I'm using the Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 lens, less filter, with my D7000. This particular cropped example was shot in Manual mode at F7.1 1/8000 ISO 800, I used a tripod with the VR off, ML-L3 remote control with mirror up. Picture control was in Vivid with the sharpness and contrast bumped up. (I also shot this in Monochrome with red filter effect with no visible difference) Am I missing something or is this the best I can get with this lens?
Sat 12-Nov-11 09:33 AM | edited Sat 12-Nov-11 09:34 AM by hawaii502160
I took some shots of our full moon last month. I used both my 70-200mm VRII, and my 70-300mm VR lenses. I ended up shooting both wide open, and using spot metering, right off of the face of the moon. I thought my shots turned out pretty well. That being said, for a really detailed shot, you probably need a little longer reach than even your 300mm can offer.
Sat 12-Nov-11 10:49 AM | edited Sat 12-Nov-11 10:53 AM by Gamecocks
I used the 70-300 w/VR on for this shot; spot, 1/250 @f/10, vivid, sharpening 6 and contrast -1 & ISO 200. I darkened a little in PP. Imo, looks better zoomed in and the lens will produce a good IQ although not like the big boys.
As Don already mentioned, cropping and enlarging to gain reach is not a good substitute for focal length. And according to SLRgear’s blur charts at 300mm the 28-300 appears only marginally less sharp than the 70-300 VR.
Here is a test shot I used in another post quite some time ago.
D7000 with the 70-300VR on a tripod, ML-L3 remote in MUP mode at 300mm, f/5.6, 1/160 and ISO 100 100% crop
Your image I believe is a down sample which throws away resolution so its hard to say from that how much detail difference there is between Don and my shot at 300mm with the 70-300 is than yours with the 28-300. At 300mm you are only placing about 540 pixels on the diameter of the moon. So providing us with a 100% crop would allow us to better judge the amount of detail captured.
Having said that I would recommend that you not shoot the full moon at such a high ISO. The sun directly lights the full moon, so the exposure you use is not much different than taking a landscape shot on a sunny day. But instead of Sunny 16 to approximate the exposure you would use Luney 11.
Also by applying Luney 11 to your settings, it also appeared that you underexposed the image by 1.5 to 2 stops. That combined with the higher ISO allowed considerable amount of noise that robs you of detail.
The photo I submitted was cropped in camera (trim in retouch) with no other modifications. I have PS8 but don't use it. Not sure what you mean by 'down sample'. Are you referring to it being underexposed? Thanks again.
The moon can be a surprisingly difficult target, and more reach is really needed for better detail. Using a good mount with Mup and keeping a reasonable shutter speed are the next keys. I'm estimating anything faster than 1/60sec should be fine given the moon's movement. A lower ISO and higher exposure might help here, but not a great deal.
Here's a recent shot I took through a 90mm APO refractor with my D7000. I don't recall which teleconvertor I used, but focal length would be either 700mm or 1000mm, ISO 400, 1/80sec.
That's a great shot and it illustrates the difference between shooting a full moon and a partial moon. With a partial moon, you will see much more crater relief as a result of the shadows. Full moons tend to show crater relief only on the extreme margins of the moon.
I'm sure you'll get there quick. Astrophotography is a curiosity that I'm actually trying to supress given the amount of time and equipment involved. For now, just getting my camera gear to interesting terrestial sites is enough.
Thanks for the comment. I did not do much to the file, no image stacking or significant NR, etc.
This particular file was submitted for the September online assignment (contrast) so I did take it through Topaz Adjust to ensure good detail and contrast, but nothing further. The original NEF in Lightroom shows +0.3 exposure, Adobe Standard profile, brightness and contrast turned down a bit, and clarity set to +15. It is nearly identical to the posted image.
Sat 12-Nov-11 12:38 PM | edited Sat 12-Nov-11 12:42 PM by DeanAZ
I believe you can do better with the 300mm lens. Here is a shot I took last month when it was not quite full. -I used ISO 100 as I can see noise in your image from the 800 setting. -I underexposed some to preserve the detail in the bright areas around fresh impacts. -Shoot manual as the light conditions are not changing and its hard to get the moon under the spot sensor. You are going to crop anyway so don't worry about putting the moon dead center. -Try some sharpening using the high pass filter. -Use the Landscape picture control as it has a higher contrast than the vivid does. And the vivid will 'enhance' the chromatic aberrations (CA) as well. -There really is no color to speak of except some red-browns from the light traveling through the atmosphere so desaturate to help minimize the CA -Don't resize the image as it will obscure detail through the resampling process. You are working with a 100% image and can't afford to throw away any detail. -Use a tripod and don't forget to turn VR off as I often forget to do. -Don't wait until the full moon to shoot as the shadows in a partial moon can bring out details.
Thank you Rocky. My next project is learning how to setup for and create a celestial time-lapsed video using the Interval Timer shooting setting in my D5100 (w/double battery grip). I'm running out of time here in northern Indiana with overcast evenings and the weather in general getting so cold. :/
I know this is a little off topic but I can't find the thread I'm looking for...someone posted a photo of some star trails and I need to know what software I can use to stack images for making the final image. Any ideas folk? Thank you.