«

Is anyone else planning to try and get a photo of tomorrow night's lunar
eclipse? I'm going to give it a try - I have an EOS 10D which I'll be using
with a Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM [1], with a Canon 1.4x teleconvertor. This
essentially makes it into a 420mm f/5.6, which gives me a field of view
roughly equivalent to a 680mm lens on a 35mm camera.

Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my exposure
under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope). Could be challenging.
Hopefully I won't need to raise the ISO above 400.

[1] *Why* didn't I buy the f/2.8? Oh yes, it weighs a ton, and my wife would
have killed me.

Some of the best photos I have seen of an eclipse have been with
moderate telephoto lenses.

The trick is to take a series of images on the same frame. Make sure
the images don't overlap.



--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math


"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:anus71-...
> Is anyone else planning to try and get a photo of tomorrow night's lunar
> eclipse? I'm going to give it a try - I have an EOS 10D which I'll be
using
> with a Canon 300mm f/4 L IS USM [1], with a Canon 1.4x teleconvertor. This
> essentially makes it into a 420mm f/5.6, which gives me a field of view
> roughly equivalent to a 680mm lens on a 35mm camera.
>
> Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my
exposure
> under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
> blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope). Could be challenging.
> Hopefully I won't need to raise the ISO above 400.
>
> [1] *Why* didn't I buy the f/2.8? Oh yes, it weighs a ton, and my wife
would
> have killed me.

Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> wrote:

> Is anyone else planning to try and get a photo of tomorrow night's lunar
> eclipse?

The weather gods have been successfully propitiated! Though just to
make sure I have some more virgins, and an active volcano, should
clouds appear tomorrow evening.

> Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my exposure
> under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
> blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope).

google: "barn door tracker" (include the quotes). There are complex
ones, and very simple ones.

10D sensor is 22.5mm wide. With the 420mm lens, the horizontal field
of view is about atan(22.5/420)==3.1 degrees. At 3152 pixels, thats
9.8e-4 degrees/pixel. The Earth rotates at about 360/86164 == 4.2e-3
degrees/second, or about 4.2e-3/9.8e-4 == 4.3 pixels/second across the
width of the sensor.

So 0.8 seconds may be a bit long, but I don't think you'll need
exposures that long anyways: even eclipsed the Moon is fairly bright.
And tomorrow nights eclipse is not particularly deep.

> [1] *Why* didn't I buy the f/2.8? Oh yes, it weighs a ton,

Exercise.

> and my wife would have killed me.

"What doesn't kill me makes me stronger." -- Nietzsche said that,
though perhaps not in the same context...

Hi,

Here is a url to tips for photographying the lunar exclipse:
http://www.nyip.com/sub_idx_pgs/tipsidx/tips_idx.php
Rosita

In article < >,
<> wrote:
>
>10D sensor is 22.5mm wide. With the 420mm lens, the horizontal field
>of view is about atan(22.5/420)==3.1 degrees. At 3152 pixels, thats
>9.8e-4 degrees/pixel. The Earth rotates at about 360/86164 == 4.2e-3
>degrees/second, or about 4.2e-3/9.8e-4 == 4.3 pixels/second across the
>width of the sensor.
>
>So 0.8 seconds may be a bit long, but I don't think you'll need
>exposures that long anyways:

Here's hoping. This was much easier last time - I only had a D30 and a 300mm
lens

>> and my wife would have killed me.
>
>"What doesn't kill me makes me stronger." -- Nietzsche said that,
>though perhaps not in the same context...

He never met my wife ;->

HRosita wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a url to tips for photographying the lunar exclipse:
> http://www.nyip.com/sub_idx_pgs/tipsidx/tips_idx.php
> Rosita

We (as in people living on the US west coast) will only
be able to catch the final phase and from an extremely
high angle...(not the ideal position for a photo.)

"Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
news:anus71-...
>
> Looking around on the web, this suggests that I'll want to keep my
exposure
> under about 0.8 seconds if I want a sharp image, otherwise I'll get motion
> blur (I don't have access to a tracking telescope). Could be challenging.
> Hopefully I won't need to raise the ISO above 400.

If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed around
1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
such. I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.

"HRosita" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:...
> Hi,
>
> Here is a url to tips for photographying the lunar exclipse:
> http://www.nyip.com/sub_idx_pgs/tipsidx/tips_idx.php
> Rosita

Thanx!

-= Ina =-
http://community.webshots.com/user/gcwsterk
Sony MVC-CD1000 / Sony DSC-F717

In article <he%qb.48073$>,
PhotoMan <> wrote:
>
>If you set your camera to ISO 100, the exposure should be bracketed around
>1/125 second at ƒ 16. IT IS A SUNNY DAY SCENE, and should be exposed as
>such.

Er, about this eclipse thing...

>I made some test shots with my dReb tonight, and they were fine.

There wasn't an eclipse last night.

In article <anus71->, Chris Brown
<_uce_please.com> writes:

>Is anyone else planning to try and get a photo of tomorrow night's lunar
>eclipse?


I'll be doing prime focus photography of it with both digital, and film
through a C 11 (with focal reducer, approx 1550 mm f/7)

































"Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."