How to take photos of the blood moon?

[limvo05]

Hi All,

Wondering if anyone seen the moon of late? Not sure if it has anything to do with the fires near by, but the moon certainly look amazing. That said, I am curious what would be the best setting to take photos of the moon? I've tried manual as well as auto settings, nothing seems to work properly. I am using the 5Ds and 20-700 MK2.

Thanks,

LV

[ebiggs1]

The place to start is the Looney 11 Rule.  It says with f11, SS 1/100 and ISO 100 you will get a good Moon shot. Of course it is just a starting point.  As always you should bracket each way several stops.  Bracketing is your friend.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

The place to start is the Looney 11 Rule.  It says with f11, SS 1/100 and ISO 100 you will get a good Moon shot. Of course it is just a starting point.  As always you should bracket each way several stops.  Bracketing is your friend.

---

Notwithstanding the Looney Rule, why would anyone ever use f/11 to photograph the Moon? You're focused at infinity, so depth of field is not a consideration, and the subject is moving (slowly, but at the highest magnification you can manage). So why wouldn't you use the widest aperture at which your lens can give decent results, in order to maximize the shutter speed? And why, with any modern camera, wouldn't you use an ISO setting at least three stops faster than 100? No doubt the answer is incorporated in "it is just a starting point". but the rule as stated sounds like an archaic relic of the Plus-X era.

[TCampbell]

This rule is the same as the Sunny 16 rule... a way to know the exposure without needing to use a light meter.

You don’t have to use f/16 for the Sunny 16 rule.  You don’t have to use f/11 for the Looney 11 rule.  But once you know the exposure... you can trade stops of aperture for shutter speed to use whatever you’d prefer.

Both rules are used because the simple inverse relationship with ISO... and given a catchy name so they’re easy to remember.

E.g. suppose you want to use f/8 ... at f/8 (one stop brighter than f/11) the inverse relationship doesn’t work.  The shutter speed at f/8 is actually the inverse of DOUBLE whatever the ISO is (e.g. at ISO 100, the shutter speed is 1/200th.  At ISO 200, the shutter speed is 1/400th).  And it’s the inverse of 4x at f/5.6, the inverse of 8x at f/4, etc.  Since those are a bit more confusing then the very simple inverse at f/11... the f/11 guideline is the easy way to remember the exposure ... and then just trade exposure stops to find the equivalent exposure.

[ebiggs1]

"No doubt the answer is incorporated in "it is just a starting point"."

Yes it is Robert, and do not doubt the benefit and necessity of bracketing.  It is an exposure, in toto, that can be modified but it gives you the "starting" point.  

[TCampbell]

BTW, this pertains a little less for the moon (any exposure for the moon will not *also* contain stars) but for photos that *do* contain stars, there's a benefit to stopping down... at least a little.

This shot was taken using the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM

The first image was shot at f/10 for 8 minutes:

This second image was shot at f/2 but for 1 minute:

Both images used ISO 800.  They aren't equivalent exposures (the first image was a test shot to test tracking - to take an 'equivalent' exposure would have required about 25 minutes and I wasn't going to wait that long) but what I really am trying to call attention to are the three brightest stars on the left side.

This is the lower half of Orion ... but rotated 90° CCW so it's on it's side.  

In the first image, the stars are sharp, but at f/10 we're getting noticeable diffraction spikes from the aperture blades.

In the second image, those brightest stars are a bit bloated and showing some saggital distortion.

Stopping down just a touch ... maybe to f/2.8 or f/4 ... would have really helpd reduce those distortions in the brightest stars (the dim stars don't have a problem.)

[ebiggs1]

Very nice Tim.   Very nice.

I sold my Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM some time ago in favor of the 85mm f1.2L.  Your shots make me want another 135mil.  They always were great lenses even way back in the FD days.

[limvo05]

Curious what focal length is best for taking photos of the moon? I used 70-200 @200mm and the moon came out pretty small.

Cheers,

LV

[kvbarkley]

At least 400, more is better.

You can figure out for yourself how much of the area the moon will take up, since it is about 1 degree.

At 400 mm the field of view of a crop frame camera is about 3.8 degrees.

For full frame, 6.2 degrees

200 mm will double those fields of view.

[ebiggs1]

" I used 70-200 @200mm and the moon came out pretty small."

If you want a nice size or frame filling Moon, you need a FL in excess of 1000mm.  However, that is impractical for most DSLR owners. The best commonly available lens is one of the 150-600mm super zooms.  And, use it at the 600mm FL end.