Oknoder Loc: Western North Dakota

You have already been given excellent advice as to how to obtain the best single frame image. I do not know what camera model or lens you are using, but manual focus with live-view magnified as much as possible. Focus on the craters on the edge of the shadow.

Use mirror up if your camera offers that option, or delayed exposure to limit mirror flop. You also could use some tricks that many astro-imagers use. We tend to shoot planetary, lunar included by shooting video, then using a program like Registax, that stacks the video frames only using the portions that are in focus at that frame. Since the atmosphere is similar to the rolling waves of the ocean you will tend to drift in and out of focus.

HTH,
Matthew

Jackdoor Loc: Huddersfield, Yorkshire.

An ND filter is very useful when photographing the sun! :D

Jackdoor Loc: Huddersfield, Yorkshire.

Not so. The camera is no more aware of the moon's apparent movement than the eye. The only reason movement is difficult is because of the long focal length required, and then it's camera movement that's the issue, not the moon's.

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

You can mount your camera in concrete if you like, but if you use too long of an exposure to shoot the moon you will get a blurred shot.

jgregg Loc: Michigan

Olin,
This photo was taken with a Canon SX50 HS on a tripod. The problems you are having are all in the settings, just need to try different ones based on our various advice. Use adjustments based on the camera you are using, the biggest control for you will be increasing the shutter speed. To start it will help significantly to shoot the moon in partial for most detail.

Settings: F8; 1/250 sec; ISO 800

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

You have to be careful with your focus. Perhaps you are focused on the stars beyond the moon, leaving the moon too close to retain focus. HUH??? :roll: :roll: :-P :oops:

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

Assuming that the camera is held rock-solid, the major apparent movement of the moon is due to the earth's rotation. As bright as the unobstructed moon is, there is little reason to take such a long exposure but suppose put an IR filter on (assuming we did not remove the factory installed filter that blocks IR) and did take a 30 second exposure. In that 20 seconds the earth would have rotated 0.125 degrees. Under very close inspection you might just be able to see that motion.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

No. In fact, when doing any lunar photography, I remove the UV filter I use. This reduces the possibility of reflections within the lens system.
--Bob

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

Both the moon and the earth are moving all the time. IF you use a long exposure eventually you will capture that movement.
So a longer shutter speed is not needed. A ND filter is not needed. I have used a Polarizing filter on the nights where the sky was not real clear. That did help a bit.
I very seldom use a UV filter as I have more problems with them than they are worth...

I set up my tripod, turned off VR, mirror up and used a
wired remote. Then I started taking pics, zoom in, zoom out, faster shutter speeds, slower shutter speeds,
Aperture wide open then to f22, always keeping the ISO
low as possible.

I have even experimented bracketed shots for HDR
I eventually learned where my pics looked best. For me it was the best way of learning. I got to see the effects of different settings etc.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I agree with most of the responses so far... more or less.

The moon reflects sunlight, absorbing a bit. On a clear night, a "correct" exposure of it is usually one to two stops more than a "full sun" photo would be. So, you can start out with the "sunny 16 rule" and simply adjust a little from there...

Sunny 16 tells us that in full sun you'll get a pretty accurate exposure if you set your aperture to f16, and then your shutter speed to the reciprocal of your ISO sensitivity. So, for example, you would use ISO 100, 1/100 shutter speed and f16 to shoot a brightly sunlit scene. You can adjust any one of these settings by similarly tweaking one or both of the other settings... For example, f11, ISO 100 and 1/200 would give you the same exposure... Or f8, ISO 50 and 1/200 also would achieve the same.

Now, the moon isn't quite as bright as full sun. Not all the sunlight that's falling on it is reflected toward us. Some is absorbed by the moon's surface, some is filtered by our own atmosphere and some is reflected other directions. So try "Moony 8" instead. Using f8, 1/100 and ISO 100 will give you two stops more exposure than "Sunny 16" and should get you in the ballpark.

You'll likely not be able to use any of your camera's auto exposure modes, because the bright moon in a dark expanse will very likely end up very over-exposed. A manual setting carefully done is more likely to get you a correct exposure.

But, there are other things to consider:

For one, as mentioned, the moon is moving. Actually it's surprisingly fast, though we don't normally notice it. Yes, 1/100 or 1/125 is about as slow a shutter speed you'll want to use, or you'll get subject movement blur. But faster might be better. You'll most likely be using a fairly powerful telephoto to shoot the moon, so a very steady tripod and slightly faster shutter speed can help. For especially long telephotos, also consider other tricks to get a steady shots... such as using a remote release and mirror lockup (a short self-timer delay and Live View shooting can do much the same things). Also it can help to add some weight hanging below the tripod and/or lay a beanbag on top the camera and lens (both limited by the practical weight capacity of your tripod, of course). A windless evening and steady ground (i.e., not a wood deck or the deck of a boat!) also may be helpful.

You also want to be careful not to use too small an aperture. Super small apertures cause a optical effect called "diffraction", that robs fine detail from your images and that might particularly be a problem with a moon shot. f8 and f11 are pretty safe with most digitals. But f16 and f22 can cause too much loss of fine detail. Read more about diffraction here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Manual focus might be the way to go, but it's generally not as simple as setting it all the way to infinity. To understand why, read up on hyperfocal distances: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/hyperfocal-distance.htm

I also suggest you might want to time your shots...Often it's better to shoot the moon at dusk or dawn, rather than in the middle of the night. This way the sky still has a little light in it, both for a more interesting shot and because contrast isn't so strong as it is later when the sky is fully dark. If you prefer a more colorless sky, with digital it's easy to change the color, de-saturate it or darken it later in post-processing.

It also may help to shoot the moon when it's low on the horizon, as it tends to be "magnified" when shooting it through more atmosphere. It also can make for a lot more interesting moon shot if there is something in the fore-ground, rather than it high in the sky. But you really need to weigh this against other considerations, such as the clarity of the atmosphere when you're shooting. a lot of air-borne dust or heat distortions can seriously deteriorate image quality (...or might make for an interesting shot... depending upon your goals).

There also are certain times when the moon is nearer or farther from the Earth. It's orbit around us isn't a precise circle, but more of an elipse. "Super moons" occur occasionally and might be special opportunities for photographers.

Lunar eclipses can be interesting too... just remember that once it's partially obscured by the shadow of the Earth, a bit of additional exposure is likely to be needed.

Online you can find moonrise, moonset, Super Moon, eclipse and other important timing info calculated for your particular longitude and latitude. Of course, anywhere you're shooting you'll still be at the mercy of the weather, ambient light conditions and other things.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

You are shooting too fast. Begin with an exposure based on iso. Example if iso is 400, your base exposure would be 1/400 sec at f16, if iso is 500, your base is 1/500 sec at f16.

Bloke Loc: Waynesboro, Pennsylvania

I haven't seen anyone else raise this, so let me try. Are you using a UV filter on your lens? Your mention of 'reflection' makes me suspect that you are. I keep filters on all my lenses for protection (cue pointless and endless argument!), but astrophotos are the one time when you really should take them off. Because the moon is so bright compared to the background, it tends to reflect on one of the surfaces of the filter...

Earworms Loc: Sacramento, California

Interesting. I often read about Hoggers shooting the moon, but I have yet to read about anyone shooting the Sun.

I have personally viewed the Sun directly through a solar spotting scope.

Bloke Loc: Waynesboro, Pennsylvania

Sorry, but no cigar... The moon is moving, surprisingly quickly in fact. The longer the focal length of the lens you use, the more it will blur. You are magnifying the movement, as well as the subject...

I (and many others) have posted moon photos on here taken with the sx50 at 1200mm equivalent focal length, handheld. To get those, you have to use a fast shutter speed, which freezes any camera motion not eliminated by IS, and also stops the moon in its tracks.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Incorrect...

That's "sunny 16" and will under-expose the moon.

The moon will typically require 2 stops more exposure... so use f8 (instead of f16).