Moon Shot

[jcuknz]

My son is staying with me and he put a problem to me that I couldn't answer so over to you folk ?



On the left is the usual shot of the moon and a burnt out blob which is corrected by cutting the exposure down

However on the right is the puzzling image where the moon is quite big in frame but he tells me the result was another white blob and I really cannot imagine why .... to achieve that framing he used digital x4 zoom on a 400mm lens.

I am suprised that the 'AE' didn't give him a better result than a white blob.

I have drawn the results in Paint rather than giving the actual files.

PS he has been ear bashed as to how he should approach the problem and knows the correct way but it is the second result that puzzles both of us.

[JR1]

Because you are trying to shoot as if it were a dull object and using AE, avoid full Moon as they look flat, always include the terminator where possible

Forget AE that is what Manual is for

125th or 250th at f4 will be enough, 400ASA even 200

http://www.openphotographicsociety.o...ure-calculator

[IzzieK]

Thanks for the link...

[JR1]

Thanks for the link...

I have been into astronomy all my life, my greatest pleasure was being a friend of Patrick Moore

[jcuknz]

I didn't mention that his puzzlement largely came from clearly seeing the detail on the LCD, he is using a Pany G3 with a 200mm lens [ 400mm AoV ] but when he took the photo it came out white. I would have thought that AE would have coped with a relatively equal proportion of white and black to give a grey rather than white result.

You have some nice results JR and he will be viewing this thread for the answers today.

His other problem came from his $100 tripod, which I gave him buying on Amazon and thinking $100 is enough to get a good one , and despite using the 10 second delay he often mis-framed the shots he took in his endeavour to capture a moonshot the camera moving so much as a result of pressing the trigger ... must get him a cable release

I used my heavier GH2 on it for this shot 1/3 sec f/10 400ISO with lens at 280mm AoV ... but of course I didn't use the centre column. I probably used my cable release, maybe not, EXIF doesn' tell you that

[JR1]

I didn't mention that his puzzlement largely came from clearly seeing the detail on the LCD, he is using a Pany G3 with a 200mm lens [ 400mm AoV ] but when he took the photo it came out white. I would have thought that AE would have coped with a relatively equal proportion of white and black to give a grey rather than white result.

You have some nice results JR and he will be viewing this thread for the answers today.

His other problem came from his $100 tripod, which I gave him buying on Amazon and thinking $100 is enough to get a good one , and despite using the 10 second delay he often mis-framed the shots he took in his endeavour to capture a moonshot the camera moving so much as a result of pressing the trigger ... must get him a cable release

I used my heavier GH2 on it for this shot 1/3 sec f/10 400ISO with lens at 280mm AoV ... but of course I didn't use the centre column. I probably used my cable release, maybe not, EXIF doesn' tell you that

Remember (and I know you have to spend in accordance with your means we all do) that some spend $100 on a case for a tripod alone.

A decent pod will be about £400

My advice would be forget a tripod, pile up BRICKS place a pillow on top and place camera on that, use self timer

The pillow will mold to the shape of the camera holding it better

[Dave Humphries]

~ and despite using the 10 second delay he often mis-framed the shots he took in his endeavour to capture a moonshot the camera moving so much as a result of pressing the trigger ...

Does his camera have a "self timer" feature, if so, he can use that to separate the shutter push from the exposure.

[JR1]

Does his camera have a "self timer" feature, if so, he can use that to separate the shutter push from the exposure.

As she said

"despite using the 10 second delay "

So I assume yes

[Dave Humphries]

As she said

"despite using the 10 second delay "

Groan (at myself)

It is a good job someone here is qualified to point out the blinkin' obvious, since I need it

Thanks Jeremy - although I don't think "she" said it

[JR1]

[jcuknz]

To pick further I would point out that both my son and I are males People in glasshouses ......

I suggest one should contemplate the narrow angle of view of a digital zoom [x4] on a 400mm lens perched atop the column of a $100 tripod and the likelihood of maintaining framing of a moderately fast moving object such as the moon The deck all was on also tends to flex as he admitted with a wry smile .... next time I am sure he will do better

He showed me some nice shots taken when climbing the adjacent mountain to Mt Baker. Wonderful what cloud and light do for the observant and fit enough to climb.

The moral of this story is that the LCD/EVF is a wonderful device enabling one to see what one is shooting but despite the three stop 'lock' which enables the clever to assess the effect of small aperture/shutter adjustments as the DSLR does it can be misleading as in this case. He saw a perfect image in the finder that the camera was not capturing.

[xpatUSA]

I didn't mention that his puzzlement largely came from clearly seeing the detail on the LCD, he is using a Pany G3 with a 200mm lens [ 400mm AoV ] but when he took the photo it came out white.

AoV? In millimeters?

[jcuknz]

Yes Ted AoV in mm ... it is a convienient way of gving a relative idea of reach and attendant problems even though some like to express it in the meaningless way of degrees ... it does of course depend on what school you went to as to what system you use. The use of degrees is probably more 'correct' but the use of mm has come to be widely recognised in the digital age but relating back to the 35mm film camera. Of course it enrages the purists
As a freindly troll I will continue to use mm and ignore degrees.

[xpatUSA]

Yes Ted AoV in mm ... it is a convienient way of gving a relative idea of reach and attendant problems even though some like to express it in the meaningless way of degrees ... it does of course depend on what school you went to as to what system you use. The use of degrees is probably more 'correct' but the use of mm has come to be widely recognised in the digital age but relating back to the 35mm film camera. Of course it enrages the purists
As a freindly troll I will continue to use mm and ignore degrees.

Good man. I'm beginning to get it

A sort of shorthand, where [400mm AoV] means 'the same AoV that a 400mm would have on a 135 format camera'.