How to photograph the moon?

I don't understand how everyone is getting such slow shutter speeds. I usually get speeds between 1/60s and 1/125s at f/11>iso320>840mm. Shooting at 300mm and f/5.6 , you should have much higher speeds than me.

I usually get my best results with a shutter around 1/125s .......................This is more than enough to compensate for the movement of the moon.(it moves faster than you think, so shutters below 1/60s will show some blur, unless you get lucky)

Steve,

My earlier post was corrected for shutter speed at 1/160s, I made a few changes during my photo session and the 30 seconds just stayed in my head. Sorry for the confusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve S

I don't understand how everyone is getting such slow shutter speeds. I usually get speeds between 1/60s and 1/125s at f/11>iso320>840mm. Shooting at 300mm and f/5.6 , you should have much higher speeds than me.

I usually get my best results with a shutter around 1/125s .......................This is more than enough to compensate for the movement of the moon.(it moves faster than you think, so shutters below 1/60s will show some blur, unless you get lucky)

---

Shadowman I'm away from home at present, but from memory, I reckon it was a pretty savage crop 60%? I'll check when I get back.

One more feeble attempt.
Nikon D60
Nikkor 70-300mm lens
ISO 200
AWB Daylight
Shutter speed 1/320 sec.
Aperture f/5.6
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...1&d=1267830677

Well, I gave it another try tonight. Still not there but better than the February version. It's pretty fuzzy, and I think if I had used the shutter remote it would have been much better.
How is everyone else doing? Any landscapes with the moon?

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/fo...achmentid=3513
1/200s: f11: ISO200: 200mm
spot metered -2 EC

http://trickingq3.com/misc/photoshop...%20cropped.png

Wendy,

That's a very good attempt. i've seen images of similar quality in photograpy books. I took a few more last night but haven't downloaded yet.

Kevin,

Nice detail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevinf

http://trickingq3.com/misc/photoshop...%20cropped.png

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowman

Wendy,

That's a very good attempt. i've seen images of similar quality in photograpy books. I took a few more last night but haven't downloaded yet.

---

Thank you Shadowman. It's pretty fuzzy, but I think I got the exposure a lot better than in February. I'll try again tonight if I have time. I still want to include it in a landscape though. Just haven't been able to pick the right spot yet. I'll have to get out of town to find something I think.

Wendy

Wendy,

I know what you mean, usually I get a good view from my top porch but at the wrong time of the evening or morning. I read that it is best to photograph the moon when it is near the horizon, but that is a rarity for me to view since I live in the city. Good luck on your next attempt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScoutR

Thank you Shadowman. It's pretty fuzzy, but I think I got the exposure a lot better than in February. I'll try again tonight if I have time. I still want to include it in a landscape though. Just haven't been able to pick the right spot yet. I'll have to get out of town to find something I think.

Wendy

---

kevinf: that is excellent - do you mind revealing your camera settings and PP methods.

Sigma 50-500mm lens & a Canon 40D.

ISO 200, f11, 1/50", Mirror Lock up, tripod, timer-released, live view for focus.

Color Temp 3950K, +contrast, clarity, sharpness, vibrance, some adjustments via Curves in Adobe Camera Raw.

Thanks Kevin

RAW and settings:

http://bitjumble.com/files/photograp...n/IMG_0535.CR2
http://bitjumble.com/files/photograp...n/IMG_0535.xmp

Very nice pictures.
What would happen if you were to shoot the moon (at infinity that is) with a wide open lens (say 2.0 or 2.8). With low f stop, for one, time of exposure (and consequent motion blur) will reduce. Is depth of field relevant here when one is shooting at infinity with wide open lens?
Yes, I am aware of the fact theat the sweet spot may be around say f5.6 to 10 or f11. Any help in this regard will be much appreciated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve S

Here is one i shot at 840mm -f/11-1/60s-iso320

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z..._DxO_raw-1.jpg

I use full man. mode--spot meter--weighted tripod--timer--man. focus--mirror locked--exposure at +1/3 ot +2/3 ev, spot metering off the brightest spot of moon.

Depth of field isn't an issue, so use the aperature setting that your lens is sharpest. Usually f/8 for most lenses. I used f/11 because i had 2 teleconverter on and i loose 3 stops because of it.

Focus is very critical in getting a good shot. Shoot about a dozen shots so you can pick the one with the sharpest focus.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dvp

Very nice pictures.
What would happen if you were to shoot the moon (at infinity that is) with a wide open lens (say 2.0 or 2.8). With low f stop, for one, time of exposure (and consequent motion blur) will reduce. Is depth of field relevant here when one is shooting at infinity with wide open lens?
Yes, I am aware of the fact theat the sweet spot may be around say f5.6 to 10 or f11. Any help in this regard will be much appreciated.

---

Hi dvp,

Almost any lens that is as fast as f2 is not going to be the best focal length for moon shots.

Even f2.8 is going to cost thousands of dollars/pounds/euros for a useful telephoto focal length for such shots; for an extreme example see here.

A shorter focal length lens will just result in having a tiny (pixel dimension) lunar image, even if you own a 20+MP camera and are having to display it at 1:1 (and crop excessively).

As you say, DoF isn't a huge concern, but since many lenses focus past infinity (look out for Buzz Lightyear ;) ), you need to be sure the moon is in the sharp bit.

I really don't think motion blur is that big an issue we need to go to these lengths, but try it an see.

Regards,

You'll lose far more detail shooting wide open than you will from the slight motion of the moon. Even stopped down to f11 I could shoot at 1/50th" which is PLENTY fast to negate motion of the moon. If losing sharpness due to movement across the sky is an issue, then the answer is a tracking mount rather than wider apertures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevinf

http://trickingq3.com/misc/photoshop...%20cropped.png

---

Excellent. Spot on exposure and sharp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScoutR

Well, I gave it another try tonight. Still not there but better than the February version. It's pretty fuzzy, and I think if I had used the shutter remote it would have been much better.
How is everyone else doing? Any landscapes with the moon?

---

I'll have to dig back through the "archives", I have some from January's (2009) Full Moon, the "Wolf Moon" if I remember correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Humphries

Almost any lens that is as fast as f2 is not going to be the best focal length for moon shots.

Even f2.8 is going to cost thousands of dollars/pounds/euros for a useful telephoto focal length for such shots; for an extreme example see here.

---

Dave, wouldn't you want to qualify that statement? If the Moon is the sole object in the photo, or if you want to show the details in the Moon's craters, mountains and mares, yes, I would agree 100%. But, if the Moon is just part of the picture as in a landscape such as what Wendy was looking for, there are numerous medium telephotos on the market that are reasonably (IMHO) priced that are f/2.8, and several zooms out there that are constant @ 2.8 across the range. Even 70mm, on an APS sensor, with a properly exposed image, shows enough detail in the Moon's disk to make out the "Man in the Moon" features. Would I ever "shoot the moon" (pun intended) at f/2.8? No way, unless I had absolutely no choice. With today's DSLRs, no one should ever be forced into that situation. Just my 2¢.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terry Tedor

Dave, wouldn't you want to qualify that statement? If the Moon is the sole object in the photo, or if you want to show the details in the Moon's craters, mountains and mares ~

---

You're absolutely right Terry, that was my assumption.

Since all except 3 shots in this thread show just the moon, I don't think I was too far off, but I'm glad you raised this, I do get 'carried away' sometimes and can inadvertently upset people :o
I 'go off on one' based on my preconceptions and don't always ask enough questions to clarify things up front. This looks like a classic example.

dvp, if you're reading this; I hope I didn't come across too strongly with my opinions. Waht sort of moon shots did you have in mind?

Thanks,

Dave, no need to apologize, no upset here my friend! I tend to do the same thing myself from time to time. :)