# Crazy moon



## JPAZ (Jul 23, 2013)

OK. I have the M and I have the adapter. Looking out the window, I see a practically full moon. So I put the 100-400 on the M. No tripod. Shooting out of camera jpeg and not RAW. I know I can do better. But, I wanted to see how it would handle. Leaning against the wall, I tried AF. Forget it, unless you like hunting. 

So, manual focus with a magnified "live view" and I got this......
iso 6400; 1/1250; f11

Makes me think that with a tripod, a bit of time, and PP on a RAW image with some noise reduction, this little camera won't be bad at all.


----------



## drjlo (Jul 23, 2013)

Shooting the moon hand-held isn't exactly how I would measure a camera's capability, but sure Canon aps-c sensor can do very well given the 1.6x crop factor. Below is my shot on full frame on tripod, highly cropped.




SuperMoonEF2 by drjlo1, on Flickr


----------



## nubu (Jul 23, 2013)

I did some moon pictures through my amateur telescope (912mm + 2x extender) some weeks ago. The little m did a good job!


----------



## Forceflow (Jul 23, 2013)

7D + 100-400mm + Sigma 2x Converter


----------



## Pinchers of Peril (Jul 23, 2013)

Wow these are awesome!!! Good job everybody.


----------



## rpt (Jul 23, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> OK. I have the M and I have the adapter. Looking out the window, I see a practically full moon. So I put the 100-400 on the M. No tripod. Shooting out of camera jpeg and not RAW. I know I can do better. But, I wanted to see how it would handle. Leaning against the wall, I tried AF. Forget it, unless you like hunting.
> 
> So, manual focus with a magnified "live view" and I got this......
> iso 6400; 1/1250; f11
> ...


The noise is due to the high ISO. Why do you need f11? Use the largest aperture. Get the ISO to about 400 or below. A tripod would help no doubt but you can hand-shoot the moon. What lens did you have? Can't read Exif on the iPad.


----------



## lintoni (Jul 23, 2013)

rpt said:


> JPAZ said:
> 
> 
> > OK. I have the M and I have the adapter. Looking out the window, I see a practically full moon. *So I put the 100-400 on the M*. No tripod. Shooting out of camera jpeg and not RAW. I know I can do better. But, I wanted to see how it would handle. Leaning against the wall, I tried AF. Forget it, unless you like hunting.
> ...



I don't think you need to read the Exif, just to read...


----------



## rpt (Jul 23, 2013)

lintoni said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > JPAZ said:
> ...



Thanks for pointing that out. I should have read the whole post better.


----------



## JPAZ (Jul 23, 2013)

rpt said:


> The noise is due to the high ISO. Why do you need f11? Use the largest aperture. Get the ISO to about 400 or below. A tripod would help no doubt but you can hand-shoot the moon. What lens did you have? Can't read Exif on the iPad.



Yeah, yeah. And with a tripod, my reading glasses, wider aperture and slower speed (so lower iso), a remote, RAW, post-processing, etc, this would have been better. Not my point. I was just seeing what the M could do.


----------



## rpt (Jul 23, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > The noise is due to the high ISO. Why do you need f11? Use the largest aperture. Get the ISO to about 400 or below. A tripod would help no doubt but you can hand-shoot the moon. What lens did you have? Can't read Exif on the iPad.
> ...




I looked but could not find my moon hand shots that were good. I shot some at 1/180 and f5.6 with my 100-400L but I don't remember the ISO setting. It is the monsoon season in India. So I hope to see the moon in another month or two. I'll hand-shoot it then and share it.

Sorry, that is the best I can do at the moment. BTW, I have a 5D3 so obviously that camera has an advantage over the M. However, you would get a starting point.


----------



## JPAZ (Jul 23, 2013)

rpt said:


> Sorry, that is the best I can do at the moment. BTW, I have a 5D3 so obviously that camera has an advantage over the M. However, you would get a starting point.



And I have some on 5d3 with 100-400 and 1.4x that are better than this one. But, I appreciate you and everyone's comments. 

For me, the M is still a tool that I am trying to figure out. That's why I posted this in this thread. I'll be taking it on a beach outing with the 22, the adapter and my 40 and the 28-105 (no IS but lighter than the 24-105) to play some more in good light.


----------



## rpt (Jul 23, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, that is the best I can do at the moment. BTW, I have a 5D3 so obviously that camera has an advantage over the M. However, you would get a starting point.
> ...


Cool! The only thing I'd say is as the moon is kind of at infinity, it does not matter if you set a smaller or larger aperture. You do not need any depth of field for your shot of the moon.

So set the lowest aperture. Set the lowest shutter speed you can shoot with and keep the ISO between say 100 and 400 or even 800. I do not have an M so I can't confirm the exact settings.


----------



## CarlTN (Jul 23, 2013)

nubu said:


> I did some moon pictures through my amateur telescope (912mm + 2x extender) some weeks ago. The little m did a good job!



Very nice!


----------



## nubu (Jul 24, 2013)

rpt said:


> So set the lowest aperture. Set the lowest shutter speed you can shoot with and keep the ISO between say 100 and 400 or even 800. I do not have an M so I can't confirm the exact settings.



I support all but "set the lowest aperture". When using an extender, even the fantastic 1.4xIII, I found it better to close down the aperture by typically 2/3 to one full stop to get maximum sharpness from of the system. This holds also for superteles and even more for the 100-400. But as always: improve the weakest part of the chain...


----------



## Quasimodo (Jul 24, 2013)

nubu said:


> I did some moon pictures through my amateur telescope (912mm + 2x extender) some weeks ago. The little m did a good job!



I love this shot! 

I shot this one with tripod, a 5D II, 800L F5.6 + 2xIII converter

http://500px.com/photo/16807807


----------



## nubu (Jul 24, 2013)

Quasimodo said:


> nubu said:
> 
> 
> > I did some moon pictures through my amateur telescope (912mm + 2x extender) some weeks ago. The little m did a good job!
> ...



Thanks! But your pic is also nice. 

One small suggestion to improve it: separate the pic into its RGB components and shift the blue layer maybe 1 or 2 pixel down and the red 1 or 2 pixel up with respect to the green layer. By this you compensate for the atmospheric spectrum visible (it acts like a prism). This is even more helpfull when taking pics at lower elevation. One can always try to do this to taste...


----------



## Quasimodo (Jul 24, 2013)

nubu said:


> Quasimodo said:
> 
> 
> > nubu said:
> ...



Thanks, I will try this


----------

