Nikon moon photos *Help*

[logril08]

I'll start off with telling you that I am a very novice photographer. So I just recently got a Nikon Coolpix P510, and I wanted to take some pictures of the moon. I had my settings on manual mode, infinity zoom, f8.3 and 1/500 (the IOS setting?) and this is my result:

The resolution turns out to not be the greatest, and it still does not have the full detail it should.
How do I go about "being a better photographer" and by that I mean get better image quality.

 

[TCampbell]

You can use the "Loony 11" rule: Set the focal ratio (aka "f-stop") to f/11, then set the shutter speed to the inverse of the ISO (e.g. at ISO 100, then use 1/100th second exposure. At ISO 200, use 1/200th... ISO 400... use 1/400th, etc.)

Your exposure looks good... often I see photos of the moon in which the moon is over-exposed. Cameras tend to do that because they're pointing at a black sky ... tricking the camera into thinking it needs a brighter exposure -- but this over-exposes the moon. Your image does not appear to be over-exposed. You could have increased the exposure a little, but this is workable.

Its tough to get a detailed photo of the moon without a telescope or long lens.

I've posted this more than once before, so I'll just post a link to my flickr image this time (instead of the image): Gibbous Moon | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

But that's taken through a telescope... the scope is natively a 101mm aperture, 560mm focal length apochromatic refractor (quick math will tell you that's f/5.6). But that would have left me with a small-ish moon in the middle of the image. So I used a 2x double... in my case it's a TeleVue 2x Powermate (TeleVue is a high end maker of telescopes and other optical gear for astronomy.) That brings me to f/11 (1120mm).

The next thing that can work against you is the stability of the atmosphere (or rather the lack of a stable atmosphere). The atmosphere can distort the image quality... like looking at something through wavy water. Ideally you capture a shot when the atmosphere is stable. The guideline is that you want to make sure that there is no warm front, cold front, or jet stream within 200 miles of you. Also land creates turbulence. Shooting over water (but we're talking massive bodies of water... oceans, great lakes, etc.) tend to smooth out the airflow. The reasons stars appear to "twinkle" is due to this instability (in astronomy it's proper name is "atmospheric scintillation"). Image "stacking" helps a lot... you shoot several seconds to perhaps a minute of video then process it through a program such as "Registax" (numerous YouTube video tutorials exist for this) and it helps create a much better image than you could get from a single frame.

Lastly, you can't have good "light" without good "shadow". When the moon is full, the moon is on the opposite side of the Earth relative to the Sun rather on the side. This means you're getting a more-or-less front/flat lighting. All those mountains and craters don't cast shadows. When the moon is on the side of the Earth (1st quarter or 3rd quarter moon phase) then you get LOTS of shadow detail and suddenly the moon looks very 3-dimensional rather than flat.

If you look at my image you'll see the far right side of the moon doesn't have any shadow detail (the side nearest the sun) but the closer you get to the lunar "terminator" or "limb" (the line that separates the bright side from the dark side) the more you see shadow detail and the moon is much more interesting.

 

[Tailgunner]

Check out the Lunny Rule.

Looney 11 rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dannylightning]

that photo looks pretty good to me, that's allot better than some moon photos that I have seen.

definitely check out the loony rule and than adjust your settings from there. getting photos in the dark and especially something that is lit up at night like the moon can take some time to get the hang of.

your best results will probably be out in the country where there are no lights around, some place where its pitch black, taking photos in the city where there are street lights and other light sources all around can also lessen the quality of your night sky type of photos.

 

[wfooshee]

A compact will simply not be the equal of a dSLR in image quality because of the sensor size.

That camera's lens gets way out there with its zoom (Nikon's site states it's equivalent to 1000mm on a full-frame) but building a zoom with the range that lens has (4.3-180mm, 42x) involves lots of compromises.

Don't use the "digital zoom" in the camera. Or if you do, keep in mind that you get the same result from simply cropping the picture you'd have taken without digital zoom.

Also, was this hand-held or on a tripod?

I think what you're looking for is sharpness, not resolution, technically speaking, and I don't know if you're going to get it with that lens.

 

[Solarflare]

Long story short: photographing the moon is surprisingly tough.

Even if you get the exposure right - people here already said how - and manage to focus, and use a tripod - I still dont get anything I would bother to show anyone. The focal lengths one would need to make the moon actually fill the frame are just insane.

 

[ruifo]

Good work!!

Here you find some of my moon pictures:
Astrophotography - an album on Flickr

If you cick each picture there, you will see the EXIF info for each one of them, and see how they were set up.

 

[astroNikon]

here's some websites that go over how to shoot the moon
a basic one ==> How to Photograph the Moon
a litttle better ==> How to Photograph the Moon: 8 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow
a little more ==> How to photograph the moon: an easy way to shoot moon pictures full of detail | Digital Camera World

the common theme you'll start seeing is using 200mm or greater lenses.
plus the tripod, remote release, atmospheric conditions, etc.
Each step of improvement can get costly in astrophotograpy.
With the noticeable exception finding a dark place and clear skies which can have quite an impact on clarity/details of photos.

 

[Anvi Sharma]

Wow/ i visit this images really good looking. thanks for sharing us.

 

[Edsport]

As mentioned by Tim Campbell, half or quarter moon will cast shadows and give more detail...

 

[Mr.Photo]

Long story short: photographing the moon is surprisingly tough.

Even if you get the exposure right - people here already said how - and manage to focus, and use a tripod - I still dont get anything I would bother to show anyone. The focal lengths one would need to make the moon actually fill the frame are just insane.

Teleconverters can be a big help when paired with the right lenses. Although a crop sensor body with a 300mm lens can produce some stunning results. I find that a degree of post processing is needed on shots of the moon to really bring out the detail. Here's a shot I did a little over a year ago using my D7000 with a Tokina 300mm f/4 lens. I then cropped the image to better fill the frame. The higher megapixels of today's camera's allow you to crop quite a bit with little to no loss of image quality.

The next clear night I have I want to try going out with that same setup but use my Kenko 1.4x teleconverter to see what I can get.

 

[TCampbell]

Teleconverters can be a big help when paired with the right lenses. Although a crop sensor body with a 300mm lens can produce some stunning results. I find that a degree of post processing is needed on shots of the moon to really bring out the detail. Here's a shot I did a little over a year ago using my D7000 with a Tokina 300mm f/4 lens. I then cropped the image to better fill the frame. The higher megapixels of today's camera's allow you to crop quite a bit with little to no loss of image quality.

The next clear night I have I want to try going out with that same setup but use my Kenko 1.4x teleconverter to see what I can get.

Nice image!