656 messages in 148 discussions
Latest 3/16/19 by Cstar1
3552 messages in 831 discussions
177 messages in 23 discussions
9988 messages in 6757 discussions
1573 messages in 259 discussions
2442 messages in 1637 discussions
183 messages in 110 discussions
684 messages in 442 discussions
1328 messages in 338 discussions
1471 messages in 1135 discussions
847 messages in 486 discussions
373 messages in 246 discussions
4108 messages in 2606 discussions
455 messages in 115 discussions
3006 messages in 2166 discussions
428 messages in 402 discussions
It is, isn't it?
James Montanus is a great photographer!
I got back into photography a few years ago and have been playing around recently to get some really sharp shots of the moon with my mirrorless digital cameras and some legacy lenses . The best one I have is an old Tokina AT-X 150-500 mm zoom that's long, ungainly, heavy,; and almost impossible to use handheld on moving objects it sets on the heaviest tripod I can bring myself to carry at any given time and works pretty well. Amazon tells me I've got an Orion StarBlast 62 due on Thursday and perhaps that will be easier on the back and a little sharper .
I believe in tripods: https://www.flickr.com/photos/101461001@N06/albums/72157676559403225
Here are some results:
That lens was very much a surprise. 1) it's a single coated zoom. 2) it's supposed to be a little unsharp at 500 mm. 3) it's a 1979 design, and lacks the refinements of modern computerized engineering, and 4) it's only 500 mm –max.
I have an Olympus 1.4X tele-converter specifically designed for a couple of their Micro-Four-Thirds lenses, one being a 40-150mm zoom; here's a (non-astronomy, sorry) crop from a picture taken at 210 mm with the converter from a distance of 105 m; that's the kind of sharpness I'm looking for.
Here's the 500mm zoom again, with a Full Moon:
Cortland (KA5S) said:
that's the kind of sharpness I'm looking for.
I can see why. The water in that shot is amazing.