Moon shot with zoom at 200mm plus 2x extender and Topaz Gigapixel AI

[Paul_Roark]

I was curious what my Sony a7r could do with a 400mm lens and Topaz's Gigapixel AI software, set a 2x expansion.  The lens was a combination of Canon L zoom at 200mm and then a Canon 2x extender. 

I placed the result on my webpage at:   https://www.paulroark.com/

It's definitely not a Hubble shot, but it isn't bad for typical consumer hardware and current software.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Peter McLennan]

Amazing image, Paul.  As you say, not bad for consumer gear.

I was admiring that very same moon last night, soon after sunset.  Thanks for reminding me.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Very impressive.

I think I'll cancel my bid to buy the Hubble.

[Harold Clark]

Your photo is in perfect focus, therefore better than the Hubble which was originally out of focus and had to be repaired!

I was curious what my Sony a7r could do with a 400mm lens and Topaz's Gigapixel AI software, set a 2x expansion.  The lens was a combination of Canon L zoom at 200mm and then a Canon 2x extender. 

I placed the result on my webpage at:   https://www.paulroark.com/

It's definitely not a Hubble shot, but it isn't bad for typical consumer hardware and current software.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Paul_Roark]

... better than the Hubble which was originally out of focus and had to be repaired!

As an aside, the owner and president of the optical company (then a subsidiary of Perkin & Elmer, I think) that made the Hubble was a friend of a friend of my parents.  I met him at his house in Laguna Beach and asked him what went wrong with the Hubble.  His side of the story was that the projected cost of the test equipment needed to test the telescope before launch was more than the cost of a second Shuttle mission to fix any error they found.  (This was obviously pre-Challenger thinking.)  And the real sad ancillary story here is the the military "spy" satellites (some of which were about the same and also made by this company) had test equipment, but the military would not let the company use the existing military test equipment for a civilian project. So they launched the Hubble without testing it.  He claims the error was an element  that was flipped over.  (Subsequent looking at this issue suggests that this is a huge simplification of the technical problem with the optics.  It might have been "flipped over" in the software that then told them how to grind the mirror.) 

On the lighter side, this optical company owner/principle also had a 16" reflector telescope in the living room.  The little monster was about as long as it was wide.  It was not pointed at the stars.  It was pointed at the babes on the beach below him.  (Busted!)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com   

[Harold Clark]

Thank you for posting this background information, most interesting. Unfortunate that the military ( taxpayer funded ) wouldn't lend a hand with the testing of the Hubble telescope, for the benefit of science and the greater good.

As an aside, the owner and president of the optical company (then a subsidiary of Perkin & Elmer, I think) that made the Hubble was a friend of a friend of my parents.  I met him at his house in Laguna Beach and asked him what went wrong with the Hubble.  His side of the story was that the projected cost of the test equipment needed to test the telescope before launch was more than the cost of a second Shuttle mission to fix any error they found.  (This was obviously pre-Challenger thinking.)  And the real sad ancillary story here is the the military "spy" satellites (some of which were about the same and also made by this company) had test equipment, but the military would not let the company use the existing military test equipment for a civilian project. So they launched the Hubble without testing it.  He claims the error was an element  that was flipped over.  (Subsequent looking at this issue suggests that this is a huge simplification of the technical problem with the optics.  It might have been "flipped over" in the software that then told them how to grind the mirror.) 

On the lighter side, this optical company owner/principle also had a 16" reflector telescope in the living room.  The little monster was about as long as it was wide.  It was not pointed at the stars.  It was pointed at the babes on the beach below him.  (Busted!)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Peter McLennan]

As an aside, the owner and president of the optical company (then a subsidiary of Perkin & Elmer, I think) that made the Hubble was a friend of a friend of my parents.  I met him at his house in Laguna Beach and asked him what went wrong with the Hubble.

Fascinating.  Just goes to show you that the best dope is inside dope.