Telephoto lens - Stabilised or not?

[Tom the Tenor]

A query please that I dare not post on airwhiners. Bought a digital SLR lately, a second hand Canon 40D. Now, I need to buy just the one lens - the options seems to be the Image Stabilised Canon 70-300 or the non stabilised 70-200 f4 L.

May I have your recommendations, please.

Thanks. Greetings from Cork!

[Invicta DC4]

From experience with a Nikon, go for the stabilised lens, you won't regret it.

[N707ZS]

Definately go for a stabilised lens, no compertition, wish I could afford one.

[G SXTY]

Stabilised, definitely. I use a Canon 55-250mm lens on my 450D, and the images are noticeably sharper with the stabilisation switched on.

[Ten West]

I've got the Nikon 55-200VR (Vibration Reduction) which has Image Stabilisation. I use it on my D40SLR.

It's absolutely superb. Highly recommended. Just one thing though - if it's on a tripod apparently you need to switch the VR function off. No idea about Canons though.

I buy cameras made by camera companies, not photocopier manufacturers. ;) (Joke!! Before all the Canon fanbois jump down my throat!)

Just wish my 55-200VR would work on my Nikon F90X film SLRs, but can't have it all I guess.

[MAN777]

Its not whether its stabilised or not that matters, what matters is how fast the lens is, or put another way what is the f number. The lower the number the faster the lens, it will let in more light as the optics are larger, that way you will be able to up the shutter speed which should give sharper images.

You dont mention what f number the first lens has ? 300mm might sound very tempting but if the optics are inferior the other might be a better option.

Lenses that give a massive zoom option are usually a jack of all trades and master of none.

mine - (Nikon D3 with range of 2.8 lenses, none of which have VR, I just have steady hands :O)

[Tom the Tenor]

The 70-300 is f4/5.6 IS. Very interesting replies. I am using a Sigma 18-200 non IS lens and though I try as much as I possibly can it is just all but impossible for me to get a steady image though I am doing what is advised and use f8 on Aperture Priority selection. This is for very slow or stationary subjects, well, aeroplanes, really, you know yourself :}. It would be more understandable if the quarry were moving quickly but they are not. It is galling and I can understand now why I have stayed away from taking photos for so long. Not much fun yet anyway.

[Ten West]

True enough, but the VR is handy in low-light and for exposure times that you wouldn't want to attempt hand-held otherwise.

You can get results that are just as good without it if you know what you're doing, but I like the fact that I can just fire away with no special precautions and everything still comes out clear.

Given that VR doesn't add much to the cost of lenses these days anyway, I can't think of a reason not to buy a new lens with it personally. :confused:

[wub]

The Canon 70-300 IS is often referred to as 'Canon's hidden L lens' I've owned one and it is a very good lens indeed. The IS is the icing on the cake and I thoroughly recommend it

[Ridge Runner]

I'd go with all MAN777 says. You cannot make up for a poor lens or poor technique by relying on VR/IS. Aperture/speed and lens quality is what counts. Prime versus zoom always being better.

Given that VR doesn't add much to the cost of lenses these days anyway, I can't think of a reason not to buy a new lens with it personally

Not sure what lenses you're buying!? VR/IS are noticably more expensive, drving up the cost of all long focal length primes and zooms

RR

[MAN777]

"The 70-300 is f4/5.6 IS. Very interesting replies. I am using a Sigma 18-200 non IS lens and though I try as much as I possibly can it is just all but impossible for me to get a steady image though I am doing what is advised and use f8 on Aperture Priority selection"

Tom

You are probably getting camera shake, because if you use aperture priority the camera is choosing the shutter speed (which is probably too low), with moving subjects you need to control the shutter speed. Therefore if you select shutter priority and a speed of about 500th sec or higher you should get sharp images as you are literally freezing the scene. This will work fine in normal lighting conditions but when the light fails you will run out of aperture to give a correct exposure. When this happens you will have to make the camera more sensitive by increasing the ISO rating (the higher the number the more sensitive) This will allow correct exposures to continue. As with everything there is a limit to what the camera can do, if you increase the ISO too high the pictures will start to become grainy.

The VR lens you describe has two f stop settings, the 5.6 will be at 300mm and f4 at 70mm. f4 is twice as fast as 5.6 (or a full stop in photographic terms) So when using 300mm the lens lets 1/2 the light in so it may need the VR in low light conditions to get a sharp image.

Another thing to consider is that telephoto lenses used at maximum aperture will have a very narrow depth of field, or in other terms only a small area in focus, making background and foreground blurred.

I am not trying to put you off this lens, it is a very capable modern lens, all I am trying to say is that like everything in life you get what you pay for.

The very best lenses like you see sports photographers using are f2.8 with massive front elements they are the absolute dogs b**locks when it comes to quality but they cost in excess of £5000 !!!!!!!!

Hope this is of use.

[Tom the Tenor]

Thanks, MAN777, for the helpful explanations. I will read over your post a few times and try it out with shutter priority and report back on how it goes after the weekend. A few 737s and A320s and hopefully the AT7s in EI colours are going to get a good thrashing over the next few days!

[MAN777]

Tom

I know it sounds a bit complicated, but photography is actually quite simple once you understand the relationships between, f stops, shutter speed etc.

Can I suggest you just google "basic photography" you will find loads of online tutorials which cover the basics.

Have a nice weekend :ok:

[Ten West]

Not sure what lenses you're buying!? VR/IS are noticably more expensive, drving up the cost of all long focal length primes and zooms


When I went shopping for my 55-200 Nikon there was about £20 difference between the new (VR) one and the old Non-VR model. Didn't take me long to think about it. :ok:

Basics? Try this:

what are shutter speed, aperture and ISO? © 2004 KenRockwell.com (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/shutteraperture.htm)

[Ridge Runner]

Yes mate but if you recall I said long focal lenses. A 200mm isn't in this category. Yes, you can even get compacts with VR nowadays but try getting a longer lens (300mm +) and the price difference is marked. RR

[Out Of Trim]

Of the two lenses your comparing, the 70-200mm F4 L is definately the better quality and faster lens. I've read of many Canon users really liking this one. So, despite it not being stabilised; it may be the better choice for you.

It does rather depend upon what you intend to do with it! If it's for Airshows etc, then you need more reach. So, the 70-300mm would offer that. However, you may do better fitting a 1.4 convertor to the 70-200mm F4 and getting the extra reach that way. 200mm x 1.6 = 320mm x 1.4 = 448mm (35mm equivalent).

All that said, most Canonists at Airshows migrate to the 100-400mm Zoom it would appear.

I'd go and check with the Canon forums at www.dpreview.com (http://www.dpreview.com)

[Aquatone1]

I used the Canon 70-200 f4 before investing in the 70-200 f4IS and found both produce excellent results. It can be a little short on focal length for flying shots and the 1.4 converter helps. The converter is left on pretty much permanantly, with no need to stop down to counter any fall off of the image.

The image stabilisation is great for static shots.

It is probably the best lens I have owned and relatively easy for an "old un" like me to lug around all day.:)


Edit. I would add that the none IS 70-200 f4 was excellent too. Just that as one gets older the IS helps.:)

[MAN777]

Just a footnote regarding the use of teleconvertors, adding them can drastically reduce the available light, an F4 lens with a 1.4 convertor effectively looses 1 stop so becomes the same as an f5.6 lens.

[Davidsa]

Consider switching to Olympus - arguably the best glass on the market, and the stabilization it built into the camera rathr than being in the lens, so it works with any lens.

David

[Tom the Tenor]

In the end the only shots I got in at the weekend were a few of one of the two lunchtime Iberworld A320s at Cork. Tried the Shutter Priority, ISO 160, 1/160th of a second and f20. Had the camera body steady as I could on a railing. Result was only fair. Worse than that though is that I have now noticed a speck of dust/dirt presumably from the sensor on the image. Now, before the 40D I had bought a 20D (both second hand) and traded in the 20D due to the same issue and it was an expensive enough upgrade to the 40D. Original shots on the newer 40D had no signs of dust etc and the 18-200 lens has been aboard her since the start when I took the plunge. It is really galling me. Only for the fact that there are two nice machines due in later today at Cork I would be giving out like stink in the shop.

Maddening though.

I am enjoying reading the replies to the original post.

Thanks.

[Ridge Runner]

TtT. Unfortunately dust is just a fact of life with DSLRs. Many nowadays have sensor cleaning which discharges them and "shakes" the sensor clean. Even these, though, are prone to the odd speck. For old cameras you can get a liquid cleaner that is applied with a sterile swab (don't use blowers!). It can all be rectified in Photoshop or a similar package. Don't lose heart.

Regarding the shutter speed I'd never go below 250 for general shooting. That gives a moderate to good amount of clarity. In the end it is all about practice and learning technique. The great thing about digital is that you can do that over and over wthout cost!!! Good luck. RR

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

Warch out for IS (Image Stabilisation).

It should be called CS. Camera Stabilisation.

It only works if you are trying to hold the camera still.

If you use it when panning, it actually makes your pix worse!

Also, at higher shutter speeds, the IS has insufficient time to operate. I use Olympus stuff and at speeds of 1/1000 sec. or better, IS is no help at all.

I've learned this info in the hardest possible way.:sad:

[MAN777]

Tenor

The reason I mentioned shutter priority was so as to override the cameras desire to give compromise settings when on auto. If you are trying to get sharp images with telephoto lenses you need high shutter speeds unless using a tripod. an aperture of f20 (small hole) will give a good depth of field (bigger area in focus) but if you have a shutter speed of 160 sec you will get camera shake. Aim for about 500th sec and f8 that will give a good balance between aperture and shutter speed.

Also a very important thing to consider when shooting aircraft is the light reading. If you are pointing at an aircraft in the sky there will be a lot of the image that will consist of bright sky, the aircraft will be darker against the sky and if the camera works out exposure for mainly sky, the aircraft will be underexposed and darker in the resultant picture. To get around this use the exposure compensation dial +1 should be sufficient. Inversely if the background is dark such as storm clouds and the aircraft brightly lit by sunshine you will have to do the opposite and set the compensation to -1 or the aircraft will be overexposed.

[jumpseater]

BB
Warch out for IS (Image Stabilisation).

It should be called CS. Camera Stabilisation.

Nope its Image Stabilisation in the Canon range and works in the lens' not the camera body. Some Canon EF lenses incorporate an image stabiliser to prevent camera shake from spoiling the shot. This is particularly useful on close-ups or at slow shutter speeds, in situations where a tripod camera cannot be used. Optical shake is detected by gyro sensors which provide data to neutralise the shake.

BB
It only works if you are trying to hold the camera still.

If you use it when panning, it actually makes your pix worse!

:ugh: This is rubbish, neither statement is true, though it may be if specifically applied to Olympus products.

BB
Also, at higher shutter speeds, the IS has insufficient time to operate. I use Olympus stuff and at speeds of 1/1000 sec. or better, IS is no help at all.

I've learned this info in the hardest possible way

If you bought Olympus then yes, unfortunately you did learn the hard way, the same refers to the earlier comments regarding Olympus glass being arguably the best, it'd be a short argument as it isn't. Canon and Nikon have rightly got a significant part of the market for these types of cameras and lens' as their IS and higher end DSLR's are by far the better performers. This is why most of the serious amateurs, semi pro and pro snappers use them, they get results. This has been the case for many years back into the 35mm days.

MAN777 has provided some good tips, I'd throw in another, look for a higher spec lens second hand from a good shop like Mifsuds ( no connection, satisfied punter). With clever buying you can get far more bang for your buck.

[Tom the Tenor]

MAN777, a result! Big rush up to Cork yesterday to nab the Heliswiss Super Puma hired for some heavy lifting up the mountains around the County Bounds between Cork and Kerry. This time had more time to compose the technial aspects of the shots in the manner you so kindly suggested so set up Shutter Priority correctly and wound the dial to 1/640th giving me f4.5 of an aperture and the shots of an RE ATR42 came out sharp as anything. Am really pleased about that though unfortunately, the Puma pulled a sneaky one and did 07 take off from the 17/35 intersection with 25/07 so it called for me to run like hell to one of the long term car parks which ate into composure time to set up the shots of the AS332. The shots achieved were better than last Sunday and one is just usable so all in all am happy at Wednesday's improvement.

Thank you. Not as discouraged now.

[MAN777]

Tom

So glad you have got an improvement.

Now - Lets just put a spanner in the works :E

When shooting aircraft with props and rotors, you will quickly realise that your high shutter speeds are freezing all the action giving the impression that helicopters are falling out of the sky and prop jobs have stopped engines, neither of which does much for the photo.

Solution ? Drop the shutter speed below 100th sec and practice "panning"
that is a technique of SMOOTHLY following the aircraft through the lens before, during and after the exposure, if you get it right the aircraft will still be sharp but the props/rotors will appear lifelike ie turning. Experiment with the shutter speeds for best effect. When panning you also get rid of distracting backgrounds as they become a blur.

Simples:ok:

Have Fun

[TEEEJ]

Tom,

Good advice from MAN777, but keep it simple to start off with. For props try 1/320th or slightly lower. For rotors try 1/200th or 1/250th . Anything higher will give you that frozen look. With practice you can then drop your speeds lower to 1/100th and below. Try experimenting with various shutter speeds on taxiing prop and rotors.

TJ

[PPRuNe Dispatcher]

Another way of being able to use a faster shutter speed is to turn up the ISO. However, higher ISO = more noise. That's where something like Noise Ninja helps.

PPD (Taking photographs since 1973... started with a Kiev 4A and a Zenith-E, now using a Canon 5DM2. I still have the Kiev...!)

[toscana24]

Tom

Glad you are making progress.

I am very lucky in that I spend most of my time in Africa where the light is usually pretty good. But despite that I operate almost exclusively on ISO400. With that you can usually operate on a reasonably fast shutter speed (never below 1/500 and ideally above 1/1000). Aperture although secondary to shutter speed is also important. My lenses (all excellent Minolta G ones) seem to be crispest at F8 or higher (smaller aperture = using middle flatter part of the lens so depth of field is less critical - ie both nose and tail might be in focus at the same time!).

With the modern digitals just experiment with different settings but above all get used to your camera. I have taken some 30,000 pics with my digital bodies and know it inside out etc. Vital as things sometimes happen fast.

Re a speck of dust on the sensor you will need to consult the manual re cleaning but advice learnt the hard way is only change lenses in a reasonably 'dust free' environment. In other words not outside at an airfield in high winds and dust everywhere!

T24

[Tom the Tenor]

Thanks for the updates and the tips about panning. I will looking forward to trying that out in the near future but for now I will stick with the easier shots like just when the push back tug gets unhooked from the aeroplane! Really simples! Good day again today when an Aer Lingus clad RE ATR-72 posed nicely for me. Today I used the manual focus option as a little bit of me is anxious about trusting the autofocus system on my value 70 mm - 300 mm lens. Value or not though today's results were again very satisfying.

Tom.

[Double Zero]

MAN777,

Firstly, good point about metering a passing aircraft, not the sky behind it; in the old days the trick was to take a meter reading of one's hand held out in the prevailing light, and set manual exposure to that; if really shooting upwwards at an aircraft I'd meter off a dark bit of ground nearby, or as you say set compensation but that's trusting the camera to react quickly enough.

I have used a Canon with IS at an airshow ( I usually try to be alongside aircraft, airshows are rarely much good; though I do have terrific admiration for those who shoot fast jets from hilltops, some fabulous results ) - I didn't think much of the IS, but it may have been more use air-air.

I do feel you are possibly a little confused about ' fast lenses ' however.

A large aperture lens's main advantage is that as it lets in more light, one can SEE a brighter image.

If you go around shooting with the aperture fully open all the time, sure you probably will get high shutter speeds, but what about depth of field ?!

On a large aperture tele' lens the d of f will be a very short distance range anyway.

This is fine as long as you focus / point at the right bit of the passing aircraft, there should be JUST enough depth to cover it.

The byproduct of a blurred background is usually desirable, but sometimes one definitely needs the background, and if using full aperture on a bright day a modern camera may achieve a VERY high shutter speed, freezing the background despite panning; I'd always use a compromise and either shutter priority or pre-set manual exposure.

I was going to say I can count the number of times I've used a fully open lens for an action shot on the fingers of one hand, but thinking about it the answer is once, when I was stuffed on an air-air shoot of a Sea Harrier by my pilot staying under cloud cover ( he was well paid and couldn't give a toss about my task ) - result, grey aeroplane against grey background, when the whole point of the exercise had been to get above cloud to illuminate the AMRAAMS under the fuselage; I was not a happy bunny !

DZ, BAe Photographer 1979-93, various other airborne stuff since.

[MAN777]

Double Zero

No confusion whatsoever, read all my posts fully, especially post 11, where depth of field is mentioned. Could go into the science of focal points and exposure but feel it would be a bit out of place on these pages

My history

Trained by the RAF, British Institute of Professional Photographers, 30 years later still 'In' photography with my own photography business.

[Double Zero]

MAN777,

I appreciate your comments, but my reply was bounced and at the moment I don't have time to do the full reply again ( maybe later tonight )

DZ

[Double Zero]

MAN777,

I'm back but with very little time...

Suggest you read my background, telling amateurs what to do is one thing...in any association or group one comes across people only too willing to say " you shouldn't do it like that, do it like this "

Shutter priority or better, manual exposure and the best lens possible is still the way to go, however software now comes into the equation, and kit that one can work naturally without peering at readouts is one of the paramount factors - as this is an individual thing all I can do is very strongly recommend potential buyers ' try before buy '; certainly not full open aperture just because it gives a high shutter speed.

As I say, for professional purposes Depth of Field Preview is worth it's weight in gold.

The best ground to air ( a regime I hate, usually guaranteed crap unless in the case of the aforementioned people on hilltops ) I ever took was at 250th, F 5:6, VPS rated at 125 ASA, John Farley flying past Dunsfold ATC; even rivals agreed it was the best G-A shot they'd seen, but that was entirely thanks to John's flying; he did 4 passes of which I got 2, using a standard 80mm lens ( similar to but better through physics to a 50mm on a 35mm camera ) on a Hasselblad 500CM, NC90 viewfinder ( no motor drive 5FPS on a Hassel, unless one counts the ELM which was utterly unreliable, and at best gave brief glimpses through the viewfinder before settling itself down to contemplate taking the next exposure !

My boss using the Nikon F4 35mm wet film with 80-105 lens & motor drive only got wingtips, John was that close, but all calm & smooth completely drama - free.

Digital cameras make shots unimaginable in those days free to anyone willing to put in the money - and skill, not least in knowing where to be -available to a lot more people ( I know someone who's a keen & good photographer, also ex-Test Pilot & racing driver with a Ferrari Daytona & top of the range Porsche turbo, but even he regards the digital Hasselblad prices as laughable )...

Each to his own, and I'm certainly not being paid to say this ( I wish ) but I'm a Nikon fan personally.

This is despite knowing most if not all digital camera 'chips' come from the same source ( Sony ) and I found a couple of 'Gotcha's' working with the F4,

A, a black LCD readout in the viewfinder is sod all use in low light - ie a lot of professional situations,

B, what idiot chose to make the ( wet film ) 35-105 lens zoom & focus twist one way, the 80-200 the other !

If that's not asking for a cock-up, I'd hate to see what is; we didn't fall for it, but it took valuable spontaneous milliseconds - or in my case, minutes.

Try before buy, if buying expensive kit the salesman might well be happy to come along on an interesting shoot.

NB some compact cameras are now running at 24megapix, so unless mad or in a real hurry I'd wait before buying current 'top of the range' kit, though there is the increasing problem of transferring large files.

DZ

[FlightlessParrot]

Some kind of image stabilisation should help with camera shake. A rule of thumb is that with 35 mm cameras, the slowest shutter speed at which you have a good chance of a sharp image without stabilisation is the reciprocal of the focal length in millimetres. So, 1/50 of a second with a 50mm lens, 1/200 with 200 mm and so on. This, by the way, doesn't guarantee sharp results; if you want really sharp, use a tripod, if you can. The maximum aperture of a lens is not an index of its quality, but a fast lens can be useful to enable a fast shutter speed at a reasonable ISO rating. Using a tripod for ground to air is pretty implausible, unless you know the flight path, have plenty of room, and a good cine tripod. OTOH, a monopod could be of use, and a makeshift would be to tie a cord round the camera or lens, step on one end and hold the camera taught against it--it will seriously reduce movement in one dimension, though you may look a bit of a twit. There used to be chains you could screw into a tripod socket to do the same trick in a more elegant looking way. If it were me, I'd go for a decent lens with stabilisation over a super-good lens without; you need ideal circumstances to get the most out of the best optics.

[Double Zero]

Flightless Parrot,

We must have gone to different colleges on photo' 744 courses...

The shutter speeds you quote are VERY low, for generally hand-held let alone for air-air or ground -air; the exact opposite of MAN777 !

I'm sorry to say your monopod / elastic idea won't work, one has to hand hold & pan far faster than that would allow.

I'm sure the hilltop types would agree - now's the chance for one of them to comment, pretty sure they must have been watching this thread, though like me they generally post on the military aircrew or aviation history sites.

DZ

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

Jumpseater.
I know that the IS is in the OLY body as opposed to the Lens in CaNikons.

However, the principle is the same in both.

The IS tries to prevent camera shake, so both systems work really well for shots where you are trying to hold the camera steady. Low light, low ISO, long lenses etc.

For panning shots, both systems work best in IS2, do they not?

My point is, for moving subjects, turn the IS OFF! Otherwise it thinks (whether OLY or CaNikon) that your attempt at panning (or other movement) is 'shake'. (apert from IS 2 when panning).

Also, whether you agree or not, the IS benefit is reduced as conditions improve. So a big help in tricky low light, 'slow' conditions, but above 1/1000 sec..
1. You should not need it so much, and
2. It has so little time to act that it can make little or no difference.

Ask me how I know.;)

[TEEEJ]

Double Zero wrote

I'm sorry to say your monopod / elastic idea won't work, one has to hand hold & pan far faster than that would allow.

I'm sure the hilltop types would agree - now's the chance for one of them to comment, pretty sure they must have been watching this thread, though like me they generally post on the military aircrew or aviation history sites.

Concur with this. A lot of low level flying snappers use a well known make of shoulder mount for panning work and especially at slower shutter speeds. I won't post a link as that would be breaking the advertising rules on here.

These are great for the hills, but extremely dodgy, in my opinion, to be using around the periphery of an airfield. The last thing you want to be doing is to spook the aircrew and security with camera and long lens mounted on a military style trigger operated shoulder mount. They do come in various colours such as bright orange, but still look like a grip stock for a military weapon. I've seen people using them at RAF Lakenheath and they certainly got the attention of the on-base security.

I'm a Nikon user and I love the image stabilisation on the 300mm f/2.8 VR and especially for panning work. Nikon call it VR (Vibration Reduction).

These landing Eurofighter Typhoon images were taken hand held from the top of a ladder at RAF Coningsby. I used 1/30th of a second. I experimented with stabilisation on and off. Without image stabilisation (VR on) I just couldn't achieve the same results.

Links to images

Photos: Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon FGR4 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK---Air/Eurofighter-EF-2000-Typhoon/1496600/L/)

Photos: Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon F2 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK---Air/Eurofighter-EF-2000-Typhoon/1499973/L/)

Photos: Eurofighter EF-2000 Typhoon F2 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/UK---Air/Eurofighter-EF-2000-Typhoon/1499972/L/)

TJ

[jumpseater]

Well BB, as someone who does a bit of sport photography, and heavier than air machines, I'm always keen to learn wot I'm doing rong, particularly as my experience seems to match TJ's, albeit with Canon gear.

BB
My point is, for moving subjects, turn the IS OFF!

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c270/2012images/folio/_B6O2766-2.jpg
My point is, nah, think I'm 'managing' ta very much. Handheld 400 2.8, 1/64th, I look at what's coming and choose shutter speed to suit 99% of the time, depending on what I want from the finished shot. My background includes working alongside news snappers, where you have to get the shot or its goodnight Vienna. None of TJ's strapons either, though having seen his work elsewhere, I'm very very tempted ...:ooh:

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c270/2012images/_B6O0994.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c270/2012images/sport/_B6O4401.jpg

Best I turn this IS thingy off ...

[BarbiesBoyfriend]

Jumpseater.

Great pix!

(However you took them!):ok:

[Double Zero]

I agree, great shots.

Are you saying these were taken at 1/64th of a second ?!

If so is that what the camera came up with - type would be intersting - or as you infer, manual exposure ?

I've worked alongside the press photographers too - everything one sees in films is true, they're utter Piranhas.

I found I got the best results by stepping away a few ( or a few hundred ) yards for a clear shot while they were busy jostling and climbing over each other !

DZ

[jumpseater]

TA for the comments.

'00'
They're not shot pure 'manual', though like yourself I was pre-digital, starting out with Zenith and then moving onto pure manual Pentax MXs' (5FPS motordrive:ok:) and then Pro spec Canon Eos1nHS and Eos3. I do occaisionally use pure manual reversion. I can still remember, sunny day, Kodachrome 64, 125th sec, for good overall exposure;)

The data for the shots are as follows 1DMKII + 400 f2.8
C130
ISO250 F29 1/60sec

Cricket
ISO160 F4.5 1/2000sec

Neddy
ISO160 F5.6 1/800

I use Shutter Priority as a main setting when doing these types of shots and rarely go above ISO250 due 'noise'. Most shots of mine are taken ISO160 or below. I work on rule of thumb basics of blur/pan = slow shutter, freeze action = fast shutter. Whilst dialling them up through the viewfinder I watch for the aperature too bearing in mind my required depth of field simultaneously.
For the C130 I wanted sharp aircraft/prop discs showing no blade, and a 'smeared' background, so I had to be well below 125th sec for the background/discs. I take in mind the speed the subjects are moving at too so a herc is relatively speaking 'slow'.

For the cricket I wanted frozen ball, bales in the air, so needed fast shutter but about 6-10ft DOF to capture player well too.

Neddy, again freeze action but as horse is moving forward, enough DOF to get horse and riders face in focus. Speed not so important as cricket as subject is moving slowly(relatively).

Working with Newshounds gave me some briliant experiences/opportunities, wouldn't have missed it for anything.

[TEEEJ]

Jumpseater,
Cracking shot of the C-130 at such a low shutter speed! You should give the shoulder mount a try out. They take a little while to get used to, but with the front hand grip you can really get the stock tight into the shoulder.

TJ

[Double Zero]

Jumpseater,

If not so already ( ? ) you could EASILY make professional !

Problem is nowadays, every Tom Dick ( especially Dicks ) & Harry thinks they're a pro', and as cameras advance the margin narrows...

As for the shoulder mounted grip Teej advises, maybe a great thing for pure photography, but as someone else pointed out, in this day & age one can get held down & 7 bullets in the head just for jumping a ticket barrier, so god knows what you'd get for holding what could easily be mistaken for a 'Stinger' or similar by an airfield !

There was a notorious incident a few years ago when an ' activist ' ( terrorists weren't trendy then ) had his car riddled with bullets in central London, somehow he survived.

'Private Eye' ran a brilliant front page of two guys in balaclava's etc, " how come you shot him 27 times ? " - " I ran out of bullets ! "

I do know, as I live about 10 miles away from Gatwick, that police regularly check the little roadside parking places under the flightpath.

I'm glad that's a recent thing, as these are precisely the places one when young with first car would go with one's girlfriend for a 'snuggle' !!!

[TEEEJ]

I agree Double Zero. As stated before I have seen enthusiasts using them around the periphery of airfields in the UK. Once you fit a 300mm plus lens to the camera you can see how they can be mistaken for a weapons system. I would advise any snapper who has them to not use them in such situations.

US military photographers are keen users of them on ops.

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2009/01/camerastocks.jpg

TJ

[Double Zero]

Thanks Teej;

I hope there's some way of alerting ATC & security ( allo, intelligince speaking ) Copyright Spike Milligan )...

Hopefully the Pprune moderators will pick it up and pass it on.

Happy shooting,

DZ

[MSF]

I traded in my bag of Olympus junk last year and picked up a Nikon D700 with a Sigma 120-400 4.5-5.6 lens.
I have found over the years that shooting aperture priority at F8 is your best bet for a sharp picture.
The beauty of the D700 is that increased iso does not mean increased noise so when you need the extra speed, just increase the iso - even 800 plus still gives excellent results.
The Sigma lens is just as good as the canon or nikon offerings, and at least half the price.
The main thing to remember is to shoot at at least F8 if you can, it's the lenses sweet spot and will give you the best results .
Shooting wide open will not unless you pay 4k or over for a superfast lens.

And IS rocks , in any situation !

[Double Zero]

In the bad old days, when shots like that above were simply impossible, there was a simple rule for air-air shots.

Hasselblad 500CM, NC90 viewfinder, Kodak VPS negative film slightly pushed from 125 to 200 ASA ( it didn't mind at all ) and if in bright conditions or above cloud, it was rare to vary from F8 at 500th; the angle of dangle and focus ( yes, getting below infinity was common ), and things like pointing the thing were foremost.

This is assuming - A word I hate ! - that one has already sorted out the met' forecast, cloud layer re. the altitude you and subject aircraft will both be happy with, and direction of sunlight re. time of day ( always allowing for inevitable delays of one kind or another ).

The time of day thing is usually ( restrictions etc ) more important for air to ground shots, as I've found houses even less happy to go around and take up a suitable heading than some aircraft I've known !

I would have liked to use transparency film but BAe Kingston couldn't handle it ( or quite possibly they didn't want me from Dunsfold getting good results, there was a lot going on behind the scenes, resulting in one head of dept' there being politely shown the door ).

I notice John Dibbs' excellent work is / was on transparency, besides the ' luxury ' of his own converted B-25 camera platform - don't know if he still has it, I'd have thought operating costs must be horrendous - though if money were no object it sounds terrific fun, and I'm aware he uses other more economical aircraft too.

I've always wondered what camera kit he uses, I've been in a position - a while ago now, 1994-ish - to see he was using transparency film at that time.

[Bushfiva]

Nikon VR has "normal" and "active" modes. The latter is more suited to panning because it extends the low-frequency correction range. But looking at the frequency response graphs of the two modes, it's clear YMMV in the real world.

[The Civil Civillian]

I think you'll find all the top brands have good 'glass', but the thing about olympus and their 4/3rds system is that all their lenses are pretty much 'above average'! Whereas other brands have different lenses with different optical performance, with Olympus, it is system-wide.

The problem with 4/3rds though is their relatively small sensors bring with them noisy high ISOs. But if you don't need high ISOs, it's a system with some compelling advantages.

Regards cameras looking like weapons and getting their owners into trouble: ask these men:

Collateral Murder (http://www.collateralmurder.com/)

or

BBC News - US 'reviewing' Iraq killing video posted on WikiLeaks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8608972.stm)

Mis-identification helped get these men killed. :-(

p.s I'd have thought Olympus, and their 4/3rds system, would have gained a lot of users in the 'spotting' comunity due to the 2x multiplication factor the system gives any lenses fitted. i.e their 50-200mm/f2.8-3.5 lens acts like a 100-400mm lens! That is a decent telephoto zoom range in a small, relatively inexpensive package!

[Argonautical]

Just for info but Pentax recommends that shake reduction is switched off for panning.

[HuntandFish]

I use an Olympus E30 with a 50-200 for motor sport it works wellif I use the right settings for IS metering and focussing . The E30 focuses quickly and will hold focus when panninig a bike through a corner . IS is aslso good if only set in the vertical plane .

[MSF]

My sigma 120-400 has 3 settings for IS -full, panning and off.
Off is reccomended for tripod use, full for handheld and panning speaks for itself.

I used to have an olympus E3 with 50 -200 f2.8.
It could not cope with aircraft very well and the autofocus hunted like a sonofabitch, and as for low ISO noise!
It was like a big 'join the dots' puzzle.

Choose your camera wisely as it expensive to change your system.
If the camera you need costs a little more, then save some more for it.

[The Civil Civillian]

MSF: "I used to have an olympus E3 with 50 -200 f2.8.
It could not cope with aircraft very well and the autofocus hunted like a sonofabitch, and as for low ISO noise!
It was like a big 'join the dots' puzzle."

Yeah, maybe... I supose the smart money nowadays goes down on a nikon D300!! (or the D400 when it appears)

I was just thinking though after I wrote that post, that someone on a tight budget could do a lot worse than getting one of the entry level 4/3rds bodies and the 70-300/f4-5.6 lens. Then he has a daylight setup that'll do 600mm @ f5.6. Look how much other brands have to pay to get 600mm!

I'll get off my [non-paid] sales pitch now! ;-)

[Bushfiva]

D300 was discontinued in September 2009.

[MSF]

I too was a a staunch Olympus fan - until the E3 (E1,E300,E410,E500 and I still have a bag full of om1's,2's, and a 3 with all zuiko glass).

The new gear failed to live up to what you should expect for over a grand Sterling , hence Choose your camera wisely as it expensive to change your system.
If the camera you need costs a little more, then save some more for it.

Aircraft photography needs a little more high spec equipment than motor racing.
350 plus mph at airshows with poor contrast between a grey aircraft and a grey sky shows the limit of a poor a/f system really fast - as I found out.
The new camera exceedes all expectations and with the new 400x compact flash cards the old full buffer problem is now a thing of the past.

In a world where true progress is rarely seen, at least photographic equipment is improving.

[Tom the Tenor]

Is the autofocus better in the high end lenses? My best results so far over the past few weeks have been by manual focus. The winter photos were all autofocus and they were all a fair bit out and were probably a good source of my earlier chagrin.

Is there any kind 'SOP' that I can call out to myself to prepare for a shot? A few days ago I had the White Balance in the shade mode and some nice shots were messed up. I was in a foul mood going to work later in the day! I dont yet have any filters - what ones are absolutely necessary?

Excluding panning shots and airborne shots does Image Stabilisation work in both axes, like for stationary subjects?

Lastly, (sorry!) can you download your jpegs to a mp3 player/ipod that has a screen and can you do the same thing after the images have been cropped? Mp3 players and ipods are slightly ahead of my time and I have only found what they are in the last few weeks.

Looks like it will be the f4 - dont yet know about the IS. Can do a a hell of a lot with that extra four hundred spondulics! A lens that would be worth more than my car!

Janey Mac!

Thanks.

[The Civil Civillian]

MSF, so what did you go for next? (excuse if it is earlier in the thread) And why?

I must say that I seldom do photography now.. it was almost as if I waited for the E-3 and when I got it, I lost the passion. So mine has moderately little use.

So I'm still learning the E-3 and am a bit perturbed by finding how noisy the E-3 is... any dark areas in the frame that are under exposed... well lets just say I'm not that impressed. [I'll play with the Noise Filter settings and see what they do]

But Olympus gear had compelling points, fully sealed bodies at far less £ than 'canikons', the tidy range of lenses all of them pretty good, the dust shaker, pixel mapping, automatic image correcting (vignetting, distortion, etc), etc. All of these where incorporated inside 4/33rds from the off.

I liked that about Olympus gear. But those small sensors... :-(

[MSF]

I saw the E1 and loved it.
It was easily the best dig slr at the time.
I used it for a couple of years but it was showing its limitations.
When the E3 was released, I was not impressed by its spec, but the olympus die hards on the 4/3rds forum convinced me that it was a lot better than it actually was.

I shot 3 airshows and out of over 8000 shots ,I had to reject over 6000 due to poor autofocus and appalling noise - even at ISO200.
Even the static shots were bad!.

I decided to go to london last October , when the E3 was still hot property , and traded 3 bodies , a 50-200 F2.8, 11-22 2.8, 14-54 2.8 as well as 2 converters, 2 power grips and a flash gun for a Nikon D700 and a Sigma 120-400 f4-5.6 +£300 and am glad that I did.
Just like you , the E3 killed it for me,but the D700 got it back.

The D700 is £600 more expensive than the 300 but in the kind of light that we get in Ireland , I can shoot all day at ISO 800 with no almost noise and the loss of crop factor is not a problem as the full frame sensor allows greater scope for selective enlargements with none of the penalties of the smaller sensors.

I can understand the arguement for going for the most affordable body with the best lens you can afford, but that was for FILM cameras.
The sensor is now usually the weakest link, where as before, a cheap PK mount body with a good pentax lens and Kodak of Fuji film could get you some excellent shots, not any more.

Tom, the best bet is to shoot in RAW mode.
You can change the white balance and a host of other settings at your leisure.
It can litteraly mean the difference between a wasted days shooting and a learning experience with good shots to show as well.

[The Civil Civillian]

Hiya MSF... sounds like you went to full frame heaven? :-)

I went on Holiday with the E-3 with that was my only camera... I felt a doofus walking round with a bloody big black thing over my shoulder when everyone else had a silver thing that fitted in a shirt pocket or the unbiqitous phone cam.

I think if I was buying a family or day-to-day camera now, I'd give the micro 4/3rds line a look. I belive they are pretty sexy!

Anyway, I came home from Poland and realised I'd left the noise filter on 'off'. [I am used to this as I'd get rid of noise with editting later] So a fair amount of these images [of Aushwitz, etc] are totally ruined as in any dark areas, there is no detail to any grass or trees, it's just a mass of indistinct bits. And I wouldn't say these images were under-exposed much.

It is a shame about Olympus or 4/3rds.. if only that sensor was bigger or they reduced the MP number to make better high ISOs.

Cheers

[MSF]

There is a prog called 'noise ninja ' that may be able to help you there.
If you had shot on RAW setting , that wouldn't have been too much of a problem.

Beware of 4/3 rds micro - same problems with no optical viewfinder!