Moon shots

[Barking]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[doxa750]

One on Halloween and the other is from a day after.

EM130988_DxO by Narin, on Flickr

EM130997_DxO (1) by Narin, on Flickr

Cheers

 

[Barking]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[RichardC]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[John King]

View attachment 856515

Jeff, you would probably get a better shot with the lens at maximum focal length, and about one stop from wide open. Use a monopod or tripod if necessary. don't be afraid to lift ISO to 400-800.

 

[Tywais]

Moon over northern Thailand last night. A lot of craters shown in this one.

E-M1 Mark III, Olympus 40-150mm PRO +MC20
ISO 200, 1/160s, f/5.6, 300mm (600mm equivalent) 0EV, spot metering and hand held.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Barking]

Jeff, you would probably get a better shot with the lens at maximum focal length, and about one stop from wide open. Use a monopod or tripod if necessary. don't be afraid to lift ISO to 400-800.

Thanks John. Have been trying out some suggested settings (Rob Trek) which have improved my images significantly, but am clearly not quite hitting the mark. (I might try the monopod next time... I've seen some others who get good results at iso 100 too.).. just a matter of trial and error I guess. Appreciate the advice..Jeff

 

[John King]

Thanks John. Have been trying out some suggested settings (Rob Trek) which have improved my images significantly, but am clearly not quite hitting the mark. (I might try the monopod next time... I've seen some others who get good results at iso 100 too.).. just a matter of trial and error I guess. Appreciate the advice..Jeff

You're welcome, Jeff. Lowering the ISO below 'base ISO' gives you more light on the sensor, so less noise. When appropriate, best to use the lowest ISO you can.

Might I suggest concentrating on the basics first. Selecting the "right" shutter speed, aperture and ISO is a start. Learn how the five different metering modes affect your image. AF can be a lot harder than the name suggests!

I always had a very specific problem with composition of form and colour, and framing. Having paid particular attention to my shortcomings in this area for some 15 years now, I am much better. It still catches me out though ...

I tend to use aperture priority mode, set the ISO as low as is practical, and let the shutter speed float - while watching it! I'm old, and getting a bit doddery. The regular doses of strong painkillers for osteoarthritis don't help my steadiness one bit ...

 

[BDR-529]

This might be the right place to ask so has anyone used those really inexpensive (<200€) Dörr Danubia/Walimex/Samyang/whatever 500mm f/6.3 reflex lenses for moon shots or anything else for that matter?

I noticed that on the very first page of this thread there were some shots from 2013 but the quality was very low compared to latest shots with even a 150mm pro lens. Then again, 2013 camera bodies were a far cry of what they are today so has someone used latest reflex lenses lately?

I noticed that Tokina has released a brand new 400mm f/8.0 just a few months ago so there must be some demand for these and being a new design IQ might be better.
Does anyone have experience of these? New Tokina is sold around 270€ with MFT mount but it has both shorter focal lenght and slower aperture so is the IQ worth the price or are all reflex lenses just waste of money?

https://www.43rumors.com/tokina-just-announced-this-400mm-f-8-reflex-lens-for-mft-too/

Reflex lenses have also one fixed aperture, doughnut shaped bokeh and they all seem to use T-mount (42mm*0,75, not to be confused with M42 mount which is 42mm*1,0mm) which means that these can be mounted on practically any mirrorless camera.

 

[Stanga]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Tried out the FZ330 for moonshots. Not as frame filling as the FZ82. But that is to be expected since the FZ82 has a zoom that is twice the length of the FZ330.

 

[Mike Wingate]

This one is different. Taken from the front of the house. Moon over Cheshire tonight at 17:00pm.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[3dpan]

This might be the right place to ask so has anyone used those really inexpensive (<200€) Dörr Danubia/Walimex/Samyang/whatever 500mm f/6.3 reflex lenses for moon shots or anything else for that matter?

I noticed that on the very first page of this thread there were some shots from 2013 but the quality was very low compared to latest shots with even a 150mm pro lens. Then again, 2013 camera bodies were a far cry of what they are today so has someone used latest reflex lenses lately?

I noticed that Tokina has released a brand new 400mm f/8.0 just a few months ago so there must be some demand for these and being a new design IQ might be better.
Does anyone have experience of these? New Tokina is sold around 270€ with MFT mount but it has both shorter focal lenght and slower aperture so is the IQ worth the price or are all reflex lenses just waste of money?

https://www.43rumors.com/tokina-just-announced-this-400mm-f-8-reflex-lens-for-mft-too/

Reflex lenses have also one fixed aperture, doughnut shaped bokeh and they all seem to use T-mount (42mm*0,75, not to be confused with M42 mount which is 42mm*1,0mm) which means that these can be mounted on practically any mirrorless camera.

A late reply, but I don't see any others either.
I have been looking at the recent releases, Samyang and Tokina, and wondering about their quality, but haven't actually bought either.
In theory both those brands should be able to make first class, high grade mirror lenses now. Especially Samyang as their latest Pro grade refractor lenses are world class.
But I suspect the current offerings are just testing the market.
f/8 and f/6.3 are just too slow for most astro applications (except the moon), unless you have auto-guiding.
I would really like Samyang or Tokina to produce a high grade fast and sharp mirror lens aimed at the astro market. 400mm f/4 would be wonderful, even 300mm f/4. A T-mount would make them adaptable to any camera brand, even an astro camera.
The biggest advantage of a mirror lens for astro is the inherent lack of CA, coma. I think that may even compensate in part for not-so-high resolution, as the stars look cleaner.
Something I have started loking at is the use a 0.7x focal reducer, SpeedBooster, with an OM 500/8 mirror lens (from the '80's). It gives me a 350mm f5.6 lens, but it is still a bit slow for me as I only have a tracking mount and can't do long exposures especially with 350mm or 500mm lenses. I'm attaching a Speedbooster example, but only done with 60 second exposures.
Cheers,

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Stanga]

I am surprised how the well the FZ330 performs at 100 ISO. Even cropped the image is still an improvement over my FZ82 in both detail and noise.
Picture cropped to 1600 pixels width to match the default of the forum width.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Mike Wingate]

A clear Moon over Cheshire. 17:00pm Wednesday 25 November.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Mike Wingate]

The cloudy Moon over Cheshire. Late

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Wednesday and Thursday evening.

 

[Mike Wingate]

The Moon over Cheshire at 20:00pm Friday.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Cold and bright.

 

[Barking]

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Quadna71]

A couple nights ago. I feel like I’m exhausting the limit of both clarity and detail with my current combination. Maybe further gains can be reached if I look into ways of avoiding heat waves, clearer skies, or just improving the subject and background by introducing artifacts such as clouds, branches, birds/planes, etc.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[BosseBe]

A couple nights ago. I feel like I’m exhausting the limit of both clarity and detail with my current combination. Maybe further gains can be reached if I look into ways of avoiding heat waves, clearer skies, or just improving the subject and background by introducing artifacts such as clouds, branches, birds/planes, etc.

View attachment 860476

Great picture, clear and crisp!
I recognize your feeling, I don't take many moon shots, but when I do with my P100-300 I always feel like I want a longer lens as I have to crop to fill the frame like your picture.
So can a Teleconverter be the answer, getting 600mm would certainly fill the frame more or a longer lens, but as far as I know 400mm is the longest µ43 lens we have.
Maybe I have to get an adapted lens (FF 500mm or so) to really fill the frame.

 

[Quadna71]

I really wish I had the option of using one. But not happening with the 75-300 lens. As much as I love taking pictures of the moon or even just checking it out with my binoculars, I can’t justify a new long lens (300mm most likely?) in order to do so. So for now I’ll just stick to searching out super moons, perfectly timed waning gibbous phases, and various combinations of the two.