Moonlit seascape. Could someone suggest settings for shooting the moon over the sea.n

[Geranium]

I have a Nikon 7100 , a wide angle lens (10-20) a 80-400 lense and an 18-200. Knowing there was a full moon last night I went down to the beach an hour before moonset but after only 5-10 minutes of shooting the moon was hidden by a bank of cloud untill sunrise. this was my first attempt to shoot a moonlit seascape . I used the wide angle lens at 15mm and f5.6. with manual focus and used a remote for six seconds. I found it really hard to focus and wasnt sure whether to focus on the moon itself. i managed to get a couple of shots in with the 18-200 lens before the moon became hidden. I shot at the full 200mm with other settings much the same. the longer focal length made it easier to focus. I was very disappointed with most of the shots. I would be very interested to know what settings others use for moonlit seascapes.

[Cogito]

I can't state anything definitive but this (Exif data is in there) was shot at ISO 100 f2.4 for 2 seconds at about 10 pm.

[Saorsa]

If you can see the moon, it is brightly lit directly by the sun. Sunny 16 is a good rule to follow because you probably won't get a decent in camera reading unless you have a really, really long lens. The question then is, other than the moon, what do you want in your picture?

In the picture provided by Cogito two seconds was necessary to capture the lights and clouds but the moon itself is blown out to a white disk. As an image it works but the only purpose of the moon is to establish the mood and time.

Another problem you will find is that the clouds and moon are moving which can cause problems with longer exposures. There is some discussion of the moon here.

[Cogito]

Brian, instead of referring to Sunny 16, why not quote Looney 11 as a rule? And I'm sure you can see the cloud cover across the moon.
Denise, I'm sure you appreciate that JUST ABOUT EVERY image posted anywhere on the web has been post processed prior to display. Mine was. Why not show us your results? there will almost certainly be additional feedback/help!

[Saorsa]

Brian, instead of referring to Sunny 16, why not quote Looney 11 as a rule? And I'm sure you can see the cloud cover across the moon.
Denise, I'm sure you appreciate that JUST ABOUT EVERY image posted anywhere on the web has been post processed prior to display. Mine was. Why not show us your results? there will almost certainly be additional feedback/help!

OK, but I think you have an excellent picture of a city by artificial and moonlight there but the moon is blown out. It is a compositional element well used as stated to set a mood and time.

As to my efforts

A few weeks ago as I went out to pick up my morning paper I had some low clouds flying past the moon. Shooting it led to a blown out moon and very noisy clouds. I don't consider it a good shot and, yes it has been post processed I added quite a lot of saturation to try to bring out the colors I could see in the clouds. Except for your request, this would never have been posted anywhere.



To contrast, this one was taken less than an hour ago with an overcast of hazy cirrus at a low elevation over city lights. The only processing done was to crop and resize for posting.



Waiting a couple hours for the moon to be higher would give much better results. Settings for the Nikon D7100 and 200-500mm lens were manual mode, ISO 400, 1/250 second at f14.

Add a bit of sharpening to that one as the only post process gives me

[Geranium]

I am having trouble ( as usual on this site) to upload my photo. .

However thank you for the replies here. the easiest way out seems to be the double exposure( two separate images in this case)which seems to be recommended by most photography writers. However this would not seem to be suitable technique if you want to catch the light reflected on the sea.

Still unable to post photo in question. I have tried to rejoin tiny pics. still cant post photo.

[Geranium]

Still cant post pic. Have tried several times. Keep getting error message. It did upload into upload bo
x once but no command to add it to this thread. I give up.

[Stagecoach]

Hi Denise,

Lots of variables here and no simple answers without knowing the scene you were trying to shoot. I have had a bit of experience shooting seascapes with moonlight so here's some pointers.

I have a Nikon 7100 , a wide angle lens (10-20) a 80-400 lense and an 18-200.

Noted, and with respect to focusing and where to focus this will depend upon the Focal length, the Aperture and what you want to be in focus within the scene.

As an example using a 15mm FL at f/5.6 focusing on something 5m away will put everything in focus from 1.5m in front of the camera to infinity. You need to understand the affects of DoF with aperture and focal length with respect to the scene and subjects within it.

Knowing there was a full moon last night I went down to the beach an hour before moonset

The brightness of the moon varies and being brightest at full is the worst time to shoot it 'if' you want it incorporated within a scene that is predominately dark. Over open sea as an example.

but after only 5-10 minutes of shooting the moon was hidden by a bank of cloud untill sunrise. this was my first attempt to shoot a moonlit seascape .

That happens to many of us

I used the wide angle lens at 15mm and f5.6. with manual focus and used a remote for six seconds.

The moon moves the distance of its diameter every 2 minutes so beware of how a long exposure will affect the moon within your scene.

I found it really hard to focus and wasnt sure whether to focus on the moon itself.

Covered above

I was very disappointed with most of the shots.

You do not say what you were disappointed with, focus or exposure?

I would be very interested to know what settings others use for moonlit seascapes.

This varies for me depending upon the scene content but as with photographing most subjects I just use the histogram and blinkies to confirm nothing is blown that I don't want blown.

As for composites as you mention in your later post this is a method that can be used but personally I'm too lazy to spend the time doing it.

At 15mm FL the moon is going to be miniscule and at 200mm very small within your framing. To expose the sea to make the most of the light available any clouds will also be illuminated partially so if you take a second exposure that is correct for the moon you have the problem of incorporating this and making it look natural.

My most successful shots of seascapes using the moonlight have been with the moon out of frame or behind heavy cloud. Would have posted some others but Tinypics is playing up at present.

[Geranium]

Thanks Stagecoach for addressing all those seperate issues. Thank you especially for mentioning that Tiny Pics is playing up. I thought it was me. I love the shot you posted here ..its exquisite ..and would love to know the exact settings. There s lots of information in the comments you made, so many thanks.

[Saorsa]

Thanks Stagecoach for addressing all those seperate issues. Thank you especially for mentioning that Tiny Pics is playing up. I thought it was me. I love the shot you posted here ..its exquisite ..and would love to know the exact settings. There s lots of information in the comments you made, so many thanks.

Hi Geranium,
Half the fun on a photo site is looking at a great image and trying to figure out how it was taken. That moonlight seascape provides a lot of clues and the image metadata contains more information. I saved the image on my computer with a right click save image and looked at the EXIF it was taken with a Nikon D800 the Exposure was 25 seconds at f8 and, based on Stagecoach's gear list taken with his Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens. The on-camera flash was not fired.

That gives us some detail on the way the camera was setup but doesn't tell us everything. Certainly, the silkiness of the water and motion in the clouds tell us it was a long exposure so we can presume a tripod. The tree though would have been backlit by the moon and left as a silhouette there are some possibilities as to how it was illuminated. Lights on shore could have provided enough light to create a brighter image over the 25 seconds. Painting with light would be the equivalent of a light on the shore but the tree is sharp and there is no softness in the leaves which I would expect if either of those were used. Shadowman's gear list shows us two flashes SBR-200 and SB-600. The SBR is a small flash designed for macro and doesn't pack a lot of power at these distances so I suspect that the SB-600 was fired manually off camera.

Taken from a non-gear perspective and move from craft to art, I see the image of Cogito's as a moonlit scene, Shadowman's is a picture of moonlight even though you can't see the moon. Both are excellent images but there clear differences in vision and approach to their creation.