem a little odd.
> ...



Yes sir, I think this is what throws most of us off who are new to photographing the moon. We see some giant object hovering above and set up for a stationary object. We fail to understand that object is actually moving around 22,000 mph and is lit up by the sun. Thats what happened to me and why I showed a lot of blur. This time around I set the camera to F11 and 1/500s. Anyhow, It was a cloudy night but the pictures seem to turn out a lot better than my previous attempts.


----------



## Josh66 (Dec 20, 2013)

It seems to be a paradox, for sure.  Very counter-intuitive...

You look at it and think "dark and slow", but it's actually the opposite.


----------



## MK3Brent (Dec 20, 2013)

Tailgunner said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> > Aloicious said:
> ...


This. 

I wouldn't shoot less than 1/250. 

Here's my take. 







f/11, 1/250, ISO 1600 (300mm Tamron f/4)


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 20, 2013)

MK3Brent said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> > O|||||||O said:
> ...



Nicely done!


----------



## Lee337 (Dec 20, 2013)

I took this moon shot back in October one day after full with my Canon SX50 HS in auto mode.  Just a little sharpening in PSP X3 and I'm happy with the results.


----------



## kschalo (Dec 22, 2013)

Here is one I took over the summer.  I had my shutter speed too low apparently but I still like it.



IMG_9250e by jkschalo, on Flickr

F11 1/40 ISO100


----------



## kschalo (Dec 22, 2013)

MK3Brent said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> > O|||||||O said:
> ...



I really like this one!


----------



## Tailgunner (Jan 17, 2014)

Here is my latest attempt at the moon and shot with my new D800

F/11
1/250
ISO 200 

D800
70-200mm 2.8 VR II
TC 1.7


----------

