# Total Lunar Eclipse - #1 of 4 - April 2014



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

There are FOUR total lunar eclipses occurring over the next two years. Tonight is the first of the four. It starts at 1:58pm ET, 11:58 MT, and 10:58 PT. If you are planning on photographing the first lunar eclipse this year, share your photos here! 

I'm aiming to get a full sequence of the entire eclipse, from the first penumbral dimming through totality and ending at the point the moon moves out of the penumbra (for me, that's from 11:58pm through 3:30am.) 

For more details, see here: http://www.mreclipse.com/LEdata/TLE2014Apr15/TLE2014Apr15.html
For exposure tips, see here: http://www.mreclipse.com/LEphoto/LEphoto.html


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> There are FOUR total lunar eclipses occurring over the next two years. This is a very rare event. It's occurred twice last century, and before that it had not occurred for many hundreds of years. After this, four total lunar eclipses will not occur again for hundreds of years.
> 
> Tonight is the first of the four. It starts at 1:58pm ET, 11:58 MT, and 10:58 PT. If you are planning on photographing the first lunar eclipse this year, share your photos here!
> 
> ...


 
Good Luck. We've been having clear evenings, until tonight, that is. There are supposed to be breaks in the clouds that will let a person view the eclipse, but photos might be a problem, since it may be a short window before the storm hits us early AM.

I went out last night and tried several exposures, and verified a clear view was possible. Today, I pulled out my seldom used TC-80N3 and set it to take a image every 5 minutes, so I'll go out and set the camera, and just let it run, snapping a image every 5 minutes until its over, or I wake up tomorrow morning and turn it off.

I'll have to use a fairly wide angle lens to do that.

BTW, The next Tetrad happens in 2032-2033 which is 20 years from now, not hundreds of years. There are eight Tetrads happening in the 21st Century.

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/OH/OH2014.html#tetrads


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

Ah, looks like they come in cycles. There was a 300 year gap up through 1908. Looks like the total cycle time is 565 years, so we'll have a bunch for a couple centuries, then another lull. I don't know what I read before, but I'm not even sure it actually projected future cycles...I guess I just assumed that it was a rarer event based on the history of Tetrads. 

Anyway, here is one of my shots, taken as the moon was entering the umbra:


----------



## Drizzt321 (Apr 15, 2014)

*sigh* I wish I had a real lens. I took mine with one of the Opteka mirror lenses. 800mm f/8, and it came with a 2x TC, so the closeups (all when the moon was starting to eclipse, so brighter) are f/16. I'm actually too embarrassed to shot the closeup that I took, although I haven't sorted through them all. So, here's one with a few stars around. I _think_ that's Mars in the lower right, although for some reason it's blue.


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

I think you did a great job, Drizzt! Especially considering you used an Opteka mirror lens, and at f/16!

BTW, the blue star is Spica, one of the key stars in the constellation Virgo. It's blue, rather than orange, simply because it isn't Mars. 

The other star, I suspect, is 76 Virginis, assuming that your image is from the beginning of the eclipse rather than the end.


----------



## m8547 (Apr 15, 2014)

Here's one I took with my little Canon 55-250 lens. It's cropped down to about 1/5 the original resolution, then downsampled to post on the web. There's a lot of noise left in the moon at 100%, but the downsampled version is not too bad.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> Ah, looks like they come in cycles. There was a 300 year gap up through 1908. Looks like the total cycle time is 565 years, so we'll have a bunch for a couple centuries, then another lull. I don't know what I read before, but I'm not even sure it actually projected future cycles...I guess I just assumed that it was a rarer event based on the history of Tetrads.
> 
> Anyway, here is one of my shots, taken as the moon was entering the umbra:



That's beautiful shot jrista  

I have never photograph the moon before. Last night, I gave it a try. Result I got is "indescribable" :-\ :-\ :-\


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> Ah, looks like they come in cycles. There was a 300 year gap up through 1908. Looks like the total cycle time is 565 years, so we'll have a bunch for a couple centuries, then another lull. I don't know what I read before, but I'm not even sure it actually projected future cycles...I guess I just assumed that it was a rarer event based on the history of Tetrads.
> 
> Anyway, here is one of my shots, taken as the moon was entering the umbra:



Nice shot! I wanted to play with the 600 and see what I could get... but it was SNOWING!!!!!!


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Ah, looks like they come in cycles. There was a 300 year gap up through 1908. Looks like the total cycle time is 565 years, so we'll have a bunch for a couple centuries, then another lull. I don't know what I read before, but I'm not even sure it actually projected future cycles...I guess I just assumed that it was a rarer event based on the history of Tetrads.
> ...



Derp. You need to use live view to dial in the exposure, or at least start with a pretty high shutter speed and work your way down to the point where the histogram just separates from the right-hand edge. For a full moon, you can start with 1/500th second, and work down from there. A full moon that is within the umbra, however, might need anywhere from 0.5s to 20s of exposure time...you just kind of have to experiment. It depends on how deeply within the umbra the moon passes (last night the moon passed through one edge of the umbra, missing the dead center, so it did not get as dark as it can...a total eclipse that passes right through the center of the earths umbra can get so dark as to be difficult to even see, like a new moon.)

Also, you have to make CERTAIN you are using Manual (M) mode...you can't really photograph the moon with any automatic modes, as there is simply too much contrast for evaluative metering to choose the right settings. Spot metering mode, metered off the moon itself, might do it, but it's still best to go full manual.


----------



## dcm (Apr 15, 2014)

I didn't get out last night to shoot the blood moon. I appreciate the photos I've seen so far. Glad I have a few more chances coming up.

Here's one I took last month for practice using the M and 55-250 STM on a tripod at 250mm with manual focus and manual exposure. Its a 100% crop of an OOC image at ISO 100, f/11, 1/90, Daylight WB. I believe I spot metered off the moon to get in the ballpark, then dialed it in with manual and did some exposure bracketing.

Don't normally mount my EF lenses on the M, but this seems to be one case it does make sense. I plan to try the 70-200 f/4 with 1.4xIII and 2xIII one of these nights. Or the Tamron 150-600 when it arrives. I probably would have been out there if the Tamron had already arrived.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> I think you did a great job, Drizzt! Especially considering you used an Opteka mirror lens, and at f/16!
> 
> BTW, the blue star is Spica, one of the key stars in the constellation Virgo. It's blue, rather than orange, simply because it isn't Mars.
> 
> The other star, I suspect, is 76 Virginis, assuming that your image is from the beginning of the eclipse rather than the end.



Thanks, but that one wasn't at f/16, that one was just the lens itself so f/8. I never appreciated how much 2-stops of light could mean in the viewfinder!

The image is from near maximum totality (10-20 min before). I thought I had seen somewhere that Mars was going to be leading slightly below the moon last night. Ah ha! There's the image http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/outthere/files/2014/04/EclipseFinderChart.jpg from Discovery Blog. Reading it a bit more, looks like it was 10-degrees off from the moon, and 800mm gives a 3-degree field of view. So I couldn't have captured Mars  Oh darn.

Maybe for the next tetrad I'll have the Tamron 150-600 with a 1.4x or 2x TC. Got to be much higher quality than the Opteka. Frankly, it'd be hard not to be.


----------



## Aswah (Apr 15, 2014)

I was out last night as well. It also was my first foray into moon shots... while the pictures need some work and frankly between two 16 hour shifts at work this was the most time I could spend playing with it... 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/aswah/13876075275/in/set-72157644009472353/


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



Will use your info on next shooting. Thanks


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

I finally managed to get some processing on my images done. Out of 200 frames, I've picked 17 that encompass the total sequence from first shadow to last shadow. Still working on that composite. In the mean time, here is my Totality Triad composite, all spiced up:


----------



## thepancakeman (Apr 15, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> That's beautiful shot jrista
> 
> I have never photograph the moon before. Last night, I gave it a try. Result I got is "indescribable" :-\ :-\ :-\



That pretty much looks just like what mine would have, except I didn't bother to try knowing how bad it would be. :-[

Thanks jrista for starting this thread, and any additional tips/tricks/how to's would be much appreciated! I have no delusions (or particular interest) in being a great astrophotographer, but it would seem that just a nice shot of the moon _should _be within reach skill-wise and equipment-wise for most of us with a little help from our friends here. Still 3 more chances!


----------



## mackguyver (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista, you really have mastered astrophotography and these shots are amazing! That said, I think I think Dylan put everyone else's work to shame


----------



## Slyham (Apr 15, 2014)

Here are mine taken with my T1i and 55-250 mm.



bloodmoon1 by SlyhamPhoto, on Flickr



bloodmoon2 by SlyhamPhoto, on Flickr



bloodmoon3 by SlyhamPhoto, on Flickr



bloodmoon4 by SlyhamPhoto, on Flickr



bloodmoon5 by SlyhamPhoto, on Flickr



bloodmoon6 by SlyhamPhoto, on Flickr


----------



## Drizzt321 (Apr 15, 2014)

Wow jrista! That's a really awesome triad shot! Well done sir.

What equipment do you shoot with? Especially which tripod head? I've got a decent enough Benro with ball-head, and it worked, sorta, but I kept wishing it was geared in some way or another to fine tune.


----------



## thepancakeman (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> I finally managed to get some processing on my images done. Out of 200 frames, I've picked 17 that encompass the total sequence from first shadow to last shadow. Still working on that composite. In the mean time, here is my Totality Triad composite, all spiced up:



Well, that's mildly...freaking awesome! Can I buy a print of that off ya?


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

thepancakeman said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > That's beautiful shot jrista
> ...



Thanks! 

I'm happy to share my expertise as well. I actually learned a few things myself last night. I'll put some more information together in another thread, so we can keep this one more of a "Share Your's" kind of thread.

Quick note on the other chances...while one or two of them will be visible from the US, for about half or so, the eclipse will occur at moonrise or moonset, so you'll really only be able to see about half of it...and it will be pretty low in the horizon. It's still definitely possible, but it will be tougher to get good detail, and you will have to be ready to go as soon as the moon rises (or well before it sets) to get the shots. For the fourth, I don't think it will be visible from the US at all, however if you live elsewhere, then check the times and dates and see if you'll get a good view.


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> jrista, you really have mastered astrophotography and these shots are amazing!



Thanks. I've been imaging the moon a LOT longer than I've been doing deep sky astrophotography, and I'm more of a master of the moon than I am of astrophotography. Maybe at some point I'll be as good with AP as I am with the moon, but at the moment, I'm still a noob compared to some astrophotography wizards.


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

thepancakeman said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I finally managed to get some processing on my images done. Out of 200 frames, I've picked 17 that encompass the total sequence from first shadow to last shadow. Still working on that composite. In the mean time, here is my Totality Triad composite, all spiced up:
> ...



Sure! I am actually trying to build a storefront site for my photography. I don't have it rolling yet, but I'll send you the link when I do. I guess I could do something ad-hoc, through paypal, if you really wanted a print right now. I use a nice high quality printer that can ship directly from print lab to my customers. Just let me know.


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

Slyham said:


> Here are mine taken with my T1i and 55-250 mm.



Great shots, nice and crisp.


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

Drizzt321 said:


> Wow jrista! That's a really awesome triad shot! Well done sir.
> 
> What equipment do you shoot with? Especially which tripod head? I've got a decent enough Benro with ball-head, and it worked, sorta, but I kept wishing it was geared in some way or another to fine tune.



Thanks. 

I used a Canon 7D, EF 600mm f/4 L II lens, but the equipment that really allowed me to get the kind of detail I did during totality was the Orion Atlas equatorial tracking mount. I did not have to jack my ISO way up to 3200 or 6400 to get images during totality...I kept it at ISO 100, tracked in lunar time, and simply increased my exposure times. At full moon, my shutter was 1/250th. At maximum totality, it was 8s to 15s. Since I was tracking the moon itself, I could expose for that long of a time without experiencing blur due to the moon transiting across the frame.


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 15, 2014)

Some great shots by Jrista and Slyham. 

I have not had time to fully sort through the photos I took last night with my 800mm and the 150-600, but most of the ones taken during the full eclipse had too much motion blur. As the moon got darker, I just increased exposure time. This was a mistake. The moon moves rather quickly across the sky and the longer exposure introduced blur. On the small screen of the camera they looked deceptively okay, but when I downloaded them to the computer you could tell the moon had moved a good bit even during a one second exposure.

I just now did a little research on the issue and saw a web site which recommended that for lunar photography you should take 250 and divide it by the mm of your lens to get the maximum exposure time to avoid blur. See http://www.amlunsoc.org/photography.htm For my 800mm lens, that would be no more than a 30th of a second and about a 40th of a second for the 600mm. (this seems to be similar to the 500 or 600 rule applied to star photography) Or I could do it right like jrista and get an equatorial tracking mount. Unfortunately, I would also need Mr. Spock to help me operate it.

It is a good thing there may be a few more of these events coming up. Time to crank up the ISO and open up the lens if I am going to use the long lenses to photo the next one.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > Wow jrista! That's a really awesome triad shot! Well done sir.
> ...



Ah yes, good old tracking mounts. Don't know if I'll ever get one, as I don't generally do much in the way of astrophotography (in which I include the Moon/ISS, etc). I suspect if I get into astro ever, I'll probably want to get a crop-sensor camera to get the higher density/narrower FoV.


----------



## jrista (Apr 15, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> Some great shots by Jrista and Slyham.
> 
> I have not had time to fully sort through the photos I took last night with my 800mm and the 150-600, but most of the ones taken during the full eclipse had too much motion blur. As the moon got darker, I just increased exposure time. This was a mistake. The moon moves rather quickly across the sky and the longer exposure introduced blur. On the small screen of the camera they looked deceptively okay, but when I downloaded them to the computer you could tell the moon had moved a good bit even during a one second exposure.
> 
> ...



Equatorial mounts are a lot easier to use than that. They sound very technical, but they are actually simple and elegant devices. All you would really need to do is use the hand controller, set it to lunar time tracking (vs. sidereal, which is the default used for stars), pick the moon to point, center (there is always a bit of pointing error), and start imaging. Once you set it, you can pretty much forget it. The only extra bit of work is the meridian flip...once the moon passes the meridian (from east to west crossing the imaginary "12 o'clock line" overhead), you need to tell the mount to goto the moon again, and it will flip the mount to the inverse orientation...then you can image for the rest of the night.


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> Equatorial mounts are a lot easier to use than that. They sound very technical, but they are actually simple and elegant devices. All you would really need to do is use the hand controller, set it to lunar time tracking (vs. sidereal, which is the default used for stars), pick the moon to point, center (there is always a bit of pointing error), and start imaging. Once you set it, you can pretty much forget it. The only extra bit of work is the meridian flip...once the moon passes the meridian (from east to west crossing the imaginary "12 o'clock line" overhead), you need to tell the mount to goto the moon again, and it will flip the mount to the inverse orientation...then you can image for the rest of the night.



Jrista, you have failed to convince me that an attempt by me to mount the equator would in any way be seen as elegant. Plus, I live in Texas and such an act is probably illegal. I am also concerned that if I tried one of those meridian flips, I would end up in the hospital. Take care, thanks for the tips and keep posting those great photos.


----------



## Click (Apr 15, 2014)

jrista said:


> I finally managed to get some processing on my images done. Out of 200 frames, I've picked 17 that encompass the total sequence from first shadow to last shadow. Still working on that composite. In the mean time, here is my Totality Triad composite, all spiced up:




Beautiful image jrista. 8) Well done Sir!


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 15, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> jrista, you really have mastered astrophotography and these shots are amazing! That said, I think I think Dylan put everyone else's work to shame



LOL.... ;D

Dam Canon sensor ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Drizzt321 (Apr 16, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Equatorial mounts are a lot easier to use than that. They sound very technical, but they are actually simple and elegant devices. All you would really need to do is use the hand controller, set it to lunar time tracking (vs. sidereal, which is the default used for stars), pick the moon to point, center (there is always a bit of pointing error), and start imaging. Once you set it, you can pretty much forget it. The only extra bit of work is the meridian flip...once the moon passes the meridian (from east to west crossing the imaginary "12 o'clock line" overhead), you need to tell the mount to goto the moon again, and it will flip the mount to the inverse orientation...then you can image for the rest of the night.
> ...



++


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 16, 2014)

The good


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 16, 2014)

The bad. Let me know what you think is the cause of this. It only occurred on the 5diii with the Tamron 150-600. I don't think the tripod moved this much and I don't think it is from the shutter, but it could be. Most all of the Tamron ones exhibited this shake when I was taking longer exposures. The first one is really odd as it duplicated the shaken star all over the frame. The first was a 20 sec exposure and the 2nd was a 3.2 sec exposure. I had the Tamron version of IS on. I was also using the CamRanger to activate the shutter. Any thoughts?


----------



## jrista (Apr 16, 2014)

That definitely looks like IS messing with your stability, Lloyd. You gotta turn IS off when doing astrophotography with a camera lens.

The good looks great! You got Spica and Mars along with the eclipsed moon. I was hoping to do that, but decided I didn't want to interrupt my imaging sequence to do it.


----------



## jrista (Apr 16, 2014)

Two more composites:


----------



## dcm (Apr 16, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> The bad. Let me know what you think is the cause of this. It only occurred on the 5diii with the Tamron 150-600. I don't think the tripod moved this much and I don't think it is from the shutter, but it could be. Most all of the Tamron ones exhibited this shake when I was taking longer exposures. The first one is really odd as it duplicated the shaken star all over the frame. The first was a 20 sec exposure and the 2nd was a 3.2 sec exposure. I had the Tamron version of IS on. I was also using the CamRanger to activate the shutter. Any thoughts?



Possibly the VC. Tamron recommends you turn it off when using a tripod or long exposures. Try again with it off to see if that improves the images. 
http://tamron.cdngc.net/inst/pdf/a009inst_1207_en.pdf


----------



## dcm (Apr 16, 2014)

jrista said:


> Two more composites:



Wow! Great composites.


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 16, 2014)

jrista said:


> Two more composites:



*!!!AWESOME!!!*

I just downloaded your 1st photo and saved it in my laptop background - I hope you don't have problem with that.


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 16, 2014)

Thanks for the confirmation that it is likely the IS. And dcm, thanks for the link to the Tamron manual. I always wondered why they included these manuals with products. 

And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off. Good work.

Kindest Regards, Lloyd


----------



## jrista (Apr 16, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off. Good work.



LOL. Yeah, a little.

Thanks.


----------



## dcm (Apr 16, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> Thanks for the confirmation that it is likely the IS. And dcm, thanks for the link to the Tamron manual. I always wondered why they included these manuals with products.
> 
> And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off. Good work.
> 
> Kindest Regards, Lloyd



I seldom read the manuals that come with the product. I find the best time to read the manual is before I buy it. Then I have a better idea of what I'm really getting and what to expect. Still waiting for my Tamron to arrive.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 16, 2014)

Slyham said:


> Here are mine taken with my T1i and 55-250 mm.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not bad at all! It rained here so I didn't get a chance to try to shoot.


----------



## surapon (Apr 16, 2014)

Dear friends.
Thousand thanks for all GREAT PHOTOS of the RED MOON. Sorry. Past two nights were Thunderstorm and raining night for my home town( Apex, NC., USA.)---No Red Moon in the cloudy sky.
Well, Here are my RED MOON by Post processing/ Photoshop----Ha, Ha, Ha.
Enjoy.
Surapon


----------



## PTT (Apr 16, 2014)

Lunar Eclipse Composite. 6D, 70-300 @300mm, f16. Kept shutter speed at 1 second or faster. Longer exposures had some Moon edge blurring. ISO varied from 100 to 2500.


----------



## dcm (Apr 16, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> Thanks for the confirmation that it is likely the IS. And dcm, thanks for the link to the Tamron manual. I always wondered why they included these manuals with products.
> 
> And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off. Good work.
> 
> Kindest Regards, Lloyd



I suggested VC because the movements look a bit mechanical and 600mm will magnify any movement. I assumed you have taken moon photos with other lenses in your arsenal and not had a similar experience. If you have, then this suggests it is the lens. If not, there are a couple of other things to consider, your base and tripod. 

Were you on solid ground or a deck? A deck can impart movement from people walking, even if they are inside the house when the deck is attached to the house. As Neuro noted in some autofocus calibration discussions, his results were affected by movement in the house until he set his tripod on a concrete floor in the basement.

Were you using a lightweight tripod or a tripod with the center column raised? The slightest of breeze can cause movement in these cases. These are two other things to consider.

I'll have to try this out when mine arrives. I haven't experienced anything like this with my 55-250 or 70-200 with extenders.


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 16, 2014)

DCM,

I was taking the photos on fairly solid, but a little wet, ground. I had two tripods set up. One was for the 800mm fd lens and the other was for the Tamron. Unfortunately, the head I was using for the 800mm was unable to solidly hold the lens at the high angle I needed when the moon was in the full eclipse position. Therefore, I used only the 150-600 for the red moon shots. The tripod I used for the Tamron was not as solid as the one for the 800, but I don't think that camera shake was the issue. I used a remote trigger (the CamRanger) so no vibration from that and was using live view. There was no real wind out at the time.

I have done several star photos before with other lenses (including the 800, a Canon 70-200 2.8 and a variety of wide angle lenses) and have not had had the stars come out in such a squiggly pattern before. Blurred yes, but consistently squiggly like this no. I first attributed the moon blur to the duration of the shutter, the length of the lens and the movement of the moon. However, that does not explain the squiggly stars. I need to go out again and try some star photos with the better tripod and with VC (IS) on and off to see if I can repeat the effect. 

Thanks for help in brain storming this issue.

Kindest Regards, Lloyd


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 16, 2014)

It looks like lots of people got good images. It started out hazy here, and degenerated into a overcast, so I gave up. The night before was clear.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Apr 16, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> It looks like lots of people got good images. It started out hazy here, and degenerated into a overcast, so I gave up. The night before was clear.



I got fairly lucky. I was up a few hundred feet above ocean level on the side of a mountain, so above the low-level fog/haze that we sometimes get. Then while there were some high level, thin clouds (cirrus I think), there was a good wind and they were moving fast so there was sufficient clear air for me to get decent shots.


----------



## Lloyd (Apr 16, 2014)

surapon said:


> Dear friends.
> Thousand thanks for all GREAT PHOTOS of the RED MOON. Sorry. Past two nights were Thunderstorm and raining night for my home town( Apex, NC., USA.)---No Red Moon in the cloudy sky.
> Well, Here are my RED MOON by Post processing/ Photoshop----Ha, Ha, Ha.
> Enjoy.
> Surapon


 
I hate it when people try to pass off a photoshop image as an original. Again Surapon, you don’t fool me. I found the original photograph that you lifted this image from on the Daily Planet website and posted it below. It shows not the red moon, but you returning from your home world. I will not let you keep up this deception through some clever cropping of a lifted photo. This has to stop.


----------



## surapon (Apr 16, 2014)

Lloyd said:


> surapon said:
> 
> 
> > Dear friends.
> ...




Ha, Ha, Ha---Dear my friend Lloyd.
Ha, Ha, Ha---You make my days again-----Ha, Ha, Ha-----Atleast We all have FUN.
Thanksssss.
Have a great work week, Before the RED MOON Change to be a Blue moon( 4/10/2014 . at 5:28 PM, the blue sky in late afternoon)
Surapon


----------



## mackguyver (Apr 16, 2014)

Surapon, I'm not sure if you have enough red "rings" on your gear to shoot the red "Blood Moon" ;D

Great shots by everyone! I live in humid Florida, so it's not something I can get into, but I really enjoy seeing all of the great work on this post.


----------



## Slyham (Apr 17, 2014)

jrista said:


> Slyham said:
> 
> 
> > Here are mine taken with my T1i and 55-250 mm.
> ...





Lloyd said:


> Some great shots by Jrista and Slyham.





CarlTN said:


> Not bad at all! It rained here so I didn't get a chance to try to shoot.



Thanks everyone! Mine are nothing compared to Jrista, but I am very happy with them considering my gear. It was nice and clear in Arizona as it is most nights. I also learned very quickly that any exposure over a second was too long which surprised me.

It was very neat to witness and capture.


----------



## CarlTN (Apr 17, 2014)

Slyham said:


> Thanks everyone!
> 
> It was very neat to witness and capture.



You're most welcome!


----------



## Northstar (Apr 19, 2014)

jrista said:


> Lloyd said:
> 
> 
> > And jrista with regard to the composites, now you are just showing off. Good work.
> ...



LOL...I was thinking the same thing but I'm very glad that you are!! Great shots and composites!!

well done jrista!


----------



## traingineer (Apr 20, 2014)

surapon said:


> Lloyd said:
> 
> 
> > surapon said:
> ...



That's a nice Mercedes you got there, Surapon. ° ͜ʖ °


----------



## surapon (Apr 20, 2014)

traingineer said:


> surapon said:
> 
> 
> > Lloyd said:
> ...




Thank you, Sir, Dear traingineer.
That my old 1985 380 SE, and great/ fast running too. Yes, 28 years old car still in great shape as the TANK.
Thanks.
Surapon


----------



## traingineer (Apr 20, 2014)

surapon said:


> traingineer said:
> 
> 
> > surapon said:
> ...



Kewl.


----------

