Shooting the Moon ?

[Doug Ouren]

Just wondering if you all might have any suggestions on tips for shooting the full moon. Thanks much

 

[AlphaWorld]

I am planning to do the same tonight for the “once in a century” super blood moon we will get in Australia tonight (super moon + eclipse). I don’t know if you will be able to see the eclipse, but the super moon is visible everywhere.

The two tips I have been given are to:

1. shoot the super moon as it rises because the horizon gives it context (It looks bigger rising over things)
2. hope that the weather is kind (few clouds) because the eclipse will only last about 15 minutes

 

[Doug Ouren]

I am planning to do the same tonight for the “once in a century” super blood moon we will get in Australia tonight (super moon + eclipse). I don’t know if you will be able to see the eclipse, but the super moon is visible everywhere.

The two tips I have been given are to:

1. shoot the super moon as it rises because the horizon gives it context (It looks bigger rising over things)
2. hope that the weather is kind (few clouds) because the eclipse will only last about 15 minutes

Thanks much for the response....and good luck tonight

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Watch your exposure, it's surprisingly bright so try different compensation levels as you can easily lose detail. Keep your F Stop at f8 or greater too. I'm not a fan of tripods, but if you're not a steady eddy I'd use one. One I prepared earlier

• ILCE-7RM4
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/800 sec
• ISO 1600

 

[AlphaWorld]

Looking for information, not criticising: why f/8 or more? Given the moon is a long way away, won't all of it be in the depth of field no matter what aperture you choose? I used wide open (f/6.3) to get as much light as possible.

My shots of the eclipse were dreadful, but I got some decent ones of the super moon, albeit hand-held.

I want to try again tonight, to try to get a "moon rise over landscape" shot, and I'll take a tripod this time.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

I did a quick try, but I really need a bigger lens for this sort of thing.
I wasn't even gonna bother, but that red/orange color had me staring at the moon long enough for me to go find my tripod.

• ILCE-6400
• E 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OSS
• 135.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/160 sec
• ISO 100

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Looking for information, not criticising: why f/8 or more? Given the moon is a long way away, won't all of it be in the depth of field no matter what aperture you choose? I used wide open (f/6.3) to get as much light as possible.

My shots of the eclipse were dreadful, but I got some decent ones of the super moon, albeit hand-held.

I want to try again tonight, to try to get a "moon rise over landscape" shot, and I'll take a tripod this time.

I guess it depends on lens, but it does still affect things. I've shot at 6.3 and you tend to lose sharpness at the outer edges of the moon where it's not quite in the focus plane. If you think you are aiming at the centre of a globe, there is curvature going away from you all around.

 

[AlphaWorld]

I guess it depends on lens, but it does still affect things. I've shot at 6.3 and you tend to lose sharpness at the outer edges of the moon where it's not quite in the focus plane. If you think you are aiming at the centre of a globe, there is curvature going away from you all around.

My thinking was “I am at infinity anyway, and it’s hundreds of thousands of km away, but you are right, the edges were a bit ragged.

I think I will need to check my depth of field at 300Mm (that’s mega metres, not millimetres!)

 

[AlphaWorld]

Well, I checked, and apparently my depth of field for f/6.3 / 600mm at 300Mm runs from 2km to infinity...

 

[Astrnmrtom]

There's no depth of field when shooting the Moon or other astronomical objects - everything is at infinity. What you WILL see are any lens aberrations. Shooting wide open really tests the lens and shouldn't be needed when shooting the Moon. Even doing star fields can benefit from shooting with your lens stopped down a little. Yes, you loose some speed and a few stars, but stars will be sharper across the field.

 

[Ralph]

One thing I will say is once you have got your moon shots and then they talk about a super moon.
I would say don't bother as you will not be able to tell the difference from your already taken shots of the full moon to the super moon.
I am not kidding you here. I done and and once I downloaded my image I was really let down as it was just like any other moon shot I had taken.
The blood moons and the other is a different story so get them when they come to your area.

I have more than 90% of my shot of the moon hand held. But I have put it on a tripod so I could leave it in my backyard to go out
from time to time to get a few more shot of the moon.
We have been more unlucky lately with the night skys so I just might have to wait till summer is back again.

But I was told don't worry about the full moon by a few. I had no idea why.
But once you start you more than likely will be hooked and because a full moon looks like a full moon,Which is why those people said that.
But when sections move and you can no longer see them this adds a lot more interest to your moon shots.
And this is how it hooks you in. So enjoy.

 

[Astrnmrtom]

Ralph,

When I first saw the Super Moon stories several years ago I was puzzled. I'd been an amateur astronomer since the 1960s and had never heard the term until it showed up on internet news stories. I laughed at all the hype surrounding this so called "special event" because these articles were hyping and event, which at first, lacked any real definition, and wasn't even recognized as anything special in the astronomical community. A full Moon that happens near Perigee and even through a telescope doesn't appear any different than any other full Moon. An event that IS important to moon viewers is Lunar Librations where variations in the speed of the Moon in it's orbit, causes the face of the Moon to slightly rock back and forth revealing details of objects near the Moon's limb at only specific times.

What's left out of the hype are several facts that if known kinda take the Super, out of the Super moon:

1. It's often mentioned in these articles a Super Moon "can be 10% larger and up to 30% brighter than normal." What's left out is; that isn't compared to all other full Moons, it compared to the full moon that takes place when the moon is farthest from the Earth so those numbers really represent the amount of variation of the Moon's visual size between the extremes of it's orbit.

2. Even at those extremes, the difference in the moon's visual diameter amounts to 3 minutes of arc (10% of the moon's 30 arc minute diameter) The human eye is, on average, only able to resolve an angle of about 1 arc minute in size, so this 3 minute difference is just above the threshold of the average person's ability to detect, and that would be only if you have something to compare it to. In other words a second full Moon at minimum size right next to the Super Moon.

3. Now that a Super Moon has an generally accepted definition: To be "Super" the full Moon must take place with the Moon's distance from Earth within the 90 percentile of it's minimum Earth-Moon distance. As an example: for April's Super Moon, the Moon's distance fell within the 90% at 226,098 miles, yet March's full Moon didn't, at 228,465 miles - a 2,367 mile difference, and one that makes for a miniscule and undetectable difference in the Moon's visual size. One event makes the news because people think a Super Moon is, well, SUPER, even though visually it is no different than March's non Super-full Moon, and frankly as you discovered, is no different visually than any other full Moon. Note: 2021's last Super Moon on June 28th, takes place with the Moon just barely inside the 90% mark at 228,003 which is only 462 miles closer than the non-Super Moon full Moon of March. So, according to the public's perception of the much hyped event, March's Full Moon was ho-humm, and June's will be SUPER!

4. The Moon can enter this 90% distance point at other points in it's changing phases yet not a single person ever goes outside, points to the sky and explains - "OMG! Look at how HUGE the Waning Gibbous Moon is!, nor will you read a news headline taking about "Next month's Super First Quarter Moon!"

So, there you have it.

Now that I've helped full deflated the Super Moon bubble, In another post that mentioned imaging a Super Moon, I suggested a project people could do to document these facts. Simply shoot a series of full Moons and combine them into a single image with the Super moons labeled to show the true visual/photographic difference.

Beyond that, don't let this bucket of cold astronomical water dampen your desire to go out and shoot the Earth's companion, or other events in the sky. These things are great even without all the exaggerated claims made by those who need you to click on an article to make money. Since I first saw one of these headlines, I have tempered my view of this hype because it does give a reason for people to look at the night sky which in my mind is a good thing. Currently the astronomical community has chosen to embrace the event for that very reason. Keep looking up, and taking pictures of what you see!

Tom

 

[Astrnmrtom]

Thought I'd add a photo of a past Super Moon April 2020. It wasn't taken with a Sony camera so forgive the transgression, but there is a funny story that links to what I said above.

A friend and I frequently met at a local beach to take pictures of sunset and this night was also one with a full Moon and a Super Moon at that, People noticed we were pointing out camera East and there was a realization from some people that it was a night of a Super Moon. As the Moon rose and we snapped our pictures I heard a lady behind me exclaim: "Oh, my God! It really IS huge!" Not wanting to take away her excitement knowing the "large" appearance of the Moon was caused by the Moonrise illusion and not from being "Super" I commented that it was amazing and beautiful.

Of course using a telephoto, and shooting with terrestrial objects in the foreground does add to the perception of a larger than normal Moon, the second shot zoomed out shows a ordinary full moon rising - albeit a beautiful one. Note the atmospheric distortion caused by refraction, squishing the moon a little, and causing the limb to be irregular. If you know what to look for, both the Lady in the Moon, and what has been described as a Native American sitting crossed legged, arms in his lap, leaning over with two feathers sticking up from his head - are visible.

• X-S1
• 158.6 mm
• ƒ/5.6
• 10/1250 sec
• ISO 800

• X-S1
• 15.1 mm
• ƒ/3.6
• 10/180 sec
• ISO 800

 

[Ralph]

Yep Tom I know what you mean and it might be a good thing to do in the comparison thing.
But I will keep taking shots of the moon when its not in the full state as for me they are far more interesting. And I even got told that sometimes
you can actually catch a satellite going past it. I have no idea if this is true or not but it would be good to see that I think.

 

[Astrnmrtom]

These may help you if you want to capture the ISS transiting the Moon:

Satellite Transit Tool: Spot ISS Transits of the Sun and Moon

The International Space Station often passes close to the Moon, Sun, and naked-eye planets. Use this tool to help you view and photograph ISS transits.

skyandtelescope.org

ISS Transit Prediction Pro - Apps on Google Play

Generate Satellite Transit Predictions for the Sun, Moon and Planets

play.google.com

International Space Station Transit Finder

This website helps plan observations of the International Space Station transit events in front of the Moon and Sun.

transit-finder.com

And this one talks about how to capture a transit. Note: One website, CalSky is no longer in operation. It's a shame because it was very handy.

Capturing an ISS Transit — Astronewton

Astrophotography can be a slow hobby. Everything above us works in a predictable ballet and since a lot of stellar objects are captured with long exposure there is little need to rush, but planetary phenomena can be an exception. Events like solar eclipses are just as predictable as the rise and set

www.astronewton.com

Have fun!

Tom