M 240, 35mm cron, and the Moon

[randolph]

hi guys, what settings are you using to capture the moon using an M 240 and a 35mm summicron ASPH?

I've been doing all kinds of test shots and settings, and just haven't been able to dial in a shot that shows some features of the moon without it being just a blob of light.

Thanks all

 

[Timmyjoe]

Don't have an M-240, and sold my 35mm summicron ASPH, but shots of the moon are shots of the moon. Although I certainly wouldn't choose that camera and lens combo for the job, unless you're in the space shuttle orbiting the moon.

What you need to do is ignore the "in camera" light meter, which will read mostly the black sky, and way over expose the moon, making it look like "a blob of light". Set the camera to manual exposure, and starting with the "in camera" light meter reading, start closing down the aperture and increasing the shutter speed, one step at a time, until you get what you're looking for. Just take a shot, chimp, take another shot, chimp, until you're getting the level of detail in the moon you seek.

Best,
-Tim

PS: This was taken with an 810mm lens, ISO 3200, 1/640th second @ f4.5

 

[Huss]

What Tim said. The moon shows up as a white blob because you are drastically overexposing it. Ignore the sky, just think about what the correct exposure would be for that bright white object.
Also, using a 35mm lens? The moon will be tiny in the image.

 

[zuiko85]

The stats are; for every 100mm of focal length the image size of the moon is .9mm (point nine millimeters) diameter image size. Therefor 35mm would produce an image size of about .3 mm. I'd use a longer lens adapted to the M240. The M240 does have live view? Not sure, not up on current Leica M features.

 

[robert blu]

...
Also, using a 35mm lens? The moon will be tiny in the image.

yes, the moon will be small...so it's what it looks like with a 35mm lens on a full frame camera.
A few month ago we had a moon eclipse and just before it the moon goy a reddish/orange color.

I shot it with a 35 cron on my M10...of course the moon is very small but I got the atmosphere of the moment including the environment...

robert

PS: Of course if the interest is in the moon itself (only the moon) a long lens is required...very long...

 

[randolph]

The stats are; for every 100mm of focal length the image size of the moon is .9mm (point nine millimeters) diameter image size. Therefor 35mm would produce an image size of about .3 mm. I'd use a longer lens adapted to the M240. The M240 does have live view? Not sure, not up on current Leica M features.

thank you, good point. i could try live view since it does simulate exposure; you can tell i don't use live view much!

 

[randolph]

yes, the moon will be small...so it's what it looks like with a 35mm lens on a full frame camera.
A few month ago we had a moon eclipse and just before it the moon goy a reddish/orange color.

I shot it with a 35 cron on my M10...of course the moon is very small but I got the atmosphere of the moment including the environment...

robert

PS: Of course if the interest is in the moon itself (only the moon) a long lens is required...very long...

robert, yes, this! i don't want a full close-up of the moon, but as point of interest in the shot and your example is what I was trying to do. your moon shows just enough detail at 35mm. do you happen to have your exposure settings?

curious at what you're aperture/shutter/iso settings are...

 

[randolph]

thanks guys for all your help. i'll give these a shot this evening!

 

[shawn]

Two things to check... the first is that your lens is actually focusing on infinity. Live view is your friend here. The second is that you expose for the moon, literally reflected sunlight so the exposure is going to be much brighter than anything else around it.

This was f4 (or maybe 5.6) at ISO 100 at 1/125 of a second.

Shawn

 

[Larry H-L]

The moon is about the same distance from the sun as we are here on Earth, therefore the amount of light falling on it during its daylight exposure isn't all that different. Our atmosphere does suck up a few stops of light, but it isn't all that different in the grand scheme of things.

 

[maryland_fotos]

A 35mm lens for that camera will indeed show the moon only as a small object, even well exposed it will be hard to make out much by the way of features.

Folks have already described much of this above. I have generally used a 500mm lens on a full frame Nikon for the moon, and I end up doing a good amount of cropping to get rid of the significant amount of sky around it. Live view indeed helps get the focus fine tuned.

I was pretty happy with the exposure on this one - 1/3200s, f/8 and ISO500, and the 500mm lens has a foot for stablizing on the tripod. One thing at that focal length (and the longer the focal length, the more quickly this is going to happen), the moon moves very rapidly across the frame.

The craters in particular seem to show the best a couple days either side of the full moon. On full moon day (well really night), the brightness wipes out the shadows which help define the craters.

DSC_9624 by Maryland Photos, on Flickr

 

[shawn]

We used the same lens on our moon shots. Nikon 500mm f4P, outstanding piece of glass!

Shawn

 

[raid]

I seem to recall the suggested exposure of f 4 at shutter speed=1/ISO.
Shawn: F4 ISO 100 speed 1/125.
Maryland Photos: F8 ISO 500 speed 1/3200, which is equivalent to F4 ISO 500 speed 1/800. There is slightly less exposure time.

Did I get it right here?

 

[Beemermark]

The sunny F16 rule works fine for determining the correct exposure for shooting the moon. The sunshine reflected off the moon is the same sunshine reflected off your lawn at noon!

 

[michaelwj]

I seem to recall the suggested exposure of f 4 at shutter speed=1/ISO.
Shawn: F4 ISO 100 speed 1/125.
Maryland Photos: F8 ISO 500 speed 1/3200, which is equivalent to F4 ISO 500 speed 1/800. There is slightly less exposure time.

Did I get it right here?

Should we call it “full moon 4”, alongside “sunny 16”

 

[zuiko85]

Two things to check... the first is that your lens is actually focusing on infinity. Live view is your friend here. The second is that you expose for the moon, literally reflected sunlight so the exposure is going to be much brighter than anything else around it.

This was f4 (or maybe 5.6) at ISO 100 at 1/125 of a second.

Shawn

First of all, really nice shot!
Now, this is what I don't get. If the moon is a sunlit object, then why couldn't a person start with the 'sunny 16' exposure calculation? Of course the moons dark regions would probably require a bit more exposure. That said your exposure of 5.6 at 1/125 would seem like it should be a couple of stops over but no, it looks right on my screen.

 

[shawn]

Thanks.

Looking at it in RawDigger I think my exposure is just about right. There is the tiniest bit of clipping in a very small area of the image but the rest of it is fine.

I'm not 100% certain I was shooting at f4. It might have been f5.6. I doubt it was anything higher than that as I would be loosing a lot of detail into diffraction. I was also trying to stay at base ISO as the camera I was using gets noisy quickly as ISO goes up.

If I had run Sunny 16 I would have underexposed by 4 stops, assuming my actual exposure was f4. That would have killed this shot with noise.

Looking online there are a few rules of thumb for the moon. One site I saw said Moony f8. My assumption for why Sunny 16 doesn't work is because the reflection from the moon is *vastly* further away than any reflection on Earth. The energy reflected from the moon is diffusing and spreading out in space as it travels to the Earth. The average energy per area is decreasing. Basically the inverse candle power rule.

Shawn

 

[robert blu]

robert, yes, this! i don't want a full close-up of the moon, but as point of interest in the shot and your example is what I was trying to do. your moon shows just enough detail at 35mm. do you happen to have your exposure settings?

curious at what you're aperture/shutter/iso settings are...

it was shot hand held @ iso 3200 F=4 1/15 sec.

I hope it helps. Of course experimenting is the key for the results, try it !
robert

 

[raid]

Should we call it “full moon 4”, alongside “sunny 16”

As discussed above, it is a Moon Rule of F4 (or F5.6)
at shutter speed= 1/(film speed)

 

[randolph]

the moon rule, i love it. thanks guys, i'll give it a shot tonight.

unfortunately, it was cloudy here last night so couldn't really do anything. i hope this evening is better and will post some results.

thanks again guys!