cahale wrote:
Whether post processing will improve them. (I'm) sorry I left my statement as a read-between-the-lines.
I'm satisfied with the SOOC version. If I make a poster, then I will post process.
There were intermittant clouds where I was located but in all truthfullness I did not practice finding the sun enough. I
have a few more that look similar to the first shot and so does everybody else. The second shot was last of the day. If I had been able to locate the sun more quickly, I might have been able to get a complete sequence of shots ... my bad, sorry.
PS
There has been no postprocessing on either shot.
H
Ballard wrote:
It’s almost looks like an internal reflection. Make sure the lens and filter are clean as any smudges can cause some scattered light. I would test just the lens without the filter on the full moon to see if the halo occurs to see if it was just the filter or perhaps the combination on lens and 1.4 teleconverter and try the different combinations
Thank you; per Occam's razor, I'll go with the simpler answer ... the difference is in the filters. I will be using the Seymour Solar filter. However, I will be taking photos of the moon to practice my focus. If there is an equipment problem, I'll notice it.
I have been posting in the Gallery and just noticed this section:
Just an FYI: I am not a novice photographer, I am a novice at photographing anything astronomical. I have been reading online articles about photographing eclipses and have gotten some advice from the folks in the Photo Gallery section. Any tips on how to get the best shot I can will be gratefully accepted.
I will be using a Nikon Z9 mounted on a secure tripod with a 600mm PF lens + a 1.4TC. I will have a Sun Finder mounted on the camera and I will be using a remote shutter release.
I had been using 1000 OAKS Solar filter and could not get rid of the "Halo" Photo 1 (3366) / ISO 400 f9 1/80th. In photo 2 (3370) the halo is finally gone/ ISO 400 f9 1/200th. The 3 photos in between the first and second also had the halo, but it was dimmer and you might not have understood what I was trying to show.
The third photo (3483) is through a Seymour Solar filter. The settings were ISO 800 f11 1/250th
When the math is done to compare the exposures, they are ROUGHLY the same amount of light to the sensor.
The 4th photo is a screenshot showing the histogram of #3483; there is nothing to the right of what you see. Based on that, I think those would be the settings to use ..... ISO 800 f11 1/250th
I will do more photographing of the sun over the next few weeks, any suggestions as to settings, technique, whatever, will be appreciated. I am already getting nervous.
alberio wrote:
It's my understanding the Thousand Oaks filter is a solar filter. I've viewed the sun many times through the viewfinder or just holding the filter up to my eyes without a camera or lens.
Perhaps I was not clear; I am asking for suggestions for a solar filter to place onto the lens of my camera.
Basil wrote:
Does your camera have an EVF or rear LCD screen?
It makes no difference, it would not be a good idea to point a lens at the sun without a solar filter on it. I am looking for suggestions for a filter for the front of my lens.
I'll be travelling to Plano Tx to stay at a friends house. I am very new to photographing an eclipse. I currently am using a solar filter made by 1000 Oaks. Based upon my test shots (posted in the photo gallery) I don't think the filter is dark enough. I'm still looking for a solar filter.
BTW I looked at the filter you mentioned and came across this.
"This filter is designed specifically for photography applications. This filter is not suitable for direct solar viewing with the naked eye, including with optical viewfinders." I need something I can look at the sun thru the camera viewfinder with. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
The answer is that it's more a question of manners than law. Every photo you take is copyrighted, it's yours, that is uinderstood. Defending the copyright is another matter entirely ..... it can become EXTREMELY expensive. You are responsible for your actions; so it's really up to you as to how you treat someone elses work. I would suggest that you ask permission to use another persons photo, it's a matter of manners. As I just wrote, there's very little you can do about it if someone uses your photo unless your willing to spend a lot of money.
Reuss Griffiths wrote:
Yes, I'm suggesting not using a tripod. Set your camera to manual mode with auto focus on. Sun image is bright enough for autofocus to work well. The rule of thumb for hand held is to use a shutter speed that is as fast as or faster than 1/ focal length (mm). If you are using a 600 mm lens, then you need a shutter speed of 1/800 or 1/1000. If you select camera conditions to get a reasonable exposure (yellow to orange disc) you can do this hand- held which is a lot more convenient. Using your lens with a wide-open aperture is acceptable since you are essentially focused at infinity and depth of field is not significant. A high ISO may produce noise in the dark areas but that's not what you're interested in, just the surface of the sun. You can check this out easily enough, just go outside on any sunny day and give it a try.
I'm going to PM you an image I made from the eclipse in 2017 which has a partial eclipse image with sunspots done hand-held.
Yes, I'm suggesting not using a tripod. Set your... (
show quote)
With the understanding that there is no right or wrong ... I can use my tripod as easily as if I was handholding the camera. I shoot BIF using a tripod all the time and the sun isn't moving (relatively) as fast. I don't anticipate any problems using the tripod. As for the f-stop, I will stop down, not to increase DOF but rather for optics of the lens.
bwana wrote:
Most serious astrophotographers shoot video when imaging the Moon, Sun or Planets.
Actually with the Nikon Z9 you can shoot 10-bit 4:2:2 H.265 in 8K. This would be close to ideal for Lunar/Solar imaging.
With any target being shot through a rolling and rocking atmosphere it is best to shoot a huge number of images and select the best one(s) for processing (known as 'Lucky Imaging'). Hires video is made for this. Shoot a minute of video and you have about 1800 'images' to choose from. Software like AutoStakkert will analyze your video, determine the quality of each frame and stack the best frames you want to combine into the final image. With my Sony A7R V I normally shoot 4-5 one minute 8K videos with a refocus between each, run AutoStakkert on each video, save the best frame from each video then run AutoStakkert on the 4-5 best frames to obtain the best of the best for final postprocessing. In other words I'm getting the best image from essentially 7200-9000 images. With luck I'll get a few images when the atmosphere is fairly stable, i.e.; lucky imaging.
bwa
Most serious astrophotographers shoot video when i... (
show quote)
I have never shot video, I'll have to think about it. In the meantime I sent a note to Stakkert asking if their program will handle NEF files.
Reuss Griffiths wrote:
Howard, Here is an alternative approach to try. If you have a solar filter, you can get great images of the sun hand-held by kicking up your ISO to over 1000 and taking your images by setting the camera to manual mode then setting your shutter speed to greater than 1/ focal length of lens. So if you have a 600 mm lens, set your shutter speed to 1/800 or 1/1000 or faster, open lens aperture to close to max(depth of field doesn't matter at infinity and essentially a flat surface). If the widest aperture you can get is f5.6, set it at f8.0 and take some images hand-held. You should adjust your conditions so that you get orange to yellow images. Normal Photoshop post processing will bring out great images of sunspots. Your posted images only had two showing. When did you take these images? There has been a lot of sunspot activity lately.
Any noise from the higher ISO will only show up in the dark areas, not on the sun's surface and doesn't impact quality and sharpness of the sunspots.
I get good sharp images of sunspots all the time using this process. These are the same conditions you should be using to take images of the partial eclipses leading up to the total solar eclipse on April 8th.
Howard, Here is an alternative approach to try. ... (
show quote)
Alternative to what? Are you suggesting not to use a tripod?
I will be doing some testing and getting practice - this is a completely new niche for me.
Thank you! The check is in the mail.