Powershot SX60 HS Moon photos

[AuntFrahn]

I have been trying to shoot pictures of the moon and having lousy results.

First I tried AUTO, which was sort of OK. The problem is when I depress the shutter the sharpness of the picture is less than before I press the shutter to check focus. The resulting image is not what I saw.

I looked online for a few ideas and tried some manual shots at f/5.6, ISO 800, speed 1/250. Again, I could see what seemed to be a pretty good image, but as soon as I pressed the shutter a little, the moon turned white. Tried it several times while using a tripod. Reduced the ISO to 400. Nada. Did not try setting the self timer - didn't seem like that would help.

Went back to AUTO and did get some shots, but again, not as clear as I expected when I pressed the shutter.

Very frustrating.

Obviously, I am new to this.

Thanks

[Waddizzle]

---

@Michelle1 wrote:

I own a t4i...I am looking at purchasing a zoom lens, not sure which one, either the canon 500, or the sigma 150-600....in either case, would the powershot xs60 negate the need for those zoom lenses, or does image quality suffer greatly at the 500/600mm range of the xs60?  I understand digital and optical zoom, but not sure if the 65X is all optical so the 21-1365mm is REALLY as good as a 1365 on a dslr camera, or if it is more like digital zoom. Thanks

---

Are you trying to determine is it better to by super telephoto lens for a DSLR, or is it better to buy a super zoom point and shoot camera like the SX60?

I suppose that it really depends upon how you plan to use it.  I'm not sure if anyone has recently made such a comparison test.  I have not.  It's almost like asking which is sweeter, apples or oranges?  My gut says that the DSLR, which has the larger image sensor, would have better image quality, most particularly when it comes to contrast and dynamic range.

[Michelle1]

Yes, trying to see if the Sigma 150-600mm is worth buying, or could I achieve the same results with the Powershot, since the 21-1365mm is optical, and not digital zoom. The Powershot has a smaller sensor, so I assume that would come into play, but if the differences are minimal, it is cheaper to get the Powershot....and a lot less lense to lug around.  However, if there would be significant difference in sharpness, then I will dig deep and buy the Sigma.  I mostly do potrait, both senior and family for income, but do enjoy nature shots, which would include eagles, snowy owls, sand hill cranes, etc...all of which are out of range of my current 250mm lens.  Yes, I am sure the Powershot would be a step up from the 250mm, but if it is just a waste of money, I'd rather save a little longer and get the Sigma, but if the differences would be minimal, then why waste the money?

[Waddizzle]

---

@Michelle1 wrote:

Yes, trying to see if the Sigma 150-600mm is worth buying, or could I achieve the same results with the Powershot, since the 21-1365mm is optical, and not digital zoom. The Powershot has a smaller sensor, so I assume that would come into play, but if the differences are minimal, it is cheaper to get the Powershot....and a lot less lense to lug around.  However, if there would be significant difference in sharpness, then I will dig deep and buy the Sigma.  I mostly do potrait, both senior and family for income, but do enjoy nature shots, which would include eagles, snowy owls, sand hill cranes, etc...all of which are out of range of my current 250mm lens.  Yes, I am sure the Powershot would be a step up from the 250mm, but if it is just a waste of money, I'd rather save a little longer and get the Sigma, but if the differences would be minimal, then why waste the money?

---

I love the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary for almost everything I use if for.  I am disappointed by it when I dial in 600mm, where the focus seems to be soft.  I have to dial it back to 500mm for sharp focus.  Cropping makes this point entirely moot.

My other complaint with the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary is that focus seems soft at infinite focus.  My jury is still out on this issue, but I keep coming up with soft images at 600mm, and the same shots are sharper at 500mm.

[Michelle1]

Great, I will keep that in mind.  I also assume, since it is a 5-6.3 it does not fare well in low light, the Sigma that is?

[Waddizzle]

---

@Michelle1 wrote:

Great, I will keep that in mind.  I also assume, since it is a 5-6.3 it does not fare well in low light, the Sigma that is?

---

I wouldn't quite put it that way.  Low light performance really depends more upon your camera body.

The lens can capture great photos of the Moon, which means shooting in low light.  The lens is designed for outdoor wildlife photography, sports photography, and other types of outdoor action.  The lens has a Minimum Focus Distance that's over 20 feet, which is a distance not often found indoors.  Can it be used indoors?  I'm sure it can in well lit arenas and gyms.

Also, shooting at f/6.3 requires a lot of light to shoot at ISO 100.  This is a given.  The lens does very well in a variety of reduced lighting conditions, most especially if your camera body can capture good images at much higher ISO settings. 

This was shot just after sunset with a 6D, 403mm, 1/800, f6.3, ISO 1250

[hellenamazieta]

I just got my canon powershot SX60 HS, but i still can't handle it.
I want to have a blurd subject background in my pictures but i never get it.
Anyone pls tell me ho do setting with this camera to have a blurd background automatically with canon sx 60 hs?
Thanks

[kvbarkley]

Please open your own topic on this. [New topic found HERE.]