pcdebb
 | fantastic! hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @12:01AM
|
jimhamilton
 | Outstanding! hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @12:03AM
|
ZZZZZZZ
 | Wow. hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @12:16AM
|
Cody0
 | 500mm?! Very nice hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @12:17AM
|
Andrew J
 | 90 minutes of shooting and I have 2 or 3 of this quality.
These are the ones with the bare lens and no converter.
Converter shots of the dark red moon took 1/2 a second or longer exposures and were still dark even at 1600 ISO. The shots looked like you stuck your thumb in red ink and smeared it on black paper.
The only shots that were usable were around 1/4 of a second exposure. Some motion blur but less noise than faster exposures.
BTW, a paper article said exposures up to 3 seconds would not require tracking hardware. Of coarse that is completely crazy and nowhere near correct.hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @12:20AM
|
MrWhsprs
 | I didn't have any luck with multi-second exposures either, due to motion blur. hey mods · » Friday February 22nd, @10:24AM
|
DeathK
 | Nice! Not all of use have 500mm lenses and a $3000 camera to work with however :p hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @01:26AM
|
Stooges Fan
 | Holy Cow! This rocks. hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @03:03AM
|
richdelb
 | Very nice job. Funny how so many of us were looking / shooting at the same object, and the same time. Kind of cool to think about that, eh? hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @07:37AM
|
rduckwor
| Excellent!! The best of the eclipse shots and magnitudes better than mine. Interesting that I was shooting the same thing with a similar lens at 1600 ASA and couldn't get my exposures below 3 seconds. hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @12:20PM
|
simplykristi
 | Awesome photo! :) hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @02:12PM
|
Hiker
 | Nicest! hey mods · » Thursday February 21st, @04:00PM
|
antiserious
 |
Great shot, and a belated Thank You for my current desktop wallpaper!
hey mods · » Sunday March 2nd, @09:13PM
|
) 
