What's it take for good full moon pictures?

[Rick Courtright]

Hi,

I don't have what might be considered a "good" camera--just a Canon point and shoot and various phone cameras. But I love full moon shots and would like to take a few of my own that don't look like little more than tiny white dots...

How much camera and lens does it take? Is one of the "bigger" digitals w/ 16-20x optical zoom enough? Or does one need to get into the "SLR w/ various lenses" class? I don't mind spending "some" money, but don't want to tie up a whole lot on something I'm not likely to use that much.

Thanks,

Rick C

 

[RonEgg]

Rick, for me what has always worked is use a narrow aperture, fast film, and tell him not to move!

 

[doccash]

Rick, I'm no expert on moon shots, but some great detail can be had at 300-400 mm lens length. a Tripod is mandatory and probably a cable release. A camera with mirror lockup capability will help as well. Astrophotography is a field of its own. Exposure times and aperatures can be figured out. Really, fast exposures are the norm as you are actually taking a picture of the sun, the darn thing is really bright. A calm night with few clouds and not much atmospheric dust will yield the best results. Probably a not to sophisticated Dslr that a borrowed/rented 400mm lens can be mounted on. [Shorter lenses with a 1.4x-2x teleconverter work well also. Shorter lenses are cheaper and converters are not too bad either.Good luck, it can be a fun project. Best to rent or borrow. Dr.C

 

[Turbobuddha]

You can do a lot with a little when it come to the moon. But, you will need a little reach to get there. With a point and shoot with a 300mm equiviant FOV (in 35mm), this would be like a 10x or 12x zoom depending on the model (roughly), you could get some pretty good shots. The smaller sensors can be really noisy in low light. Espesially on auto. Best bet, switch over to manual and use a tripod. Also use the timer to delay the shot. This will allow the camera rig to settle down a bit and give you sharper images. I would shoot for manual settings of ISO 100, F/5.6 (on a point and shoot you wont have much range) and then a shutter speed to get the exposure you want. Don't do auto anything or you'll probably get poor results. With a DSLR camera and a basic kit lens (liek a 55-200 a 75-300 etc) you can stop down to F/8 or F/11 for optimal sharpness, use the tripod, and go longer exposures. Then, find some interesting forground objects and have fun (tip, hit your foreground opject with the flash to light it up a bit).

This one is with a Canon 30D (DSLR) and my old C90 Astro (Basically a 1000mm Spotting Scope). Exposure of 1/60, F11, at ISO 100.


FullMoon_20101221_0461b by Turbobuddha, on Flickr

This one, I REALLY like. Canon 600mm F/4 IS L w/1.4x (840 F/5.6). The 600 was a rental. Shot at 1/200, F/5.6 and ISO 100.


Da Moon by Turbobuddha, on Flickr

Full moon shots aren't to awful interesting. I always enjoy studying the crators around teh limb and watching the shadows creap across the terrain.

These shots, from a cost perspective, the full moon shot would run around $600 and the gibbious shot, about the same (3 day rental on the lens). That's with the used camera bodies. Not including post processing software, computer, etc. The 600mm F/4 IS L is $12,000 lens if want to own it.

Just for comparison, this is with a 200mm and I think with a 2x telextender (400mm)


Cliche by Turbobuddha, on Flickr

This would be a partial lunar eclipse at sunset with at 200mm.


Lunar Eclipse 2011 over the ICT by Turbobuddha, on Flickr

And how about a full on lunar eclipse at 1000mm? Deep in the earths shadow. ISO 400, 6s, F11.


LE_20101221_0524 by Turbobuddha, on Flickr

 

[southernfarmer1021]

Stunning photography! Would love to see other nature photos!

 

[fiasconva]

Ohhhh, those kind of moons. I was thinking maybe find some drunk coeds.

 

[GammaRay]

The lunar eclipse photos are are super!

 

[RPM Enterprises]

Taken off our bedroom deck.

 

[WAYNO]

Very nice photos.

I was caught off-guard by the original question too.

I understand the easiest way to get a full moon shot is out the window of a passenger train. :roll:

WAYNO.

 

[Rick Courtright]

I understand the easiest way to get a full moon shot is out the window of a passenger train. :roll:

Hi, Wayno

Mark July 14, 2012 on your calendar! If you're not celebrating Bastille Day, you can attend the festivities: http://www.moonamtrak.org/

I debated clarifying WHAT kind of full moon shots in my original question (the type Turbobuddha posted was correct, BTW!) but figured someone would run w/ a different version. You guys never disappoint!

Rick C

 

[KTM]

I used my Sony DSC-HX100V to take this photo of the moon last night. 30x optical zoom. This was taken hand held, no tripod used. I have a couple tripods but I was too lazy to go get one.

 

[eveled]

I don't have a clue what it takes to photograph the moon but I think it is a worthwhile endeavor. I love it during a red sox game when they zoom in on the full moon and you can see all the details of the surface. Those cameras must be worth a lot of money. Good luck with your pictures.

 

[BlkHawk73]

 

[Enemy Ace]

Use the longest focal length you own. A doubler attached to the base of the lens can help fill the frame on shots where you want the moon very large. The moon is brighter than you might think.A good place to start would be to use 125 second at f8 at 100 ISO. Overexposing will make a white glob of the moon and too long of an exposure will make it oblong.