Supermoon/lunar perigree.

[Ginge R]

Does anyone with experience of this type of photography have any tips? I have a couple of DSLR so can mix things up a little.

http://www.sciencealert.com/we-re-about-to-see-a-r...

[jmorgan]

Usually on a scope myself but mirror lockup, remote release and a rock sold tripod and do not touch the set up and protect from wind etc, give it a moment between shot in case the setup moves a tad or you alter stuff. Moons is bright (quelle surprise) so I let my camera sort out its metering. Focus may have to be on manual though. Tracking as well, it does move........

[bobski1]

not an expert, but a a few pointers I have had over time
- tripod is essential bit of kit you would need.
- Long exposure
- Put the shutter on a timer as even pressing the button can cause potential vibration.
- Shoot raw, holds the most amount of detail for better post processing.

I shot these one a monopod on full zoom with just JPEG came out okay but will be out for this also to try & improve on it:

DSC_0781 by ShortFalls, on Flickr

[300bhp/ton]

+1 on the tripod. The moon is brighter than you might think though, so you may not need such a long shutter speed.

Those city scape pics would probably be a little trial and error. Too long an expose will wash/over expose and might also get some movement blur from the moon as well.

You might want to mess about with your ISO settings too.

If you have a telescope you can mount the camera too, then obviously you'll have great magnification options. Although remembering a newtonian scope will make everything look upside down.

A good telephoto zoom lens or mirror lens can work wonders too. And with high pixel camera's you always have the opportunity to zoom in a bit more afterwards.

[GravelBen]

Long lens, fastest shutter speed you can get away with at a sharp aperture for the lens. Forget long eposures, it moves too fast for that. You could use a tripod to steady it but IIRC my better results have been sitting and bracing against a wall or railing.

Couple of examples to give an idea of results from faster shutter speeds:

Full Moon by Ben, on Flickr

Big crop from 400mm, 1/320 @ f/8, ISO100.

Bright Moon by Ben, on Flickr

400mm + 1.4x TC (=560mm), 1/500 @ f/11 (f/8 on the lens but TC reduces it), ISO1600.

[300bhp/ton]

Nice pic Ben Better than my attempt.

Only using a 300mm lens though and suspect nothing as speedy as your setup.

[Ginge R]

Thanks everyone.

Ben, awesome shots. I agree about using legs; not great in the wind - a decent beenie should do the trick. I'll be shooting through a not too quick 300mm.

[Dan_1981]

DSC_0058 by Dan_1981, on Flickr

That'll be my version - with a pretty slow 300mm

[Ginge R]

Good stuff. Mine's a boggo standard Canon ef F5.6.

• Would a filter help, if so, which one?

Out doing test shots this evening..

[DibblyDobbler]

Ginge R said:

Good stuff. Mine's a boggo standard Canon ef F5.6.

• Would a filter help, if so, which one?

Out doing test shots this evening..

I wouldn't bother with a filter. Only additional thought is to fine tune the focus on live view at max magnification (if you have it) - makes a surprising difference

[Ginge R]

Good stuff, cheers.

[GravelBen]

I found the trickiest part was getting focus just where I wanted it - af wasn't hitting it and the focus ring on the tokina 400/5.6 isn't great for fine adjustments.

[DIW35]

Ignore any suggestions of using a long exposure; the bright part of the moon is in full sunlight. What usually fools the exposure meter on most cameras is when using a relatively short lens that includes a lot of black sky in shot. This results in a longer exposure than you need, resulting in a washed out/overblown image of the moon itself.

Long exposures can also give rise to blurred shots due to camera movement or movement of the moon itself.

[rich888]

I started a similar thread back in Oct 2014 which has some terrific photographs and advice, might be worthwhile taking a look: http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[conkerman]

Just bought a tripod to have a go at this

I'm a little short on reach though.

I can get 150mm @F2.8

Or use the Nikon 18-200.

Funds won't allow buying something longer this month

[Ginge R]

I was going to do it sometime soon anyway, but I bought msen a Bigma 50-500mm F/4 to catch this one.

[Speed addicted]

I recently bought a Tamron 150-600. I think it'll be getting an airing once I get off this bloody oil rig!

[checkmate91]

conkerman said:

Just bought a tripod to have a go at this

I'm a little short on reach though.

I can get 150mm @F2.8

Or use the Nikon 18-200.

Funds won't allow buying something longer this month

If you get the focussing spot-on, you'll get something passable with detail through a 200 lens. Will need a mighty crop though.

[Andynbr]

Look into a free piece of software called RegiStax

It's not very intuitive to use first time round, but there are some good online tutorials and downloadable base settings to use.

It allows you to stack multiple shots on top of each other and really brings out a lot of details otherwise unseen. The more images you stack, the more detail is brought out, but can make the processing a lot slower and flakier. Start with 10 photos and work up from there. Somewhere between 20 and 40 shots is best.

Generally though, as others have said; you'll use mostly daylight settings. Long exposures will completely blow the moon out and it will ghost across the image, it moves quicker than you think. You'll definitely need a tripod if you're planning on trying RegiStax. It tends to fail alignment if you try and hand hold.

[DIW35]

Registax is useful for bringing out faint stars and details in nebula/gas clouds, but shouldn't be needed for the moon.