Shooting moon?

Ricky91t

Hey all,
Took some shot of the moon last night but they came out over exposed i tried a few setting then tried auto and no flash mode(because i didnt want to use a flash because its absolutely pointless) as a last resort .What do i set my cam to to show all the moon detail
Thanks

MREGAN

You dont need a flash to shoot the moon you need a good tripod. Shoot on a timer and if your camera can do it have the mirror locked up so their is less vibration when the shot is taken. The moon is very bright so you have to consider this when taking photos. Also a long range lens will always help towards getting better detail.

Ricky91t

Ok
i was using self timer
I was shooting woth a 20D
on a tripod
A better flash
I could stick on my sigma
But would it make any difference?
Edit:Using a 90-300mm

dingdong1234567

I tried shooting the moon over the christmas and used shutter priority. Just keep experimenting with the timing of the shutter to get the right shot. Some will be over-exposed and some will be ok.

I used sigma 70-300. it was good for the job.

Jon061

Yes a tripod is a must have if taking photos of the moon when using a zoom lens. A full moon on a cloudless night can be really bright so at least 1/250 is needed lower than this and you would start to see signs of over exposure.(depending on iso setting)

Taking photos of the moon when its only half sunlit is nicer because it makes it look for 3D.

ike

Took this sometime last year - set ISO to 50 (a full moon is VERY bright) f/8 and 1/50, and I spot metered off the moon itself.

Ricky91t

Anyone know if the 20D has spot metering?
Im still kinda new to it

Gambler

ike wrote: »

Took this sometime last year - set ISO to 50 (a full moon is VERY bright) f/8 and 1/50, and I spot metered off the moon itself.

Attached two images I took myself when I first got my bridge camera.

The darker of the two is f3.5, 1/250sec exposure and iso 100 and the brighter one is f5.6, 1/250 sec exposure and iso 64 if that helps you get some settings to start playing with

Quackles

Here's my attempt from over the christmas



Taken with 400d, the 70-300mm sigma.. settings were 1/400th second at f/10, ISO 100.

MikeyNT

Hilarious.

5uspect wrote: »

You'll need a more powerful flash to shoot the moon.

I've used a 20D on a tripod with a 100-400L and I got great results. They make a great wallpaper.

Naturally the moon gives off more than enough light not to require a flash. I like when there is a partial eclipse because you can see the contours of the craters which give the impression it is a lot closer than it is.

sheesh

Ive shot the moon with a p&s (yep they were very small, but i got some detail) on a tripod. It does not require a very long exposure in fact all the long exposure ones were blurrly like you described I just increased the shutter speed to a point where the details were visible and then increased it again. results were slightly dark but good enough for the equipment I had.

You could look at the white balance as well.

Question: Any body here try a polarising filter for shooting the moon?

sheesh

sure god love me but these are my results of photographing the moon with a canon a620




well I still had to try!!!! there was nothing good on television.

TelePaul

This is an awesome vid on how to shoot the moon and other weird places (like under the sea)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeNO56xNlZo

5uspect

At first I thought the OP was taking the piss, hence my smart arse reply.

Anyway Ricky metering is a very important part of photography and is far more than just a feature. The type of metering you use determines how your camera uses the available light to determine the exposure length etc. Most cameras have different types such as matrix, center weighted and spot. These basically mean that the regions what lie within those particular parts of the frame are used for metering calculations. Matrix uses most of the frame, center weighted uses the central area and spot uses a tiny bit in the middle. This makes spot metering idea for moon shots where only the light for the moon is used to determine the exposure length. Otherwise the dark of the sky will force the exposure up blowing out the moon.

Ricky91t

5uspect wrote: »

At first I thought the OP was taking the piss, hence my smart arse reply.

Anyway Ricky metering is a very important part of photography and is far more than just a feature. The type of metering you use determines how your camera uses the available light to determine the exposure length etc. Most cameras have different types such as matrix, center weighted and spot. These basically mean that the regions what lie within those particular parts of the frame are used for metering calculations. Matrix uses most of the frame, center weighted uses the central area and spot uses a tiny bit in the middle. This makes spot metering idea for moon shots where only the light for the moon is used to determine the exposure length. Otherwise the dark of the sky will force the exposure up blowing out the moon.

Thanks 5uspect
And thanks Telepaul
When i buy something new id rather use it than spend my first few days reading manuals and books.Im 16 like they wont exactly entertain me.All i use manuals for is if im really stuck on something then ill resort to it but most the time ill figure it out:D.Im happy with what iv learnt from using my camera compared to all my friends if i hand them my DSLR is "M" mode they would'nt know what to do.Iv been using a DSLR for just over 12 monthes now and i got my 20D before xmas.The fact people like some of my shots and comment them makes me happy i could'nt care less if members on here insult me just because i havent come across a feature before which i havent yet used and probably never will on my 20D(It only partial spot metering)

Oriel the nicest thing you could of done is explained to me what it is like 5uspect.And in replay to you "Why do all the pretty, stupid people have all the money?!"i dont have all money iv been saving for cameras and i cant see why you had to call me stupid as that is an insult

oshead

Shooting the moon is quite easy. The full moon is almost in full light from the sun so the settings to try are as follows.

The sunny f16 rule (f16 @ 125th sec @ ISO 100), at least 200mm lens, spot metering, tripod, mirror lock and timer or remote control. You could try experimenting with the sunny f16 rule. Do the math

Hope this helps.

Dave OS

Ricky91t

oshead wrote: »

Shooting the moon is quite easy. The full moon is almost in full light from the sun so the settings to try are as follows.

The sunny f16 rule (f16 @ 125th sec @ ISO 100), at least 200mm lens, spot metering, tripod, mirror lock and timer or remote control. You could try experimenting with the sunny f16 rule. Do the math

Hope this helps.

Dave OS

Thanks Dave
Look thats all i was asking for.
Thats all Oriel had to post back or simply say:Sorry i dont know

whyulittle

I have a few different shots of the moon on my Pix Ricky, from new moon to full moon: http://pix.ie/whyulittle/416881/in/album/318094

I'll have a look at the originals for the settings.

Thirdfox

challengemaster wrote: »

oh you'll pay for that one! you forgot I do 2 martial arts?

How do you know that I don't?

Apologises to OP - here's the settings I used to take a moon shot (you can put these in manually and not worry about metering problems)

f11
ISO 200
1/60 second
using my 55-200mm VR lens

and this is the result (after processing in photoshop)

Ricky91t

Thirdfox wrote: »

How do you know that I don't?

Apologises to OP - here's the settings I used to take a moon shot (you can put these in manually and not worry about metering problems)

f11
ISO 200
1/60 second
using my 55-200mm VR lens

and this is the result (after processing in photoshop)

Thanks
Now all i have to do is wait for the moon to make its next appearence
Think its too cloudy for tonight

challengemaster

Thirdfox wrote: »

How do you know that I don't?

I don't, but I'm quite confident you wouldn't stand a chance

f11
ISO 200
1/60 second
using my 55-200mm VR lens

and this is the result (after processing in photoshop)

Do tell, what post processing did you do?

Fajitas!

Actually. Next person to drag this thread off topic, flames, or in any other way, shape or form breaks the rules of the charter, earns themselves at least a weeks worth of holidays.

Thirdfox

ricky91t wrote: »

Yeah i did that recently (Googled) and i found one but i dont trust it as it might screw the cam up.If i find one on like a canon forum then i might use that:D

The official unofficial one should be the one done by a Russian programmer. Maybe ask about it on the Canon forums of dpreview or something.

challengemaster wrote: »

I don't, but I'm quite confident you wouldn't stand a chance

Do tell, what post processing did you do?

Well my martial art is in the long sword discipline (and being Asian I get a natural advantage)

Post processing:
Levels,
Curves,
Sharpen (in that order)
didn't use noise reduction
Then I cropped the moon at 100% and made a 1280 x 768 wallpaper out of it.

challengemaster wrote: »

you're not going to find a firmware hack for canon products on their site... :rolleyes:

I'm questioning if Oriel was right about you! (joke )

He did say the Canon forums and not their site

Ricky91t

Thirdfox wrote: »

Now I do remember a firmware hack that unlocked the "hidden" features of the 300D - metering might be one of them.

Look for it on google (needless to say this will void any warranty you may have and Canon does not condone this at all). But I remember thousands of people "upgrading" their camera this way and I haven't heard of any problems.

This the firmware by any chance?

challengemaster

Thirdfox wrote: »

Well my martial art is in the long sword discipline (and being Asian I get a natural advantage)

so what's longer, your sword or my leg omgAyzn?! hax! I may aswell admit defeat now!

Post processing:
Levels,
Curves,
Sharpen (in that order)
didn't use noise reduction
Then I cropped the moon at 100% and made a 1280 x 768 wallpaper out of it.

I see.

He did say the Canon forums and not their site

I was thinking like Canon site actually had a forum... guess I was mistaken

Thirdfox

This the firmware by any chance?

I think so (Nikon user here so not really familiar with this).

challengemaster

Thirdfox did you use highpass sharpening on that? and what settings if you can remember?

ps.thanks for settings love the shot

Thirdfox

Can't remember specifically but normally it's USM at 150% 0.3 pixel radius and 0 on that other thing (can't remember what it's called).

But in camera I have the D40 to + on sharpness (Nikon tend to apply less sharpening by default compared to Canons says Phil Askey).

elven

What a lovely, informative thread about shooting the moon. Let's keep it that way...

Quackles

Thirdfox wrote: »

and this is the result (after processing in photoshop)

Awesome shot, crystal clear moon detail - one thing, though - on my monitor, configured with a spyder 2 pro (although due a reconfigure, it's been a couple of months), I can quite clearly see the box around the 'original' black sky and the black added in photoshop.

Ricky91t

Thanks for clearing the thread up
Much better now
Was planning on shooting the moon tonight but the weather is very bad here
So gonna give it a miss

Thirdfox

Quackles wrote: »

Awesome shot, crystal clear moon detail - one thing, though - on my monitor, configured with a spyder 2 pro (although due a reconfigure, it's been a couple of months), I can quite clearly see the box around the 'original' black sky and the black added in photoshop.

Yes, I'll have to redo it (I can just crop the moon out and paste onto a black background). In my hastiness I just selected a box around the moon and adjusted levels curves etc. from that. So the level and curves difference is quite clear on a properly configured screen (not my poopy laptop one though ).

whyulittle

Thirdfox wrote: »

Yes, I'll have to redo it (I can just crop the moon out and paste onto a black background). In my hastiness I just selected a box around the moon and adjusted levels curves etc. from that. So the level and curves difference is quite clear on a properly configured screen (not my poopy laptop one though ).

I was just about to say nor mine, but you can actually see the box if the screen is tilted back. Nice shot, but what was wrong with the original sky?

GristlyEnd

Depending on the phase of the moon, I would put your camera in manual mode, f/8 to f/11 and change your shutter speed until you get something you are happy with.


This was shot with a 300mm stacked with a 1.4x & 2x extender.

Zzippy

DarrenG wrote: »

Depending on the phase of the moon, I would put your camera in manual mode, f/8 to f/11 and change your shutter speed until you get something you are happy with.


This was shot with a 300mm stacked with a 1.4x & 2x extender.

Great shot. I was nearly looking for the American flag!

Must get out and try this myself some night, but living in Galway I might be waiting a few weeks for a clear night! :rolleyes:

Thirdfox

whyulittle wrote: »

I was just about to say nor mine, but you can actually see the box if the screen is tilted back. Nice shot, but what was wrong with the original sky?

Here's the new moon (an astronomer will probably correct me and say a full moon )

The black should be even now



Nothing was wrong with the original sky, but there was minute water vapour in the air I suspect that gave a halo to the moon. Now when I selected the moon I drew a box around it and changed the levels and curves. Unfortunately I forgot that anything outside of the box would remain at the original light settings and hence the visible difference at the edge of the box.

Quackles

Thirdfox wrote: »

The black should be even now

Yup, uniform blackness no matter what way fussy wenches like me tilt my screen

Ricky91t

Heres my hot at it
Finally managed to get one.Its not the best as the moon was only out for about 2 mins like this so i feel i was lucky
Thanks to Challengemaster for informing me the moon was out

TelePaul

ricky91t wrote: »

Heres my hot at it
Finally managed to get one.Its not the best as the moon was only out for about 2 mins like this so i feel i was lucky
Thanks to Challengemaster for informing me the moon was out

That's a great shot, good to see you've taken everyones advice on board.

5uspect

Good stuff. How did you shoot it in the end?

Ricky91t

Thanks telepaul

I shot on tripod at 300mm on my 20D Evalutive metering
Found this worked best(Focused and then moved moon off centre)
In manual
ISO:100
Shutter:1/15
Aperture:f/11

Borderfox

Canon 40d 100-400 @ 400mm and 1/50th and f10

oshead

To hell with composition.

The Moon @ 280mm, 100% crop.

pete4130

I'm with oshead on this. 100% crop. ISO 200 @300mm. Spot metered f11 at 1/1000th second. Had VR turned off but with the wind I should have kept it on perhaps? I miss the 1.5 crop factor for shots like these.

challengemaster

Dodgykeeper

f2.8 1/8000 sec iso 320 Handheld dont have a Tripod (Yet)

TelePaul

Nice work all!

TelePaul

Dodgykeeper wrote: »

f2.8 1/8000 sec iso 320 Handheld dont have a Tripod (Yet)

A well-crafted book-chair combo will do as a temporary tripod.

Valentia

Can't find the settimgs at the moment but here's one I made earlier:

pete4130

Took another tonight, lots of low fast moving clouds this time. Hard to get the sky exposed well with the clouds so tried, for the laugh, a 9 shot HDR . Its waaay overcooked too.

Thirdfox

Valentia wrote: »

Can't find the settimgs at the moment but here's one I made earlier:

Looks like Mars!

Lovely picture.