Moonshot assistance required (ex NASA need not apply)

Messages
4
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello to you all.
This being my first post ( it shows as 2 but I posted in the wrong place) Please be gentle!!

I Have been trying to get some shots of the moon.
Not having a lot of luck, as seen below.
Damoonsmall.jpg

EOS 350D DIGITAL
Date/Time: 2006:09:10 06:02:27
Resolution: 800 x 726
Flash used: No
Focal length: 200.0mm (35mm equivalent: 1401mm)
CCD width: 5.14mm
Exposure time: 0.020 s (1/50)
Aperture: f/9.0
ISO equiv.: 400
Whitebalance: Manual
Metering Mode: matrix
Exposure: Manual


Damoonsmall2.jpg
EOS 350D DIGITAL
Date/Time: 2006:09:10 07:04:59
Resolution: 800 x 732
Color/bw: Black and white
Flash used: No
Focal length: 200.0mm (35mm equivalent: 1401mm)
CCD width: 5.14mm
Exposure time: 0.0050 s (1/200)
Aperture: f/10.0
ISO equiv.: 400
Whitebalance: Manual
Metering Mode: matrix
Exposure: Manual

Both pics were on tripod, with a 2X converter and the canon 55-200mm kit lens. Mirror lock up was used with a timed (self timer) shutter release to reduce camera movement. The only other possibility is light polution but would that soften the picture as above?





Is it the lens, is it me?

We don't get many clear nights and I have wasted both this weekend!!

I have used the lens/tc together before and although you lose AF I have had some good results. BUT not of the moon!! Can anyone help me, please?
:bang:
 
I would suspect the lens, you seem to have taken as many precautions as you can to eliminate shake, the shutter speed seems fine though it wouldn't hurt to try a bit faster. I can't speak for the 55-200 but many lenses at the cheaper end of the market are very soft at the longest end. My Sigma 70-300 apo is a bit soft out there, add to that your 2x converter and you are fighting a losing battle. Try the zoom on it's own or at a lesser zoom with the converter.
 
The moon looks out of focus to me.
This could be down to two things, incorrect focus, or camera shake.

For focus, make sure you have the lens set to infinity and use a larger depth of field (f5.6) to allow for a faster shutter speed.
You shouldn't really need to use a small aperture because of the distances involved when shooting the moon.

Camera shake can happen even when mounted on the tripod and using mirror lock up. It is exagerated more when using longer lenses.

What you need to do is apply some downward pressure to the camera, to stop the shutter movement causing the vibration.

HTH.
 
Did actually reduce the length of the legs to reduce flex but didn't think about pressure. I will give that a go later if the sky stays clear.

On the question of focus is there a specific distance above which you are at infinity?

Is it possible that light polution is causing it?

Does anyone have any experience of the canon kit lens and if the lens is not capable of taking the picture could I get another as it is 'not fit for the job it was sold for' ?
 
I don't have any experience with the kit lens, and I wouldn't put the problem down to light pollution.

Try the suggestions above and you may see a difference.

Here's one I took at 1200mm including the 1.4x TC.
If you look carefully you will notice a slight amount of camera shake, and this was with me applying quite a lot of downward pressure to steady the camera/lens setup.
I was sat on the floor with the tripods legs at the lowest height.

MEP_C7E46130601.jpg
 
Ok thanks will try that and hopefully post a great pic (but not as good as yours) soon.(y)
 
On the question of focus is there a specific distance above which you are at infinity?

Well, there is, but once you're at infinity, you can't pass it, so as has been said, just focus the lens right out to the limit of travel.
 
Well, there is, but once you're at infinity, you can't pass it, so as has been said, just focus the lens right out to the limit of travel.


Well, that's a reasonable assumption but it's possible to go 'further' than infinity. Some tele lenses allow for focussing Infra-Red at inifinity which is different than visible light.....
 
Well, that's a reasonable assumption but it's possible to go 'further' than infinity. Some tele lenses allow for focussing Infra-Red at inifinity which is different than visible light.....

But aren't the IR correction marks reached by turning backwards from infinity ? :)
 
I always thought IR was one notch past the infinity marker. Must have got my wires crossed.
So it's a midgies smidgie of a turn back from infinity then?
 
The IR mark is past the normal fixed focus index mark. But you have to turn backwards from infinity to align with it. :D
 
Well I was always under the impression it was the other way round, that you had to focus just past infinity for IR.

Seems Infinity is the end of the line (Looks like Buzz Lightyear was wrong then, with "To Infinity and Beyond!")

Then again, I have never dabbled in photography with film, let alone IR film...so that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it :D
 
Camera shake can happen even when mounted on the tripod and using mirror lock up. It is exagerated more when using longer lenses.

What you need to do is apply some downward pressure to the camera, to stop the shutter movement causing the vibration.

HTH.

^^^^^^
Very true, First signs for me is definitely camera shake, Are you sure your tripod is VERY STABLE on the ground.

Also I agree your lens could be soft at that distance.

Believe me moon shots are very hard to get right..:(

This is my take at 600mm with everything anchored to the ground very firmly.

moon1.jpg
 
Well I was always under the impression it was the other way round, that you had to focus just past infinity for IR.

:D

That's what I thought as well! So Buzz Light year was an IR photographer.... ;)

Well, here we go..... just got my (around 35 years old!) 300mm f/4.5 Nikkor and the IR index is inside visible light. ie the lens is focussed for IR infinity where visible light is focussed at (at a guess) 180 meters..

Apologies folks. Buzz must've been an artist then!
 
Back
Top