The 2017 Solar Eclipse

Not feeling particularly like fiddle-fiddling around with my DSLR, I chose today to use my Olympus PM1 and 14-42mm lens as my camera of opportunity. Being so light and small meant I could use a very old and flimsy tripod that I paid $30 for a few years ago. While it did not perform at all well with a heavier DSLR, it performs well with my lighter mirrorless camera.

The actual eclipse started before I bothered to get out there with my camera. Having said that I was set up and photographing before and during totality. One of my first shots was just a plain ordinary photo of the sun. The moon was taking a bite out of the sun in the first photo but it didn't show up too well.

In the next photo, I tried going to manual mode from iAuto and underexposed a little. The crescent of the moon cutting into the sun didn't show up at all. It's not a bad photograph though.

 Next, I pulled off the mylar sunglasses that my girlfriend had given me to view the sun and put one eyepiece over the lens. That worked well. It's possible to see clearly that a bite has been taken out of the sun. In retrospect I would have liked to zoom in and take another photo but I'll have to wait 70 years for the next solar eclipse in Columbia, South Carolina or go to one of the other locations. I gather there are solar eclipses fairly regularly across the world. The next full eclipse is either 2025 or 2026.

 Having taken a photo like that, the moon ate more of the sun to such an extent that it became really quite dim though not dark. The sky did not turn black as I'd thought it might have. To be honest, the first eclipse I was when I was a very small child. The next was in the years 1990-2005 though I can't recall exactly which year. I'd been living in Britain and the BBC had droned on so much about the eclipse that I was thoroughly tired of it by the time it eventually turned up. Thus, I didn't pay too much attention. I looked and noted it was dark outside but that was all.

Suddently totality happened. Clearly having a polarizing filter on the lens didn't help as evidenced by the reflection of the sun with the moon in front on the front element. It was rather interesting to see everything go darker and rather unique to see light levels that low without any afternoon or morning color cast.

 Looking at the photo I realise that using iAuto I had achieved my goal. The stars are visible in the photo or at least some of the brighter ones are. There are a couple to the right that appear as single red pixels. Those are not hot or stuck pixels - they're real planets.

Enlarging the central portion of the photo it's possible to see a star just above and to the left of the eclipsed sun. For those of a technical disposition, the exposure was 1.3 seconds, f5.6 at ISO 200. Bang went my theory about exposing for 5 seconds at ISO 1600 and f3.5. iAuto saw to that and came up with the goods. Now I've heard a lot of bunk about iAuto and auto this and auto that but honestly, it does seem to make photography easier and makes for better images.

Does anybody remember the old days when nobody used a light meter? I do. I used not to have a light meter on my camera. I used to have to gauge exposure by ambient light. In fact a neighbor and I used to call out exposures then check them on a light meter. We were rarely if ever wrong. Then in came light meters which eliminated bad light estimation. Then came auto exposure which eliminated dark or light photos. Then in came auto-focus which eliminated out of focus images. Then came digital and intelligent programming. 

Given that even the average phone is a splendid camera, I'm highly unsurprised to find most people now take photos with their phones and that professional photographers are finding it harder than ever to sell their snake oil. I see adverts by expensive wedding photographers and wonder who is ever dumb enough to fall for that one. Heck, if they''re dumb enough to pay for photography when their friends cell phone images will be of excellent quality and shared on facebook within seconds then I've got a bridge to sell. That's if you don't prefer to buy blinker fluid or need your car radiator flushed.

So, will I be at the next solar eclipse? I cannot say definitely that I won't though I find the idea unlikely. On the other hand I never ever thought I'd have made the journey from the United Kingdom to the United States of America nor that I'd end up living here. Stranger things clearly having already happened, I might indeed be at the next total solar eclipse. That's going to be either Chili or Argentina on July 2nd, 2019. That would be my mother's 88th birthday had she not passed away last year. Perhaps that's a message from beyond telling me to be there?

The Eclipse challenge

Two minutes of totality. That's not very much! My goal or challenge this eclipse is to try to photograph the eclipse with the stars in the background. This, I shall do with my Olympus PM1 and 14-42 lens. This is an older camera that I purchased secondhand a couple of years ago.

Experimenting with it last year, I found 40 seconds at 128,000 ISO at f3.5 resulted in an extreme over exposure with banding. I've not used the camera a whole lot so you might say it's almost strange territory.

Let's say that was overexposed by 4 stops (it was probably more) then 40 seconds becomes 1.25 seconds. There's no point in stopping down as the lens is focused at infinity and any areas slightly out of focus just won't be a problem.

We can conclude that on a dark night that a good exposure will be 128,000ISO, 1.25 seconds and f3.5. Now bringing that up for those that have a maximum ISO of 1600, we have 3 stops to add to exposure so 10 seconds should do the trick. Thus, your ideal night sky would be 1600 ISO, 10 seconds at f3.5. I say f3.5 because that's what most lenses are, wide open.

In terms of zoom length, unless you want to burn your eyes and sensor into oblivion then stick with wider angles such as 14mm on my Olympus or 28mm on 35mm or 18mm on a 1.5/1.6 crop sensor. With a 1" sensor that would be 10mm. Basically, keep it simple - keep the lens wide open.

As far as tripods are concerned, a decent tripod is a great help. I've shot sky photos with the camera placed on a tree stump, pointed upwards before now and it has worked really well. I'm not quite sure where the sun will be on the 21st (eclipse day) so a tripod or a bean bag will be very helpful.

As far as eclipse glasses and funky filters are concerned, I wouldn't personally bother. There's nothing to be gained from photos of the moon partially over the sun. It's not something a million other people won't put on Facebook etc while thinking they're the smartest, coolest kids in town instead of the dumbest. There's nothing particularly to be gained from watching the moon go across the sun either.

As a matter of fact, I've been through 2 total eclipses before. Two in Britain - the first I was too young to know what it was all about - and one where the media had bored the pants off everybody by blathering about the eclipse 24x7 for the previous few weeks. That one, I was so bored by that I never even went outside to look at it. My dad just tutted over the darkness and switched a light on while continuing to read his book.

My sole recommendation other than trying an exposure of ISO 1600, F3.5 and 10 seconds with a 10/14/18/28mm lens (or whatever the widest your kit lens will do) is to try to limit sensor exposure to the sun. The sun might harm your sensor. Now I'm not that worried. My PM1 cost me $75 secondhand two years ago. If I had to replace it, I'd be looking at about the same price. It's not earth shatteringly expensive.

Speaking of secondhand cameras, there are so many really good secondhand cameras out there that there's little point for anybody to buy new any more (other than to single-handedly and heroically maintain the cocaine habits of the bosses at the camera manufacturers). If I go out looking for a secondhand camera, I can find 8 and more megapixel cameras for next to nothing. The dimwits amongst us have fallen for the "upgrade" scam enough that there are plenty good cameras with hardly any wear, available.

Not once have I ever complained that my 8 megapixel 2007 Canon XT lacked resolution. It has been more than adequate for every task Ive thrown at it. The sole reason I have an Olympus PM1 now is not because of it's 20 megapixels but because of it's light weight and small size. I just found the Canon a bit big and bulky to hump around. It's fine for a studio or something similar but for travel, it just takes up too much space.

They say the best camera is the one you have with you. When I had a smartphone, I always had a really good camera with me. Now I don't have a smartphone, it doesn't particularly bother me. I dumped social media at about the same time as my smartphone quit on me. Neither were bringing me much joy so I canned the expense and time wasting.

If there are any clear nights then it might be a good idea to head out to practice photographing starry nights. If the moon is bright in the sky then photograph that too. Bracket your exposures. You only likely get one chance at this eclipse. Who knows what will happen between now and the next. The moon might fall apart (it is really old), there might be a zombie apocalypse (Voodoo is famous for its zombies)  or even an invasion from Mars (a sample return might bring back energy-based life forms that cannot be detected until it's too late).