Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Moon shots

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 18, 2004 12:43:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I'm getting closer to where I'd like to be with basic astrophotography (the
moon). This was taken tonight with a Nikon D70, ISO 800 at 1/80th, attached
to a Meade ETX-125 telescope. Low ISOs were giving me problems with scope
shake, even on self-timer, so I went for the higher ISO. Since ISO 800
produced really noticeable noise on a shot like this, I ran it through Neat
Image once and it helped a lot. I give it about a 5 out of 10 for crispness
so far.

http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon.jpg (563 KB)
http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon2.jpg (153 KB)

More about : moon shots

Anonymous
December 18, 2004 2:54:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Not bad at all! I find it incredibly hard to get good full-face pictures of
the moon; shutter vibration always gets me.

You might stack several exposures taken at high ISO in order to cancel out
the noise.


Clear skies,

Michael A. Covington
Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur
www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html


"Cynicor" <j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:ksidnR57fMjIBF7cRVn-2Q@speakeasy.net...
> I'm getting closer to where I'd like to be with basic astrophotography
> (the moon). This was taken tonight with a Nikon D70, ISO 800 at 1/80th,
> attached to a Meade ETX-125 telescope. Low ISOs were giving me problems
> with scope shake, even on self-timer, so I went for the higher ISO. Since
> ISO 800 produced really noticeable noise on a shot like this, I ran it
> through Neat Image once and it helped a lot. I give it about a 5 out of 10
> for crispness so far.
>
> http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon.jpg (563 KB)
> http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon2.jpg (153 KB)
>
>
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
December 18, 2004 3:06:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Actually, let me suggest something. If you're getting 1/80th at ISO 800, go
down to ISO 100 and do a "hat trick." That is, set the exposure to about 10
seconds. Hold your hat or a dark card in front of the telescope. Shutter
opens... allow about 5 seconds for vibration to die down... swing the card
away and QUICKLY right back (this can be done in 1/10 second if you
practice), and then wait for the shutter to close.

I've never tried this digital version of the "hat trick." It might require
a filter, or masking the telescope down to about 2 inches, to keep the
exposure short enough. Let me know how it works!


"Cynicor" <j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:ksidnR57fMjIBF7cRVn-2Q@speakeasy.net...
> I'm getting closer to where I'd like to be with basic astrophotography
> (the moon). This was taken tonight with a Nikon D70, ISO 800 at 1/80th,
> attached to a Meade ETX-125 telescope. Low ISOs were giving me problems
> with scope shake, even on self-timer, so I went for the higher ISO. Since
> ISO 800 produced really noticeable noise on a shot like this, I ran it
> through Neat Image once and it helped a lot. I give it about a 5 out of 10
> for crispness so far.
>
> http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon.jpg (563 KB)
> http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon2.jpg (153 KB)
>
>
Anonymous
December 18, 2004 3:50:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"ng" <ngupta44@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1103348866.699665.71100@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Nice pics.. and what a coincidence ! I too took moon shots just 15
> minutes ago using my panasonic fz15. Not as good as your but just here
> is 1 of them :
> http://home.comcast.net/~ngupta4/panasonic/moon1.JPG

Not bad either!

My best moon shots have been with non-SLR digital cameras aimed into the
eyepiece of a telescope. There's very little vibration from the leaf
shutter in such a camera.
Anonymous
December 18, 2004 9:25:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:43:26 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "Cynicor"
<j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote:

>produced really noticeable noise on a shot like this, I ran it through Neat
>Image once and it helped a lot. I give it about a 5 out of 10 for crispness
>so far.
>
>http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon.jpg (563 KB)
>http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon2.jpg (153 KB)

Nice. Have you tried the in camera noise reduction yet?
________________________________________________________
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
http://EdwardGRuf.com
Anonymous
December 18, 2004 4:57:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:32:15 +0800, Christopher Pollard <xmastree@hotpop.com>
wrote:

>Tomorrow I'll post mine, taken with my Olympus C-750, one clear night.

Or even today...
http://www.xmastree.34sp.com/images/moon.jpg

>It looks tiny by comparison...
But then, I don't have a telescope.


--
Chris Pollard


CG Internet café, Tagum City, Philippines
http://www.cginternet.net
Anonymous
December 20, 2004 4:52:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 06:25:16 -0500, Ed Ruf <egruf_usenet@cox.net>
wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 21:43:26 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "Cynicor"
><j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>produced really noticeable noise on a shot like this, I ran it through Neat
>>Image once and it helped a lot. I give it about a 5 out of 10 for crispness
>>so far.
>>
>>http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon.jpg (563 KB)

Aggh! someone cropped the moon!

>>http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon2.jpg (153 KB)
>
>Nice. Have you tried the in camera noise reduction yet?

I have, it's sodding slow to the point of being annoying. It's
probably best to leave all that stuff to Photoshop.

This moon is neutral gray, right? The noise is color noise, so it
should be simple to dump.

The most noticeable issue to me wasn't the noise, but the chromic
aberration, especially on the moon's horizon. The RAW importer may be
able to reduce that.

On the subject of space, NASA says the shuttle will be flying again
next year.... and my back yard points directly towards the Space
Center!

--
Owamanga!
Anonymous
December 26, 2004 1:55:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Cynicor <j.t.r.u..p.i..n...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>I'm getting closer to where I'd like to be with basic astrophotography (the
>moon). This was taken tonight with a Nikon D70, ISO 800 at 1/80th, attached
>to a Meade ETX-125 telescope. Low ISOs were giving me problems with scope
>shake, even on self-timer, so I went for the higher ISO. Since ISO 800
>produced really noticeable noise on a shot like this, I ran it through Neat
>Image once and it helped a lot. I give it about a 5 out of 10 for crispness
>so far.
>
>http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon.jpg (563 KB)
>http://www.trupin.com/photos/Mooooooon2.jpg (153 KB)

It looks like you're near the limit of sharpness that I'd expect for
a 5-inch telescope. There _is_ a theoretical limit as to how much
detail you can get, and if you're in a city it's even lower, and there
is nothing you can do about it.

Meade says the theoretical resolving power of that scope is 0.9 seconds
of arc. The moon is about 30 minites of arc in diameter so that's just
1/2000th of the moon's diameter. Anything smaller than that and your
telescope simply isn't capable of showing it even under the best of
conditions. Atmospheric effects typically cut that in half.

One trick that improves the image is to stack a whole bunch of images.
Take 30 photos in a row and combine them.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
!