|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-23-2019, 10:35 AM
|
| |
Much better, so the lens & convertor are definitely capable of more! Going from my own failures looked I do think it's more than motion blur that's the issue though, but I could be wrong:).
I do notice that the exif of your photo shows 1/3s?
20 seconds would be very noticeable star trails, at 600mm they would be about 4% of the width of the frame. Please correct my lack of astronomy skills, but the moon takes about 27 days to orbit around the earth, or 2*pi/(27*24*60*60) ~ 2.7 micro radians per second across the sky. The rest of it's apparent motion from where I'm standing is from the earth spinning, which the stars get too. So the stars are about 72 microrads/sec and the moon is 72-2.7 microrads/sec or about 69 microrads/sec (it's orbiting opposite with the earths rotation I think?).
---------- Post added 01-23-19 at 12:38 PM ----------
Oh sigh. Beat me half an hour:p. I'm blaming the snow/sleet that kept disrupting my hillbilly internet connection that prevented me from posting before lunch:).
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-22-2019, 01:00 PM
|
| |
How did you manually focus? I find live view much easier for the moon or stars than the viewfinder.
Where you using a remote and mirror lock? (this will disable SR by default, newer cameras might have options to override though)
Have you tested this combo out in the daytime on far away subjects before?
2 seconds might be borderline at this magnification, but I'm not sure that's the sole problem here. A non-eclipsed moon so much brighter, you might try photographing the moon the next few nights, you could at least see what you and your equipment is capable of with the necessity of a long exposure removed from the equation.
|
