bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

I was shooting 600 mm, f/4 @ ISO 200 for the full Moon shots. 1/400 sec. exposure pre-eclipse. 1/5-1 sec. exposures at totality.

Sony RX10 IV (w/ flip screen liveview), tripod mounted, Manual mode, autofocus throughout.

Other than cloud before and after totality and, at best thin cloud for the remainder, not a bad night!

A couple of shots below:

bwa

Lunar Eclipse(7x10 sec,50 mm,F/3.2,ISO 200)


Lunar Eclipse(1 sec,600 mm,F/4,ISO 200)

pmackd Loc: Alameda CA

Sky was cloudy with periods of rain throughout the evening in Alameda, CA but there were a few brief intervals of more or less clear sky. I would assume there was enough extra moisture in the air to affect the shots so tack sharp wasn't really possible. Used Nikon D500 with 300mm f4 PF lens and 1.4x Nikon TC only for second shot. First shot was ISO 125 f5 1/320 sec hand held, Blood moon shots ISO 200 f5.6 1.6 seconds on tripod with 2 second delay. Tilt screen used for viewing but no live view.

Next time (May 2021 and 2022) I would raise the ISO of the blood moon shot to 1000 or more and decrease the exposure time accordingly to minimize motion blur. And try some NR as noise would increase substantially.

This camera/lens combination autofocused just fine, probably because of the contrast on the left side of the moon.

jims203 Loc: Connecticut

I had a very hard time with the cold, my frozen gloves which were useless and tripod not to mention clouds before and after the main event but managed to get one decent shot. The specs are stars.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Nice!

bwa

tschuler

foxfirerodandgun, we are from the same neck of the woods. I'm near Mansassas. It was not only cold and windy for the moon eclipse... it was extremely cold and windy (for VA). My thermometer said 12 degrees, and with the wind that we had, the wind chill surely was way below zero. The wind was so bad, I had a hard time keeping my camera and tripod from swaying. I tried to snap shots in between gusts of wind.

After being outside for one minute, I could barely operate my camera. It's impossible to make adjustments with gloves on, so my fingers would freeze up immediately. Like you, my photos were disappointing. I tried using live view to focus, and from the difficult position to view the screen, the moon appeared to me to be in focus. However, I was so cold and my eyes aren't the greatest. I guess my focusing was just not good enough.

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

“. . . adjust the angle of the tripod/lens . . “

I think I have discovered one of your probs foxfire, the lens goes on the camera, not the tripod! 😎😎😎

jims203 Loc: Connecticut

Not when it is a large one.

TBPJr Loc: South Carolina

I used a Canon 5D Mark III with the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM and the Extender 1.4 III, on a tripod with a ball head, using a remote with the camera set to start shooting two seconds after activation. I did have to use the slot that let the camera tilt straight up (at the max) to follow the moon as it rose to overhead during the eclipse. I had found out a previous time trying to photograph the moon how difficult it could be just to see the moon through the viewfinder, so I was somewhat prepared. Because I had also tried a good number of moon pictures before, I understood the range of results I could expect, at least somewhat. While the moon was at angles that made it practical to use the normal viewfinder, I used it; when I finally had to go to the live view, it worked very well to help me get my pictures.

What I ended up doing was starting with ISO at 1600, the mode switch to "P," and with five bracketed shots for each picture. After seeing my results, I adjusted the exposure compensation (all the way to -4 for a while, and then to +4 at the other extreme); as the eclipse decreased the light, I moved my ISO to 3200, then 6400, 12800 next, and, finally, 25600 in an attempt to have a higher shutter speed (I still got up to a half-second shutter speed at the highest ISOs as the moon dimmed). Also, I used autofocus until the system was unable to achieve focus--the live view turned out to be a help for that, as it showed very well what the camera did as it searched for focus and found it (the box in the center of the view turned green when it had focus), and what happened when the moon got too dim for autofocus. After that, I used manual focus on live view, and was generally satisfied with the results. Anyway, the pictures below are representative of what I got in 210 exposures (.jpgs from the camera, cropped in PS Elements 2018--I will try editing the RAWs later to see I can improve them); all were at 560mm. I have not corrected the EXIF yet--all the pictures were taken an hour before the time shown for each picture (I thought I had checked).

Each picture was cropped pretty heavily; I think the moon was just less than 10% of the frame.

This picture was only a little while into the eclipse; I was trying to get a progression, starting with before the eclipse began--this one was about 15 minutes into the process. ISO 1600, 1/1600 sec., f/20.

(Download)

11:22 pm picture; I was trying to get both the lit and the shaded parts of the moon showing at the same time. I believe I had kept the exposure point set in the lit area for the pictures before and for this one. ISO 3200, 1/400 sec., f/10, -4 EC.

(Download)

This one shows the whole moon, but the lit part is completely burned out. I believe this is after I moved the exposure point to the shaded portion of the moon. ISO 3200, 1/6 sec., f/8, -3 EC.

(Download)

By 11:41 pm, I could almost capture the entire surface with one exposure (but not quite). ISO 25600, 1/4 sec., f/8, +1 EC.

(Download)

A minute later, I still have one over-lit end and the other end in deep shadow; this may have been bracketed with the 11:41 picture--the numbers seem as if it was. ISO 25600, 1/25 sec., f/8, -2 EC.

(Download)

Finally, my last keeper of the evening, at 11:58 pm (which was supposed to be about twelve minutes before totality). ISO 24600, 1/2 sec., f/8, +4 EC.

(Download)

cucharared Loc: Texas, Colorado

As to the original OP's question - I have tilting back screens on both my Sonys, so no problems there. And, no real problem with the pre-blood moon phases. However, once it was a blood moon I had increased the IOS, reduced the shutter speed, and opened the aperture so much that digital noise rendered my shots terrible. What I didn't try was shutter speeds below about 1/4 second. As it was, I had both my RX10iv and A77ii started at IOS 160, shutter speed 160, and aperture F11. As the light decreased I reduced the shutter speed and opened the aperture to max, which was 1.4 and 5.6 respectively. I gradually moved the IOS on both until reaching 2400. I knew the RX10iv photos would suck at that IOS but I thought the A77ii would fare better. Not that I could see.

Both were tripod mounted. The RX10iv on a MeFoto with a ball head. No problem with angle on it. The A77ii was mounted on my ancient video style tripod with a cheap whatchacallit (that thing used by birders and wildlife photographers - oldtimeritis kicking in). It ran out of angle early in the process, but I started shortening the back legs. Finally that wasn't enough without getting too precarious, so I changed the angle with the original panhead that I'd left on. That took care of the final angle I needed. But it looked like I was on the ragged edge of overbalance and tipping over to the rear.

Oh, the RX10iv was fully extended to 600mm equivalent and the Tamron 200-500mm on the A77ii was at max. Both were autofocused on the edge of the moon. I've never been able to manually focus the Tamron on the moon. Adjustment is too coarse.

ron

lakeside Loc: Texas

I too was disappointed and didn't realize how hard this eclipse would be. I was glad I purchased the LensMaster Gimbal as it worked perfectly as always with my D500 and 200-500mm lens. I should have tried using a longer exposure instead of the ridiculous ISO settings, but the moon seemed to be moving so fast. The jpegs look better than the RAW photos. I used a remote shutter release, mirror up, live view,160-200 shutter speed and tried all ISO settings. I would have to hit the remote shutter release twice while in live view, so I switched it off to take the shot. Back to the manual for that! Temps were cold for us....sorry folks 38 deg is cold!

Einreb92 Loc: Philadelphia

Since others have posted, I guess I might as well. Tripod, Gimbal, Tammy 150-600 G2, auto focus, VC off. I would have to check what the settings were. I took over 100 shots. It was as cold as a witches.... CC welcomed.

(Download)

dickwilber Loc: Indiana (currently)

I am envious of those that had clear views. We had "lake effect" snow here in northwest Indiana. There may have been a hole eventually, in the overcast that, would have allowed viewing the eclipse, but at 5 degrees who could wait it out. I'd run out every so often - no moon, head back in. I haven't been in position to photograph the blood red moon in 37 years and that was (of course) with film so I could not play with ISO, so only got pictures of the partial eclipse. Really had fun, though, with my then 14-year-old son, seeing the moon being blotted out and turning red.

foxfirerodandgun Loc: Stony Creek, VA

Shucks!! That could have been it!!

foxfirerodandgun Loc: Stony Creek, VA

I know exactly what you mean tschuler. The wind here wasn't an issue because of the tree line windbreak. However, if I had been in the large timsered area next to my home it would have. As for the cold fingers, etc. yep, I had the same issue.

hpucker99 Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I was tempted to use my 6" Celestron with a camera mounted on the back and another piggy backed on it. I used this setup for the 2017 solar eclipse and it was easy to adjust the scope if the tracking got off a bit. As it was, I had the 2 cameras on 2 tripods, adjusting them in 5 degree weather every 2 minutes got tiring. Next time, I'm bringing the telescope just for the mount and tracking.