Hi Don,
Going by those two shots the total eclipse of the Moon should be no problem. I'm also intending to have a go with a 400mm lens on a fixed tripod but with a 1.4x convertor. I have taken a full Moon pic with that arrangement which has come out fine. The total eclipse itself may be problematic as it is darker and will require a longer exposure. It is possible that it may need a tracking mount, we will just have to wait and see. All good fun.

Dave

To answer Foxy's question on where the stacked multiple TC image would be acceptable or not ( A phenomenon that I can sware have read somewhere as something not possible or not to be perform by the manufacturer's recommendation) I did a test tonight. Two of images obtained are added to gallery (Sorry I find it very difficult at times to find the old forum topics, still navigatioin being a problem for me, so left the images for easier approachable gallery. Here are the links.


LINK - 1
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...g&limit=recent

LINK - 2
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...3&limit=recent

Don

I have been looking at photos of a total lunar eclipse I took in 2003 and find that the ratio of the time exposures from full Moon to eclipsed Moon are 1 to 2000.
i.e. I used 1/500 s for the full and 4 s for the eclipsed. All other factors were the same.

The Moon moves relative to us at 15 arc seconds per second. The diameter of the Moon is 0.5 degree which equals 1800 arc seconds. So in each second of exposure with a fixed mount the Moon will move just under 1% of its diameter. I'll leave you to judge whether that would be acceptable or not. It may be worth trying with as high an iso as the camera permits (or use RAW) and possibly stretching the result in photoshop. What I am saying here of course only really applies if you want a detailed red Moon. A small red Moon as part of a scenic shot could be much easier.

This is probably all quite academic as it will be cloudy !!

Dave

I have just seen or forecast through to Friday the 2nd and its grim apart from tomorrow. :( :( I need one clear night to prove if 2x TC will work satisfactorily on my 400 ( it is not recommended for focal lengths greater than 200mm ). Not sure if I can get reasonable results with that, never mind moving into Sassans league. :D

Well done with your pic in the gallery as it shows what we can expect to see if the sky is clear.

Don

Tonights moon taken with 400mm f5.6 and TC201 2x converter. This converter is designed for lenses up to 200mm, and not recommended for the 400 lens so not a bad result. ISO400, lens wide open so effective aperture f11, shutter speed 1/200 to minimise any vibration effects.

Modifications to kit before trying this combination were making a new mounting foot extension for the lens ( see post in lenses forum ), adding a 1.5 kg counterbalance to the Manfrotto 501 head and suspending a 5kg weight off the tripod main boss to keep vibrations to a minimum.

Cloud cover has now come in or I would try a mini comp with Sassan and add my last TC. Not that that could really compete as it would only give 1600mm f22 wide open. :D :D

Don

That looks nice and sharp Don, how are you managing that because it is not easy. How do you plan to cope with the total eclipse because it looks as if you may need a shutter speed of around 10s? Because of that I think I will cheat and use my driven mount. I have also been experimenting this evening and have taken some shots through a 400mm lens plus a 1.4TC. The result as far as I can tell is identical with yours. I also took a shot through my 200mm telescope where there is clearly more detail. Unfortunately, although I could just squeeze tonight's Moon into the field of view, a full Moon is too big, so for the eclipse will use the camera lens.

Dave

Dave,

I only managed a couple of shots before the cloud came in, so picked on the one with highest shutter speed. The intention was to progressivly work my way down the shutter speed range and that would show up the minimum that I could go to. Just been outside and its a bit of a dead duck as quite a bit of general thin cloud as well as thicker stuff. Hey ho, will keep trying if we get any clear skies before Saturday.

As for the eclipse I will just use the 400 and no converter. Less magnification but lots fewer probs in terms of shutter speed.

Don

Well if this one is not successful the next is 21 Feb 2008 and then a 2 year gap.

Dave

Don as you wanted, here are a few images of my set up.

Explanation on last image that are my true practical secrets are in merit order IMHO:
1) Wimberley style gimbel head. The main key to success. When long lens is place right here (At the center of gravity using 3 way adjustments) the set up is virtually weightless. I can use even losely fasten knobs, yet move the point of lens in any direction accurately and with ease. The good thing is where I leave the point of shot, it stays there. If you have worked with the heavy camera/lens, you know how frustrating is when you finally zero in on location you want, and the moment removing you hand off the camera, it sags down with gravity so constantly you need to keep in mind a rough correction factor here, if not using a solid setup (I still have the nightmare of the days or rather nights that I was using my regular tripod).

2) Solid tripod (Make sure recommended carrying weight of tripod is well above the intended weight of you set up. Manufacturers tend to lie well here.

3) Remote shutter release. I use the wired one to exclude the problems specially with IR and battery of wireless ones. Mine is the cheaper one from Hong Kong. Does excellent job.

4) Magnifier for viewfinder. Remember you are not having any focus assistant what so ever. Don't laugh but without this, I definitely bracket my focusing. I have two magnifier. Here is the Nikon DG-2. Seems for once the different manufacturers did not mind to use the same standard of fitting (Unlike their zealously formated other aspects such as bayonet, memory etc). I use the Olympus for when moon is very high in the sky as that one has 90 degree turn and 2 different magnifications (Cons being right to left not corrected and no option to see the viewfinder unmagnified (Checking manual parameters, ISO etc).

5) Mirror lock up that is set from "Custom menu" in Canon.

I don't use any counterbalance weight. My set up as seen is rock steady. The other problem is you need to virtually chase moon with every shot. In about 4 exposure, moon is completely traveled from above to lower frame of my view finder so repeatative repositioning is a must. No if you want to change a parameter, ISO, EV etc, just figure out the efficiency and time. You surely want to have a close communication with higher authorities, as partially cloudy sky means pending disaster and frustrations.

Wish every one especially for resident of Europe a fun picturing total eclipse. We unlucky North Americans especially the west coast residents will have penumbra only from 18:24 or so on March 3rd (Moon rise 17:40) so I'll keep on looking at my cholesterol levels to keep myself un-rusty for the next one to come.

Thanks for those Sassan.

I am just about to step out the door and go to Focus On Imaging Show and will look at your Wimberly head there, also eyepiece magnifier as I totally understand that bit. I am meeting Foxy there so I am sure we will discuss the subject.

Don