Taking pictures of the Moon

[justleesa]

I admit, I have always been a bit moon stuck. Growing up I would either sleep walk, sleep talk or not get any sleep at all when we had or were very near to a full moon. I just love gazing at it, drawn to it like a magnet.

On some days the moon appears larger than life and that is how it was tonight as I was on my way home from work. HUGE! It looked like it was resting on the bridges of the H1. I was double lucky because I had my camera AND my tripod with me...there was just no spot on the highway to be found where I could stop and take pictures safely.

I kept driving towards it, hoping to find a spot to stop. but the closer I got to the moon the further it pulled away. It still looked fantastic, just not as big. I took an exit and started heading back home and found a little street on a hill where I was able to set up my tripod.

The camera was set to ISO 1600 with a 75-300 lens. I took a few dozen pictures at various settings. Even with the tripod (I have to invest in a better one) I was not a still as I would have liked and of all of the pictures I took maybe only one or two really came out well.

In the ones of the moon alone I was able to catch some detail but when I was trying to take pictures with the sleepy little town below I just couldn't catch it. Either the moon was blown out or I couldn't catch the details of the homes below. So what's the trick of getting a shot like this?

Here is the picture that came out the best...considering.

 

[DennisW]

Very nice Lisa. My moon pics haven't been very good. I'll keep trying though and maybe one day one of them will be in focus or not all squigly. Even a car going by can make your tripod shake enough to ruin a picture of something as far away as the moon.

 

[Cacia]

wow.....I love the thought of you being so inspired, even after a long day at work to be doing this late at night!

 

[Peter Guy]

Catherine, we couldn't pass up taking some moon shots while at anchor in the BVI. This one is NOT quite as "pure" as yours....

 

[justleesa]

Peter.

I love the composition of your picture! The double lines and the illumination of the clouds enhances what the picture has to say.

Lisa

Dennis,

on the canon website they have an interesting section on taking pictures of the night sky...I bet you'd like it

Catherine,

I was indeed inspired :blush: I am thankful (to you) that I had the zoom lens with me...still dreaming about the other zoom lens though...maybe someday.

 

[Charlie99]

.....when I was trying to take pictures with the sleepy little town below I just couldn't catch it. Either the moon was blown out or I couldn't catch the details of the homes below. So what's the trick of getting a shot like this?

How about two identically composed photos, but with different exposures. Then use photoshop to replace the blown out moon with a properly exposed one.

I've used this trick for some photos where the background hills or sky and clouds were overexposed if I had long enough exposure to get proper detail in the darker foreground.

 

[justleesa]

hmmmm...good Idea...I'll have to put the remote back in my bag though...I'd shake it up too much for it to be exactly the same...25 more nights till full moon

 

[DA Aquamaster]

If you don't have a remote or a remote release along with you, the self timer works great as it allows time for any vibrations to dampen in the tripod.

Assuming your tripod is stable, longer exposures at a higher F stop also help capture more detail.

There is some small change in apparent size during the month due to the moon's slightly eliptical orbit but most of the effect is due to the optical illusion that occurs when the moon is near the horizon. It just looks a lot bigger than it really is close to the horizon even though the actual size does not change over the course of the evening.

The moon itself presents some interesting problems to photograph as a nearly full waning gibbous moon like the one you photographed is about magnitude -12 or -13 compared to magnitude 2 for the stars in the big dipper. What works for it in terms of exposure will wash nearly everything else out.

I agree if you want a picture of a moon over a quiet little town, your best bet may be two shots - one to properly expose the moon and another to properly expose the town then replace the moon in the town shot. It's an easy job in photoshop.

 

[justleesa]

Beautiful pic DA...you can see the same craters ...just at a different angle

If you don't have a remote or a remote release along with you, the self timer works great as it allows time for any vibrations to dampen in the tripod.

where is that dang manual???....I forgot all about that. Thanks for the reminder.

Assuming your tripod is stable, longer exposures at a higher F stop also help capture more detail.

I tried longer but the clouds moving thru hazed the picture. I guess I have to wait for a clear spot.

 

[ABQdiver]

I love the moon, especially with a reflection off the water. I've had buddies that connected their cameras to telescopes and got awesome pictures. Setting up with just the camea and a tripod is pretty tuff.

This picture was taken off the St. Thomas coast. Set the white balance and snap a couple.