[LRflex] Re: IMG: The Moon for 6 groschen
- From: philippe.amard@xxxxxx
- To: liste reflex <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 22:21:56 +0200 (CEST)
Thanks for the input Bill :-)
Kids never fall far from the Leica tree ...
Regarding sunny 16, It took me years before I could assess the light properly
without metering ... trial and error and all that jazz. Now I'm pretty happy
that the digital age has brought up with it not only instant reviw,but also
very accurate matrix metering. And to stay on topic my R8 was the first camera
I owned that I could trust for that, even with a - sorry ted - flash ...
Amitiés
Philippe @ Mutz
========================================
Message du : 27/04/2013 22:13
De : "William Abbott " <bill2301@xxxxxxxxxx>
A : leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copie à :
Sujet : [LRflex] Re: IMG: The Moon for 6 groschen
David, Philippe,
Here's my two cents worth, as pointed out to me by my oldest son one day when
we were talking.
I was saying something about photographing the moon and he said, "Well, you
know the exposure don't you?" to which said, "No, not really, never thought
about it."
He said, "The moon is directly lighted by the sun, right? So the exposure
should be just what it is here on earth in broad daylight for a light object in
bright sunshine."
To which I replied, "Duh!"
So I looked at what your guru suggests for Full Moon exposure, at f/16, with
ISO 100, he says 1/125 second, close enough to what I learned as a boy as the
so-called "sunny sixteen" exposure: 1/ASA at f16.
All the best,
Bill
On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:12 AM, David Young wrote:
> Good Morning, Philippe!
>
> When I first looked at your rather good image of the moon, several thoughts
> sprang to mind...
>
> 1) The detail in this shot, and the admission that it is a "severe crop"
> tells
> me that if you really did get the lens for "6 pence", then you got one
> heckova
> bargain!
>
> 2) "Noise" in this image is very well controlled. Which indicates low ISO.
> But, low ISO means longer exposures. And it does not matter how sturdy a
> tripod you have ... all Lunar/Solar exposures are limited to roughly 340/the
> focal length of the lens (in mm) before rotation of the earth causes image
> burr.
>
> 3) But then I checked the Exif data, which shows a 300mm optic, exposed @
> 1/40th at f16, at ISO 560.
>
> So, the noise at ISO 560 is a credit to the D700. And 1/40th is well within
> the 1.3333 second limit for rotation of the earth. Then I wondered WHAT on
> earth possessed you to shoot such a dim subject at f16?
>
> Finally, I checked Fred Espenak's site (Fred is NASA's Eclipse Guru)
>
> http://www.mreclipse.com/LEphoto/LEphoto.html
>
> To find the your exposure is right "on the money", by his exposure guides.
>
> Having photographed many lunar and four solar eclipses, my only question that
> remained was: "Why would you not open the lens to say, f8 or f11, thus
> slightly
> increasing the shutter speed (with it's obvious benefits) and avoid the
> optical
> diffraction associated with f16 & smaller apertures?
>
> All of this is "stream of unconsciousness" ramblings. Your result is a very
> nice shot! Nicely done!
>
> May I ask which 300mm lens you've acquired?
>
> David.
>
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Phileica/Angels/The+Moon+for+6+pence-
>> 3345.jpg.html
>
> ------
> Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
> http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
> Archives are at:
> //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www.lrflex.furnfeather.net/
Archives are at:
//www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
Other related posts:
