Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 5, 2007, 12:15 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 90
Default

I noticed we were having a full moon tonight, so I thought that would be a good test of my new 400mm lens (see this thread for the lens details: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=94 )

I braved the cold and got these...

First , the lens by itself (hand held, w/shake reduction - F5.6, ISO100,1/125s)


Ok, so that's not so impressive... not much detail to be seen... So I grabed my doubler (which means this was effectivly shot at 800mm) and switched the camera from auto ISO to fixed at 800... (hand held, w/shake reduction - F5.6,1/250s)


I'm personally fairly happy with this second shot. (actually, these were the 5th and 6th shots respectivly... the first 4 ended up with white dots for the moon... before I switched the camera over to spot meetering...)

Paul
pbender is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 5, 2007, 2:47 AM   #2
TC3
Senior Member
 
TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,169
Default

Hi good try but can i suggest exposing for a lil less time so that the image is not blown out ...the moon is pretty bright

By the way what lens did you get? I use an old Tokina RMC 400mm and a 2x tc for moon shots. Not great but not bad either
TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2007, 6:31 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 189
Default

Hi, nice try but I suggest to use spot metering + smaller aperture (f/8- f/11) and slightly underexpose to bring out more details :-)

Best and happy shooting, JR

Reps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2007, 9:35 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

Remember that even though it is night the moon is in full sunlight.
So the old Sunny 16 rule applies, slightly modified.
(exposure for images in full direct sunlight are f/16 @ 1/iso.

For the full-ish moon here try f/11 @ 1/iso.
For better detail tripod mount and try with ISO 100 or ISO 200.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2007, 10:01 AM   #5
TC3
Senior Member
 
TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,169
Default

No need to tripod mount at all! Expose at 250/s or 250/s at around f11 (try different apertures of course) and you should get nice detail. The moon is moving so wont a 1sec pic cause motion blur?
TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2007, 10:48 AM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 90
Default

TC3 wrote:
Quote:
By the way what lens did you get? I use an old Tokina RMC 400mm and a 2x tc for moon shots. Not great but not bad either
It's a Sigma 400mm (see the thread I linked to in the initial post for more details. and a picture of the lens).

The teleconverter I have is a promaster with most, if not all, of the electrical contacts. I actually bought that for use with my Ricoh... at least 5 years ago....

To All who have replied so far, thanks for the advice, I'll head out again in the cold tonight, and see if I can get one with different apperature settings. It was so cold last night that I focused on focusing, and let the camera do the thinking on the exposure settings.

Paul
pbender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2007, 10:07 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Maw Harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Default

Paul,

You braved the cold but I GOT A COLD so wasn't able to get out for a try, I was just tooooo miserable. I would have been happy with an image like your #2. I just got my tripod legs so hopefully I'll be able to give it a try next time around.

Good information in this thread tooooo....

Bev
Maw Harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 6, 2007, 1:08 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 90
Default

Well, I did make it out tonight to take a few more shots. Here is the best from tonights shooting. This was shot at F16,1/60th of a second,ISO100, and using a monopod mounted to the lens' tripod collar...



Incidentally, I noticed something when doing my normal post processing on these... my automated scripts, built using imagemagick, to convert from dng to jpeg seems to be doing some automatic exposure correction.

In the morning, after I've had a chance to warm up again, I'm going to pull these up with the gimp and generate a jpeg without the exposure correction. That should improve the results.

Paul
pbender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2007, 3:57 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 90
Default

It's been a while since I had a chance to look at these photos, but I finally was able to play with them a little.

Here is the last image I posted to the thread, converted using the UFRaw plugin to the GIMP. The only change I made to the raw image was a +1EV correction to lighten it up a bit. The image was reduced to 800x533 pixels after the import, and then saved as a JPEG:


And another version of the same image, this time imported with a +2EV correction, and then cropped to get rid of most of the black background. This version is half the size of the original crop.


I personally am relativly pleased with these results.

Paul
pbender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2007, 7:10 AM   #10
TC3
Senior Member
 
TC3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,169
Default

The image is very soft and it might be better to lose the tc and just try the lens and then crop.....i find this works better for me when using my 400mm 5.6 Tokina
TC3 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:49 PM.