Here's a shot I took at about 11:40PM Pacific Time
I used my new lens!
I used my new lens!
This is tricky. And it is not only about lens.and because this all would increase the shutter open time to some 5 seconds.
I can do that. I'll try to remember when I get home tonight.Great one Dembadon, would you care to post also a live size crop of the moon?
Thanks for the tips, Andre. I need to purchase a tripod. My method for this shot was pretty janky! I found the slope of the headlight on my pickup to be the perfect angle to get the moon (somewhat) centered. I placed the base of the camera against the front of the headlight to help prevent shake.One more thing, Dembadon,
A hint for the exposure, Dembadon. You have been using the extremes of the lens: f 300mm and Aperture 5.6. Now you can see here that lens performance degrades slightly at the extremes, (play with the slides). From 200mm to 300mm you see the blur increase sharply from ~1.5 to ~2.5 units, meaning that you get actually more resolution at 200mm than at 300mm, assuming that you have ample pixels like the EOS 550D. Also stopping down slightly (f8) increases the resolution again.
So what I would have done for the sharpest result is using maybe 250-280mm, just slightly before the zoom hits the stop, because that stop could also decentre the lenses ever so slightly. And I would stop down a bit, like f7 or f8.
I'd also would have select manually ISO 100, for minimizing the noise, and then put the combination on the tripod, and because this all would increase the shutter open time to some 5 seconds.
Thanks! I'm quite impressed with this lens considering how much I spent.Very nice shot Dembadon! Clouded in here with snow falling.
Congrats on the new lens - it covers some very handy focal range(s).
Actually the idea was to avoid max zoom together with max aperture, that's the real soft spot, although that would be great for flattering portraits. So either stopping down the aperture or avoiding full zoom works already; doing both however, works still best though.I'll try to keep the focal range around 250-280mm, as you suggest, from now on.
That's correct- atmospheric turbulence can be modeled as a slowly-varying (in time & space) phase-only object, over the timescales and length scales of most imaging systems (thin screen model). Long exposures tend to show uniform blurring, while shorter exposures become sharper.In this case it is not the motion - both pictures were taken for times short enough so that the motion can be neglected. It is more about atmospheric effect.
This is a good point- increasing the front focal length increases the angular magnification, making the system more susceptible atmospheric effects. I'd have to check the book for quantitative results.Could be that the resolution of the lens is too low for the effect to be seen - we are talking about 300 mm vs 1000 mm or even 1500 mm if memory serves me well.
That's correct- atmospheric turbulence can be modeled as a slowly-varying (in time & space) phase-only object, over the timescales and length scales of most imaging systems (thin screen model). Long exposures tend to show uniform blurring, while shorter exposures become sharper.
For whatever reason, I spent the past hour banging my head against my desk trying to generate some numbers. Here's what I came up with:As explained earlier - it doesn't have to be camera motion.
It won't hurt to check how the lens performs in good light and with short times - at 300 mm rule of thumb says to use time 1/300 sec. Make it 1/500 (300 mm * 1.6 = 480 mm) and try to shot some distant object. Take a look at 1:1 crop then.