[JeffJS]

Can you explain the markings on that Vivitar?

The lens is a T mount lens and it's range is 600-1000 mm zoom. The aperture is fixed at something like f9.6. The ~2000mm is when using the matched 2x converter (and the aperture becomes f19. The lens zoom operates by loosening a friction ring and push/pull the lens to the desired focal length. This is something you want to do BEFORE puting it on the camera. Doing so ON the camera will insure that whatever dust is in the lens, will be in the mirror box, mirror, sensor, etc (learned that one the hard way and it's how I came to purchase the O-ICK1). The lens has a tripod collar but only weighs about 2 pounds. If you put it on the tripod using the collar, you have to have a rock solid tripod/head. I use to have a (very nice) fluid video head and it could not hold this lens/K10d combo at an angle when using the lens tripod mount.

Not one of my best but this is Uncropped out of the K10d at 2000mm

---

Last edited by JeffJS; 04-01-2010 at 09:10 AM.

[RioRico]

I have a much older M42 long Vivitar, and it focuses PAST infinity, so I use a flanged M42-PK adapter to bring it DOWN to infinity.

As mentioned, Luna really whips along in its orbit. For a longer lens and longer exposures, a motorized equatorial mount really really helps. Shoot Luna when it's anywhere from a bare crescent (to get the Earthglow) to 3/4 full (to get the crater shadows). Shoot Luna when it's highest overhead, for least atmospheric turbulence, and from elevation -- I'm at 3500 feet now, my other home is at 5500 feet, and I really like moonshots at about 9500 feet. Wear a sweater.

For a totally different aspect, shoot a full Luna with a 400-500mm lens at a smoggy sunset in the ports of Long Beach / San Pedro CA, framed with cranes and derricks and catwalks and pipes etc. Or just before sunrise from the Berkeley Hills, with the San Francisco Bay lowlands covered in thin fog and Luna setting between the towers of the Golden Gate Bridge. Or just near any convenient mountain.

[Nowhere Matt]

Another useful feature of this and many other good Internet forums is once you have started a topic, the boards often list suggested reading of similar topics already created down at the bottom of the page. I am certainly not discouraging anyone from creating a new topic and sometime using the topic search feature will make your head spin but it is just another great service of this message board that similar subject matter is listed near the bottom of the page of every topic posted on the forum.
By now I am sure you are filled with great suggestions and very anxious for clear, dark skies and several minutes to yourself tonight so you can go out there and get better results.
Your images do seem very soft on focus. Sometimes the position of the tripod and your body restricts how well you can see in the viewfinder without bumping the camera even to focus well. I keep my tripod as low to the ground as I can to reduce vibrations of extended legs, mounting pole and such. Rarely do I fully extend my tripod; I sit or crouch beneath my camera to focus and operate the remote to take the shots.
Here is a recent shot taken with my K10 Five Star 500mm, t-mount lens coupled with two - 2x teleconverters: a Focal MC 2x and a Star-D MC 2x.

This should be iso 400 at 1/30th with the lens set to f11 but remember there are two tc at work here.
The software used in your crop, your jpeg settings and focus may be your enemy.
Also for the record, I often break some of the suggestions. Lately I have been setting up shop in my driveway, shooting the moon when it hits it's highest point in the sky which was less than five hours after sunset and just about in the center of a city with a population of more than 60,000.

This one was taken with the Five Star 500mm and Star-D tc using the K-7 in the early morning, shooting from my backyard focusing over the neighbor's house.

Now these are far from the sharper images other have demonstrated around the forum and I realize there are steps I can take to get sharper also. You should get there very soon as well.

[wildlifephotog]

That first one is a beauty, Matt.
Second one ain't shabby neither.

[joodiespost]

@op, that's about as good as you'll get with the 300mm. I've seen people post [in the post your picture section] a really detailed shot of the moon and they say it was with a 300mm but i have the 300 and I know you can't get that much detail from it.

[Marc Sabatella]

I disagree. Moon photography is 90% technique, 10% lens (maybe a slight exaggeration, but close). Any of the available lenses that go to 300m are *capable* of better results than those seen in the OP, but you have to carefully follow all the advice given in all these threads on getting solid solid support, fast enough shutter speeds, careful enough focus, avoiding overexposure, etc.

[Mike.P®]

Pentax K10D, Pentax F* 300mm f4.5 and Pentax 1.7x Teleconverter. Hand held.



Exposure: 0.006 sec (1/180)
Aperture: f/8.0
Focal Length: 500 mm
ISO Speed: 200

[JeffJS]

That's a very expensive moon shot.. A Very Nice one, but expensive... I tend to doubt that a zoom would do the same thing. Even a nice one like the 55-300.

[Ex Finn.]

OP`s images look about normal for 300 on a night with not so good seeing.
This was with my DA 55-300.(auto levels only in PS., no FocusMagic processing).

Cheers, Mike.

[joodiespost]

Here ya go, I believe this is as good as it gets with a 300mm. Maybe just a wee bit clearer than the op. Straight out of the camera, cropped, no pp. pS, i know it's a full moon so I lack some shadow details. But as far as full moon shot goes, this is about it.

[tokyoso]

Here ya go, I believe this is as good as it gets with a 300mm. Maybe just a wee bit clearer than the op. Straight out of the camera, cropped, no pp. pS, i know it's a full moon so I lack some shadow details. But as far as full moon shot goes, this is about it.

300mm shot for your #300th post. very cool...

[SpecialK]

also, shooting an almost full moon is really bright which will wash out some contrast and detail.

No, you adjust the exposure as for any other subject.

[cupic]

I find the best result is in M using MF Av value of f/11 and ISO @100 and always re focus after even shot,this will throw everything around the moon black and also best results are found in PP


cheers

[Ex Finn.]

PP is a must unless you can shoot from orbit.
First is straight out of camera, second is same image after some PP.
Only way to get decent moonshots is to use a telescope (300mm does not cut it) and wait for good seeing (atmospherics)= steady non turbulent air.

Cheers, Mike.

[RolloR]

this is 200mm hand-held:



Takumar 70-200 F4 Macro
K-x
some PP (reduced the highlights)