DSLRUsers.com

This is actually my first attempt at a moon shot (I have been inspired by others on this forum)

Sigma 70-200 with 2x teleconverter on Manfrotto tripod. 1/350th sec at f/8.0 iso 200.

sirhc55
Not bad...but try this. Stand on a chair, this will get you closer, and try a little fill flash to bring up those shadows on the dark side.

Good one chris........

bp

I tried that Matt but the Federal police got onto me and said I should desist as the SB800 was a hazard to natural wildlife on the moon

Welcome to "Club Howler" Chris.

Not bad at all, you know looking at the Moon sends you a bit Luuuuuny don't you
Just look at me

Mic.

That's a freakin' good shot Chris. That's gotta make you proud to own the Sigma 70-200, 2x, and Manfrotto support!

Now I have got used to the 70-200 Sigma I am very impressed with its quality - thanks Onyx for sending it on its way to me.

This is fantastic, Chris. I tried taking pics of the moon over Easter down by the beach...they were crap to say the least! I used a tripod and the 70-300G, but the moon was WAY over exposed while the reflections on the water were barely there. I think I took 20 and deleted 19!

Could someone tell me as to what are the best ways to capture the moon successfully? I tried when she was low in the horizon, before she got too bright. Practice prehaps?

Stormygirl - you will notice that I posted with the pic the f stop and shutter speed. I took around 20 shots of varying shutter speeds and aperture to get this pic. There was a fair amount of adjustment in PSCS to get the colour levels correct and some USM to sharpen it up. I then had to crop as the pic was reasonably small on the frame.

So, 2 reasons for this shot - luck and PP’ing

Thanks, Chris. I'll keep trying and learning....that's what it is all about!

stormygirl wrote:Thanks, Chris. I'll keep trying and learning....that's what it is all about!

Absolutely Stormygirl and I would add that no matter how many years any of us have been into photography - we, everyone of us, will always learn from others - even those new to photographer who have a natural talent. That’s why it should never deter anyone from posting.

Not bad for an old fella!!! nah good job there Chris looks nice and clear and u did it well mate. A + for the sigma lens that i will soon have i hope.
The 2X TC is that a sigma 1 or something eles, reason i was thinkin about the Kenko` is that it works with most other lenses as like Nikon and so on.
Cheers mate
John

Hi John

After much search on the olde web I found that the Sigma 2x teleconverter was very highly praised in use with the 70-200. I decided to go all Sigma just in case any of the others did not do the job.

I must admit that my first experience with the 70-200 and then with the 2x was not good. But, before blaming the lens I practiced and like a new car you have to come to terms with how to use it properly. I’m happy

Chris,
You have the Sigma lens few days now and you have tried Glen's Nikkor 70-200VR in real, can you neutral tell more your opinions about them.
I know the cost of each is in big difference, just want to see your opinion on technical, quality built, photo, etc...
Thanks

Birddog - IMO the Nikon is a better lens because it does have the VR capability.

Optically I would say that the Sigma is possibly half a point below the Nikon which is really insignifcant.

Build quality on the Sigma is very good with a nice balance, the focussing motor is as quite as the grave and extremely fast.

There were 2 reasons for my purchase of the Sigma over the Nikon; the first, and most obvious, was a cost factor but the more obscure reason was I wanted to make it harder to take photo’s.

I will have it with me tomorrow so anyone at the mini meet can try it out.

I will have it with me tomorrow so anyone at the mini meet can try it out.

And leave it behind

Many thanks for your respond Chris! Looking forward to see you tomorrow.

Chris - Excellent work .

I can now see that you are getting to know your new lens plus TC x2.

fozzie wrote:Chris - Excellent work .

I can now see that you are getting to know your new lens plus TC x2.

fozzie,
Lust it?

Birddog,

Only thing that I am lusting for at the moment are leg warmers for my Gitzo. The weather is getting colder, and also to prevent scratching to the carbon fibre legs while in storage and transit intrastate/interstate.

stormygirl
Most people over expose the moon. The exposure at 200 ISO is around f/8 at 1/250th of second! If you bracket around that exposure then you should nail it.

Thanks Chris, for that comparison, there is no doubt that the Nikon is the pick of the bunch if you can afford it. the sigma doesn't have VR and i think it really comes down to what you are going to use it for and so on. I think VR is great but i rarley use it as i am normally shooting things doing 200kls or so on. Focus speed is what i am after at the moment and it's a choice of is having VR worth an extra $1,000 smackers, for me anyhow. I am a Holden man but i like the look of some Fords, so i thinks with some things this is like canon and nikon, you either like 1 or the other. I can honestly say that before i got into the slr side of things i would have had a canon maybe if the price was right as i was looking at the 20d, but yeh seen the D70 and well was cheaper and i think both can be as good as each other.

Good to see that we have options with lens choice and save a few bucks.
Sorry for rambling on.LOL
Cheers
John
BBJ

Nikon + Sigma are very good lenses. Better than Tamron and the other crud

kipper wrote:Nikon + Sigma are very good lenses. Better than Tamron and the other crud

Do you mean that you're on the lust for the Sigma 300-800