John Di Leo

along the Blue Ridge Parkway CapeElizabeth Sunday Rte 3, Nova Scotia, South of Halifax

only one shot of my gear...my BMW R1200GS LC that within the past few weeks carried me and photo stuff to New England, Nova Scotia (Cabot Trail), and Mt Washington (and back home). I was rained on by both Maria and Nate--all part of the "adventure." somewhere in Virginia Peggy's Cove, Nova Scotia Middle Head Trail, Ingonish, Nova Scotia

Mary Doo said: " David and John, it must have been quite an effort to point your gigantic lenses upward for the total eclipse - with the tripod getting in the way etc." It really wasn't too bad at all to set up. I had an aligned finderscope on the big tube. That is a dedicated telescope tripod with an equatorial wedge and a clock drive that I ran from an old motorcycle battery I had. It was aligned to the north, again eyeballing it with the compass on my smartphone. Before I left I pretty much eyeballed the setting for the wedge at what I thought would be the latitude of where I thought I would be observing in Nebraska, and I was pretty close, so once I had the sun in the frame, it stayed there with just a bit of tweaking. The mount has fine controls for up and down and right and left. I illuminated my viewfinder to see where the sun was in the frame, and I had a right angle finder. It was very sturdy, but even so, the wind was strong enough to shake things a bit at times. In addition, you'll see a shaving mirror that I mounted on the tripod so I could see live view without crouching down. It all worked much better than I expected. And if I ONLY remembered to remove the solar filter after diamond ring....ugh I did get this panorama with my smart phone and a timelapse My mistake was I changed the routine on the fly--don't do that, esp with such a tight time window; but I thought I had to because at iso 100 the images were dark during partial. So I went up to 400. Threw me off. then I "decided" to do the panorama right at beginning of totality, instead of the planned after totality pix shot. And when I went back to the camera to shoot the totality pix, I forgot the filter was still on...DOH! Didn't realize that til I saw nothing showing up in my viewing mirror, thought I lost the sun, slewed the camera a bit, realized what i did, found it for a lucky, but sloppy diamond ring. UGH!!! Well, 2024 has nearly 4 minutes of totality and I could've recovered with an extra 90 seconds--or so I am telling myself!:eek::oops:

On the centerline a few miles south of Broken Bow, Nebraska, Ash Creek Canyon Rd.,in the middle of a cornfield. Running three cameras and doing so alone led to missing shots of the corona! Don't ask me how that happened! I did get a (sloppy) 3rd contact-because of my failure at corona, and some partial shots though, showing a couple of sunspots likely as big as the Earth. Lots of flare on the Diamond ring, but this one's corona was not that impressive, I think. The diamond ring does show a bunch of prominences though. 2024's has a duration of totality of nearly 4 minutes. 2:35 was way too short. Always an adventure. And yes, windy. Had to trash some shots because of movement of that rig

here ya go, complete with traffic. Kudos to the OP USA - 2017 August 21 Total Solar Eclipse - Interactive Google Map - Xavier Jubier

I would opt for the sigma with the converter, assuming IQ is equivalent to Nikon??? 400 x 1.4 = 700, is that the way it works? and the 5.6 would then be ~~f8? That would give you a focal length of 700mm, and to my view i think that is pretty close/ideal considering alignment ease and field of view. But, the Nikon does that too, right? With careful focusing, and remember the shadow/moon is about 93 million miles closer than the bright bits so focus can be different, and a stable mount you should get some very memorable images. The Nikon, do you own it already(?), with a converter might be more salable/useful after--and there may be some really good deals on long lenses afterward! I would at least put into the equation costs of each setup, forgetting the 500 mirror because of sample variability. If you've already reviewed the IQ of the Sigma and the Nikon zoom, and are comfy with it, look at costs. 700mm is 700mm so it would come down to, in my mind: do you want to keep it after will you sell it after? what is out of pocket $$ ? IQ (not in that order) don't worry about low light capability...does not come into play, at least not significantly just my 2 cents

Interesting discussion, lots of points of view, and, if you're getting good exposures whatever you're doing is right for you, right? On my d700 it was never an big issue, I mostly shoot in A priority with a fixed iso, mostly well lit subjects, often landscapes on my motorcycle rides, but also street portraits at Mardi Gras, at night in less than ideal conditions. There were occasions where I would turn it to 0 or, shooting in White Sands recently, kicked it up to +1, though maybe 0.7 would've been better??? If the metering was off, it wasn't by much. From the discussion above though I think it was just minor camera variation. I am not saying I thought the 700 was too hot by 0.3, but that images, and especially skin tones were more pleasing at -0.3--req less tweaking in post. The d810 seems spot on though, at least in daylight with average contrast scenes. It was a noticeable difference though and wondered if others saw the same. Appears the answer is yes.

bit of a reprieve, in most places along the path the sun is a bit over 60 degrees from the horizon. That really does help with the ergos

Yes, the top link, but the bottom one is interesting also. Get ready for the H Y P E. We still have not heard from the alien conspiracists or doomsday peeps. The Rigelians, or maybe the Pleaidians, will destroy us all! Stay inside! watch it on NEWS4, Your Eclipse Central! Do not go outside until we tell you it is safe! Let Us Watch It For You! Actually, I think the Idaho/Tetons disaster declaration is so over the top. People are going to be there for maybe a day or two, there is NO Disaster. The path is miles and miles wide and crosses a continent, and it ARMED with a shadow. How scary is that. Gives new meaning to being afraid of your own shadow. People are gonna watch then leave departing in every direction. They are not escaping something. They are not starving or lacking clean water. They are going home. OMG. If that's what happens in Idaho, will Nashville be burned to the ground by starving hordes? Idaho should get ready for a traffic jam... maybe. Get some First Responders out there to direct traffic and they will be ready when astronomers and photographers fight it out for space on the scenic byways of the Famous Potatoes state. Probably not, you think? Geez, but that's a good reason to avoid the herd mentality and the Official Wisdom that accompanies it. Coming from a hurricane prone state, a survivor of Katrina, this type of hyperbole is all too common. Disaster around every corner. There are going to be some traffic jams, as well as people picnicking with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, kids running around. There is NO disaster, unless for Idaho's Finest a traffic snarl for a couple of hours is a disaster. Preparation for lots of people and traffic is appropriate, but will it really be that much worse than July 4th or Labor Day or Memorial Day? Sorry for the rant, but it often seems these sky is falling people do so to justify their budgets and their existence. Back to the original topic, the eclipse, it is a sense that the sky is falling as the shadow descends, I forgot to mention that earlier. Rod, I too am looking at Ne and Ks and Mo, maybe as far west as the National Homestead Park in SE Ne.

cool! post some pix of your rig when you have it set up. And how well it works. I know it's one of the advertised big deals of the experience, the temp drop and the night time animals, but in truth, I've not been witness to that. I am in no way denying it, but just haven't seen/felt/heard that, and I was looking for it. yes, agree fully. I have a feeling I will be on some obscure backroad in Ne or Mo One thing I have seen is the moon's shadow approaching; it's coming at you at about 2300mph. The "trouble" is at that time there is so much happening, like Bailey's Beads, Diamond Ring, that you can get lost in the visual splendor of it all. I came across an article this morning that I found very interesting in the way it described the event. I thought it was spot on. It's worth the short read "2017 Total Solar Eclipse will be 'one of the events of the century'" and it was on the Fox News site

I'm set because I am using a telescope mount with a finderscope that is aligned. Others may benefit though? Repeated in 7 years . Tongue blade(depressor) is a good idea for stability. The wire crosshairs do not have to be exactly 90degrees. As long as the viewer know where the object should be relative to the crosshairs, the sun is big enough that it should be close to aligned. Not like looking for a star or other pinpoint of light. ah, too bad about the wildfires up there, but if the op arises, take it.

This is a good theme with some very intriguing shots. Would love to know where they were taken. My flying saucer was somewhere in Nevada--a truly beautiful state. The Hydrogen Alpha sun was at Shiprock, NM. Thanks, Mark for starting it and man that looks like Mars

Agree. It is a simple thing. Affixing it to the camera is the tricky part, you can't just stick it on with anything anywhere without blocking knobs, buttons, etc. And it has to be secure enough to work twice, not once. One to align and stay aligned to, two, work on eclipse day. I was thinking you could use a cardboard tube, longer the better, with some needle and thread crosshairs, they don't have to be exact at all, just taut. A secure paper towel tube would likely work fine.

nononononono. You were good up to the "remembering your eclipse glasses" part. No filter and most certainly no eclipse glasses will stand up to a processed and focused image of the sun. Even through a 6x finderscope, it will/could burn right through and all the way to your retina. A filter should only be in front of the lens, iow between the sun and the lens. If any optics are used projection of the image is safest and works. You can use the palm of your hand. You just want to know that the sun is in there--the finderscope--and when it is it will project. Or did I misunderstand you? The problem I see with that is that you wind up looking at the sun, albeit with glasses, and is there a gun sight that mounts to a hot shoe? That is the major speed bump. Though I suppose that could work? And I suppose you mean a physical not optical gun sight? I'm really surprised nothing like that exists? If you google it, there is interest, but most posts talk about a DIY project using a harvested old flash for the shoe mount and then mounting something onto that.

Hi, Rod, I fully concur with your experience. Yep, that's what I was talking about. And what you didn't mention, but I am sure experienced, was the eye fatigue factor. One eye into the black void of your VF and the other staring at the sun just isn't fun. Now add the timer of the eclipse on it. Or bugs flying around your face. It can be a real challenge. Shooting at less of an angle can make all the difference in the world, but this one is at/near zenith and that's tough. The right angle will help a lot though. Interesting that Live View didn't help---can you explain more? If one had something like this Lume Cube Hot Shoe Mount LC-HS11 B&H Photo Video and even the cheapest finderscope you could fab the two together, take the rig out to align on something terrestrial and fixed, for convenience, test it out on the moon and you'd be set. To get the sun in view you would have it attached to the camera and point the whole set toward the sun and look for the projected image of the sun thru the finderscope. If you aligned the finderscope well enough the sun will be in the camera, or very close. Did you find the ball head strong enough to hold the whole rig? Mine was not and i was forced to accommodate a bit of slippage. Using a real telescope mount takes care of that and if I have it set up properly can track the sun either manually of with its clock drive.

Unfortunately, "chasing" is part of the solar eclipse thing. That said, for the USA, unless you happen to be close to the path of the next one--and that path is less extensive--and still in good enough health that travel is possible, this August is the best shot at it. A lunar eclipse affects an entire hemisphere of the Earth. SOLar is a narrow band and it might be in the Altoplano, or the Marshall Islands, or off the coast of Uruguay. But, Sandy, you are so very close in Mt to the path of totality, just a day's drive, a chip shot. It is so rare for them to come this close. You need to go!

well, good luck and clear skies

On my prior dslr, a d700, I found that setting the exposure compensation to -0.3 yielded a more pleasing image to me. Now, with my new-to-me d810, I find that to get the same pleasingly exposed image, no compensation is needed. If I go to -0.3 the image is underexposed. did the exposure bias (probably not the right term) change with the d810 vs the d700? Would that be a function of the wider dynamic range?

There is no comparison between lunar and total solar. A lunar is "isn't that interesting?" A solar is a near religious experience; like God is looking at you. The sun seems so close you can almost grab it. To be honest, lunars are boring compared to total solars. If this is your first--there's another in 7 years in the USA--take a few shots, but prioritize just being there. My brother is heading to Clemson also, I will not make a decision until a couple of days before and then hit the road. I want to be near on site the night before. Sandy, I will look for the stamp. I heard it's a "forever" stamp--and the D810 after all the refurb issues, seems to be working out fine.

Yes, but to put that another way, when the shadow of your rig is the smallest on the ground, you're close, if not there. It will not be a "circle" because the camera body is there casting its own rectangular shadow. I use a mod of that to align. If you are using a small telescope, as I am, there is a finder scope on it. To use this technique, the finder scope must be aligned with the big tube of the scope: Do this well in advance, easiest to align on a terrestrial object, I used a chimney of a house a block or so away. With an aligned finder scope (or nearly so, but closer the better) slew the rig so that the sun's image is projected through the finder scope, I use my hand as a "screen." The sun will be in or very close to your VF. A very useful accessory is a right angle finder. For Nikon they come in two sizes 19 and 22. The older ones are 19, and cheaper, and stepup up rings are avaulable. I don't know if such an accessory exists, but a small finder scope that fits into the hot shoe of flash, would be useful, but again, does that exist? Re making your own rigging for the filter, make 1000000% sure it is secure from being bumped or wind or whatever! Even a few milliseconds of sunlight through magnification will permanently damage your retina. There is NO recovery.. Also, all filters must be between the sun and your equipment...not behind Sun---------Filter----------lens-------camera---------eye.......not any other arrangement there are filters made to go into eyepieces( and maybe viewfinders???)--AVOID! Any imaged sun, esp magnified, has the ability/likelihood of burning through the filter and then permanently damaging your eye. There are many vendors of solar filters in various sizes. I cannot remember where I bought mine, but it has a blue ring on it, and slips over the end of the small scope I am using. It fits well, but I reinforced it with velcro as an added safety measure. Orion Telescopes: Search Results on 'solar filter' and Products – Thousand Oaks Optical I was testing the setup the other day on my driveway. It was in the 90s and very hot. Since we are all looking for clear skies and the money shots will happen when the sun is overhead, and it's mid-August, I am going to bring a large umbrella for some shade during the run up to totality. Seems like a useful piece of equipment.

With respect... you're not going to see corona without the disc occluded, the disc need to be blocked to see corona. There are special devices to do this--but these are not something you can get from Amazon. The best time to observe corona is during a total solar eclipse. Upping the shadows in Lightroom is not going to do it. Those are artifacts in the exposure above, not the corona. You need a tripod for totality, if, for nothing more than efficiency. I, too, went out the other day and shot some test shots. Aside: exposures and iso are very forgiving if you have stability. No disrespect intended, but no matter how good you are at catching birds in flight, the sun is not that subject. During partial phases, handheld can work mostly because you have all the time in the world to get it right/do over. Totality is different. You are shooting at far slower shutter speeds, as well as some faster speeds, to get different things, ie prominences, corona are far different exposures. Think about what you're trying to do (in at most 2.5 minutes). You have to Find the sun in your viewfinder---this is not easy at all. You are using a very narrow angle lens, the viewfinder is BLACK because of your sun filter--like looking through with the lens cap on; your eclipse glasses are off, to see anything in the viewfinder. That means your other eye is open or winked, but pointing directly at the sun. If you can do it, now try to find the sun at the zenith---that's where the sun will be for most of the USA, or nearly so. It is not a suitable test to try at any time of the day; you must try it at the time of the eclipse. You neck is 90 degrees to your body and you are "holding" a biga$$ piece of equipment that weighs a few pounds. And trying to keep steady. Good luck with that. I suppose you could try laying on the ground, but to avoid a tripod? One thing to point out and the above exposure shows it. Usually I can check exposure of the sun by focusing on sunspots. They are often pretty apparent, though not above. My shots showed the same, a blank disc. I looked at the sun's limb for sharpness, and as above, it looked sharp, but no sunspots. There are two reasons that could be: The focus distance from the closest part of the sun's surface to the Earth is different from the distance to the limb-to the tune of OVER 430,000miles, the radius of the sun. Depending on the lens/telescope you're using this may mean a slightly different focus setting. So, if you are focused on the limb--as the above image is, and as mine were, any sunspots might be out of focus and not show up well--at least the potential for that is present. I have seen images where focus was on a sunspot and the limb is not 100% sharp--BTW a very cool shot is of the moon's limb advancing on a sunspot. The other reason you don't see sunspots is maybe none are there on this "face." That turned out to be the case. The sunspot number is way low- it was zero- and on the astro/solar sites with live views of the sun, I saw a blank disk, like above. Now, that said, the moon's distance is about 240,000 miles. To put that into perspective, the radius of the sun is nearly double the Earth-moon distance. So, should one focus on the moon's limb for Baileys beads and Diamond ring, then refocus on the sun's limb for prominences...advice sought on that, but the main point is: Do you really want to handhold that, keeping the sun centered (no easy task), and changing shutter speeds? Yesterday, I went in the other direction completely. As I mentioned earlier, I am using an old Bausch and Lomb 1200 f/12 telescope. For my test, I had it on a manfrotto tripod with a swiss arca ball head, D810 with a Nikon DR-3 right angle on the viewfinder. I tested at about 130pm. It was very hard to find the sun in the viewfinder at that time of day. I gave up and, since I was just testing my setup, I waited until later when I wasn't shooting at zenith, or nearly so. I also re-aligned the whimpy finder scope--which has NO solar filter at this time. Tested the setup, looked ok, but I was concerned that this was a lot of weight for the ball head. I dug out the case for the B&L and got the mount for it. With only one trip to Lowes, I adapted it to the tripod and equatorial wedge I had for an old Celestron C8. Brought it outside last night to check on collimation. That is Jupiter next to the moon--played with the collimation, which was pretty good, looked at the crescent moon, and saved the focus setting. the advantage of a real mount is the ease with which you can "slew" the scope and lock it's position; there are knobs. And it is sturdy out the wazoo. So that's what I am going to bring. But all of that to say, to think you are going to handhold a total solar eclipse, could be wishful thinking. Or you could be terrific at it. I know I am not. PS That is a cool shot even with the banding

with that much stuff why not a rolling Pelican case?

This link has some helpful stuff Canon DLC: Article: A Total Guide to Totality: Solar Eclipse Photography