Inputs needed on Moon photography

[malli_h_m]

<p>Hi there,<br>

After I read about 'mini moon', there was spike in curiosity to photograph Moon . Though I myself can not make difference between 'mini moon' and normal moon , i just took photograph of moon day after 'mini moon' . Moon was well above Horizon, may be I say 30% above from Horizon.<br>

Though this photo seems to be good and well appreciated by friends and family, I felt there is lot of scope of improvement.<br>

This <strong>Cropped Photograph of Moon</strong> is JPEG straight out of Camera. No photo editing is done except cropping.<br>

Here is the information of this photo:<br>

--------------<br>

Camera: Nikon D7100<br>

Lens: Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 SP Di VC USD<br>

Handheld , no support or no tripod is used.<br>

Color Mode = Black & White<br>

Exposure Mode= Manual ( i.e M setting on Dial)<br>

Image quality= jpeg fine ( 8 bit)<br>

Aperture= 7.1<br>

Shutter speed= 1/200<br>

ISO=200<br>

focal length =300mm<br>

Exposure Compensation= 0 ev<br>

Metering= Center weighted<br>

VC ( Vibration Compensation) = ON<br>

White Balance= AUTO1,0,0<br>

Color space = sRGB<br>

Focus= Auto Focus<br>

AF Area Mode= AUTO<br>

Active D light=OFF<br>

Distortion Control =OFF<br>

-----------<br>

Here is the Photo link<br>

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1090425<br>

Please suggest how I can improve Moon Photography techniques/settings without using Tripod . Of course, with existing Camera and Lens.<br>

Have a nice day<br>

Malli</p>

<p> </p>

[SCL]

<p>If you don't want to use a tripod, try using a beanbag or sandbag to steady the camera. At 1/200 you are still introducing shake into the shots, it comes as a normal function of minute bodily movements, like blood flowing thru your veins. Yes VR helps, but not enough for truly clear shots of distant objects like the moon. Most manufacturers suggest turning VR off if you are using a steadying device like the a tripod, sandbag or beanbag - because VR introduces a vibration to counteract your normal physical movements. Personally, I would use manual focus at infinity rather than autofocus. Some post processing would improve the shot, sharpening and setting of levels. Most impressive moon shots are done when the moon is much higher in the sky because when it is closer to the horizon, there is more distortion due to the light rays passing thru more temperature differentials of air, as well as more particulate matter in the air.</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>I simply leaned against an outhouse when I shot my first moon shots ... it was too cold to mess around with a tripod :-)<br>

If you look at the right hand side of your moon you may get the idea that flat lighting of full moon is not the best and part moon resulting in side lighting/shadows is better.</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

Shoot RAW, gives a bit more room for improvement. Guideline for moon shots is f/11 at a shutter speed of 1/ISO, like

1/100 @ ISO 100 > you are quite close to that, work from there. There's a lot of air and pollution between us and the

moon so look for a very very clear night for moon shots.

[User_6502147]

<p>Yes, decent support is needed = beanbag (minimum). Not sure your lens is able to resolve well; therefore, you could rent something longer. Also, it would help if you have an external release (cable type would work)...to trigger the camera.</p>

<p>Les</p>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>Some AF systems are a little more precise on single servo than auto, or at least slower to settle on "good enough." That is the case with the d3200 and may be with the 7100 as well. Since the moon is not moving in and out, I suggest single servo AF if you're going to use AF at all. </p>

<p>Lenses vary, and JPG reductions for the forum don't always reflect the quality of an original, but I'd experiment with looking for the sharpest setting on the lens. The D7100 has a lot of cropping room, and it might be that the lens is enough sharper at a little less than its maximum length to offset the crop. I've found, for example, that the Nikon 55-300 DX lens is enough sharper at something around 250 that it sometimes pays to zoom out a little and crop more. </p>

[kerry_grim]

Live view to focus and an electronic release which are very cheap.

[rconey]

<p>Hello,<br>

Moon shots are lots of fun. someone mentioned that full moons have flat light and can be sort of dull. with half moons and such there is a 3D effect to the mountains that is appealing to me. <br>

Take lots of shot. Throw most away. Pretend you got the best with just a shot or two. <br>

For hand held, earlier in the evening is better. Bracing against something is helpful. Dark night is more dramatic but metering for the moon bright but not burned out is harder. <br>

More magnification is better. I got a manual focus (Nikon) 400 f5.6 lens and 2x teleconverter pretty cheaply and have used it with full frame, DX (crop sensor), and with a J5 1 inch sensor. I'm still not sure which is best.At night I am shooting iso 1600-3200, sometimes on a tripod, sometimes hand held and braced. a burst of 5 shots and pick out the least movement. <br>

A few are pretty cool. Lots are not. I need more magnification. BUT its all fun.</p>

[glen_h]

<p>Full moons are lit by the same sun as the earth, so the Sunny 16 rule should be close. Actually, right on the full moon, it is even brighter. It turns out that the moon is not a diffuse reflector, but reflect more light (close to) straight back. </p>

<p>I have done new moons, with just a sliver of light, with a Tamron 18-270, I believe with 2X, maybe 1.4X, teleconverter, handheld (with VR). Enough to see the outline of the whole moon. </p><div></div>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Keep in mind that the moon/earth are moving so keep your shutter speed at speeds that will freeze the moon, otherwise you will get blur no matter how focused. </p>

[pete_resetz]

<p> The Moon is on a clear night, approximately 1/10 of the Sun's brightness at high noon. Also one must take into account the atmospheric conditions. The best time of the year to take Moon photos is in February when the air has the least amount of mirage, which is from ground heat rising into the upper atmosphere, also where you point the camera from and whats in front of you. A house in the dead of winter will give off heat which will cause mirage. Winds currents of the differing layers of the atmosphere are something else to take into consideration. Atmospheric pollutants can also affect your image coloration along with light pollution. This has been simplified. </p>

<p> You can use the NOAA's (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) web site found at www.weather.gov to help plan your next photo shoot. Plus some of the astronomy magazines have on line tutorials to help further you in your quest for the perfect Moon picture.</p>

[malli_h_m]

<p>Thanks Everyone for your very informative suggestions. Now I have better understanding on gear settings, environmental factors , time to be chosen. I will take care of those .</p>

<p> </p>

[mwmcbroom]

<p>When I shoot pix of the moon, the use of a tripod is a given. For critically sharp images, it is a must. Your exposure was good.</p>

<p>When I shoot pix with a digital, I always use Live View and I always will zoom in to at least a middle setting to check focus -- and I also always manually focus the lens. I don't trust AF for moon shots. Of all the lenses I've used to shoot photos of the moon, the one that did the worst job was my Nikon 70-300mm AF-D ED. I'm not really sure why this is. I've used it only once for moon shots, so I'm going to give it another try. My best results were obtained with an old Century Precision Optics Tele Athenar II 500mm f/5.6, set to f/11.</p>

<p>Robert mentions that the full moon can be kind of flat looking. I agree with this. So if I'm taking a shot of the "full moon" I prefer to take the pic either the day before or the day after "full." More shadow detail is evident, especially on the periphery, which improves the overall look of the image, I think. Canon XS DSLR, Century 500mm f//5.6 @f/11, 1/125 second, ISO 100.<br>

<img src="http://michaelmcbroom.com/images/mooncpo500b1.jpg" alt="" width="1118" height="1108" /></p>

[ken_cabeen]

<p>I second Michael's advice, as well as the use of a good old Century Lens like the one he used to get that fantastic moon photo. I have a Century 650mm f/6.8 Tele Athenar II (the TA I not ideal for some reason) and it gives astonishingly beautiful, sharp photos of the moon. They can be found on ebay from time to time for not too much money. But make sure you can return it if necessary; some of them don't focus all the way out to infinity because someone may have changed the T-ring mount from, say, a Canon (for which the lens was set up for originally at the Century facility) to a Nikon T-ring, which will alter the focal plane distance. If you really want to go crazy on it, try image stacking with a program such as Registax. I've gotten some great results doing that.</p>