My server seems to be down for a bit. But it depends on the conditions, the ISO, and the lens. I'm no expert but typically a half moon is about 1/125 at like f/5.6 with ISO set to 100. It varies kind of a lot tho. If you have a digital camera just start at iso 200 f/5.6 and walk up the shutter speeds from 1/60 to about 1/1000. If there's no correct exposure after that then something must be amiss.
Nikon 500mm AFS f4 version I + 1.7 Nikon TC - shot the same lens combo on both Nikon D300 and Canon 5D MKII...and they were almost exactly the same. This is the D300 version. I have tried about a half dozen lens combo's - with and without TCs...this is the best one I have come across yet.
yep, that's it. I don't mind the link...no worries.
I do think I can improve on the quality if I were to get a circular polarizer, or dark green filter to fit into the internal compartment. Plus lower the ISO to about 100. I have tried a couple difference telescopes (both reflector and refractor) but chromatic aberation ruins the images...plus light fall off in the corners and edges.
MANILA MOON - MARCH 7, 2010. Observed from Paranaque City, Philippines, on March 7, 2010 (04:57:54 local time), Canon 7D + 400 2.8 L IS + stacked Canon 2x and Sigma 2x TCs, 1600 mm, f/16, ISO 100, 1/25 sec, contrast detect focus in Live View, 475B/3421 support, remote switch, processed 100% crop.
James Markus wrote:
yep, that's it. I don't mind the link...no worries.
I do think I can improve on the quality if I were to get a circular polarizer, or dark green filter to fit into the internal compartment. Plus lower the ISO to about 100. I have tried a couple difference telescopes (both reflector and refractor) but chromatic aberation ruins the images...plus light fall off in the corners and edges.
Were you shooting through the scopes afocally (through the eyepiece?) or prime?
Prime or prime with a TC is the way to go. I guess you already know?
It seems to have very good contrast for a 1968 lens! I did a curves adjustment but so did I on all the others too. Hmm, maybe I shouldn't have done a curves on this one? Here it is without:
Liquidstone wrote: MANILA MOON - MARCH 7, 2010. Observed from Paranaque City, Philippines, on March 7, 2010 (04:57:54 local time), Canon 7D + 400 2.8 L IS + stacked Canon 2x and Sigma 2x TCs, 1600 mm, f/16, ISO 100, 1/25 sec, contrast detect focus in Live
Romy
I thought by now your Sigmonster shots were legendary..
kakomu wrote:
Whatever the case, the best evidence to debunk moon landing conspiracies would be independent efforts (not led by NASA or the US Gov't) to spot NASA equipment (especially the Laser reflectors).
Bifurcator wrote:
Great shot of the giant there kakomu! It looks like if you lower the exposure or stack a few you could even get stripes. Nice!
I actually had some shorter exposure times, but it just looks like a brown spec with lower exposure. I liked the higher exposure because you can see 3 of its moons.
In the end, 300mm is way too short to get any good shots of Jupiter.
-- kakomu wrote:
I actually had some shorter exposure times, but it just looks like a brown spec with lower exposure. I liked the higher exposure because you can see 3 of its moons.
In the end, 300mm is way too short to get any good shots of Jupiter.
Yeah, probably for most of our optics we need to stack a few to actually get stripes. Still a nice shot tho!
juan65 wrote: pingflood wrote;
Clearly that is a fake. See how the sun is on the LEFT in the uncropped shot, but on the RIGHT in the crop?
it looks good to me.
If you have a digital camera just start at iso 200 f/5.6 and walk up the shutter speeds from 1/60 to about 1/1000. If there's no correct exposure after that then something must be amiss. 
Here it is without:
