Moon Photos with Olympus Made Easy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 січ 2021
- Use the high resolution mode found on most Olympus cameras to take a great photo of the moon. Often you can get better results than can be seen with the eye using these techniques. There are some things that you need to be aware of and watch out for camera vibrations.
- Наука та технологія
Very informative! I never watched this before shooting the supermoon last September (2023) with the E-M1X and the 100-400mm but the atmospheric conditions weren't ideal, either. I had bands of thin clouds and incorporated them into the final image in Photoshop. I didn't use the digital tc since the clouds were to be part of the final image from the beginning. I was shocked at how sharp the handheld final result was, to be honest. Sure, it's soft and I knew it would be from the beginning, but I'll be playing with your techniques here once I get set up with a tracker in the near future. I was rather surprised to find out for myself that my moon color/exposure perceptions were off, as well, though I bracketed a number of exposures that saved the final image. Thanks for sharing your input and experience, as always!
Thanks! Appreciate the detailed discussion.
Brilliant video! Thank you! I recently just got the OM-1.
YYYEEESSS!!!!
Thank you for this! I liked it before I watched it!!!
Excellent lesson on how to shoot the moon. Thank You!
Thank you Lars
I just took ( 2/21/2021) a few of the moon using my 1836 mm 150 mm dia Cassigrain telescope and my cell phone just for fun and they actually turned out pretty good. Surprisingly the rebound cone in the larger craters showed really well and the shadows where sharp as where the ridges with no false color. Cell Phone a old Galaxy J 3. So good using the photo for my computer screen saver. Might have to invest in some soft ware and a dedicated camera . Did subscribe so can learn more even at my age of 76. Thanks for the video
A lot of people start that way by taking a photo through an eyepiece of their telescope.
Fantastic content AND debunking conspiracy theories? This is what I needed today. Awesome video!
Ya I hate this conspiracy theories.
awesome
Image stabilisation, which you cannot use with hi-res. Vibrations come from the 'clockwork' motors in mounts like the Sky-Watcher (mine's red), and ground buzz, as well as extra-long lens wobble pushing the button. Turning stabilisation on, which is usually a no-no on a tripod, can kill it.
The Leica 100-400 does offer full Dual2-IS on the Lumix G9. The M.Zuiko 100-400 is not an Olympus Pro lens and does not offer Synch-IS. However, "The IBIS on the body and the IS on the lens can be used independently. If you keep both active, the roll axis is combined with pitch and yaw on the lens. Although this means that sensor and optical stabilisation can work together, it is far less advanced that what Sync IS does where all the axes on the sensor shift are used." (mirrorlesscomparison.com/micro-four-thirds-lenses/olympus-100-400mm-vs-panasonic-100-400mm/#stabilisation).
And yes this works with my E-M5ii with Panasonic lenses that have an OIS switch - set camera to 'use Lens IS', switch lens OIS on or off, and we have IBIS plus part OIS which is different to using a no-OIS lens of the same length with IBIS only. It is not documented.
Synch-IS is said to be better than Dual-IS but probably inferior to Dual2. Dual2 with the Leica 100-400 on the G9 and it becomes a hand-held lens at any shutter speed, utterly ridiculous. Stabilisation can take the buzz out of a motorised mount and the sting out of shutter release. The Olympus soft shutter is good but far from perfect, but do use long delay plus a cable release. Delay twice as long as you think it needs ;)
With adapted lenses we get to set focal length into the stabilisation; this may well need cheating with extra-long lenses; there is a physical element to length and weight which is not just focal length. Something like 500mm or 800mm Samyang reflex camera lenses are short and light. Their focal length can be cheated by using a longer or shorter T2-MFT adapter (a short one is good for infinity focus). They may also take a x2 teleconverter; the longer and heavier a lens the more they wobble and the more it may want stabilisation even on a tripod. They're cheap and fun, all-manual and fixed aperture probably too wide for the job, optics is passable, as telescope, but not as good as any MFT lens nevermind 100-400, but they are long. The massive and huge Bigma 50-500 is recognised so the stabilisation just gets on with the job but the foot-long Tokina 400 may want setting to "800mm" due to the crop factor. That old lens has a T2 thread, can take a focuser and a nose-piece astro cam, piggy back on OTA, charity shop special. Experiment with the stabilisation setting because it also depends on how much vibration the tripod has.
Apologies for length of post. I've been using MFT for many years - they have many major advantages over the usual suspect Canon Rebel for astro work.
Now I actually use the 12-100mm f4 pro lens and m1 mark ii.
ISO 200.
Shutter 200.
F8.
Single spot shadow metering.
High res.
8 seconds delayed shutter.
No tracker.
Actually thinking about the 100-400mm lens.
Very useful video, thank you. Just one minor nitpick: do you really need the music?
Anyway, astro photography is something I want to play around with in the future. So I'll be checking out your other videos. I'm an Olympus user too, BTW.
It's fun. Give it a try. And ya my music selections are not always the best. But you probably wold not prefer the German Metal I usually listen too.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Hahah probably not. 😉 I just think that music is overused. It just isn't needed. Just IMHO.
At f/16, with a 4/3 sensor, lens diffraction effects would start to become evident, leading to softer images. And in fact you cannot use f/16 in hi-res mode - you're limited to f/8 for this very reason. I'd start with whatever aperture the lens performs best at, and for mzuiko lenses this is typically one stop down from wide open.
Using f stops other than f16 were encouraged in the video. Diffraction limit is a small factor considering the other things. You will not be able to see diffraction limits over atmospheric seeing. Also the diffraction limit of f16 is a rather outdated notion. Modern lens coating have extended the diffraction limit by about a half a stop to f18. I can say that at f16 this lens is fine.
Diffraction is still very much an issue in modern lenses, regardless of coatings, and obviously it's much more of a problem when using hi-res because the circle of confusion covers more photosites. Take a look at the lab test results for the 300mm (a lens with superior performance to the 100-400mm that you are using). www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/olympus/300mm-f4.0-is-pro-ed-m.zuiko-digital/review/
I don't doubt that atmospheric effects override diffraction, but it should not be discounted.
@@mel-stephens You should look into planetary photography. It is often done at f30 or higher. Like I said before. Diffraction limit is like acorn in a 50 gallon trash can in this type of photography. Don't worry about it and just do photography.
Actually I am going change my stance on this. Diffraction limit is a myth. Read this. jonrista.com/2013/03/24/the-diffraction-myth/
@@TheNarrowbandChannel Thanks for posting this very informative article link. I have never been restricted by the notion of small aperture diffraction claims. The idea of never shooting m4/3's smaller that f/8 is complete nonsense -- as this article accurately points out. Especially for Landscape and Macro (and I assume Astrophotography too) adequate DOF is of paramount importance.
I'm glad you are posting videos using olympus cameras for astrophotography. I have most of the OM lenses and im keen on trying the OM 500mm f8 Reflex and the 1000mm f11. Which on the mk3 would be 1000mm and 2000mm respectively. I wonder if these lenses would be any good for nebulae or if i need to go down the 600mm(1200) or the 300mm(600)
Those are too slow. Lots of small refractors now available for very good prices.
@@TheNarrowbandChannelthat's good to know I'll look for into those then 👍🏻
I get best moon shots on new moon 😅
Do you make many shots without tracker? 🤔 I still need better tripod and tracker. But hopefully that will be there, when I get my 8mm 😊
For astro an old heavy aluminum used tripod works great. You do not need the fancy new carbon fiber ones. They are pricy anyway.
Try to use a shutter speed over 1000/sec to freeze the moons movement.
I have the Olympus 300mm F4 and 40-150Mm F2.8 lenses and was wondering how adding a 2x converter would work with Moon and Star shots. I am completely inexperienced shooting space stuff.
For the moon a 2x converter would be great. You could also do the sun BUT you WILL need special filters. I would not use it with deep space nebula though as you loose a lot of light. Typically in astro my we try to get wider focal lengths. Space nebulas are huge.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel cool thank you I do have a 10 stop ND filter and a few other ones i can stack
@@terrywbreedlove Really though get a dedicated one. The sun filters are not to expensive. They cut the suns rays down to 1/100,000 so a lot more than a 10nd filter. Plus they do not have nay color shift.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel never heard of them i will check right now thank you
But we need to answer one question - how is this with DSOs on low-end intermediate gear (think... iOptron's Sky Guider Pro) guided and unguided? Because I'm getting the feeling that my ultraportable setup would end with this lens (with the SGP+ASIAir Pro combo) and I haven't seen anyone try it out.
Thanks!
Watch some of my other videos. I have used these types of setups and talked about them in many of my other videos. DSO are fun.
@@TheNarrowbandChannel i meant this specific lens - how does it perform with DSOs? 800mm of reach, even at f6.3, would be incredible considering the size of the whole package if it's a good performer guided or not.
@@marcusa3177 Oh I see. Yes a review for that lens is in the works soon. And I did already put up some results for it in my review of the Em1 Mk3. Be sure to check it out.
On normal tripod, you always turn off the IS. But how is it on tracker? 🤔
Keep the IS off with a tracker too. It has to be treated like a tripod since it is one in a sense.
"Most pictures you see of the moon are overexposed."
Seriously? Is there any data on what images others are seeing?
Isn't good exposure in the eye of the beholder?
I don't think taking pictures of the moon is that hard.
This video makes it harder.
Don't overthink it.
Yes this is well documented. Even the pictures I showed were overexposed. The moon is 11-18% reflective in areas that most people show as white while grey portions are 7-10% and most overexpose them till they are about 18% skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-resources/astronomy-questions-answers/shouldnt-a-perfectly-reflecting-full-moon-be-just-as-bright-as-the-sun/