fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Report Posted January 13, 2017 I don't know if anyone else caught it last night, but the moon was nearly full last night and it was spectacular. I got out my 10x50 binoculars and was able to see the Sea of Tranquility (when I was braced against the wall). The Wolf Moon is tonight and should be a real show stopper. I did take a few pictures, but I couldn't get steady enough. Here is a stock photo from the site linked. http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/01/moons_of_2017_full_wolf_moon_r.html Quote
Turtle Posted January 13, 2017 Report Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) I don't know if anyone else caught it last night, but the moon was nearly full last night and it was spectacular. I got out my 10x50 binoculars and was able to see the Sea of Tranquility (when I was braced against the wall). The Wolf Moon is tonight and should be a real show stopper. I did take a few pictures, but I couldn't get steady enough. ... Not sure where you are, but the Full Moon here on the West coast was 3:30 am Jan.12, or in other words, last night. :moon: At any rate, I did take note and shot a couple photos. Managed to catch a bit of a halo in the wide shot. Get yourself a tripod for those unsteady times. :thumbs_up Edited January 13, 2017 by Turtle Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) Not sure where you are, but the Full Moon here on the West coast was 3:30 am Jan.12, or in other words, last night. :moon: At any rate, I did take note and shot a couple photos. Managed to catch a bit of a halo in the wide shot.Get yourself a tripod for those unsteady times. :thumbs_up Nice shots. I am on the east coast (Greenville, SC to be exact). I have a tripod back in the office with my camera equipment, but the Samsung smartphone does not have a place to mount it. I used to be quite an avid photographer, but digital kind of killed it for me. After using digital cameras for the last 10-ish years (wife's or company camera), I suppose I should go buy a good one for myself. I have 110, 126, 127, 35, and 620 film formats, and 87/88, 126/127, and roll type Polaroid cameras. I didn't like the 110 pocket camera, but loved the clunky cumbersome 620 Brownie. The film was about as big as the picture, which left a lot of resolution for enlarging to huge prints. Edited January 13, 2017 by fahrquad Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 I did not see the Apollo 11 LEM base or lunar rover. JMJones0424 1 Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 I remember watching the Apollo 11 landing (and all of the subsequent landings) live on July 20, 1969. I was 8 years old at the time. I barely remember the last Gemini mission. Video of the actual landing in link. I kind of lost interest in the manned space program when we got to the shuttle program. IMHO, it was kinda like United Van Lines in space. Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) I remember watching the Apollo 11 landing (and all of the subsequent landings) live on July 20, 1969. I was 8 years old at the time. I barely remember the last Gemini mission. Video of the actual landing in link. I kind of lost interest in the manned space program when we got to the shuttle program. IMHO, it was kinda like United Van Lines in space. Sorry if that looks like an MTV promo... Edited January 13, 2017 by fahrquad Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 Flight paths of Pioneer 10 and 11, and Voyager 1 and 2. I am guilty of following Voyager 2 almost exclusively, but there were others that I remember. Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 Apparently Voyager 1 is now in interstellar space and Voyager 2 is just about there. http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/where/ Quote
Turtle Posted January 13, 2017 Report Posted January 13, 2017 Nice shots. I am on the east coast (Greenville, SC to be exact). I have a tripod back in the office with my camera equipment, but the Samsung smartphone does not have a place to mount it. I used to be quite an avid photographer, but digital kind of killed it for me. After using digital cameras for the last 10-ish years (wife's or company camera), I suppose I should go buy a good one for myself. I have 110, 126, 127, 35, and 620 film formats, and 87/88, 126/127, and roll type Polaroid cameras. I didn't like the 110 pocket camera, but loved the clunky cumbersome 620 Brownie. The film was about as big as the picture, which left a lot of resolution for enlarging to huge prints. Danke. I took the moon photos with a Nikon L830 camera, and while it lacks manual controls I consider it the best camera I have ever owned. Like you, I have gone through many film cameras and a B/W darkroom setup, though all I still own is a Nikon 35mm SLR with lenses, filters, motor drive, yada, yada, yada.I don't use the dinosaur but can't part with it. Hell, I can't even give it away. Unlike you, digital has revived photography for me. Always ready, take hundreds of shots at virtually no expense, see them instantly, and throw out what doesn't cut the mustard. Shoot video too, and that's something you could never do with a Brownie. Retouch the keepers in comfort at the computer without the hours of standing at an enlarger and the expense of chemicals and paper and the lengthy cleanup. I also watched the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo missions as Walter Cronkite explained every detail in concert with interviews of the rocket scientists. As to seeing the landers, you surely are pulling my leg as no Earth based telescope can image anything that small. Well, enjoy tonight's Moon watch. :) JMJones0424 1 Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 Pioneer 10 died in 2005 and Pioneer 11 died in 2003 when their nuclear piles had decayed so much that they could not generate enough electricity to send a signal. Here is Pioneer 10 during construction in 1971. https://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/missions/archive/pioneer10-11.html Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 Pioneer 3. Pioneer 4. Pioneer 6-9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_program Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 I said I didn't see the LEM or rover, not that I expected to, so I wasn't actually pulling your leg.. Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 Just had to add this Spectacular shot. Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 I still have every camera I have ever owned except for the cheap plastic 127 format camera I took on the class day trip to Philadelphia (from Long Island) when I was in 7th grade. It got broken some time after the trip, and I mean broken into pieces. When I went on a 3 day class trip to DC in 8th grade in 1974 I had bought a Kodak 134 Instamatic, which is down the hall. It still works if I can find batteries and 126 film. I believe the batteries were PX-825, but as my wife keeps reminding me, my memory is going (in her opinion)(just because I forget inconsequential details like where she is going with her twin sister after work). I was debating between the Kodak 134 and the new Kodak X-15. The 134 used internal button batteries for the meter and flash while the X series used flash cubes with the battery built in (which was disposed of after 4 shots). A product of those wasteful times. (for some reason the site is telling me that the image extension for the stock photos for the referenced products is not allowed)(here are the links if you are the least bit interested) https://www.google.com/search?q=x-15+flash+cubes&tbm=isch&imgil=DxJWl8mhr5g-vM%253A%253BR4qQaQeM-hIrfM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fuk.pinterest.com%25252Fpin%25252F243757398552406496%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=DxJWl8mhr5g-vM%253A%252CR4qQaQeM-hIrfM%252C_&usg=__-a96PeHzMxM6TUXQb-MkXokWyUg%3D&biw=1366&bih=589&ved=0ahUKEwiz29S66L_RAhUriVQKHSW0CB4QyjcIKQ&ei=KiV5WLOeBKuS0gKl6KLwAQ#tbm=isch&q=kodak+134+instamatic+camera&imgrc=pjzBeNmndkbJpM%3A https://www.google.com/search?q=x-15+flash+cubes&tbm=isch&imgil=DxJWl8mhr5g-vM%253A%253BR4qQaQeM-hIrfM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fuk.pinterest.com%25252Fpin%25252F243757398552406496%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=DxJWl8mhr5g-vM%253A%252CR4qQaQeM-hIrfM%252C_&usg=__-a96PeHzMxM6TUXQb-MkXokWyUg%3D&biw=1366&bih=589&ved=0ahUKEwiz29S66L_RAhUriVQKHSW0CB4QyjcIKQ&ei=KiV5WLOeBKuS0gKl6KLwAQ#tbm=isch&q=kodak+x-15+camera&imgrc=D5POIJ7VtZfr8M%3A Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) My first 35mm was a Minolta SRT-MCII that I bought in 1978, which is a slightly modernized version of the old workhorse SRT-101 . They are both equivalent to the Pentax K-1000, if that is more familiar (no idea on Canon, Yashika, Mamiya, or other brands that may or may not still exist). It is fully functional once I put in a new battery for the light meter (and find some 35mm film) My most recent 35mm is a Minolta X-700. My sister-in-law gave it to me before her divorce 17 years ago. She had no idea how to operate it and only gave it to me to keep it from her abusive ex in the divorce. I have never used it, and it has been sitting in the padded aluminum camera case with the SRT-MCII, and other assorted attachments, up on the top shelf of the office closet. I believe it has an automatic and manual modes, but again I have never used it. http://www.butkus.org/chinon/minolta/minolta_srt_mc-ii/minolt6.jpg Edited January 13, 2017 by fahrquad Quote
fahrquad Posted January 13, 2017 Author Report Posted January 13, 2017 Yikes, that did not turn out as expected. Deleting bad links shortly Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.