My first shot of the MOON.... is is worth a look???

[kreuzberg]

Very cool, When tried to photo the moon all I got was a blurry circle! lol

 

[DennyCrane]

The most important thing to remember is the moon is very bright and ~any~ auto settings will result in a washed out over-exposed moon. Start around f/8 1/100 ISO-200 and take each setting up and down from there.

 

[phocus78]

great shot

 

[WhyNotMe]

thats great! I can't believe you got that will a 300mm...you have inspired me to shoot the moon next time i am somewhere dark enough lol.

 

[UUilliam]

wow! for a first shoot of the moon it is pretty awesome!!!

 

[o hey tyler]

Once again....my point is proven. There are some straight up /-\ ss holes in this forum.

That comment wasn't necessary.

El oh el?

 

[DennyCrane]

I am now officially hijacking this thread. Has anyone tried either an ND filter or a circular polarizer to shoot a moon picture?

 

[Big]

Cool pic! I especially like the bottom left part.
I'm guessing you used a telescope?

sorry dude dont have a telelscope...
sigma 70-300 was my assistant here

Makes me wanna trade my Canon 70-300 in for a Sigma...

 

[Plato]

Nice shot, the moon looks oddly shaped in the bottom left corner though, wierd.

This is due to the fact that it's not a full moon. The cycles of the moon are commonly discussed in elementary school level science classes.

However, this is a pretty good shot of the moon. Thanks for sharing. Hopefully you can get a shot of a full moon sometime.

The lead sentence on the link that you provided to prove your point:
This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2007)

 

[tiffanyjean]

That is a great shot! Nice first shot of the moon!!

 

[astrostu]

Nice shot, the moon looks oddly shaped in the bottom left corner though, wierd.

This is due to the fact that it's not a full moon. The cycles of the moon are commonly discussed in elementary school level science classes.

However, this is a pretty good shot of the moon. Thanks for sharing. Hopefully you can get a shot of a full moon sometime.

The lead sentence on the link that you provided to prove your point:
This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2007)

That Wikipedia page is completely irrelevant to this discussion or picture. The one on the Lunar Cycle is what you want.

 

[Plato]

This is due to the fact that it's not a full moon. The cycles of the moon are commonly discussed in elementary school level science classes.

However, this is a pretty good shot of the moon. Thanks for sharing. Hopefully you can get a shot of a full moon sometime.

The lead sentence on the link that you provided to prove your point:
This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2007)

That Wikipedia page is completely irrelevant to this discussion or picture. The one on the Lunar Cycle is what you want.

Wikipedia is always irrelevant.

 

[Mitica100]

I am now officially hijacking this thread. Has anyone tried either an ND filter or a circular polarizer to shoot a moon picture?

No need for excuses. It's a legitimate question.

But let me first reply with a question of my own:

Why do you need to shoot with a ND filter? Longer exposure, perhaps? OK, that was two questions...

When shooting the moon remember to shoot for daylight and not the darkness around it. Hence shoot in manual mode and adjust as needed. I have shot a full moon with a 400mm handheld at 1/250 and at f/5.6 with very good results.

 

[DennyCrane]

I am now officially hijacking this thread. Has anyone tried either an ND filter or a circular polarizer to shoot a moon picture?

No need for excuses. It's a legitimate question.

But let me first reply with a question of my own:

Why do you need to shoot with a ND filter? Longer exposure, perhaps? OK, that was two questions...

When shooting the moon remember to shoot for daylight and not the darkness around it. Hence shoot in manual mode and adjust as needed. I have shot a full moon with a 400mm handheld at 1/250 and at f/5.6 with very good results.

My idea was to get one of them to cut the glare, allow a longer exposure and get more detail from a nearly full moon. I tried it. It failed.
I relinquish the thread.

 

[Mitica100]

I am now officially hijacking this thread. Has anyone tried either an ND filter or a circular polarizer to shoot a moon picture?

No need for excuses. It's a legitimate question.

But let me first reply with a question of my own:

Why do you need to shoot with a ND filter? Longer exposure, perhaps? OK, that was two questions...

When shooting the moon remember to shoot for daylight and not the darkness around it. Hence shoot in manual mode and adjust as needed. I have shot a full moon with a 400mm handheld at 1/250 and at f/5.6 with very good results.

My idea was to get one of them to cut the glare, allow a longer exposure and get more detail from a nearly full moon. I tried it. It failed.
I relinquish the thread.

Denny, I understand what you're after. By adding a ND filter you're going to have a longer exposure. The Earth and the Moon move and all you're going to get is a white-ish elliptical shape, dictated by the time exposure.

Here is another example, taken just 10 minutes ago, this time on a tripod. Camera is a Canon 5D, lens is a Sigma APO 400/5.6 and exposure was 1/250 at f/5.6/