raising center column of tripod - ok?

If you think about it for a moment you should be able to use the same exposure that you'd use for a sunny day right here on earth. There's no atmosphere, or clouds so its always sunny on the lit side. The sun is effectively the same distance from the moon & the Earth percentage wise. Its way, way brighter than the surrounding night sky, but that's not what you're photographing is it?

The sunny sixteen rule should work fine!

Good logic -

However, over the years, many 'Moon Photographers' choose to over expose the shot, to provide a 'better' rendering of the Moon's Surface.

Typically - Rule of Thumb for Moon Shots is the "F/11 Rule" (i.e. F/11 @ 1/ISO seconds @ ISO).

Effectively over exposing the (brightest part of the) moon's surface by 1 stop, providing an overall result of the (brighter parts of the) surface being a tad closer to white, than what they actually are.

Remembering of course that NOT all shots of the moon will be a "Full Moon". And of course also remembering that the F/16 Rule is for "Front Sun Lit Subjects" and the F/16 Rule needs to be modified for Side Lit; Top Lit and Back Lit Subjects.

And also remembering that the "correct exposure" for any shot can be predicated on the "correct exposure" for ONE PORTION of that scene.

***

Taking David's shot as an example - and noting that:

1. the EXIF reveals:ƒ/8.0 @ 1/800 @ ISO 800 Exposure Bias - 0 EV

2. the moon is mostly in shadow (if you will, the moon David's shot is a "Side Lit Subject")

3. there is probably 1~1.5 Stops worth of Post Production recovery of Image Detail for 'over' exposure at the extreme right of the histogram in a 5DMkIV.

Then, it is logical to assume that F/8 @ 1/800s @ ISO800 (being 2 Stops OVER from the F/16 rule) is a very useful exposure for that particular shot moreover, to generally render the Moon's Surface a bit brighter, whiter and crisper, it makes sense to generally over expose the shot, from the "F/16 Rule".

Note also that the history of the F/11 Rule for Moon Shots stems from Film Days, where the over exposure latitude is typically and generally greater than for Digital Capture.

WW

The moon is bright, unless clouds or smog are obscuring it. Just shoot hand held. . .

Anyway, try hand holding. The moon is easy-peasy . . .

Nice shot.

I think it is relevant to mention to the OP, that your Hand Held shot was made with an Image Stabilized Lens.

WW

I'm going to swim against the tide here.

There is a widespread view that one should never raise the center column of a tripod--and better yet, that one should buy a tripod without one. I think that is greatly overstated.In my experience, it often creates no problem.

I use an Oben carbon-fiber tripod with a center column. The center column is well damped. When it isn't windy, I use the center column often, even for night photography photos with exposures measured in minutes. I rarely have a problem with vibration. Windy conditions, of course, are a whole different matter.And when it is windy enough, the tripod will vibrate (less) even with the column not extended, but hanging a weight helps.

I also use the center column routinely in doing studio-based macro work. I use a geared head to get fine control of angle and a rail to get fine control of distance to the subject. The only way to get reasonably good control over vertical placement is with a column. I do these shots with fairly low continuous lighting, so exposures are typically around 1 second. Moreover, I focus-stack these images, so slight motion can ruin the stack, even if most of the images are clear. Just slight movement on the floor, which is wood, is enough to ruin the stack, and I use both a remote release and mirror lockup to lessen movement. In these circumstances, the column has never been a problem.

On the other hand, I have never used the tripod or heads that you have. So, my suggestion is that some time when you aren't concerned about getting the perfect shot, take some images with and without the column, blow them up on the screen, and see whether you have a problem.

I have got decent photos of the moon by leaning against the side of my house. But if I were doing a lot of this kind of shooting, it would be my goal to do it comfortably. Waiting for clouds to disslpate. So a stool is the trick. Or go to a an astronomical club that has a clear sky location with no sodium lighjts. For stability. I like a little overkill, I bought a used Manfrotto double top leg model used. Rugged. This is the type. You can depend on solid and not too heavy to pack in a trunk. And if you get fancy, add a binocular hexagonal mount to get a side accomodation if I make myself clear.

this is often called a parallelogram type mount....it is made for big binoculas but is adaptable easilty to a medium size camera. Again, sitting is the logical choice for craning to the zenith to catch the moon in its full glory....exposure is a no pain exercise. Mirrorless cameras and multiple shots do the trick. who cares what the f stop is you are stable with a good tripod and need not worry about extension wobble. I guess my point is made....come to my backyard and I will demo with a Funinon 7X50 Marine binocular with camera platform. Come in the water is fine....sit and enjoy. Get night adapted with red flashlight lens...what else? Read up on astro clubs in the neighborhood. The moon gets dull after a few months. Aloha. Another illustration of good viewing ideas not too pricey---http://www.telescope.com/Mounts-Tripods/Altazimuth-Mounts-Tripods/Orion-Paragon-Plus-Binocular-Mount-and-Tripod/c/2/sc/35/p/5379.uts