Thought I would have a go at a Moon shot.

Sigma 135-400mm DG APO with 2x Vivitar Teleconverter.

Something's taken the edge off the sharpness Mike, maybe the teleconverter.

yes, it may help if I use a tripod as well I think.
It was a bit of a strain on the arms.

No tripod, a strain on the arms and a real long shot for getting a sharp image...

Well I didn't say it was a GOOD moon shot

That's like 800mm hand held, I wouldn't even have got the moon in the viewfinder.

Very likely. I've only had mediocre TCs, and matched them with equally mediocre glass, too, when I've been trying to achieve very long focal lengths.

But I've invariably found that even taking into account the greater enlargement required, I get better results with the bare lens, without the TC.

There does appear to be a bit of shake there, too, not surprisingly, if that's 800mm.

I've only used up to 400mm lenses for the moon, and got a few half decent ones, so I'd give it a go with a tripod and without the TC.


Even with your one, though, within its limitations, I think it can still look quite good. If you'll forgive me:

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Technical/MikePMoon.jpg[/IMG]

That looks better, a bit sharper to my eyes.

good first try, you'll want a tripod to steady it up a bit. Even so you'll still need to keep shutter speed above ~1/60th if you want to avoid the cursed thing moving.

The moon moves surprisingly fast.

A 400mm lens on a Pentax dSLR is 3.44 degrees horizontally across the frame.

The moon moves at about 360/(24x60x60) = 0.0042 degrees per second, which as a fraction of the frame is therefore:

0.0042 / 3.44

On the K10D, the frame is 3872 pixels wide, so the moon moves at

(0.0042/3.44) x 3872 = 4.7 pixels per second.

So 1/5 of a second exposure will give you movement blur of less than a pixel on the sensor.

You probably don't need an exposure as fast as 1/60, but much slower than a 1/10 and you're chancing it.

This is one I took using my Bigma.

[IMG]http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x261/ClarkyinAus/Moon-1.jpg[/IMG]

Exif
Bigma @ 500mm
iso @ 100
aperture @ f9.5
shutter @ 1/90sec
Used a Tripod with 2 sec timer

I bet you always won at Top Trumps, too, when you were a kid.

Seriously, it is very nice. Just that bit better than I can do with 400mm. A shade crisper, without the need for too much messing.

Very nicely timed, too - not quite full, so you get that texture.

Reminds me of my trip to Oz last year. It was very strange seeing the rabbit, rather than the man, in the moon.

Thanks Chris, I really like the Bigma, but damn its heavy to lug around. I would expect Mike's Sigma 135-400 would be capable of the same sort of shot. wink:

Top Trumps, Don't think i have ever played that game :

BTW Dumb Question time. Where is the Man/Rabbit in the moon ::

In the northern hemisphere, we have 'the man in the moon' - the darker patches look like a face.

From the southern hemisphere, the moon appears at a different angle (as you've shown it), and it looks (I think) like a rabbit.

This is what it looks like from here:

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Misc/IMGP5519-1brsmsh.jpg[/IMG]

Neither the man nor the rabbit is that clear in big pictures like these, but I think they're pretty obvious just looking at it with the naked eye.

Well I had to go hunting on google because for the life of me I couldn't see a man nor rabbit.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v188/Sockpuppetuk/Display/Dscn2677s315c2man.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v188/Sockpuppetuk/Display/rabbit.jpg[/IMG]