Quick October Moon

I showed this photo in a previous post . . . 

That was hand-held and a week ago.

Tonight, I went out and shot the moon (not the way that sounds) using my tripod. Very rarely do I use a tripod. I should, but it’s a bother and I’m not a professional and I can make things look good in post-production. Mostly. 

By the way, you can click on the photos for a larger view. 

Now, that photo and the one below were shot while some thin clouds drifted in and veiled the moon. 

It might not look like it, but you can see a bit of it in this video:

It’s short and you should watch it in HD. 

However, a few hours later, I went out again and the sky was much clearer. Mind you, there’s still a fair amount of atmospheric humidity and residual heat (this is, after all, the tropics). 

I also used the “Moon” setting in the camera. I don’t use that while hand-held because it adds a delay to the shutter and if you hand-hold, that delay will invariably have you drift away from the subject. 

Not with the tripod.

Except, because the moon moves, the exposure between shots changes a bit as well. 

One other thing. I have a pretty decent tripod with a decent head . . . but the P900 fully extended shows every minuscule vibration amplified 10x. 

The act of pressing the shutter is enough to introduce vibration in the shot. In fact, the beginning and end of the movie above were trimmed because the frame moves around in an annoying way that you see in many YouTube videos these days. 

Still, I have to tell you . . . to my eyes, those are pretty decent shots. They don’t look super at the pixel level but they are passable. The photos are slightly cropped to frame the moon in approximately the same location but it’s minimal.

You can still buy the P900 for a bit over $500 whereas one of Nikon’s 500mm or 600mm lenses will run you anywhere from three to four times as much (or more — the 600mm lens is $10K). And, I’m not sure the results would be any better. 

They’re not bad on a clear night at high altitudes in the winter. I know because my 400mm lens (600mm effective zoom on a DX body) comes close . . . but it’s cropped close and heavily processed. Mind you, I assume with an actual 600mm lens and a D850 camera you could produce fantastic photos . . . but that set-up would cost you close to $14K.

I didn’t do much to the above and could have probably used the JPGs straight from the camera. 

Anyway, just collating data, as they say. 

That’s it. This post has ended . . . except for the stuff below.

<><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><>

Note: if you are not reading this blog post at DisperserTracks.com, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website.  Could be they also torture small mammals.

<><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><>

If you’re new to this blog, it might be a good idea to read the FAQ page. If you’re considering subscribing to this blog, it’s definitively a good idea to read both the About page and the FAQ page.

About disperser

Odd guy with odd views living an odd life during odd times.
This entry was posted in Black & White, Black and White, My YouTube, Photo Post-processing, Photography Stuff, Photos and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Quick October Moon

  1. mvschulze says:

    1962.07.10 007 1st quarter moon
    These images are remarkable, – the P900 is indeed an impressive camera. In the long ago past, attempting to “capture” the moon in a similar way required a telescope and camera, and amateur results were deemed good, simply because it captured craters and other details – all horribly blurry compared to today! M :-)

    Like

    • disperser says:

      I assume you meant to attach a photo from 1962.

      Adding an image: if you upload your image to the WordPress Media Library, you should be able to just paste the link and it should load the image. If not, you can use this code:

      where URL is the link to the image (remember the quotes) and width is the pixel width (I suggest 640).

      As for the camera and photos; yes, in certain instances, the camera is amazing. Anyone who is into long-zoom photography (animals, birds) would be happy with it. Not as good for action shots (animals running and birds flying) primarily because at the high zoom it’s difficult keeping the subject in the frame if it’s moving. At fault is the crappy viewfinder which — I’m reading — is something that’s been remedied in the P1000.

      I keep seeing “pros” dissing the camera online but I also see many videos and photos from amateur and they are perfectly fine as far as I can see. I’m still trying to process the information and decide if I’ll upgrade.

      Like

      • mvschulze says:

        Exactly right, rushing as usual the attachment effort ran into being summoned for dinner by my patient wife! Thanks for the lead.
        Your clearity (moon) is a good step sharper than I’m getting with my Tameron 150- 600, even with post sharpening – but I’m still experimenting. In light of that, I have been very pleased with the budget conscious lens otherwise. M :-)

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Amazing photos, Emilio!
    I love the moon!
    You take lunarific portraits of the moon!
    If I took photos of the moon they would just be looney!
    HUGS!! :-)

    Like

  3. Liked the larger views.
    Pity about the silly giggling on the video.

    Like

Voice your opinion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.