They all look quite good Bill. First is the best though. I think they look much better than the one you posted yesterday. For example, look at the upper right part of the moon, in these new pics, you can see the small craters clearly, in the previous attempt, you cannot.
rg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > While the fellas were out for their evening constitutional, I looked at the > heavens and saw a very clear sky with the moon in a location that I could > take pictures of it easily. > So, I set up the rig again, and went about photographing it again. > This time, I set the focus most carefully, and used a cable release on the > camera, along with the 3 second delay. > Then, I decided to ramp up the ISO to see if I could get some noise. > There are three shots of the moon on this page, the top was shot at ISO 100, > the middle at ISO 400, the bottom was shot at ISO 1600. > Again, this series was shot with the A600/5.6 with the 2XL converter > mounted. I attempted to process each file as close to identically as I > could, though I gave the ISO 1600 file less sharpening as it was showing > noise at that point. > > http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrobb/pictures/moon/moons.html > > Anyway, as a technical experiment, it seems successful, as a photograph, the > subject line says it all. > > William Robb > > -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
