I’m certain that much of New Zealand has much cleaner air than many of us have to deal with.
Focus on Moon
- Thread starter steigw
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nikon autofocus
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
steigw
Member
Well I tried to take all your suggestions into account. I do appreciate what each of you has written. I did end up handheld and I did forget to turn off VR. I did ensure the focus square turned green. I initially tried Auto ISO, but it kept pegging it at 25600 so I turned off Auto ISO. ended up at ISO 1250, 700mm, F8, 1600 sec. I ended up with a small image on export, I need to practice how to do that per the guidelines, but here's the result. the lower edge seems sharp, but other parts of it seem either out of focus or have highlights blown out. Any suggestions as to what went wrong?
Attachments
steigw
Member
Those are pretty darn good moon images especially for hand held with a long lens.
What you describe as better sharpness near the bottom is just the way the light from the sun hits the edge of a slightly off-full moon and the tiny bit of Terminator. That tiny bit of edge lighting on that edge brings out the texture of the craters that doesn't appear on the face of the moon or the other edges simply due to light angles. As you get further from the full moon you'll get a less round moon but also see more of this edge lighting detail as the terminator moves across the broad face of the moon.
To my eyes and on my laptop not my full sized photo editing monitor this looks fine and I don't see a lack of sharpness on the face or far edges but just straight on illumination and relative lack of detail that brings. I'll take a look at the larger image when I get to my other monitor but at least on this screen that image looks fine to me.
Those pics don't look bad but it appears the exp. is so high it's washing out the detail with bright light. Here's a shot I took last night with my Canon RF 100-400mm lens. When I compare our pics I get the impression that maybe most of your problems may just be in the editing. I had to reduce my exp. and tweak the black, contrast, brightness to get my picture to where it's at. Keep an eye on your histogram as well, it's a good guide. BTW, there should be videos on you tube that show you how to change the size of your pics. GL
A lot of valid remarks above this post.
I just would add that the most precise way to focus the moon or any other celestial body is manual mode with zoomed-in part of the viewfinder (or live view). That requires a tripod mounted camera.
I just would add that the most precise way to focus the moon or any other celestial body is manual mode with zoomed-in part of the viewfinder (or live view). That requires a tripod mounted camera.
Took this one this morning at the park, hand held, 600mm @ 1/60th, single point Autofocus, f6.3 wide open!
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
Midway
Well-known member
From October 26th. Hand held while trying to find a gap in the trees big enough for a clear shot. Posting because I don't remember all the setting as it was a spur of the moment shot just before going to bed. I typically use spot metering and exposure compensation if using auto ISO and just underexpose a bit if not. I think I used Single-Point AF for this. My action to resize for web tends to add too much processing and sharpening for these types of images.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
That's a great example of how much surface detail comes out as the moon is less full and the terminator marches across the face of the moon creating a much wider bright to shadow transition region.
Noise Reduction can reduce detail.
Midway
Well-known member
I have heard that to be true but hadn't tried it until this shot. A couple days later I thought I would add a TC 1.4 and use a tripod but it doesn't present as well, possibly due to the point you make. I was surprised how much the moon phase changed in a couple days.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
If memory serves, the Apollo 11 landing was when the moon was waxing since they wanted the light at the correct angle to bring out the details for landing. ie, the position of the terminator was a major factor in determining launch from earth so they could land at the appropriate time to see those details.
I hadn't heard that, interesting!
This turned out pretty good. Remember, the moon is pretty bright at night and it's very easy to overexpose it. That robs you of contrast and detail.
I snapped the moon this morning. Reason: checking the 180-600 plus the Z 2X. Was not as sharp as the naked lens or the 1.4x, unacceptable. I'll show it and settings. Focus is no concern for my Z8 and Z9 bodies.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Nah.
Hi! I have exactly the same gear - D850 +1.4TC +500PF lens. However you do need a rock solid tripod and remote shutter release for best quality moon images. You say it is focusing problems but I think image quality is the issue with such high iso's. You certainly do not need such a high shutter speed. I got away with 1/125 for the image below (probably 1/250 would have been better). Also the moon is very bright so most images shown in this thread have blown any colours. To get more detail and colour you can take various exposures and align then stack. The image below is 11 light frames and 11 dark frames. You will be aware that it is also a fairly big crop which reduces quality.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
steigw
Member
Could you please explain the 11 light / 11 dark frames? Do you keep the aperture and shutter speed the same and then go up a couple stops and down a couple stops?
He means exposure bracketing. HDR blending.
After taking the light frames, it is likely I used iso for the darks