Moon Shot

[stevecim]

Thoughts Please

Stephen

[David Kilpatrick]

Camera, lens, settings, support, processing? Hard to comment without this information really!

David

[Dr. Harout]

EXIF info:
Sony A350 @250mm
ISO 400
1/160s f/6.3

I think it needs a bit of sharpening. Otherwise much good overall.

[stevecim]

Hi All

Bit strange that the EXIF show the lens at 250mm, I'm sure I had it at 300mm, could the polarizing filter affect that?

The image was processed in Sony's IDC Brightness -0.22EV, Contrast -11, D-Range Opt. Manual 7,73,60 But looking at the image this morning It might look better with D-Range off, Sharpness 98,44,-25,100, noise Reduction, Manual, 53,50,50 and touched Y in tone curve bit darker.

Then upsized it to 90MB, then a heavy crop.

Think I may have over cocked it, Also used a light weight tripod and cable release.

[stevecim]

here is a crop from the unprocessed image

[KevinBarrett]

Better results could be got if you stopped it down to F/8 or f/11 where the lens is sharpest. The exposure will be longer but the moon shouldn't move too far. You might even go for a lower ISO setting. Make sure SSS is turned off and make the tripod as short and solid as you can get it.

Your processed picture is pretty good considering the unprocessed version, but there is a lot of noise in the processed version that looks like moon-texture. I'll venture a guess that it is not noise but actually sharpening artifacts because the original doesn't have much noise beyong the usual Sony "watercolor" effect.

Also, I'm not sure what benefit the polarizer filter gives you for this shot. If you took it off you'll gather some more precious light. Or is there something I'm not quite getting?

[Howard]

I've found that the spot meter reading points to an exposure of around 1/400 s at f/11 with ISO at 400 ... which would translate to 1/100 s at ISO 100. I took this picture resting the camera on a coat in Crete a couple of months ago - that was with a 300mm lens too. I think your half-moon is more interesting because of the shadows that are visible near the terminator (where 'day' meets 'night').

[Dr. Harout]

Howard, seems I forgot to welcome when you first posted. I apologize.
Meanwhile may I say you have great shots on your site. Didn't manage to look all, but sure will.
By the way, you should exhibit your beer shot here

[Howard]

Thanks for your kind words, Dr H.

I'd have thought this beer particularly well known amongst users of our cameras:



(Beer of choice when visiting Greece.)

[stevecim]

Hi

Thanks for the tips Kevin, I tried again last night. here is cropped image, No polarizer


Cheers, Stephen

[KevinBarrett]

Wow! Lots better! After that most improvements are all astronomer's tips, like waiting until the moon is highest in the sky so that you minimize the ammount of atmosphere you're shooting through. That shouldn't be a problem with the a350 since you've got that fold-out screen to help with all the funny angles it might incur. Just have to find the right time of night!

The phase of the moon can have a lot to do with the apparent detail as well. You'll notice that in your second image the terminator lacks a lot of dramatic shadows in the sea. It is quite remarkable the details that come and go in the lunar cycle.

[Birma]

Great shot Stephen, as Kevin says it looks much improved over the first one. I really must have a go at this moon photography business.