What A Night For An Eclipse

Despondent, Joyous, Depressed, Ecstatic...

Those were my emotions waiting for the eclipse. We had 10 or 12 days of evercast weather (Despondent). Then, Tuesday night, it cleared (Joyous). Wednesday was clear, until lunch time, when it started to cloud up again (Depressed). Finally, about 8:30, it started to clear (Ecstatic). It clouded up on me again right before totality, which was a MAJOR bummer! But I got some shots before that happened.

I shot with the Coolpix 5700 on a tripod, my N80 on a tripod, and my K1000 attached to my Celestron C-8. All told, about 70 frames as near as I can tell. Here a few from the Coolpix. Reduced for PR, but otherwise staight out of the camera. I may try cropping some of them later. The N80 and K1000 shots will follow next week.

As previously stated, I shot with the Coolpix 5700 on a tripod, my N80 on a tripod, and my K1000 attached to my Celestron C-8. Here's a grab shot I took with the Coolpix.

Not quite like here! It was pretty hazy/overcast - saw an orange and white blob for a minute or two... I'll watch for your others.

BTW - I'm ahead of you in the big race to 2,000! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by another view

Not quite like here! It was pretty hazy/overcast - saw an orange and white blob for a minute or two... I'll watch for your others.

BTW - I'm ahead of you in the big race to 2,000! :D

---

I noticed that! It won't even be close at the rate you're going!!!

I will definitely be posting more eclipse shots in the coming days.

Shooting the eclipse wasn't as simple as I had suspected. That little bugger keeps moving. Also I shot the full moon at 1/1500 @5.6, by the time it was eclipsed (red) I was at 3". Not until I uploaded the images did I realize why mirror lock-up is so important for longer exposures at long focal lengths. There is a progression from tack sharp to unacceptable. Now I know for next time.

Anyway, just being out there was a lot of fun. I got a really good look through my view finder. I had a total of 640mm with digital crop factor.

We were the luck ones, with the exception of a couple thin clouds passing by, the entire event was crystal clear.

Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Platts

Also I shot the full moon at 1/1500 @5.6, by the time it was eclipsed (red) I was at 3". Not until I uploaded the images did I realize why mirror lock-up is so important for longer exposures at long focal lengths.

---

FWIW, mirror lockup does nothing for long exposures. Perhaps you meant a bulb setting?

I forgot my tripod at home so tried to handhold everything. But even IS isn't magic. I haven't had a chance to look at the results yet, hopefully some of them came out well. Out Eclipse Party at the college was surprisingly well attended. We even had one student using here PDA to take photographs off the eypiece of one of the telescopes!

my longest exposure was 3", so maybe long is the wrong word, but I definately noticed it for all shots between say 1/10th and 3". I used a shutter release and tripod and there was no wind to speak of. I will post the progression when I get home to show you what I mean.

Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Platts

my longest exposure was 3", so maybe long is the wrong word, but I definately noticed it for all shots between say 1/10th and 3". I used a shutter release and tripod and there was no wind to speak of. I will post the progression when I get home to show you what I mean.

Mike

---

Sorry, I should have said that mirror lockup is really only useful with shutter speeds between about 1/15 and 1/30 of a second depending upon the design of the camera.

I'm surprised you say that Michael. So long as the small amount of time in which the camera is shaking exposes long enough to capture a little light it will show. I disagree with you in the sense that it's also useful for longer exposures such as 3 seconds long. It depends on the situation of course but in some circumstances it's important. Imagine if you will a 3 second exposure of a city alleyway with streetlights in it. Those streetlights are definetely going to be bright enough to be captured in that initial 1/15 to 1/30 of a second and will show on the exposure even though it took an additional 3 seconds for the shadowed area of the trash cans to come out.

Mike, for what it's worth, I started out taking lunar shots with a shutter release, and for some strange reason I get better results using my camera's self-timer instead. I get just the slightest amount of camera shake when I press the shutter release and I don't know why, but when I set the self timer and get the heck out of there I get absolutely none.

I can't figure out why the shake, but just having the physical contact with the cable which touches the camera at the point of shutter release is a factor...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Platts

Shooting the eclipse wasn't as simple as I had suspected. That little bugger keeps moving. Also I shot the full moon at 1/1500 @5.6, by the time it was eclipsed (red) I was at 3". Not until I uploaded the images did I realize why mirror lock-up is so important for longer exposures at long focal lengths. There is a progression from tack sharp to unacceptable. Now I know for next time.

Anyway, just being out there was a lot of fun. I got a really good look through my view finder. I had a total of 640mm with digital crop factor.

We were the luck ones, with the exception of a couple thin clouds passing by, the entire event was crystal clear.

Mike

---

On your clear weather! I'm envious!!!

There is a learning curve with astrophotography. When I took my first shots through my Celestron, anything below 1/250th got soft, then blurred. I've refined my technique, and I can now take shots through the Celestron up to one second (my longest shot so far) and get sharp images.


I've always read that mirror lockup is important when shutter speeds get down around 1/30th to 1/15th of a second. Apparently, that is long enough for the mirror "slap" to blur the images. I've also read that with shots longer than a second, mirror "slap" usually isn't a factor. All I know is that my N80 must have minimal (or cushioned) mirror slap, because I've gotten sharp images in that range before.

Can't wait to see your images.

And let me repeat - I Am Jealous of your clear skies! I wanted to get some shots of the totally eclipsed moon, and couldn't. :-(

Thanks for the tips Speed, I actually came to a similiar conclusion re: shutter speed and blur, so it was good to hear you say that. I'm not sure that you can see it in this image, but there is an obvious difference between the 3rd and 4th frame.

Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trevor Ash

I'm surprised you say that Michael. So long as the small amount of time in which the camera is shaking exposes long enough to capture a little light it will show. I disagree with you in the sense that it's also useful for longer exposures such as 3 seconds long. It depends on the situation of course but in some circumstances it's important. Imagine if you will a 3 second exposure of a city alleyway with streetlights in it. Those streetlights are definetely going to be bright enough to be captured in that initial 1/15 to 1/30 of a second and will show on the exposure even though it took an additional 3 seconds for the shadowed area of the trash cans to come out.

---

If your exposure is set correctly for 3 seconds, movements lasting 1/15 of a second won't be recorded regardless of how bright the scene is. The mirror slap will have no effect.

You might want to use the self-timer (to avoid finger movement) or a bulb setting (open shutter for long exposures).

Michael, What do you think may have happened in my 4 sec. exposure. I am really trying to learn, I'm not to happy with the last few frames and don't want to repeat my mistakes in the future.

My set-up was exactly the same and the weather conditions remained calm through out. The only thing that varied was the shutter speed. Here is my set-up

Bogen tripod, fully extended legs, center pole up approx. 1/2 way (eye level)
Canon 10D
Sigma 70- 200 f/2.8 set to 200, w/ 2x TC
Initial focus was set set in Auto, then switched to manual
f/5.6
electronic cable release.

Regards,

Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Platts

shutter release

---

You do mean cable release, don't you? The shutter release is the button on the camera; a cable release is a remote mechanical or electrical release that lets you trip the shutter without bumping the camera. Using the self timer (set to 2 or 3 seconds or so) works pretty well too.

Generally the longer the exposure (talking at least several seconds) the less that it's a factor. Long lenses with shutter speeds around 1/8-1/30 are the biggest problem. But in a case like this I'd say it's better to be a little overly cautious - nobody complains that their pictures are too sharp now, do they? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Platts

Michael, What do you think may have happened in my 4 sec. exposure. I am really trying to learn, I'm not to happy with the last few frames and don't want to repeat my mistakes in the future.

My set-up was exactly the same and the weather conditions remained calm through out. The only thing that varied was the shutter speed. Here is my set-up

Bogen tripod, fully extended legs, center pole up approx. 1/2 way (eye level)
Canon 10D
28-135 IS (IS switched off)
Initial focus was set set in Auto, then switched to manual
f/5.6
electronic cable release.

Regards,

Mike

---

from a non photography perspective...everything is moving. The moon is making its way across the sky as you were taking its picture. Figure it takes 15 hrs = 900 minutes = 54000 seconds for 180 degrees across your field of view. If those assumptions are correct, the moon will move .013 degrees in the time you want to take that picture. After converting to radians (ahem, engineering student here) we can figure out how far it actually moved. 2.2e-4 radians. The moon is roughly 384400 kilometers away. So in that four seconds the moon moved about 84.5 km.

Even though i don't actually know...anything... i would say that 4 seconds is probably too long for a camera that is not moving with the moon.

Just my observation.
-Pete

Pete,

I think your on to something here. I was wondering why all of the eclipse shots on photosig were shot at ISO 400 or 800. Probably to avoid this phenomenon. I was set to 100.

Thanks,

Mike

Pete,

I think your on to something here. I was wondering why all of the eclipse shots on photosig were shot at ISO 400 or 800. Probably to avoid this phenomenon. I was set to 100.

My quick estimate is that the moon was moving approx. 1.5% of it's diameter in 4 secs. I could fit about 6 moons across in the viewfinder (guessing here). I went outside every 15 minutes and the moon had moved out of my field of view from it's starting point at the center focus point.

BTW, I have my BS in Chemical Engineering, so I can appreciate your analysis.

Thanks,

Mike

Mike-
So many engineers are into photography its amazing. My own theory is that our profession does not allow enough creative room and the soul of an engineer has to reach out. I think most people just think we like gadgets....with lots of switches :-D

I'll do another analysis since you gave me a better idea. Lets just say for the sake of it that my original one was close to being right, and that the moon is moving at 84.5 m/s. (really simplify it all) The moons actual diameter is 3479 or so km. You said you can fit 6 in your viewfinder. So your view is 20,874 km. 84.5 x 4 = 338 km of movement in 4 seconds. Which is astoundingly 1.6 percent of your view. If your viewfinder is 3072 pixels across then the moon moved 49.7 pixels in 4 seconds. 50 pixels is enough to cause some blur, although i bet you wouldnt see that many since some will be exposed for a short time. Just continuing with this idea as my other machine crunches away at matlab.

With no tripod, i handheld all my moonshots and dealt with the less then great exposures as more moon got covered.

-Pete
PS - where did you get your ChemE, and do you use it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by petemac

PS - where did you get your ChemE, and do you use it?

---

UMASS, Amherst, 1992

I use it in some capacity as I own a custom adhesives development company, but most of the time I'm dealing with either Finance or Statistical Quality Control.

Which Engineering discipline are you studying and where? What do you plan to do with your degree? If it's in the cards, consider getting your MBA while your young. It will significantly increase your earning potential.

Mike

Cornell 2006 mechanical ... suppossedly lol

For the first two years of my engineering work everyone said it would get better and more enjoyable. But i still just loathe my classes and my work. I am interning now with Sikorsky Aircraft and this experience has done a pretty nice job to make me realize that i don't want to do this for the rest of my life. It has also shown me that working for money will never be enough. A lot of people say that you can't have a job and enjoy it, but i strongly disagree. I am 20, and have had 3 cubicles to call home...already too many, and already way too much time pounding away at a keyboard on someone else's accord.

I think I might do a masters of engineering simply because I can pull it off in a single semester and then move into the arts, hopefully architecture. It will be pretty hard to get in anywhere though. I wish i had transferred out of engineering when it was still economically viable to do so. Live and learn...

-pete
PS - sorry about the semi-hijack thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Platts

Michael, What do you think may have happened in my 4 sec. exposure. I am really trying to learn, I'm not to happy with the last few frames and don't want to repeat my mistakes in the future.

---

Here's a nice article that discusses a lot about sharpness.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/sharp.shtml

Since there is nothing in the near or middle distances, why not just set manual focus to infinity to start with?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by petemac

Cornell 2006 mechanical ... suppossedly lol

For the first two years of my engineering work everyone said it would get better and more enjoyable. But i still just loathe my classes and my work. I am interning now with Sikorsky Aircraft and this experience has done a pretty nice job to make me realize that i don't want to do this for the rest of my life. It has also shown me that working for money will never be enough. A lot of people say that you can't have a job and enjoy it, but i strongly disagree. I am 20, and have had 3 cubicles to call home...already too many, and already way too much time pounding away at a keyboard on someone else's accord.

I think I might do a masters of engineering simply because I can pull it off in a single semester and then move into the arts, hopefully architecture. It will be pretty hard to get in anywhere though. I wish i had transferred out of engineering when it was still economically viable to do so. Live and learn...

-pete
PS - sorry about the semi-hijack thread

---

Not to hijack this thread too much but I quit 9 years with my company (job went from electronics technician to software quality assurance engineer) so that I can go to culinary school and become a chef. I hate my current job too but look forward to a third career change :)

Very nice, Mike.
I'm envious of your clear skies - we had rain, so I stayed in bed.

Take a look at this: http://skyandtelescope.com/observing...ticle_89_1.asp

"The minimum focal length for getting a good-looking Moon is about 300 mm. With a 500-mm lens and a 2-second exposure you can probably get away with a camera on a fixed tripod, but longer exposures or focal lengths will require a tracking mount to prevent blurring due to the turning of the Earth."

My emotions went something like:
10 am: "Grumble."
2pm: "Dangit."
6pm: "Shoot."
9pm: "&%(!"

I never saw said lunar eclipse :( At least our resident astrophotographer got to though!

Better luck for me in 2007! :p

Rick