The Moon This evening.
 

This evening’s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

The Moon This evening.
 

On Jul 19, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ):

On Friday, 20 July 2018 00:00:59 UTC-4, Savageduck wrote:
This evening’s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

Very nice, sharp shot. Finally, someone who realizes detail is better when
the moon is in partial phase.
BTW, check your wallet:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5741273037/fujifilm-goes-long-with-fujinon-xf-200mm-f2-lens-and-teleconverter-kit

Regardless of a serious case of GAS, the price of that hunk of glass exceeds
my wallet pain threshold.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

The Moon This evening.
 

On Jul 20, 2018, Whisky-dave wrote
(in ):

On Friday, 20 July 2018 08:20:37 UTC+1, RichA wrote:
On Friday, 20 July 2018 03:14:42 UTC-4, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 19, 2018, RichA wrote
(in ):

On Friday, 20 July 2018 00:00:59 UTC-4, Savageduck wrote:
This evening’s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

Very nice, sharp shot. Finally, someone who realizes detail is better when
the moon is in partial phase.
BTW, check your wallet:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/5741273037/fujifilm-goes-long-with-fujinon-xf-200mm-f2-lens-and-teleconverter-kit

Regardless of a serious case of GAS, the price of that hunk of glass
exceeds my wallet pain threshold.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

I know few Nikon owners who have the 200mm f/2.0, but it's a mind-bendingly
perfect lens. I expect the Fuji to be the same. This lens will cost 8-10
times more to build than say a 200mm f2.8 (the ED glass Fuji has to use
costs about $600/lb. so the $6000 price with the converter while really
high, IMO, is justified. Buy it's a specialist lens, maybe moreso than
300-400mm telephotos, and will be rare.

What do you think this speciality of the lens is aimed at, just those with
very deep pockets, I;m just wondering what sort of subject or person would
actually need (rather than just want) this lens and why.

The largest group using this lens, or this class of lens, will be sports
photographers. This would be especially useful for indoor, and outdoor sport
venues, night, or day. It is very fast glass for that FL, and being designed
for APS-C would have an effective FF FL of 300mm, Add the 1.4TC and the 200mm
goes to 280mm, or an FF effective 420mm. For the group of pro photographers
shooting sports it could prove to be a bargain lens at $6,000 given the high
cost of similar Canon, Nikon, or Sony FF glass at $10,000+.

Then there are also going to be a few wildlife photographers who would find
this len, with, or without the 1.4TC quite attractive.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

The Moon This evening.
 

On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 01:51:18 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Friday, 20 July 2018 05:00:59 UTC+1, Savageduck wrote:
This evening=E2=80=99s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.
=20
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg
=20
--=20
=20
Regards,
Savageduck

Nice , I tried doing a shot of Mars a few nights ago as Mars is pretty clo=
se to Earth at the moment will be at it's closest on 27th IIRC. Just 30 od=
d million miles away=20
EOS M3 with 70-300mm.
Didn't get anything worthwhile but I had to try, got some interesting wobbl=
ing effects, but at least I could see colour.
And even with the naked eye I could see it's orange red colour which is unu=
sual in London anyway.
Might try again next week which means a 3-4am fun, guess my cat will get a =
late supper or early breakfast.



Next week (well 29th) you'll get a lunar exclipse and Mars in
opposition as near as it will get for a while plus a few other planets
in sight.

--
AnthonyL

The Moon This evening.
 

On 20/07/2018 05:00, Savageduck wrote:
This evening’s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg

Straight out of the camera or post-processed?

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

The Moon This evening.
 

On Jul 20, 2018, David Taylor wrote
(in article ):

On 20/07/2018 05:00, Savageduck wrote:
This evening’s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg

Straight out of the camera or post-processed?

That was the RAF with some LR CCC contrast, and dehaze tweeks, no LR
sharpening, followed by a 1:1 crop. Then I took it into PS CC and applied
Unsharp filter. However, I shoot RAW+JPEG, so here is the SOOC jpg, au
natural, uncropped, and otherwise unmolested, straight from the SD card to
Smugmug.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-hRm97Zd/0/bf1a551b/O/i-hRm97Zd.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck

The Moon This evening.
 

On Jul 20, 2018, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jul 20, 2018, David Taylor wrote
(in article ):

On 20/07/2018 05:00, Savageduck wrote:
This evening’s Moon shot with X-T2 + 100-400mm handheld.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-J7Z6MBf/0/6dab5c7e/O/i-J7Z6MBf.jpg

Straight out of the camera or post-processed?

That was the RAF with some LR CCC contrast, and dehaze tweeks, no LR
sharpening, followed by a 1:1 crop. Then I took it into PS CC and applied
Unsharp filter. However, I shoot RAW+JPEG, so here is the SOOC jpg, au
natural, uncropped, and otherwise unmolested, straight from the SD card to
Smugmug.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-hRm97Zd/0/bf1a551b/O/i-hRm97Zd.jpg

I tried some minor local adjustment on that jpg using LR CC to come up with a
comparison with the SOOC. The first screen shot shows my Adjustment brush
settings in LR CC. Those were the only adjustments made. The second screen
shot shows the side-by-side comparison.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-hMS4ZsD/0/2b43ca37/O/i-hMS4ZsD.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-4vMRCx2/0/f9e246dc/O/i-4vMRCx2.jpg

--

Regards,
Savageduck