Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Photography
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:43 AM
 
13,211 posts, read 21,827,501 times
Reputation: 14123

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
On a positive note, flash can help freeze the frame though. So while the moon will be dimly lit, it won't be completely blurry.
Say what? Please explain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2011, 08:49 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,815,462 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog View Post
Say what? Please explain.
Say what happens when the camera takes picture of the moon at f/3.5, 1/160s as opposed to f/3.5, 1.0s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:26 AM
 
13,211 posts, read 21,827,501 times
Reputation: 14123
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Say what happens when the camera takes picture of the moon at f/3.5, 1/160s as opposed to f/3.5, 1.0s.
So what you're trying to say is that using flash on a point and shoot fools the camera into using a faster shutterspeed which can reduce motion blur at the expense of under-exposing the moon. That makes sense, although I don't know why you have to speak in parables to make your point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,815,462 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog View Post
So what you're trying to say is that using flash on a point and shoot fools the camera into using a faster shutterspeed which can reduce motion blur at the expense of under-exposing the moon. That makes sense, although I don't know why you have to speak in parables to make your point.
Parable? But yes, the point with flash was that while light won't reach the moon, it can help freeze the action.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Bliss Township, Michigan
6,424 posts, read 13,246,280 times
Reputation: 6902
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Parable? But yes, the point with flash was that while light won't reach the moon, it can help freeze the action.
I'll have to give this a try next time. It's worth a shot. I've always had issues trying to take shot of the Moon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 12:05 PM
 
Location: Barrow, Alaska
3,539 posts, read 7,652,769 times
Reputation: 1836
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nephler View Post
I'll have to give this a try next time. It's worth a shot. I've always had issues trying to take shot of the Moon.
Not particularly useful, mostly because you can't control it at all, and f/3.5 at 1/160 of a second is going to over expose the moon significantly except during a total eclipse.

Note this article from a couple of weeks ago:

Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk View Post
You can't use auto exposure with all that black sky around the moon. If you can set the exposure manually, it would be about the same exposure as you use in daylight on earth. (It has the same light source that Earth has.) At ISO 400, that would be about f11 at 1/500 second, IIRC.
That is dead on, both for the cause/effect and about what to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,815,462 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd_Davidson View Post
Not particularly useful, mostly because you can't control it at all, and f/3.5 at 1/160 of a second is going to over expose the moon significantly except during a total eclipse.
Well, f/3.5, 1/160s was just a number tossed in for a point. It may over or even under expose the shot, also depending on the ISO. Many point and shoot start at ISO50. It is also possible that the lens wouldn't have as large an aperture at maximum zoom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Barrow, Alaska
3,539 posts, read 7,652,769 times
Reputation: 1836
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Well, f/3.5, 1/160s was just a number tossed in for a point. It may over or even under expose the shot, also depending on the ISO. Many point and shoot start at ISO50. It is also possible that the lens wouldn't have as large an aperture at maximum zoom.
Exactly. You can have no clue as to what it will do, and there is no way to control it. It's not a useful tool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,815,462 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd_Davidson View Post
Exactly. You can have no clue as to what it will do, and there is no way to control it. It's not a useful tool.
What isn't? In auto mode, the photographer has little control anyway (in many cases, not even over ISO). But don't assume that f/3.5 will produce an overexposed picture, but overall exposure will also be dictated by brightness of the moon, the ISO and the shutter speed. I should know, considering that last I took aim at the moon, it was with a short tele preset lens without any aid from the camera (135mm, M42 mount on Sony A55).

Again, when I quoted the settings, I wasn't recommending a setting, I was pointing at differences between what flash-on setting might do versus not. But now that I think about it, that setting may actually work with ISO50.

Last edited by EinsteinsGhost; 11-29-2011 at 01:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 06:21 PM
 
Location: Barrow, Alaska
3,539 posts, read 7,652,769 times
Reputation: 1836
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
But now that I think about it, that setting may actually work with ISO50.
At ISO 50 the Sunny 16 Rule would be 1/50 at f/16; hence, f/3.5 would appear to be far from a correct exposure for the moon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Photography

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:00 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top