Camera advice required please

[benm345]

Apologies if this isn't in the right forum, but I was looking for a bit of advice from spotters who record landings/take offs.

I'm looking to invest in a camera so i can sit down at my local airport this summer and hopefully catch a few interesting departures/arrivals on video. I've been told the best camera for the job would be a dslr attached to some sort of flexible tripod type device.

I'll be honest, I have no previous experience with cameras/recording equipment apart from using my smart phone. Is there anyone on here with a bit of experience lend a bit of advice and give me a few tips/recommendations on a good set up for the job.

Thanks in advance!

[philbky]

DSLR certainly. Minimum 200mm lens, in addition to whatever lens comes with the camera, but preferably a 70mm-whatever mm zoom lens you can afford. Make sure you buy a good sized memory card and spare batteries. Even lower end DSLRs have reasonable video today but still shots are often more dramatic and you can take a burst sequence.

In over 40 years of aviation photography I've never used a tripod except for the odd static night shot and, at one month short of 69, can't see why one would be advantageous. Consider looking at a good processing program such as Photoshop, or Photoshop Elements for stills. There are also some good cheaper ones around. For video, Windows has a video manipulation program but there are many others available.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by philbky

In over 40 years of aviation photography I've never used a tripod except for the odd static night shot and, at one month short of 69, can't see why one would be advantageous.

Agreed. Spend the money you have set aside for a tripod on buying a slightly higher spec camera instead.

Using a tripod with a long lens makes life difficult when the subject is moving fast. Practise panning instead if you want action shots.

[Hotel Tango]

Ditto the above two replies.

[Evanelpus]

Remember, it's more the lens than the camera that'll give you quality pictures. Don't be fooled by the Currys 'bundle' DSLR deals with two lenses. Those two lenses tend to be at the bottom end of the quality glass spectrum.

Sort out a budget, read plenty of reviews and don't buy anything until you are 100% satisfied that what you are buying will do the job for you.

[Pali]

Good APS-C sensor can be better than a full frame as it gives impression your lens are longer (multiply by 1.6). In plane spotting it is an advantage as really long lens are expensive.

Quality lens e.g. L's series by Canon are advantage.

However I don't agree with statements regarding tripod. Actually I invested in Sachtler fluid head tripod which costs more than my 7D and I can say that panning action cannot by compared to cheap ones or holding long lens in the hands.

Just try it once and you will see.

[xtypeman]

Go too a good independent camera shop and ask to try out various combinations. Also sometimes its worth looking at second hand equipment. With the independent shops many of them are photographers as well so tell them what you want to do.

[AtomKraft]

Buy a Nikon or Canon crop sensor camera. This way the focal length of your lens will be multiplied by 1.5 for the Nikon, and 1.6 for the Canon.

Don't buy a full frame camera, unless it's as your second Camera- useful for static shots though.....

With the crop bodies (Nikon D200, D300, D500, D3100, 3300, D5300 etc), a 200mm lens is a "300mm" on the Nikon and a little longer on the Canon.

Buy a good lens. I think the Sigma 50-500 OS is the best tele for air shows.
Second hand maybe £500?

If you can afford it, get a Nikon D500 body.

There's some good advice!

[wub]

I have been a lifelong camera user, primarily interested in photographing aircraft. I have used the mighty Canon gear and for the last few years micro 4/3. Recently I switched to a Sony RX10 III which has a 24-600mm lens, it is sharp through its entire range. In addition it shoots 4K video from which it is possible to extract a still photo. It can also does slow motion. It has built in image stabilisation, to prevent blurred shots and has really impressed me. So much so that I am selling all my other equipment.

[philbky]

That's a good shot and good advert for the camera BUT....

For its price, the camera is a way over the top end bridge camera. I've had a couple of those from Fuji and Minolta in the past and once dust gets into the body, and it will, you are into a great deal of angst and expense. Sony say they have adequate moisture and dust sealing, but so does every other bridge camera.

Then there is the electronic viewfinder. I have a Sony a58 which has an electronic viewfinder. Useless for panning and burst shooting with a big lens so my 150-500 lens stays on my a300. I use the a58 for landscapes, portraits and general work where motion isn't a problem.

With the sort of money wanted in the USA and UK for the RX10 III you can buy a good mid range DSLR, and one or more good zoom lenses to cover the range of aircraft shots required.

[El Bunto]

In over 40 years of aviation photography I've never used a tripod except for the odd static night shot and, at one month short of 69, can't see why one would be advantageous.

Tripods ( or at a push a monopod ) are very useful for unique dawn and dusk shots , particularly of daytime-shy types. I was photographing freighters the other morning around 05:00 and needed 1/160 to 1/250 shutter with ISO1600. No way you can hand-hold that on a long-lens.

And they're also great for catching helicopters, you'll need similarly slow shutter speeds to blur the rotors.

If you just want run-of-the-mill daytime shots of the same airliners that everyone already photographs then you'll probably be fine without one. In which case why bother? Is it worth the investment? You'll be 'competing' againt rich amateurs with £8k+ of kit, might be better to sit and browse their output on jetphotos.net or hire kit for a week from Lenses for Hire.

[wub]

Quote:
"Then there is the electronic viewfinder. I have a Sony a58 which has an electronic viewfinder. Useless for panning and burst shooting."

Really? Your a58 might have a useless viewfinder but I can assure you the RX10 does not.

=

[philbky]

I can acheive the same result with the a58 on a one shot basis. My point was that the electronic viewfinder is not fast enough to deal with panning burst shots. I would be interested in seeing three consecutive panning shots fractions of a second apart.

[wub]

I'm not getting into this. I was offering a suggestion to the OP, nothing more.

[philbky]

Originally Posted by wub

I'm not getting into this. I was offering a suggestion to the OP, nothing more.

It was you who said the viewfinder on the RX10 was better than my experience on the a58. All I 've asked you to do is prove your point. If you can, great, if you can't then my comment stands and you would be better off for panning burst shots - a need that is a given for aircraft photography - with a dslr and some good lenses.

[philbky]

Originally Posted by El Bunto

Tripods ( or at a push a monopod ) are very useful for unique dawn and dusk shots , particularly of daytime-shy types. I was photographing freighters the other morning around 05:00 and needed 1/160 to 1/250 shutter with ISO1600. No way you can hand-hold that on a long-lens.

And they're also great for catching helicopters, you'll need similarly slow shutter speeds to blur the rotors.

If you just want run-of-the-mill daytime shots of the same airliners that everyone already photographs then you'll probably be fine without one. In which case why bother? Is it worth the investment? You'll be 'competing' againt rich amateurs with £8k+ of kit, might be better to sit and browse their output on jetphotos.net or hire kit for a week from Lenses for Hire.

Whilst I understand your point about tripods for high ISO shooting with long lenses I have never used one for helicopters. Check the EXIF for this photo which was hand held.