I'd keep on bribing. Results are superb I may have said that before, but he has amazing eyes. Love no 1 and 2. The treatment you gave the second image is fantastic.

Ah, there we go. A proper explanation. Cheers

Some of my own observations; I'm no expert!

First, the closer the moon is to the horizon, the harder it seems to be to get a sharp shot. Why? No idea; light probably. You need higher ISO to capture it just after moon rise than you do when it's high up in the sky. Low cloud, even if very thin, pollution etc ;all get in the way. If this is the original color, assuming WB is correct, then I'd assume this was shot not long after moon rise or not long before moon set, not when it was say at peak.
Second, full moon. I find it tricky and much easier to get good sharpness from other phases.

What lens do you shoot with?
If it's a zoom do you know which focal length and aperture range combination it performs best at (is the sharpest at). For starters, go back a little from max.
For example, my 55-300 is best at 260-270, f8, lowest ISO possible. If handheld, not more than 400, if on a tripod always at 100 gives me minimum noise allowing for a bit more sharpening in post, than an image shot at say ISO 1600. Least on my camera. May be different on a K1 I suppose
I also tend to purposely underexpose my night moon shots. Properly or overexposed, from my experience, are always less sharp somehow. This is by no means a fact, just my own 'feeling'.

Manual live view focus or exact infinity if you know it on your lens. Than there is PP.... in lightroom all I do is choose a color/lens profile; then off to Photoshop for contrast adjustment before turning it into a Smart Object and applying Smart Sharpening.

One of mine with the only tele I have, 55-300, at 270mm, f8, iso 100, manual live view focus, tripod - link
Some would possibly sharpen it a bit more but I'm not a fan of 'overcooking'.

I really like the second image.

Welcome to the forums, Carol

In this case you may want to specify what you consider light weight

I will second a Gorrilapod- I have this Joby (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Joby-GorillaPod-SLR-Zoom-Cameras-Ballhead/dp/B002FGTWOC...=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1473873744&sr=8-4&keywords=joby) and love it - it happily fully supports the K3II and the 55-300 or the Sigma 10-20 (up to 3kgs) It's all a matter of how you 'set' it's legs. It's tremendously flexible in that respect.
It's short and stubby though so you will always need a table/wall/rail something to set it on or attach it to.
I personally found the regular size tripods that are super light, just don't hold up to even the lightest winds very well when fully extended without you having to hang some weight on them, which I guess can work if you carry a few extra kilos in your bag at all times. If you don't then you might as well have a Joby.


My main tripod weighs 2.5 to 3kg depending on which head I use and I often find that too much to carry around when walking alone.

Fantastic. Just love them The birches are quite intriguing, and I am yet to have a shot of them that I would like. You just made it even less likely I'll ever like any of mine haha. No 6, looks liquid; you can almost 'sense' it's movement. No 8, the people are immaculate; it has a very 'parisian fashion' feel to it and I love the color scheme. And the last one - great balance between blur and definition imo.

I'd totally print a couple!

Now I'm itching to go out and experiment some more; begone work!

Thank you for sharing.

I have no idea what an NEC Multisynch costs, but the difference between an hd and a 2560 x1440 is just incredible. Well worth giving up an addiction for. In my case, it was ciggies I have a Dell Ultrasharp 2560x1440. Regardless of whether I'm on my laptop or PC, I do all my pic processing on the big screen, unless I am travelling.

I really like that.

1,2 and 9 are superb. It's tempting to say it's a fantastic lens for the money; but in this case rather a great photographer with the right tool