[ZombieArmy]

Hi, I've been shooting the moon a while and have never noticed this before.

It's not perceivable without clarity boosting, but it shouldn't be happening this badly even with it, this is a very new issue.

[Adam]

Pretty normal based on my experience, since there's virtually no light coming through in the background at that shutter speed.

[traderdrew]

Two causes / areas of noise besides high ISO. 1. Out of focus areas of a photo. 2. Adjusting exposure in post processing. Try photographing the moon with spot metering.

[calsan]

Another problem - your moon looks upside down from where I'm standing... :-)
Perth Australia

[rrstuff]

Hi, I've been shooting the moon a while and have never noticed this before.

It's not perceivable without clarity boosting, but it shouldn't be happening this badly even with it, this is a very new issue.

pull blacks up just a tiny bit. There will be no noise.

[biz-engineer]

Well, in that case, you would need dark frame substraction (low shutter speed noise reduction) activated. But from my experience, low shutter speed noise reduction (=dark frame substraction) works well with long exposures but increases the amount of noise with medium fast exposures. So either you switch-On the slow shutter speed noise reduction and stop down in order to get the best of it, or you average multiple fast exposures to average out the short term noise of the sensor.

[Pentax_family]

I have taken photos of the moon several times and I did not use the dark frame. The moon light is very bright and I can take it with ISO100 - 400 depend on light conditions, with F=8 to 10. I am very happy with the images thanks to the SR feature of Pentax, I could not replicate it with Nikon!
Below is one photo taken with K5IIs + HD1.4x + DFA300/f4.0.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/alexslwong33/20534332519/in/album-72157657505014275/

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[BrianR]

I have taken photos of the moon several times and I did not use the dark frame. The moon light is very bright and I can take it with ISO100 - 400 depend on light conditions, with F=8 to 10. I am very happy with the images thanks to the SR feature of Pentax, I could not replicate it with Nikon!

Lovely shot, but why the dig at Nikon? They have lenses with their version of shake reduction. Not that it's needed for the moon, their cameras can also be mounted on tripods, or propped up on a pile of rocks and aimed at the moon if you can't afford a tripod (and then you get to use mirror lock up). Pentax equipment doesn't improve by talking trash about other brands.

[mcgregni]

Another problem - your moon looks upside down from where I'm standing... :-)
Perth Australia

No, it must be you that's upside-down !

[bigyinn]

Lovely shot, but why the dig at Nikon? They have lenses with their version of shake reduction. Not that it's needed for the moon, their cameras can also be mounted on tripods, or propped up on a pile of rocks and aimed at the moon if you can't afford a tripod (and then you get to use mirror lock up). Pentax equipment doesn't improve by talking trash about other brands.

I think you're looking for a dig when there isn't one. He's merely stating he couldn't do it with a Nikon. He doesnt say, "he couldn't do it with a Nikon, because they're rubbish" does he? He's just making an observation.

[MilkaSchokoHase87]

@ ZombieArmy:

Did you shot this pic through a open window? Maybe warm air was streaming up where you made that photo?
Did you use a heavy weight tripod? wind can shake a low weight tripod.
Did you use a cable or anything to avoid shaking by pressing the shutter?
MUP or 2s Delay (is always with MUP) should be fine for it.
Also cheap converters or a cheap zoom lens can make some noise - or fog outside made steam up your lens.

At high focal length you MUST have it shaking free and use very short exposure times (>1/500 will be fine).

[BrianR]

I think you're looking for a dig when there isn't one. He's merely stating he couldn't do it with a Nikon. He doesnt say, "he couldn't do it with a Nikon, because they're rubbish" does he? He's just making an observation.

Fair enough, but there seems to be a pretty clear implication that Nikon wasn't capable of doing this, i.e. in this case the Pentax is superior. Given the reasons I've mentioned that's kinda misleading. I keep seeing unnecessary and often outright wrong comparisons with other brands, so if I'm getting tetchy on the issue, I do apologize. Pentax cameras stand up just fine on their own merits without trying to knock the competition down pegs.

Return to mooning each other, and sorry for the sidetrack.

[Pentax_family]

Fair enough, but there seems to be a pretty clear implication that Nikon wasn't capable of doing this, i.e. in this case the Pentax is superior. Given the reasons I've mentioned that's kinda misleading. I keep seeing unnecessary and often outright wrong comparisons with other brands, so if I'm getting tetchy on the issue, I do apologize. Pentax cameras stand up just fine on their own merits without trying to knock the competition down pegs.

Return to mooning each other, and sorry for the sidetrack.

I am just saying that I cannot do it with Nikon because I don't have Nikon with VR (if you look at my Nikon gears)! I have several tripods but I did not use tripod for most of the time, especially when shooting moon when I use shutter speed less than 1/40 sec.
If you found it offensive, I can change the wordings to "I could not do it with my Nikon gears".
I am happy with my gears, no matter that is Nikon or Pentax, otherwise I won't keep it!

[BrianR]

I am just saying that I cannot do it with Nikon because I don't have Nikon with VR (if you look at my Nikon gears)! I have several tripods but I did not use tripod for most of the time, especially when shooting moon when I use shutter speed less than 1/40 sec.

Ok, that puts it into a better context. I couldn't have shoot any of the pictures in this thread under the same limitiations with my Canon gear either (for the record, it's an a510).

But, and this is relevant to shooting the moon I promise, why do you specifically not use a tripod for the moon at shutter speeds less than 1/40s? This is exactly where a tripod + mirror lock up will win over any type of SR no? Just convenience?

edit- Oh, never mind, I think I misunderstood what you just said. Under the limitation of a) no tripod and b) slow shutter, your SR capable camera is better. Absolutely.

I am happy with my gears, no matter that is Nikon or Pentax, otherwise I won't keep it!

[Pentax_family]

Ok, that puts it into a better context. I couldn't have shoot any of the pictures in this thread under the same limitiations with my Canon gear either (for the record, it's an a510).

But, and this is relevant to shooting the moon I promise, why do you specifically not use a tripod for the moon at shutter speeds less than 1/40s? This is exactly where a tripod + mirror lock up will win over any type of SR no? Just convenience?

edit- Oh, never mind, I think I misunderstood what you just said. Under the limitation of a) no tripod and b) slow shutter, your SR capable camera is better. Absolutely.

Just unnecessary!