Discussion in 'General Gallery' started by Zach, Jan 9, 2009.
Could be my monitor but seems under-exposed and centered.
This is a documentary type shot- it is expected to be centered. You could crop a bit. Maybe some longer exposure? That's a lot of light hitting your camera though for 1/250 and F18 and 200 ISO, so it looks like you have plenty of room to play around with settings.
Use lowest ISO. Use a much smaller f/number. See the lunar photography guide.
You have to remember the moon is very bright, especially a full or close to full moon. Normally when shooting the moon I use the following settings:
I would strongly recommend using a tripod and cable release if you are shooting with a telephoto lens otherwise you will have to bump up the ISO to get your shutter speed up. If you are not using a tripod you will want to keep your minimum shutter speed at a 1:1 ratio with your focal length or even faster if you are using a crop sensor camera like me. If I wanted to shoot the moon hand held without a tripod with my 50D and 400mm lens, I would want my shutter speed to be 1/640 or faster (crop factor x focal length, or 1.6 x 400mm = 640).
This is a starting point so you may have to adjust your aperture or shutter according to the actual brightness. Here is a photo I took last night with the above settings (EXIF data should be intact) using my Canon 50D and 400mm f/5.6 lens.
Use lowest ISO setting. Most Canons are 100, most Nikons are 200 (in my experience).
Image quality/size should be the highest, but that's a general rule of thumb. Unless by "large" you mean that the moon is more "close-up," as in |)\/8's example vs. Zach's ... that's just a case of a longer effective focal length.
I also have to say that, in my opinion, both of their shots are under-exposed. After looking at the histograms on each, I would say 1.5-2x as long of an exposure would work better.
I adjusted the brightness and contrast to what looked good on my monitor, perhaps I need to recalibrate. That photo is also cropped quite a lot. Below you will find the original with no adjustments other than converting from RAW to JPG, which looks slightly overexposed on my monitor. You will also find a 100% crop of the original.
I think I've pimped this twice today already, but take a look at the lunar photography guide I wrote for this forum. 7 pages of everything you should need to know to get started.
On my monitor it looks under-exposed rather than over-exposed. While the histogram has bimodal peaks at just less than 50% gray, the brightest part is at 81.6% gray (206 of 255 8-bit levels). If it were my photo, I would stretch the histogram so that the entire brightness range is used plus play with the curves a little bit to bring out some more contrast, but not over-do it as I've seen many folks do.
Since I've already posted the photo in another thread, I hope this isn't bad form to repeat it here. Taken tonight when the moon was ~30° above the horizon. I'm curious on any thoughts of it.
Thanks and apologies if it is considered highjacking. I'll gladly remove if requested.
Separate names with a comma.