Moon on Fuji Provia 400f

Hi all,

I normally shoot the Moon with Provia 100f because of its fine grain but I
had a few shots left on a 400f roll so I finished them on the Moon.
Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is shortened
as well. On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

Still undecided which I will use (weather permitting) for the upcoming
eclipse.

Any way, here's the shot:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Take Care,

JAS

Jose,

It's truly been a pleasure to see the progress you have made in just a
very short time, from the time we first heard from you, to now.

Great shot!!!

I remember my astrophotography period (that was back in the Cretaceous
Period, when dinosaurs walked the earth - I had a pet T-Rex that would
stand guard while I was out in the Arizona desert taking astrophotos, so
NOBODY messed with us), and watching you move with the digital generation
has been a fun experience. You've made more progress in the last year
than I did in five with 35mm film.

Thanks for letting us share your growth in this great pastime!!!

--
To reply, remove the "z" if one appears in my address
"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...
Hi all,

I normally shoot the Moon with Provia 100f because of its fine grain but
I
had a few shots left on a 400f roll so I finished them on the Moon.
Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain
is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is
shortened
as well. On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a
second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

Still undecided which I will use (weather permitting) for the upcoming
eclipse.

Any way, here's the shot:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Take Care,

JAS

Beautiful shot!

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/

"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...
Hi all,

I normally shoot the Moon with Provia 100f because of its fine grain but I
had a few shots left on a 400f roll so I finished them on the Moon.
Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is shortened
as well. On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

Still undecided which I will use (weather permitting) for the upcoming
eclipse.

Any way, here's the shot:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Take Care,

JAS

"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...

Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is shortened
as well.

Right; high-speed films tend to be like that. Elite Chrome 200 less than
most... you might try it.

On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

More to the point, it also "stops" the vibration from your camera's shutter.

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Nice!

--
Michael Covington
Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur
www.covingtoninnovations.com

Jan,

Thanks so much for the kind comments. A while back your advice was
instrumental in getting me in the right scope, etc. I still have your
eyepieces picture with the wine bottles and such - a classic . LOL on the
dinosaur stuff. I'm starting to consider myself in that league .

Thanks again and take care,

JAS

"Jan Owen" wrote in message
news:KSjkb.70767$vj2.40702@fed1read06...
Jose,

It's truly been a pleasure to see the progress you have made in just a
very short time, from the time we first heard from you, to now.

Great shot!!!

I remember my astrophotography period (that was back in the Cretaceous
Period, when dinosaurs walked the earth - I had a pet T-Rex that would
stand guard while I was out in the Arizona desert taking astrophotos, so
NOBODY messed with us), and watching you move with the digital generation
has been a fun experience. You've made more progress in the last year
than I did in five with 35mm film.

Thanks for letting us share your growth in this great pastime!!!

--
To reply, remove the "z" if one appears in my address
"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...
Hi all,

I normally shoot the Moon with Provia 100f because of its fine grain but
I
had a few shots left on a 400f roll so I finished them on the Moon.
Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain
is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is
shortened
as well. On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a
second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

Still undecided which I will use (weather permitting) for the upcoming
eclipse.

Any way, here's the shot:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Take Care,

JAS

Thanks Chuck - much appreciated.

Take Care,

JAS


"Chuck Taylor" wrote in message
...
Beautiful shot!

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try the Lunar Observing Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/

"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...
Hi all,

I normally shoot the Moon with Provia 100f because of its fine grain but
I
had a few shots left on a 400f roll so I finished them on the Moon.
Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain
is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is
shortened
as well. On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a
second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

Still undecided which I will use (weather permitting) for the upcoming
eclipse.

Any way, here's the shot:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Take Care,

JAS

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the comments. You mentioned Elite Chrome 200 as having a better
tonal range than the 400f and I don't doubt you for a second but will the
tonal range hold up at +1 ?

I'm still up in the air on the coming eclipse. I shot the last one on 400f
and the tones were pretty compressed. You can see it he

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/lun..._composite.htm

Then again, if seeing is so-so and taking into account a big reduction in
photons for the eclipse, ISO 400 should help a lot, and as you metioned,
shutter vibration will be less of an issue. Guess I better get busy and
shoot some Elite Chrome at +1 before the eclipse so I can get me a quick (I
hope) learnign curve.

Thanks again and take care,

JAS


"Michael A. Covington" wrote
in message ...

"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...

Interesting to note the differences on the two films. First, the grain
is
more apparent on the 400f, but I also noticed the tonal range is
shortened
as well.

Right; high-speed films tend to be like that. Elite Chrome 200 less than
most... you might try it.

On the 400f's behalf, being able to shoot at 1/500th of a second
makes for consistently sharper pictures - free of most atmospheric
turbulence.

More to the point, it also "stops" the vibration from your camera's
shutter.

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Nice!

--
Michael Covington
Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur
www.covingtoninnovations.com

"Jose Suro" wrote in message
. com...
Hi Michael,

Thanks for the comments. You mentioned Elite Chrome 200 as having a better
tonal range than the 400f and I don't doubt you for a second but will the
tonal range hold up at +1 ?

A one-stop push, you mean? Yes, at least partly. I would not recommend
pushing it for an eclipse.

I'm still up in the air on the coming eclipse. I shot the last one on 400f
and the tones were pretty compressed. You can see it he

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/lun..._composite.htm

Then again, if seeing is so-so and taking into account a big reduction in
photons for the eclipse, ISO 400 should help a lot, and as you metioned,
shutter vibration will be less of an issue. Guess I better get busy and
shoot some Elite Chrome at +1 before the eclipse so I can get me a quick
(I
hope) learnign curve.

Either that, or just use it straight. One stop does not make that much
difference.

Films are *all* so good these days that I can't keep up with them! I need
to test Provia 400F myself.

Clear skies,
Michael

"Michael A. Covington" wrote
in message ...
Films are *all* so good these days that I can't keep up with them! I need
to test Provia 400F myself.

Don Westergren has test data on his Web site:

http://home.nethere.net/mpd/FilmTest...lmTestData.htm

It appears to be the best unhypered film for astrophotography currently
available

On 10/19/03 07:52 +0900, Jose Suro wrote:

Any way, here's the shot:

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/jsuro/10_...n_10072003.htm

Wow. Just wow.

I took this with my little 4" and was pretty proud of my results
for a first prime-focus effort.
http://www2.gol.com/users/trane/luna.jpg Seeing yours just
makes me shake my head.

Yours is such a beautiful shot.

trane
--
//------------------------------------------------------------
// Trane Francks Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
// http://mp3.com/trane_francks/