The MOON this morning with a 400mm lens
Posted 29 January 2013 - 16:20
- yunfat likes this
Posted 29 January 2013 - 18:10
400mm on the 7d , that's a lot of reach !
will sharpness improve even further if you used say f4 ?
something odd going on the left edge, there are blurry patches
Posted 29 January 2013 - 18:11
Posted 29 January 2013 - 18:13
Posted 29 January 2013 - 21:25
Posted 29 January 2013 - 21:53
Can we see a picture of the gear?
Posted 30 January 2013 - 00:41
Posted 30 January 2013 - 10:38
If only it would keep still
Moose says " if you have a very expensive lens and you have a very cheap tripod, you're nuts"
Posted 30 January 2013 - 16:02
I think the Nikon is actually hiding behind the Canon lens... :-)
"my Nikon 300mm"
Nah, that is a Canon lens.
Edited by bjornthun, 30 January 2013 - 16:03 .
Posted 30 January 2013 - 16:20
Posted 30 January 2013 - 19:35
Posted 30 January 2013 - 20:05
I was irritated by the Canon lens as well but after the hint with the Gitzo tripod I got the clue that the 300 mm is required to establish in our imagination.
What I actually see is a Canon 400 mm big glass unit mounted on a manfrotto (?) crying for more solid tripod support , and a selection of smaller lenses on the shelf behind with too little detail for guessing what type they are and whether Canon or Nikon or something else
Posted 30 January 2013 - 20:24
For really detailled pictures of the moon you need much longer lenses. Even 1200 mm is not frame-filling on DX/APS-C formats.
Moon with 1200 mm lens (Nikon D2X)
- kristian skeie and armando_m like this
Posted 30 January 2013 - 20:58
Should be related to the lens, sensor, or atmospheric reasons?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users