Joined: June 2007
|Quote (Nomad @ Feb. 21 2008,03:27)|
|Coincidentally, I was out with my Canon camera plus 70-200 lens. I'd never shot an eclipse before and I was underprepared. I'd read up on some ideas for how to shoot it, and really I should have done better than I did, but there was some last second screwups involving being locked out of the house in 8 degree F weather, so I ended up being kind of rushed once I got inside.|
In particular, while I thought I zoomed all the way in I DIDN'T! I'm kicking myself for this, I took my lens which was a bit on the small side for lunar photography, and didn't even use it to its full capability.
I also wasn't thinking about having to keep my shutter speeds up, rather than turn up the ISO I let the shutter speeds get up to 5-6 seconds at totality. Which meant blurry images. I know that things are moving around up there, I've dealt with this before, but I just don't have a handle on exactly when the Earth's rotation (or the Moon's motion) starts showing up in images.
So here's a crude montage of a few of the better images. All my shots of totality are blurry, the one of near totality that I included is better even though the illuminated portion is massively blown out.
It was pretty neat, I don't think I've actually ever seen a lunar eclipse before. Not that I can remember, anyway.
The time will vary with the magnification.
When you magnify the image, you also magnify the movement. If you are taking images of more than a couple seconds with a high power telephoto lens, you really need to piggyback on a guided telescope.
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris