Need help on focus issue (Page 2): Another side view from a SX50 user. I was wondering if Capn Jack would have used Spot metering, (directly on the moon) if the results might have been...

karelowe Loc: Boise, Idaho, & Mesa, AZ

Another side view from a SX50 user. I was wondering if Capn Jack would have used Spot metering, (directly on the moon) if the results might have been a bit more to his liking. When I take pictures of the moon, hand held and zoomed all the way out on my SX50, I change my metering to Spot metering and it works much better. I am not sure if that would change the tree focus, but the moon would have come in to focus much better.

Larrie Loc: NE Ohio

Suggest you try focus stacking and get a tripod

Growler Loc: The Great South Land

Now your getting close to the solution

MyPharo wrote:

Well if the camera is on a tripod . He can shoot 2 photos . focused on one point each . then merge the photos into one..

:thumbup:

Growler Loc: The Great South Land

The problem with this pic is trying to focus on 2 objects one is going to suffer because of the dof

karelowe wrote:

Another side view from a SX50 user. I was wondering if Capn Jack would have used Spot metering, (directly on the moon) if the results might have been a bit more to his liking. When I take pictures of the moon, hand held and zoomed all the way out on my SX50, I change my metering to Spot metering and it works much better. I am not sure if that would change the tree focus, but the moon would have come in to focus much better.

Growler Loc: The Great South Land

hb3 wrote:

I would suggest that it is going to be quite difficult to shoot a photo where an object 100 yards away and another 230,000 miles away will both be in focus...

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Capn Jack wrote:

This photo was taken hand held on my SX40 trying to catch the Harvest Moon as it rose through the Pines. Nothing has been done to the photo and it is right out of the camera but it brings up a question in my mind. It appears to me that the focus is on the pine branch so what could I have done to have both the moon and the Pine ( which was about 100 yards away) in focus ? I am sure there is a simple solution but I don't have it. Would appreciate someone helping me here.

Looks like you decided to let the camera decide where to focus (as it usually focuses on the nearest object). The distance between the tree branches and the moon is just a little too much, to get both subjects in focus, just by chosing a smaller aperture, it might work if you zoom out at the same time, but the best way to do this, is to make a composite, that way you can have both exactly as much in focus as you like.

Capn Jack Loc: Virginia Beach, Va

I really want to thank all of you that answered my post. I guess that you were right that with the SX 40 limitations and no more time than I put into setting up the shot, it is a "mission Impossible" . Actually I had a tripod sitting about 20 feet from me and a DSLR, but I wanted to see what I could do free hand with the SX40. I also have an SX50 but the same limitations I assume. Oldjobber, I hope I didn't talk you out of the SX series as I really love those cameras for most everyday use. Putting all your answers and suggestions together provided me with a world of valuable information, better than any manual could do. Now if someone could just help me with my 82 year old shaky hands ( ha ha)

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Capn Jack wrote:

Oldjobber, I hope I didn't talk you out of the SX series

It's still a contender, but I'm not Old just Odd. LOL

Erv Loc: Medina Ohio

You look old and odd Larry!!!
Just like me.:):):)
Erv

OddJobber wrote:

It's still a contender, but I'm not Old just Odd. LOL

steelerdave89 Loc: Cashiers, NC

I loved the honesty here and some awesome information I believe. I read a lot or most of the posts back on this subject and I know there is a lot more knowledge here than I will have.
If I have learned one thing about shooting in Auto is that It seems like it never looks like I want it to. Therefore I hardly ever use it. Once you get out of Auto Mode and get some results that you like you will not want to go back either. I have found that it is very important to Take Pictures and Try Different Settings until you find what you like. I once read somewhere that you need atleast a 300 mm Lens to even really attempt and get good Moon Photos. Not sure how the person even got the tree limbs to look like that at 100 yards, that's a long ways folks.

Erv Loc: Medina Ohio

Hi Dave. You can get a good shot of the Moon with 200mm. You just have to be right on with your focus. The quality of the lens plays a big part too. Even shooting things far away, the same thing, good focus and good glass. Most of my moon shots are just for the fun of it and I do them hand held. But if I want a great shot, I drag out the tripod and use the back screen to get it tac sharp. On the D300s you can make the back screen zoom in and that is a big help getting focus.
Erv

steelerdave89 wrote:

I loved the honesty here and some awesome informat... (show quote)

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Capn Jack wrote:

...

OddJobber hit it on the nail .

A few more comments... I DL the image and read the EXIF as well as the Canon notes.

You are using this camera in full auto so you should not be surprised by what is going on here.

Auto-focus goes for the contrasted areas to set itself. The closest is... the pine tree so it focused on that. You need to go the 'full Monty' (spelling) and use the camera on a complete manual mode.

Taking two pictures and stacking them is doubtful as the moon moves quite fast at this level of magnification.

Honestly, as is the picture is good but if you tried to get both in focus? Nope.

A 'cheater' solution would be to take two pictures, one of the pine (as is now) and one with ONLY the moon then merge the two using masks... I am not talking about stacking anymore.