Partial eclipse of the sun

sevencrossing

On march the 20th at 9.30am in the UK we get a partial eclipse of the sun
I do NOT want a "close up " of the whole sun. I am after a landscape, including a recognisable local landmark
eg a tower. I am after a sequence in one shot something like

any advice?
I know not to look at the sun
I was planning on using 10 stop ND and using live view
I have a D800 and lenses from 16mm to 400mm

spraynpray

I'm with you on this seven. Interesting topic, thanks.

Msmoto

A couple of issues to think about:

A long telephoto in daylight with an internal ND filter, as the 52mm filter on a 400mm f/2.8, when pointed at the sun will allow the lens to be cooked. One must use something like this

http://www.thousandoaksoptical.com/solar.html

This series on my Flickr account could very well be done as a multiple exposure

This was done with a B+W 52mm IR Dark Red (092M) MRC Filter

proudgeek

I've been using StarStaX, which I think could be applied here. Somewhere in doing the research, I noticed came across a great stacked sequence of a lunar eclipse that was built using this software.

spraynpray

So what is the chance of a 10 stop ND giving a result?

ptrmcky

I was going to rent a 600mm f4 with a 1.4 teleconverter and use my 52mm 10 stopper. Could this destroy a £7000 lens and get me in lots of trouble with the rental company?

Ironheart

You will never destroy a lens with light/heat from the sun. You will however (potentially) destroy what the lens is aimed at, either your sensor, or your eyeball. The 10 stopper is okay for taking pics with live-view and for limited direct sun exposure. I would not *ever* look in the viewfinder with only a ND filter on the front. ND filters block *visible* light but don't block UV or IR which is what cooks your retina (or eventually the sensor, but it has UV protection and is actually okay with the light, just the heat will eventually destroy the sensor, but probably only after an hour or so with the ND on it). Before I would put my eye up to a viewfinder there would need to be a *solar* filter on the front like one of these:
http://www.thousandoaksoptical.com/solar.html

General warning from http://starcircleacademy.com/2012/04/solar-filter/
There are at least FIVE different standards for measuring the transmissiveness of filters: “Neutral Density: ND, Optical Density – also often called ND, Shade Number – for welders glass, transmissiveness, and stops). For a photographer who is familiar with the ND scale used to rate Neutral Density filters this is NOT the same scale as the “Optical Density” scale used to rate solar filters! An ND3.8 (photo solar filter) in the optical density scale is equivalent to the ND8192 neutral density filter! An ND8 filter for your camera is 3-stops of light. For safe visual viewing you need about 14 stops! So an ND8 is woefully short of light snuffing capabilities. Moreover neutral density filters used with cameras may or may not extinguish harmful Infra-red and Ultraviolet radiation.

spraynpray

OK, I'm going to compose my image quickly with live view then put the lens cap back on while I wait for the sun to get into position then take the shot and cover up while I chimp. I can't see a problem with that, can anybody else?

Being England, it will probably be too cloudy anyway...

Ironheart

Are you going to use a ND or other filter? What FL?

spraynpray

10 stop ND and something between 24-120 on the D750.

sevencrossing

10 stop ND and 70 -400 on a D800

Ironheart

You'll be fine as long as you don't use the viewfinder. One of the trade-offs of being completely safe with a solar filter vs a 10 or more stop ND is that the solar filter will only show the disk of the sun. With a ND you will be able to get some context, other details and landmarks. Just don't look in the viewfinder with your remaining eye. (Joke from the laser warning sticker: WARNING: Do not look at laser with remaining eye). I guess you had to be there...

Msmoto

OK, my information is that when one is using a big tele, e.g., 400mm f/2.8, in the middle of the day, pointing it not the sun can create a lot of heat internally. The filters on this are actually behind all the glass, so any heat from the magnification of the image is still in the elements. Thus, I always am shooting the sun late in the day, and I find the red filter above, about a 3 f/stop filter gives me what I want. A ten stop will pretty much drop out any light other than the sun itself.

Now, as to what one gets with a solar filter which cuts out 99.999% of the light:


In the upper right corner is one looks at the surface in this larger view:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fantinesfotos/14864705484/sizes/o/

one can see the details of areas of flare. The filter i use fits perfectly on the front of the lens, about 8 inches across.

Note, this image was captured in Colorado from an altitude of about 6,000 feet above sea level. The real limiting factor in this astro stuff is IMO the degrading of the image due to atmospheric conditions, even on a clear day.

spraynpray

That is a good image of the sun Tommie, but I am not expecting to get detail like that, just to get the foreground subject and the sun in focus and so the sun is not very burnt out to the extent that it is bleaching the surrounding features of the image. I'll have to accept silhouettes if I am going to get it in one - it's going to be interesting for sure.

Msmoto

I have some other images, one being with a B+W 52mm 093 (87C) Infrared Glass Filter.

Blocks Entire Visible Spectrum
Filter Appears Opaque to the Eye
Transmission Begins at 1% at 800nm
Transmission Rises to 88% at 900nm

The image was focused via live view, almost nothing to see. This is not a good result IMO, but I offer it as an example of what we might see with this filter. I may attempt to do this again in the near future. Hopefully I will get better results.

sevencrossing

Thus, I always am shooting the sun late in the day, .

In the UK the eclipse is scheduled for 9.30am but may be we can get it delayed

Msmoto

OK, OK, you guys always seem to have some creative thinking.

I think I would attempt the eclipse with your ND filter...10 stops, and try live view, keep the lens covered as you have planned, and share what you get.

Please be careful....

Oh, last minute thought...when looking at the rear screen, one must be careful to not accidentally look "around" the camera directly into the sun. Maybe a mirror could be used to view the rear screen so as to not have the sun directly in your eyes. Or, cover the camera with a black cloth like we did in the old days to see the ground glass, and this would make seeing what is on the rear screen easier.... I think.

spraynpray

I don't get it Tommie - are you saying that you never, ever look at the sun with your naked eyes? Sure, it's not good to stare at it, but a lot of my and others sunrise/sunset shots actually have sun in them to some extent. My optician tells me that the opacification of my eyes is completely normal for my age.

bald_eagle

spraynpray said:

I don't get it Tommie - are you saying that you never, ever look at the sun with your naked eyes? Sure, it's not good to stare at it, but a lot of my and others sunrise/sunset shots actually have sun in them to some extent. My optician tells me that the opacification of my eyes is completely normal for my eyes.

I'm pretty sure it's a good idea NOT to look directly at the sun at all. I believe most of the damage occurs on the retina itself, and the brain "maps" the bad spots out.. If the macula is damaged though (it's less than 1mm diameter), then if I remember correctly, that will leave a permanent blind spot...

Having said that, the sun's power is considerably lower at sunrise and sunset, so theoretically you could look at it a little longer before causing damage..

I think msmoto's warning also concerns looking at the back of the camera which would probably mean that the pupils would dilate leaving more risk of the bright sunlight and UV spilling round the camera body entering the eyes...
Also one of the main reasons for not using "cheap" sunglasses - the darkened glass lets the pupils dilate in bright sunlight, but they usually have little or no UV protection!!!

I'm looking forward to seeing you guys' pictures of the eclipse... a bit envious that I'm not home in the UK!

Cheers,
Baldy.

spraynpray

I just went out and looked - or tried to look - at the sun. Things have changed since I was a kid and I now find I can't come close to doing that any more. Doubtless the opacification of my eyes makes it harder too. @baldeagle has it right when he said sunrise and sunset is a lot weaker.

OK, this isn't going to be so easy. I am now thinking of a composite to cover the eclipse.

Msmoto

Most of my "sun" views are accidental.....LOL.....

OK, when the sun is near the horizon the atmosphere filters out almost everything which will damage our eyes. The bummer is when i have the lens (800mm) with its Thousand Oaks Optical filter attached, pointed at the sun and accidentally peak past the camera....Zap! Kinda like those flash tubes when one discharges inadvertently just about the time you are looking at it from 10 inches away....Oh s......

Of course, as has been pointed out, cataracts are helpful..... B-)

sevencrossing

I know not to look at the sun

I am after some advice on how to shoot and stitch the phases of the eclipse, as shown in the example
I am only going to get one chance at this

Msmoto

If I were to do this, I would have the set up pre determined. I might test the 10 stop ND at an exposure of f/22 or f/32 for 1/8000 sec, ISO 100. Maybe ISO 50 if the camera goes that low. On a tripod I would set up multiple exposure and shoot about five over the course of the event. Avoiding having the sun into the lens in between each exposure would be important. And predetermining the camera movement required during the exposures may be necessary.

The filter I use is about 100 times (about 7 stops) more dense than a 10 stop ND filter and this is the exposure I used at about noon:
1/640, f/10, ISO 100

If you want to combine images in post processing, this would make it easier as an individual shot of each phase could be used.

The above is my guess and may be totally incorrect, but this is where I would start. Good luck.

spraynpray

I'm going to concentrate on shooting the eclipse without any foreground then shoot one and add it later.

sevencrossing

Looks like the only way I am going to photograph the eclipse, is get my old hot balloon out, and fly above the clouds

spraynpray

Typical UK weather by the looks of it then. may see it through clouds which could be good.