 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / July 2005Aviation photography lenses
I've been recently starting with DSLR photography and picked up a Digital Rebel XT that I'm very happy with. Having a non-unlimited budget, I got it with the 18-55 kit lens (usable for some point&shooting), a 50mm f/1.4 prime (it knocked me down my chair when I looked at the quality I can get with that lens, just awesome), and a 75-300 f/4.0-5.6 III (non-USM, non-IS - this lens is really disapponting me, but it's also very cheap, so I had to expect it). My target is to be able to take aviation photos in a quality so that airliners.net will accept my submissions. I have a decent workflow in Photoshop CS2 which works quite well, but the limits of the 75-300 lens can't be corrected to a level acceptable by airliners.net. It's simply too soft between 200-300mm, and the lack of contrast is terrible. Is this just me, do I have a bad copy, or is the lens bad by design? Anyway, I'm afraid I need to go for an "L" lens somewhen in the future. The problem is that any xxx-300 "L" zoom lens, or even 300mm "L" primes, are way too expensive for me for the moment. So I thought about 75-200 f/4.0L with a 1.4x extender. My question: would this combination still give good, "L" quality when used properly, or isn't this a combination that is supposed to work? Will autofocus still be fine? Other question: if I mail-order the lenses from B&H (I live in Switzerland), if something's broken, who will take care of warranty, and how many months would I be without lenses if anything breaks? Local stores carry all this but it's at least 30-50% more expensive than in the US. Thank you for your comments -Manuel Hi, Just a quick question ... When you say "Aviation Photography", are you talking about airbourne photography, or photography of aircraft (or both)? Cheers, CC > I've been recently starting with DSLR photography and picked up a Digital > Rebel XT that I'm very happy with. Having a non-unlimited budget, I got it [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- > When you say "Aviation Photography", are you talking about airbourne > photography, or photography of aircraft (or both)? Sorry, I should have been more specific ... I'm talking mainly about staying on the ground taking pictures of planes about to land (on final), while touching down, or shortly after take-off. I will also take some pictures of parked planes on the tarmac. OTOH I'm not trying to take pictures of airborne planes way up high, I think this would need even more long (and expensive) lenses... but I'd also like to take airshow pictures (where the flying airplanes are quite close to the public). As you can see, I'm looking into doing many things... :-) that's why I was looking at zoom lenses, being aware that they're never the same quality as the primes, but you can't have it all... I've found out that a 300mm lens is enough to get the planes "large enough" (but then again I might be wrong), and now I need the "best bang for the bucks" to get a decent quality out of my pictures. Thank you -Manuel >Sorry, I should have been more specific ... I'm talking mainly about staying >on the ground taking pictures of planes about to land (on final), while >touching down, or shortly after take-off. I will also take some pictures of >parked planes on the tarmac. You do realize this is one step away from becoming a train-spotter. ...or have you already graduated from train-spotting? <g> Which airport are you going to concentrate on, and do you have special access?  SignatureOwamanga! http://www.pbase.com/owamanga > You do realize this is one step away from becoming a train-spotter. > ...or have you already graduated from train-spotting? > <g> OMG, now that you tell me that, I'm going to sell my equipment right away :-)) No, no trainspotting in mind for the moment. > Which airport are you going to concentrate on, and do you have special > access? I'm concentrating on two small regional airports in Switzerland (LSZA and LSZL) where I do have special access being a private pilot (and no, I'm not taking pictures while flying :-) eventhough I have already done that before with my P&S camera, but with the dirty/scratched plexiglas windows it really doesn't make sense) -Manuel > I've been recently starting with DSLR photography and picked up a Digital > Rebel XT that I'm very happy with. Having a non-unlimited budget, I got it [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Thank you for your comments > -Manuel Hi Manuel, I have the Canon Digital Rebel. I also have a Canon 35mm Rebel (well, that is on lone to a niece for shooting wildlife right now.) However, for the 35mm Rebel, I had a 75-300 F4.0-5.6 non USM, non IS lens. I did mount that on the Digital Rebel. I was happy with the contrast of that lens on the 35mm. I was not happy with that lens on the Digital Rebel. I did buy a Canon 75-300 USM, IS lens F4.0-5.6. That one is fairly nice. See if a camera store will let you try one out for a day. I also have an old manual focus 500mm lens that ...well, I sort of modified by taking the screw mount off of a Peleng 8mm lens and putting it on the 500mm lens. This worked. I am attempting to get another screw converison to EOS mount. >From what you are trying to do, you may want to look at something in the range of a 500mm lens. However, this may present problems. At an airport, shooting photos with a lens that draws attention to you in this day and age could be trouble. A large lens like a 500mm could be asking for trouble from the security folks, or just people calling the police saying some terrorist is spotting planes. I would start by looking at Canon's 75-300 USM lens. It seems to be better then the non USM lens. roland > I would start by looking at Canon's 75-300 USM lens. It seems to be > better then the non USM lens. Thank you for your tips. The photographer at my local camera store recommends the 70-300 DO IS, which has more or less the same price like what I was looking at (70-200 f/4.0L + 1.4x extender). Any experience with that DO lens? Is it comparable to the "L" glass, especially wide open? -Manuel Manuel, The 70-300 is not as sharp as the 70-200 L. I have the L lens and a Digital Rebel XT, and it is awesome. Very sharp with great contrast. It's also very light if you are going to be using it handheld. Here's a lens rating with the two side by side: http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylenstxt.jsp?filter=%22brand='Canon%20 EF'%20OR%20brand='Sigma%20AF'%20OR%20brand='Tamron%20AF'%20or%20brand='Tokina%20 AF'%20or%20brand='Vivitar%20AF'%22 I have read that there is very little degredation with the 1.4x Canon extender, but I do not have one. -- Martin >> I would start by looking at Canon's 75-300 USM lens. It seems to be >> better then the non USM lens. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > =---- > Manuel, > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > > =---- Manuel, I have been thinking a little more about your stated goal of shooting photos of aircraft on approach at an airport. Before you spend money on a new lens... you might want to try something. You will lose depth of field, but you might get something you can use. I believe this is AV mode on the camera (I don't have the camera in front of me right now.) Open up the aperture on your lens to the largest opening (set it on F4/F5.6), Then attempt to take a photo of an aircraft on approach with the lens you currently have. It might just be the camera is selecting what it thinks is proper for what you are shooting, and not what is really proper for the type of photography you are doing. It might be worth a try. (I don't like spending money unless I really have too!) roland > I believe this is AV mode on the camera (I don't have the camera in > front of me right now.) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Then attempt to take a photo of an aircraft on approach with the lens > you currently have. I am currently shooting in aperture priority mode with about f/8, because the lens gets too soft when wide open. I guess I'll do some more testing with the equipment I have right now before going out for some frustration-buying, which doesn't make too much sense at this stage I guess... Thank you everyone for your tips! -Manuel How about the Canon EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L USM IS? >> I believe this is AV mode on the camera (I don't have the camera in >> front of me right now.) [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption > =---- > How about the Canon EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L USM IS? I have been thinking about that one, too ... but that's still a little bit beyond my budget. I think I'll save up for some more months and then try again :-) -Manuel >>How about the Canon EF 100-400/4.5-5.6L USM IS? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > -Manuel I'm in a similar boat as you I suspect - I have a Tamron 70-300 plus a kit Canon 300D for taking pictures of horses. There are many situations where I can't get enough light, or this lens simply isn't sharp enough to make a good pic. The recommended lenses cost $1000-2000, which for a beginner is a monstrous investment. I'm trying to join up with a local photography club - I'm hoping to get to know some folks and that some of them will have some very good glass I can try out. IMO, that's the only way I'll spend the $1800 for a f/2.8 70-200 - is to take side-by-side shots and see how much better the results are. Dave [] > I'm in a similar boat as you I suspect - I have a Tamron 70-300 plus a > kit Canon 300D for taking pictures of horses. There are many [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > for a f/2.8 70-200 - is to take side-by-side shots and see how much > better the results are. It would also be interested to know how results from an image stabilised camera like the Panasonic FZ5/FZ20FZ30 or Canon S2 IS compare. The investment is far less and the camera much more compact.... Cheers, David > I'm in a similar boat as you I suspect - I have a Tamron 70-300 plus a kit > Canon 300D for taking pictures of horses. There are many situations where [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 70-200 - is to take side-by-side shots and see how much better the results > are. I'm in the same boat also - in my case being equipped only with the stock 18-55mm. I think the 18 end of it will do all that I'll ever need in the wide angle department, but it's proving hopelessly inadequate for most specific outdoor scenarios at the 55mm end. Having said that, I took a friend for a flight the other day - I handed him the camera - told him to keep it zoomed in all the time, and was quite surprised at the results - especially considering the vibrations in light twins probably aren't the best for hand-held shots. I'll be investing in a long lens shortly - it's darned confusing, but I'm going to put a couple of stakes in the ground by only considering Canon L series lenses. Additionally, I don't think I'm going to get too excited about the F2.8 variety - I imaging the DOP would be very limited, and if I'm ever that desperate for a shot I've alwys got the option of pretty high ISOs (up to 1600). So I'm probably going to be looking for L series lenses in the F4 to F5.6 range. That's my thinking at the moment. I did try the venerable F2.8 70-200 L series the other day (non IS) and was fairly unexcited by the "zoom factor" at 200mm - so I think I'll start with the 100-400 and see how I go from there. It'll leave me with a gap between 55 and 100mm, but I don't think that'll bite me in the bum too often. >> I'm in a similar boat as you I suspect - I have a Tamron 70-300 plus a >> kit Canon 300D for taking pictures of horses. There are many situations [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > between 55 and 100mm, but I don't think that'll bite me in the bum too > often. You're never forced to use f/2.8 - that's what manual and AP mode are for. But in any case, you might also consider adding an L series 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter. That and a 70-200 or 100-300 would be a great range of telephoto glass. Dave >>> I'm in a similar boat as you I suspect - I have a Tamron 70-300 >>> plus a kit Canon 300D for taking pictures of horses. There are [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > great > range of telephoto glass. I'm coming in late on this thread, but I also shoot aviation as a serious hobby. I am currently using a Sigma 50-500 on a Maxxum 7D and am very happy with the results (other than the Popeye forearms I'm getting from horsing 6+ lbs of camera and lens about.) Also not the cheapest solution... Bob ^,,^ Point you browser at ... http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showcat.php?cat=27 To read comprehensive review of all the ones you're considering. We have an old saying in aviation: "It takes 2 things to fly - Money, and airspeed" - generally speaking, the higher the airspeed, the more money required. Unfortunately, I'm learning that there is a similar thing with lenses when it comes to aperatures and other nicities :( > > I would start by looking at Canon's 75-300 USM lens. It seems to be > > better then the non USM lens. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- > Point you browser at ... > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> experience with that DO lens? Is it comparable to the "L" glass, >> especially wide open? There are quite a few 70-300 DO IS shots on this page, beginning at about #25 and running through #72 of 94. Not a real careful evaluation, but for the most part pretty much untouched other than Save For Web at PS 30 quality. Now that I look at them, not much in the way of wide-open, though. Maybe not much help, then. http://www.fototime.com/inv/728348D9864A3C1 SignatureFrank ess > Point you browser at ... > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > required. Unfortunately, I'm learning that there is a similar thing with > lenses when it comes to aperatures and other nicities :( Hi Colin, Yes, the larger aperature you go for, the more money it costs. I was just trying to explain that Manuel might be able to get his camera to shoot the type of photo he is after with the equipment he has right now. If he can get the most out of what he has as a base line, it might give him a little better idea of what he is really looking for. Also, for shooting an incoming aircraft, he is going to want the largest aperature he can get for the money. The quality of the glass might be important, but for what he is after he might want to consider the speed of the lens first. roland Manuel, Unfortunatly the lenses with the quality to be simular to your 50mm f/1.4 will be top $$$$ A 100-400L would be the most versatile because its sharp from 100-400 and has IS for those hand held shots (makes even 1/30th at 400mm a possiblity). So far away or closer you can still use your same lens. Nothing will beat a prime but a prime with any converter will be degraded to a small to large degree. A 70-200 with a 1.4 TC would be better then the 75-300 but you will loose autofocus and you will also loose a stop of light. I would rather have the 300mm prime over the 70-200 with 1.4 TC. Also primes are much better with TC 1.4 or 2.0 then zooms are. You get what you pay for! Good luck :+) > I've been recently starting with DSLR photography and picked up a Digital > Rebel XT that I'm very happy with. Having a non-unlimited budget, I got it [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.