what is the required adjustments on the camera settings to get the best details of the moon? the imaging is without a telescope. i need to know all of the useful settings to change, even the ones that exist only in 1,000 $ cameras.
With your average point and shoot camers the moon is going to be a bright disc on a black background even at max zoom.
The first thing is to turn off your flash.
Then experiment with everything. Its a bright object and will over expose easily so you want a fast shutter speed and ISO setting.
Start with ISO-100, 1/125sec f/8 see what you get and experiment.
The Moon is probably my favourite photographic target. It's a deceptively difficult target to photograph well, as its contrast levels are so high depending on its phase.
Firstly, the Moon is over 9 times brighter at full moon than at quarter moon. As light is reflecting off the entire surface and coming back at you head-on, there is very little detail to be seen as the entire surface is awash with light. It is far better to photograph the moon at quarter, half, or in between times as the sun is hitting it at an angle relative to the surface, allowing shadows to form across crater tops and mountain peaks. It is far more interesting to photograph at these times.
I'm interested in hearing what camera/lens combination you intend to use. Obviously, the longer the focal length, the more moon will fill your field of view, and the more detail you will capture. Hopefully you have at least a 200mm or 300mm lens. Anything shorter won't give you much moon on the photo!
A couple of simple pointers will see you heading in the right direction.
1) Manually set your camera to its lowest ISO setting - ISO100 or ISO200 if you can. There is more than plenty of light coming from the moon, meaning that you don't have to select higher ISO settings which in turn means less noise in your images.
2) If your camera has aperture priority setting, or you're using a lens that you can manually adjust the aperture on, try to stop it right down to f/11, f/22 or beyond to give you the greatest depth of field that you can. The moon is a sphere, and you'd be surprised how "un flat" it really is - even at near-infinity distances. If you use an aperture that givers you a shallow depth of field, you will definitely notice that either the limb (edge) of the moon is at different focus to the centre of the sphere. Stopping down as far as you can go will alleviate this to a fair degree, and because the moon is so bright you'll be able to adjust your exposure time easily to compensate for the small iris.
3) Given that you've stopped down, the exposure time is next to be considered. As the moon changes phase, the variation in reflected light is huge. What worked yesterday of the day before is suddenly way too bright or dim tonight. Mount your camera on a tripod - do not hand-hold it. At least prop it up on a solid surface at the right angle. Take your first shot at a high speed - say 1/640th sec. Look at the result on the rear LCD. If it is too dark still, easy - go to the next step - 1/500th. Keep going until your image suddenly has nice contrast, and you can see the finer details of the surface "rays" emanating from younger craters such as Macrobius as white streaks across the plain.
4) Focus - now that you can see detail, go to manual focus and start to adjust your focus slightly in between shots, zooming in to 10x on your rear LCD to see the changes from frame to frame. Concentrate on a small feature such as a central crater peak or mountain top. As you exercise focus back and forth, you'll see the feature at its clearest when you reach that best focus position. You can try auto-focus if you have it, but it's usually unreliable in that the camera will most likely try and hunt around and eventually just use the limb to focus on. This isn't optimal when you're looking at the centre for good detail.
5) Some of the newer up-spec DSLR cameras these days have a good feature these days in "live view". Live view allows you to manually focus whilst viewing your target at 10x optical zoom. This is great as long as you're on a good solid tripod and don't have perceptible shake. Live view tends to be a little unsteady because of the high zoom factor which makes it useful in the first place.
6) You can take a stack of quick images as the Moon moves through your viewfinder and cameras field of view given the lens attached. Try and set it up so that the moon enters and then moves across the field, letting you take a quick succession of shots before it disappears out the other side. You can stack these shots in Registax or some other stacking program to average out any noise you've encountered, and to also average out the seeing shift from frame to frame due to atmospheric conditions.
I am interested in your reply re aperture. This might sound a little silly as I don't know if depth of field applies effectively for say a F4 SN OTA but can this be done? Ie in prime focus where the camera is t coupled to the OTA, can you "stop down" the OTA to achieve this?? Eg I have a 8"SN F4 scope - would adding an aperture mask on the front achieve any real depth of field?? Very interesting as my moon photos are just like you describe - void of any real sensation of a 3D object and slightly out of focus in areas but in focus elsewhere .
I would love to hear your opinion on this as us beginners sometimes struggle even with the basics. I'll give it go anyway see what happens - that's part of the fun of this hobby.
Telescopes are not, as many may think, entirely fixed in the focal ratio. The "native" focal ratio of your SN8 may be f/4, and that is a function of its focal length divided by its aperture - not mirror. If you stop-down your f/4 scope with an aperture mask you'll turn it into a "Herschelian" telescope, with a slower f/ratio. Typically, planetary refractors all have high f/ratios, such as f/13 and up.
This will give you a scope that doesn't pull as much light, and therefore doesn't capture as much atmospheric turbulence. It will be more forgiving in the focus stakes (less critical) and is generally a better planetary scope for it. Depth of field will also subsequently increase. I used to do the same with my old f/5 8" newtonian - using the supplied 2" aperture mask. If you hit a lousy spot on the primary with the small light cone (doubtful, but possible) just rotate the mask and try another spot.
Well, I got home with a new vision to try something different with the external aperture mask. Where do I find something solid and black?? Bugger .
Anyway, I grabbed an old lever arch folder and cut a hole in it and worked out that I changed the F ratio from F4 to F6.5 (not much but a start).
Well, I have to admit, bugger me, the focusing was noticeably more forgiving as Chris points out .
So tomorrow I'll try some more changes and see how it goes.
So here is a quicky from tonight. 40D prime focus into the LXD55 8" with an external mask to drop from F4 to F6.5 - 7 images at 1/350sec ISO200 and stacked in Registax.
I still have a lot of improvement - esp in the colour and focus/detail at the fully lit part at the top. I'm really a blundering novice in the post processing department at the moment and its more of a try anything and hope!
Chris, may I ask for some details of your 3rd image? The field depth is really striking making it look like a globe rather than a pancake. So too the colour - this is something I really need to read up to extract that nice blueish highlight in the mare regions. This is such a great photo of yours that will give us beginners a good example of what to aim for .
aad_Dira, hope you do well too as I am only starting off. As Chris says, you really need min 300mm lense to get some detail. Use manual focus and make sure your camera is on a tripod with a cable release (or use the inbuilt timer function so you're not touching the camera when it takes the shot) Good luck!
I'm interested in hearing what camera/lens combination you intend to use. Obviously, the longer the focal length, the more moon will fill your field of view, and the more detail you will capture. Hopefully you have at least a 200mm or 300mm lens. Anything shorter won't give you much moon on the photo!
Quote:
aad_Dira, hope you do well too as I am only starting off. As Chris says, you really need min 300mm lense to get some detail. Use manual focus and make sure your camera is on a tripod with a cable release (or use the inbuilt timer function so you're not touching the camera when it takes the shot) Good luck!
yes, i know that i need a large lens to do this because i tried too much before with my powershot camera, but i got just a bright white disk. i have now a chance to take a good photos because my friend has bought an EOS camera. it showed a good details of the moon without any settings adjustments, so i hope that it can take a greet photos if i used the right settings.
Quote:
A couple of simple pointers will see you heading in the right direction.
1) Manually set your camera to its lowest ISO setting - ISO100 or ISO200 if you can. There is more than plenty of light coming from the moon, meaning that you don't have to select higher ISO settings which in turn means less noise in your images.
2) If your camera has aperture priority setting, or you're using a lens that you can manually adjust the aperture on, try to stop it right down to f/11, f/22 or beyond to give you the greatest depth of field that you can. The moon is a sphere, and you'd be surprised how "un flat" it really is - even at near-infinity distances. If you use an aperture that givers you a shallow depth of field, you will definitely notice that either the limb (edge) of the moon is at different focus to the centre of the sphere. Stopping down as far as you can go will alleviate this to a fair degree, and because the moon is so bright you'll be able to adjust your exposure time easily to compensate for the small iris.
3) Given that you've stopped down, the exposure time is next to be considered. As the moon changes phase, the variation in reflected light is huge. What worked yesterday of the day before is suddenly way too bright or dim tonight. Mount your camera on a tripod - do not hand-hold it. At least prop it up on a solid surface at the right angle. Take your first shot at a high speed - say 1/640th sec. Look at the result on the rear LCD. If it is too dark still, easy - go to the next step - 1/500th. Keep going until your image suddenly has nice contrast, and you can see the finer details of the surface "rays" emanating from younger craters such as Macrobius as white streaks across the plain.
4) Focus - now that you can see detail, go to manual focus and start to adjust your focus slightly in between shots, zooming in to 10x on your rear LCD to see the changes from frame to frame. Concentrate on a small feature such as a central crater peak or mountain top. As you exercise focus back and forth, you'll see the feature at its clearest when you reach that best focus position. You can try auto-focus if you have it, but it's usually unreliable in that the camera will most likely try and hunt around and eventually just use the limb to focus on. This isn't optimal when you're looking at the centre for good detail.
5) Some of the newer up-spec DSLR cameras these days have a good feature these days in "live view". Live view allows you to manually focus whilst viewing your target at 10x optical zoom. This is great as long as you're on a good solid tripod and don't have perceptible shake. Live view tends to be a little unsteady because of the high zoom factor which makes it useful in the first place.
thank you very much for information, i will try to take a photo today or tomorrow (in the nearest chance to steal his camera ).
Quote:
6) You can take a stack of quick images as the Moon moves through your viewfinder and cameras field of view given the lens attached. Try and set it up so that the moon enters and then moves across the field, letting you take a quick succession of shots before it disappears out the other side. You can stack these shots in Registax or some other stacking program to average out any noise you've encountered, and to also average out the seeing shift from frame to frame due to atmospheric conditions.
since i will use an EOS camera with a pro settings, i think that there is no need for using a stack program.
since i will use an EOS camera with a pro settings, i think that there is no need for using a stack program.
Absolutely there is. A standard DSLR isn't a magic box, and cannot beat atmospheric seeing conditions. You will definitely gain better results from stacking multiple images taken in quick succession. Also use mirror lock as well to overcome the slap motion it creates within the camera - leading to more shake.
So here is a quicky from tonight. 40D prime focus into the LXD55 8" with an external mask to drop from F4 to F6.5 - 7 images at 1/350sec ISO200 and stacked in Registax.
You're certainly a fast learner Darrin! Great shot. Your highlights and midtone levels could do with a little tweak upwards to bring out the rays, but you're on the way well and truly - it's a very good attempt. Just as a note, you might be able to source the plastic dust cap off of a Skywatcher/GSO 8" newtonian (SW600) from somewhere. These are great because they have a capped 2" aperture which will yield around f/16 on your scope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight
Chris, may I ask for some details of your 3rd image? The field depth is really striking making it look like a globe rather than a pancake. So too the colour - this is something I really need to read up to extract that nice blueish highlight in the mare regions. This is such a great photo of yours that will give us beginners a good example of what to aim for .
Thanks Darrin. This shot is taken with my Nikon D40, an entry-level 6 MP Nikon DSLR which came out around three years ago. The D40 was mounted on my Takahashi FS-102 refractor running at a nice long f/16 with a Televue barlow. For some reason I find the D40 a better lunar camera than either my 350D or 40D, but have a difficult time putting my finger on the real reason. White balance is always set to daylight on all of them, but the Nikon reproduces the colour a little better. In Photoshop, tweak your saturation levels a little and you'll extract that elegant colour without going garish.
[Tips hat] Thanks John You've produced some corker images in your time!
And will again Chris. I've worked out the the best scope for the moon is just a good old newt. I was just getting good with my sisters 8" F4 when I had to return it, so I've just finished purchasing one to take it's place, to be used only for the moon with the 400D.
Absolutely there is. A standard DSLR isn't a magic box, and cannot beat atmospheric seeing conditions. You will definitely gain better results from stacking multiple images taken in quick succession. Also use mirror lock as well to overcome the slap motion it creates within the camera - leading to more shake.
i can`t beat the atmospheric conditions and uses camera settings in the same time. the video gives a thing and the photo gives another. and i think that the photo can give a better focus and details.
another question: what is the required processing on computer to get the best view of the moon?
i got a good photo , i mean for an amateur . the magnification is very low so the image is not very clear, but anyway it is not too bad after cutting (i didn`t uploaded the original image because it is very large).
settings:
ISO 100.
aperture f/18.
shutter 1/4 second (it was just a black color with 1/650th and 1/500th).
Looks like you're starting to get to know your setup. The exposure at this FL can made the difference between a washout and a good image with decent detail. Keep going!! You're doing well without a telescope at this stage!
Anyway, Im starting out too but I do have a 8" telescope although it is getting on a bit and the LXD55 is sort of frowned upon by all but back in 2003 when I got it, it was in my budget but not a "cheapie" and for observing it has been absolutely fantastic. But since I got a Canon 40D for a present recently, this astro photography has opened up a dimension in astronomy I could only admire in astro magazines (and still do!).
Anyway, here is a new photo taken tonight of the moon - Canon 40D prime focus into my old LXD55 but this time some changes thanx to Brendan for helping me understand turbulence and Chris (Omaroo) for some finer tips.
This image is from a 40D, prime focus, stack of 48 (from 70) in Registax, at 1/180sec, F16 (via a 2" external mask which made one hell of a difference to fine focusing), ISO 400 and daylight white balance. I am terrible at Photoshop so I just can't get that nice "steel blue" in Chris' image but I seem to have got the focus and stacking good - maybe ?? for now, I steer clear of Photoshop but slowly learning. Anyway, image 2 shows 1 frame that is average due to atmostphere, yet image 3 is a shocker yet is only 2 frames later (about 1/2 sec later in fact!!). Note the HUGE change in clarity. What I learnt from this is the huge variation in focus frame by fame even though I haven't touched the camera - ie atmosphere as Brendan points out!! This now really explains my grief at liveview and actual photo as per my post earlier this week.
aad_Dira, keep going and try cause I am finding the help here at Iceinspace absolutely first class and I found this "hobby" just a past time until the last week or so since I joined and these guys and gals are so full of tips and helps that are more than happy to give us beginners tips and good directions
i got a good photo , i mean for an amateur . the magnification is very low so the image is not very clear, but anyway it is not too bad after cutting (i didn`t uploaded the original image because it is very large).
settings:
ISO 100.
aperture f/18.
shutter 1/4 second (it was just a black color with 1/650th and 1/500th).
A good first attempt aad_Dira. Yes, your particular setup that evening required 1/4 sec, but you now see the point on how to go about determining your exposure. Start fast and slow it down. At times, I've had to expose for over a second to see a usable image.
Whenever you might be able, borrow a longer lens and try again. Yo'll get to the point where you'll see the benefit of stacking images, even though there is effort involved. It's infectious.
Darrin - that is, quite frankly, a sensational image that you've produced. You should be very proud of that one. For having dabbled for such a short time, you've taken off like a rocket with it. One day (and soon) get to know Photoshop. It's not difficult if you follow some of the plenty tutorials floating around. A couple of main adjustment tools - shadows/highlights, levels, curves and hue/saturation will take you no time to learn and the benefits will be self-evident. Well done!
Whenever you might be able, borrow a longer lens and try again. Yo'll get to the point where you'll see the benefit of stacking images, even though there is effort involved. It's infectious.
yes, i need to try again with a better lens. but may this will not happen soon.
thanks Darrin, i will keep going , and i hope to take a photographs via a telescope in someday.
this is the image with a minor processing by Gimp (i don`t have the Photoshop currently). i adjusted the brighness and contrast, and changed slightly the colors to make the Moon`s color more bluish.
as I don't know if depth of field applies effectively for say a F4 SN OTA but can this be done? Ie in prime focus where the camera is t coupled to the OTA, can you "stop down" the OTA to achieve this?? Eg I have a 8"SN F4 scope - would adding an aperture mask on the front achieve any real depth of field?? Very interesting as my moon photos are just like you describe - void of any real sensation of a 3D object and slightly out of focus in areas but in focus elsewhere 
.
.
.
. the magnification is very low so the image is not very clear, but anyway it is not too bad after cutting (i didn`t uploaded the original image because it is very large). 
