What do you need for photographing the moon and the planets ?

photoleet · 03-27-2012, 08:53 AM

Just wondering what equipment is needed for photographing the moon and planets. Also the prices involved in this.

**jatrax** · 03-27-2012, 09:43 AM

Moon is easy. 300mm lens will do fine if you can crop. Depends on whether you want just the moon or are trying for a scenic with some landscape involved as well. I have taken good shots of just the moon with a 400mm lens and also with the 400mm and a 2x teleconverter (800mm equivalent) but you could get the same image by using a shorter lens and cropping. Good solid tripod and remote release are required with those focal lengths though. Haze, cloud etc. will severely degrade the image so picking your night is important. Also, light pollution from city or other lights will affect the image.

Be aware that the moon moves rapidly. Setting your shutter speed too slow will cause blur. Fortunately it is quite bright as well so a reasonable shutter speed is not hard to get. Use the lowest ISO you can achieve to keep the noise as low as possible.

Pricing? You could get a DA L 55-300mm for less than $200 most likely, a Takumar 300mm prime for about the same, add a 2x doubler to the Takumar and you get 600mm. A good tripod and head combo $200 and up. Those are all very bottom level pricing, you could easily spend $8,000 for an FA*600mm and a Gitzo tripod with Acratech head. Depends on your budget and your image quality requirements. I see you already have the DA L 55-300mm so try that first. If you have a teleconverter try that too although image quality usually suffers a bit.

No idea about shooting planets though. Maybe a telescope and adapter?

**Hawki** · 03-27-2012, 09:49 AM

I'm hardly an expert on this subject, but you may want to expand just a little on what you want to accomplish to get the best advise. What you may need to shoot the planets well should do a good job for the moon, but probably not the other way around.
The moon is relatively close compared to the planets and a good, fast telephoto, solid tripod, good clear sky and the rule of 500 and you should get a very nice image. Great images of the planets would most likely require a whole new level of equipment. The focal length required to get a good shot of Saturn for instance would most likely require tracking the planet to get sufficient light.
There you go ... I've done shot all of my knowledge.

**grhazelton** · 03-27-2012, 10:40 AM

And of course the moon is a sunlit object, so you might start with the sunny f16 rule: f16 and shutter speed of 1 over the ASA, or that newfangled ISO.

Hawki, is the "rule of 500" you cited a restatement of sunny f16?

lytrytyr · 03-27-2012, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by StDevious

Just wondering what equipment is needed for photographing the moon and planets.

For Sol 3, the kit lens works fine!

JinDesu · 03-27-2012, 10:52 AM

The moon is actually really really bright in comparison to everything else. If you are shooting with a 300mm, you can get very good settings (low ISO, small aperture, fast shutter speeds) if you want to expose to see details on the moon.

**Hawki** · 03-27-2012, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by grhazelton

And of course the moon is a sunlit object, so you might start with the sunny f16 rule: f16 and shutter speed of 1 over the ASA, or that newfangled ISO.

Hawki, is the "rule of 500" you cited a restatement of sunny f16?

No ... it's a calculation of how long of an exposure you can take with a given focal length before you have trails on your subject caused by the Earth's rotation. Essentially, if you are shooting a 50mm lens, it would equate to 500/50=10 seconds max exposure

cheers

newarts · 03-27-2012, 12:59 PM

The largest planet (venus at its closest) is about 1/30th the size of the moon. So you need substantially more resolution to see the planets than to see the moon.

Angular diameter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nass · 03-27-2012, 01:05 PM

Dave, cool. You really are the king of diagrams =)

newarts · 03-27-2012, 01:35 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Nass

Dave, cool. You really are the king of diagrams =)

Thanks! I [heart] diagrams!

**grhazelton** · 03-27-2012, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Hawki

No ... it's a calculation of how long of an exposure you can take with a given focal length before you have trails on your subject caused by the Earth's rotation. Essentially, if you are shooting a 50mm lens, it would equate to 500/50=10 seconds max exposure

cheers

Kewl! A little item worth knowing. So, using a 500 mm lens on my K10d it would yield a 1 second exposure. Is this independent of film or sensor size?

Thanks!

alphanerd · 03-27-2012, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by lytrytyr

For Sol 3, the kit lens works fine!

Unfortunately, the kit lens doesn't fit the whole planet in the frame. You may find a circular fisheye more satisfactory for photographing that planet.

demp10 · 03-27-2012, 05:15 PM

Also try not to photograph the moon when it is full. It is tempting but it will appear rather flat. Try a couple days before (or after) full moon and you get some very nice shadows on the craters that give a 3-D feel.

cali92rs · 03-27-2012, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by grhazelton

And of course the moon is a sunlit object, so you might start with the sunny f16 rule: f16 and shutter speed of 1 over the ASA, or that newfangled ISO.

Hawki, is the "rule of 500" you cited a restatement of sunny f16?

I was taught the Moony 11 rule...f11 and 1/ISO

**grhazelton** · 03-27-2012, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by alphanerd

Unfortunately, the kit lens doesn't fit the whole planet in the frame. You may find a circular fisheye more satisfactory for photographing that planet.

But if you can find a high enough vantage point....

03-27-2012, 08:53 AM	#1
photoleet Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: DMV Photos: Albums Posts: 431	What do you need for photographing the moon and the planets ? Just wondering what equipment is needed for photographing the moon and planets. Also the prices involved in this.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Night Museum and two planets	_riccardo_	Post Your Photos!	6	04-02-2012 10:01 AM
YOU'VE BEEN TRUMPED ,The story of the planets ahole billionaire	jogiba	General Talk	5	10-18-2011 06:31 PM
50 potentially habitable planets	Fl_Gulfer	General Talk	12	05-15-2011 10:46 PM
Photographing moon	fekish	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	29	11-18-2010 09:21 AM
Landscape Little Planets	jezza323	Post Your Photos!	9	09-02-2010 06:53 PM

03-27-2012, 09:43 AM	#2
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Moon is easy. 300mm lens will do fine if you can crop. Depends on whether you want just the moon or are trying for a scenic with some landscape involved as well. I have taken good shots of just the moon with a 400mm lens and also with the 400mm and a 2x teleconverter (800mm equivalent) but you could get the same image by using a shorter lens and cropping. Good solid tripod and remote release are required with those focal lengths though. Haze, cloud etc. will severely degrade the image so picking your night is important. Also, light pollution from city or other lights will affect the image. Be aware that the moon moves rapidly. Setting your shutter speed too slow will cause blur. Fortunately it is quite bright as well so a reasonable shutter speed is not hard to get. Use the lowest ISO you can achieve to keep the noise as low as possible. Pricing? You could get a DA L 55-300mm for less than $200 most likely, a Takumar 300mm prime for about the same, add a 2x doubler to the Takumar and you get 600mm. A good tripod and head combo $200 and up. Those are all very bottom level pricing, you could easily spend $8,000 for an FA*600mm and a Gitzo tripod with Acratech head. Depends on your budget and your image quality requirements. I see you already have the DA L 55-300mm so try that first. If you have a teleconverter try that too although image quality usually suffers a bit. No idea about shooting planets though. Maybe a telescope and adapter?

03-27-2012, 09:49 AM	#3
Hawki Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: North Face of Mount Shasta Photos: Albums Posts: 120	I'm hardly an expert on this subject, but you may want to expand just a little on what you want to accomplish to get the best advise. What you may need to shoot the planets well should do a good job for the moon, but probably not the other way around. The moon is relatively close compared to the planets and a good, fast telephoto, solid tripod, good clear sky and the rule of 500 and you should get a very nice image. Great images of the planets would most likely require a whole new level of equipment. The focal length required to get a good shot of Saturn for instance would most likely require tracking the planet to get sufficient light. There you go ... I've done shot all of my knowledge.

03-27-2012, 10:40 AM	#4
grhazelton Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Jonesboro, GA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	And of course the moon is a sunlit object, so you might start with the sunny f16 rule: f16 and shutter speed of 1 over the ASA, or that newfangled ISO. Hawki, is the "rule of 500" you cited a restatement of sunny f16?

03-27-2012, 10:43 AM	#5
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by StDevious Just wondering what equipment is needed for photographing the moon and planets. For Sol 3, the kit lens works fine!

03-27-2012, 10:52 AM	#6
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	The moon is actually really really bright in comparison to everything else. If you are shooting with a 300mm, you can get very good settings (low ISO, small aperture, fast shutter speeds) if you want to expose to see details on the moon.

03-27-2012, 11:51 AM	#7
Hawki Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: North Face of Mount Shasta Photos: Albums Posts: 120	Originally posted by grhazelton And of course the moon is a sunlit object, so you might start with the sunny f16 rule: f16 and shutter speed of 1 over the ASA, or that newfangled ISO. Hawki, is the "rule of 500" you cited a restatement of sunny f16? No ... it's a calculation of how long of an exposure you can take with a given focal length before you have trails on your subject caused by the Earth's rotation. Essentially, if you are shooting a 50mm lens, it would equate to 500/50=10 seconds max exposure cheers

03-27-2012, 12:59 PM	#8
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	The largest planet (venus at its closest) is about 1/30th the size of the moon. So you need substantially more resolution to see the planets than to see the moon. Angular diameter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

03-27-2012, 01:05 PM	#9
Nass Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The British Isles Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,402	Dave, cool. You really are the king of diagrams =)

03-27-2012, 01:35 PM - 1 Like	#10
newarts Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Ames, Iowa, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 2,965	Originally posted by Nass Dave, cool. You really are the king of diagrams =) Thanks! I [heart] diagrams!

03-27-2012, 01:55 PM	#11
grhazelton Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Jonesboro, GA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by Hawki No ... it's a calculation of how long of an exposure you can take with a given focal length before you have trails on your subject caused by the Earth's rotation. Essentially, if you are shooting a 50mm lens, it would equate to 500/50=10 seconds max exposure cheers Kewl! A little item worth knowing. So, using a 500 mm lens on my K10d it would yield a 1 second exposure. Is this independent of film or sensor size? Thanks!

03-27-2012, 04:56 PM	#12
alphanerd Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 119	Originally posted by lytrytyr For Sol 3, the kit lens works fine! Unfortunately, the kit lens doesn't fit the whole planet in the frame. You may find a circular fisheye more satisfactory for photographing that planet.

03-27-2012, 05:15 PM	#13
demp10 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Atlanta Photos: Albums Posts: 602	Also try not to photograph the moon when it is full. It is tempting but it will appear rather flat. Try a couple days before (or after) full moon and you get some very nice shadows on the craters that give a 3-D feel.

03-27-2012, 05:31 PM	#14
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by grhazelton And of course the moon is a sunlit object, so you might start with the sunny f16 rule: f16 and shutter speed of 1 over the ASA, or that newfangled ISO. Hawki, is the "rule of 500" you cited a restatement of sunny f16? I was taught the Moony 11 rule...f11 and 1/ISO

03-27-2012, 07:18 PM	#15
grhazelton Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Jonesboro, GA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by alphanerd Unfortunately, the kit lens doesn't fit the whole planet in the frame. You may find a circular fisheye more satisfactory for photographing that planet. But if you can find a high enough vantage point....