Photography equipment.

[Beardy]

This evening I took some photographs of the rather splendid ‘pink’ moon. I took some initial pictures with my phone², before deciding it was a sight worth getting the big camera² out for.

On a quick review I’m left wondering why I bother with the big camera. Maybes a more considered review of the images on lightroom will change my mind but…

Okay, I know that with time to set up and consider what I’m actually doing, the Nikon will produce the better image, but I do get a bit peeved when the iPhone keeps providing me with snapshots with more initial Impact.

1. iPhone 13 pro max
2. Nikon D810 with 24>70 F2.8 balanced on my lightweight travel tripod.

[Jaded]

70mm is not a great focal length for the moon, longer would be better. Were you on manual? Anything auto would not be good, given the focal length.

Phones use computers in making their photos, it is one of the things you pay for, the computational stuff.

[Polar Bear]

I must admit that recently I have become fascinated with taking a decent shot of the moon.  Both my Samsung Galaxy S9 and my Google Pixel 6 Pro take competent snaps of it with digital zoom and built in post image processing but I'm hankering for something better.  I have a Sony Alpha 350 DSLR which still works very well and a decent, sturdy, Manfrotto tripod.  My reading around the subject tells me that 300mm minimum is what I need for a lens to take that picture that I seek. 

We already own a 70-300 Tamron zoom but I am thinking that better quality prime glass (or even better quality tele zoom glass) would be even more effective. 

I have the "shot" already in my mind and I am going to set up and do a trial to see what it looks like with the Tamron.  This should help me decide if I do need bigger or simply better glass and then I can look around to hire or buy secondhand.  If I buy I can sell later or keep for other "interesting" shots such as sitting in a hide for hours and shooting water fowl or deer.

The problem with a good shot of the moon or anything is that it usually needs lots of good planning and preparation.  People do get that lucky shot sometimes but that's why pro photographers cost good money.

[pcolbeck]

70mm is not a great focal length for the moon, longer would be better. Were you on manual? Anything auto would not be good, given the focal length.

Phones use computers in making their photos, it is one of the things you pay for, the computational stuff.

All digital cameras use computers. Its just that phones have more powerful computers than DSLRs. If you are shooting RAW 99% of the processing is assumed to be done by the software on your laptop or desktop rather than in the camera though which flips the equation and means that you are throwing more compute at the problem than a phone possesses.

[Jaded]

However the computer isn’t there when you take the photo.

[rogerzilla]

I have a DSLR and film SLRs but rarely take them out, mainly because anyone with a real camera outside tourist spots is seen as a "paedo" these days.

Mobiles with multiple lenses can take very good photos; the main problem is the lack of a lens hood, so flare is terrible into the light.  The autofocus is usually shite with an off-centre subject, as there us no simple way to override it.

For simple, well-lit shots, they are good enough for a fairly large print now.  This is one from last week:

20220421_131159 by rogerzilla, on Flickr