Moon at 600mm

[nineoneeighttony]

 

[cgipson1]

Where are you getting 600mm? a 200 with a 2x TC on a crop body? Not very sharp.. very poor detail.

You don't need to shoot the moon at F18.. it is so far away you could shoot it at f2.8 and still have plenty of DOF to get it sharp.

All F18 did was add diffraction softness... I am also thinking that the TC probably added a bit loss of IQ.

You can also get much more detail on the moon when it is not full... with a partial moon, you get more sidelighting with stronger shadows on the detail.

I won't even mention how distracting that logo/watermark is....

 

[prodigy2k7]

Ya. Pretty sure my 70-200 gets more detail at 200 with no tc.

 

[DorkSterr]

Ugh... I agree with the two post above, I hope you just rented this lens. Very soft moon.

 

[nineoneeighttony]

Where are you getting 600mm? a 200 with a 2x TC on a crop body? Not very sharp.. very poor detail.

You don't need to shoot the moon at F18.. it is so far away you could shoot it at f2.8 and still have plenty of DOF to get it sharp.

All F18 did was add diffraction softness... I am also thinking that the TC probably added a bit loss of IQ.

You can also get much more detail on the moon when it is not full... with a partial moon, you get more sidelighting with stronger shadows on the detail.

I won't even mention how distracting that logo/watermark is....

200 w/ a 2x doesn't add up to 600... it was some old lens I don't ever use 28-300 with a 2x

 

[LizardKing]

Hello there!

Charlie already covered pretty much everything. But I have a 28-300 on a crop body myself and take moon pictures all the time. You can definitely get something sharper than this one, specially using a nice 2x TC I think, although I'm new to all this and never even used a TC myself haha

Now, I'm not sure what was the problem here, but maybe it was in the focusing. Did you use manual? If so, where did you focused? I usually go all the way to infinity and then use Live View to come back just a little bit, until I see the craters or details in good focus. Infinity doesn't work quite well for the moon, and neither does automatic... or, at least, not for me

Besides this, 1/15 is too low of a shutterspeed for the moon. Even if you don't see it, it's moving all the time and faster than you think. Get it -at least- up to 1/100th or more if possible. You should be able to get there if you lower your aperture. I agree f/2.8 should be enough, but it's probably better to take advantage of your lens' sweet spot. Try 'Googleing' it. If you're not going for the sweet spot, then keep it really wide to help get a faster shutterspeed.

From the EXIF data I see you've +100 Clarity, so I'm thinking this ought to look really soft w/o it. But nothing to feel bad about, it's not that easy to get the hand to photograph the moon. Takes several tries to do it good, and as someone said up there, try to avoid full moons like this. You'll get far better results when you have shadows there.

edit: oh and one more thing, try to take the pictures when the moon is really up in the sky and on really clear nights. If you could get out of the city, at least a few miles, that'll really help improve the clarity.

 

[cgipson1]

Where are you getting 600mm? a 200 with a 2x TC on a crop body? Not very sharp.. very poor detail.

You don't need to shoot the moon at F18.. it is so far away you could shoot it at f2.8 and still have plenty of DOF to get it sharp.

All F18 did was add diffraction softness... I am also thinking that the TC probably added a bit loss of IQ.

You can also get much more detail on the moon when it is not full... with a partial moon, you get more sidelighting with stronger shadows on the detail.

I won't even mention how distracting that logo/watermark is....

200 w/ a 2x doesn't add up to 600... it was some old lens I don't ever use 28-300 with a 2x

On a crop body, that would be the percieved image! 200 X 2 = 400! 400 x 1.5 crop = 600, right? Pretty basic math! Wow.. I have a Nikon 28-300 that is sharp... I have some really good moon shots with it.

 

[nineoneeighttony]

Where are you getting 600mm? a 200 with a 2x TC on a crop body? Not very sharp.. very poor detail.

You don't need to shoot the moon at F18.. it is so far away you could shoot it at f2.8 and still have plenty of DOF to get it sharp.

All F18 did was add diffraction softness... I am also thinking that the TC probably added a bit loss of IQ.

You can also get much more detail on the moon when it is not full... with a partial moon, you get more sidelighting with stronger shadows on the detail.

I won't even mention how distracting that logo/watermark is....

200 w/ a 2x doesn't add up to 600... it was some old lens I don't ever use 28-300 with a 2x

On a crop body, that would be the percieved image! 200 X 2 = 400! 400 x 1.5 crop = 600, right? Pretty basic math! Wow.. I have a Nikon 28-300 that is sharp... I have some really good moon shots with it.

could I see them!?

 

[LizardKing]

Charlie has the same 28-300 that I do, if I remember correctly... He probably has better images to show you, since mine were taken from the city with a 20 bucks tripod and by me xD
Anyway, if it helps you in any way, here you go:








BTW, maybe it's just me, but everybody here is only trying to help you and I sense something strange in your responses. If you've got problems with the responses you get, then I'd recommend not to upload any more pictures for review/critique. On the other hand, if I'm wrong and this is just my idea then I apologize for it.

 

[cgipson1]

sure....

Here are a couple... they have been cropped obviously! Both shot at 300mm... F8 ISO 100

 

[nineoneeighttony]

Thanks for sharing guy!!! I like all of them! I have never got a shot of the moon that sharp!

 

[nineoneeighttony]

Does using a TC affect images when shooting the moon?

 

[cgipson1]

Does using a TC affect images when shooting the moon?

Depends on the TC!

A Nikon 1.4.. no real loss A Nikon 1.7... a little A Nikon 2x.. a little more

Sigma??? Would probably have a good bit more loss than the Nikon.

Your choice of F18 didn't help... bad diffraction softness...

 

[nineoneeighttony]

I went out and shot it again with the 70-200 @ f/2.8 again last night and it was not much better, any other suggestions for me to try. Besides getting away from the city, does weather have an effect? It was 112 here today.

 

[LizardKing]

Yes, weather does affect. Think you're shooting through the whole atmosphere, so it's kind of a big deal the conditions you have. I'm not sure if it has anything to do with temperature, but definitely humidity plays an important role, for instance. Are you manually focusing? I had a couple awful attempts before realizing the problem was that focusing at infinity was a mistake.