Moon in the Afternoon

Shot with a Nikon 600 f/4 (manual focus) lens on a Canon 5D body inthe afternoon using a fast shutter, with contrast added in postprocessing. No teleconverter was used.

--Lannie

Very nice shot, although its just a little dark.

Thanks. Yes, it is dark and with high contrast in order to bring out detail.

 

--Lannie

Neat shot! Such wonderful detail, I am amazed. 600mm Nikon lens? Pardon my stupidity, but what kind of adaptor do you use to attach a Nikon lens to a Canon camera?

 

I like the B&W. My imagination is on a roll. I'm envisioning this in a huge square frame, with successive shots of different phases of the moon. Double matted, of course. Each individually cut from the same matt board, framed with a large (4 inch), black wood frame. I'm not sure if the frame would be smooth or have a decorative molding cut :) I'd just have to choose that after the matt was applied. It would look nice in one of my grandson's rooms :) Hanging next to their telescope!

 

See what happens when I see something creative, it is inspiring :) Nice job!

Thanks, Jayme. I used the cheap Chinese Nikon to EOS adapter found on eBay to connect the lens to the camera. Works beautifully, but an attempt to use the Canon teleconverter (extender) for even more magnification caused an error message in the camera with this arrangement, and so no further optical magnification was used beyond that of the long lens (about 12X). The large digital file was, however, cropped and blown up (resized digitally) to gain additional magnification.

 

I have to figure out why the attempt to use the Canon teleconverter caused the camera to give an error message and freeze up the shutter. I don't know if it is related to the use of the cheap adapter or not, or whether the narrow tube of the Canon teleconverter/extender between adapter and camera just would not work with a Nikon lens. I am a bit puzzled, but not too surprised. Perhaps a Nikon teleconverter attached in front of (i.e., on the lens side of) the adapter would work, but I don't own any Nikon teleconverters. So for now, I can't stretch the focal length from 600mm to 840mm (using 1.4X) or to 1200mm (using 2X), and so for now 600mm will have to do. In any case, I guess that this means that there can be complications with the Canon-Nikon arrangement, at least with the cheap EOS camera-to-Nikon lens adapter when one tries to use Canon teleconverters--or, more likely, the incompatibility is in the teleconverters/extenders. I still think that this arrangement (adapter and all) might work with certain Nikon teleconverters, the ones for long, manual focus lenses--but never with the Canon "extenders." That's my theory of the moment, anyway.

 

I could, of course, get more magnification if I were not using the 24mm x 36mm sensor of the 5D, but I really, really can't afford another Canon digital camera right now--and I don't see the point in moving back toward Nikon for just one application. Most of my Nikon stuff is gone. This long lens is about all that is left except for the Nikon FM (up for auction right now) and a few Nikon MF lenses (coming up for auction this weekend). Nikon does make great glass, though, and so it is a relief to see it working well on Canon bodies, as long as one doesn't mind going manual.

 

--Lannie

I use a small piece of tape to prevent contact of the lens / converter to the camera body preventing the camera from knowing there is a lens connected, and avoiding the error. Since you are manually focusing this may work. It works for me using a teleconverter attached to a short focal length telescope and Canon20D.

Nice shot for Afternoon by the way.

 

Thanks, Howard. I'll have to try that.

 

--Lannie

This is a shot I have been wanting to try for sometime. All the best. Dennis

Thanks, Dennis. I don't know if I would be thrilled with the prospect of doing this in Alaska during the longest nights of the year.

 

--Lannie

Thanks for the info. I've seen those on eBay & wondered if they really worked. I'll have to get one & try it!

Jayme, the cheap Chinese EOS to Nikon adapters (Nikon lens on Canon EOS body) definitely work (and work quite well), and are cheap enough to buy one for each Nikon lens that you might have, if you use it only on a Canon body. (You would not want to have to be moving them on and off all the time, since they are a bit of a pain to get on the first time, but they stay put once on--or at least the kind I use does. The camera also snaps reassuringly into place after you have attached the adapter to the lens.)

 

As for teleconverters, I have yet to take a photo with either of my two EOS teleconverters, and so I can't speak to the quality of results when using them to extend focal length and thus magnification. I hear that the 1.4X is fine but that the 2X is a bit soft. The 1.4X is smaller but costs more.

 

--Lannie

From your comment I take it that you switched from Nikon to Canon. Can you tell me why?

By the way, the moon shot is excellent....Bert

Well, Bert, truth be told, I miss my Nikon glass, as well as that wonderful aperture ring. I went with Canon because they have a full-frame DSLR, and I still like to shoot in the old tradition where a 50 is still a 50, etc. If I had to do it again, I doubt that I would switch, although both brands give excellent results. I'm not sure that Canon is worth the extra premium that I am paying for lenses and body--just to get full-frame. That said, I have had no problems with the Canon system so far, photographically speaking, but paying extra for the most basic of accessories gets a bit old. . . .

 

--Lannie

I like this one Lannie, my moon shots are all with the 18-200 VR lens and then in PS cropped in (zoomed) wish I had a lens with say like this, I think you said a 600mm. Last night I was out here in Plano Texas at about 10:30pm and it was a over cast night all but just some brakes here and there but I got a look in the western sky at the Crescent Moon with Venus just off the tip and they were closer then I have seen the two in a very long time. Venus was as far away from the moon as the Crescent moon is wide, if that makes any sense at all lol. I tried to get a shot of it but the brake in the cloud that gave me the glimpse of my best star-moon shot was gone as fast as it was there. I love all your work the old burns and houses are great.

Thanks, Ken. I do have the TCs now to try to get even "closer." I've got to try it soon.

 

--Lannie

Wow, I have a 300 2.8 and a x2 tele so I might just give this a go this winter, this is amazing!!!

Ger..

Thanks, Ger. It's even better when it is a crescent.

 

--Lannie

thanks for the tips on my shot, now i know what not to do also i can see that a remote release can make hell of a diffrence...

Thanks, Naveed. On my posted shot, I think that I used a timer, but something is certainly needed so that one can keep one's hands off the lens.

 

Your moon shot looks much better.

 

--Lannie

Whoa....very impressive shot. I have gazed at the moon many times and wondered......

How the heck do I get my camera to see what I am seeing????!!!!.

Beautiful detail. I love the contrast and frame and shape of the moon. Really nice work.

Thanks, Tiffany, although I really should try it with a crescent, when the contrast is even better for showing the craters.

 

I also want to try it with a cropped sensor camera, to increase magnification, as well as with the 1.4X Teleconverter.

 

--Lannie

Wonderful clarity. The technical comments and suggestions from other contributors are also very useful, so thanks for sharing. Regards, Margo.

Thanks, Margo. Your comment made me realize that I have not followed up on this after all this time--about two and one-half years.

 

--Lannie

Lannie,

This is one amazing shot. You did a wonderful job with this one. Amazing I don't know what else to say. Regards, Patsy