Hi all,

Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten the
bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for lens
that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good clear
images of aircraft on display.

Cheers in advance,

Pete

Hi Pete,
I got my D80 this spring for a trip to the UK to take in a couple of
airshows and a number of museums. I got the Nikon 70-300Is lens and it is
nice. But, for the serious photographer, probably something more in the
500mm range would be preferable. I could only afford the 70-300. :) The
weather didn't cooperate for the UK airshows, so my photo's there were
so-so. I did have a little better luck at Dayton a few weeks ago at the Dawn
Patrol Rendezvous. The 70-300 is very nice, and the image stabilization is
great! I really like my D80 too.

The Dr1 is full scale. The DVII is RC

Mike

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e183/mbealmear/DPR2007/DSC_2421web.jpg

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e183/mbealmear/DPR2007/DSC_2507web.jpg

"Peter.D.Evans" <orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com> wrote in message
. 109.144...
> Hi all,
>
> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten the
> bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for
> lens
> that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good clear
> images of aircraft on display.
>
> Cheers in advance,
>
> Pete

Oops, that didn't work. Try this.






"Mike Bealmear" > wrote in message
. ..
> Hi Pete,
> I got my D80 this spring for a trip to the UK to take in a couple of
> airshows and a number of museums. I got the Nikon 70-300Is lens and it is
> nice. But, for the serious photographer, probably something more in the
> 500mm range would be preferable. I could only afford the 70-300. :) The
> weather didn't cooperate for the UK airshows, so my photo's there were
> so-so. I did have a little better luck at Dayton a few weeks ago at the
> Dawn
> Patrol Rendezvous. The 70-300 is very nice, and the image stabilization is
> great! I really like my D80 too.
>
> The Dr1 is full scale. The DVII is RC
>
> Mike
>
> http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e183/mbealmear/DPR2007/DSC_2421web.jpg
>
> http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e183/mbealmear/DPR2007/DSC_2507web.jpg
>
> "Peter.D.Evans" <orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com> wrote in message
> . 109.144...
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
>> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten
>> the
>> bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for
>> lens
>> that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good clear
>> images of aircraft on display.
>>
>> Cheers in advance,
>>
>> Pete
>
>

Well, I used to know to do this. :)


"Mike Bealmear" > wrote in message
. ..
> Oops, that didn't work. Try this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Mike Bealmear" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> Hi Pete,
>> I got my D80 this spring for a trip to the UK to take in a couple of
>> airshows and a number of museums. I got the Nikon 70-300Is lens and it is
>> nice. But, for the serious photographer, probably something more in the
>> 500mm range would be preferable. I could only afford the 70-300. :) The
>> weather didn't cooperate for the UK airshows, so my photo's there were
>> so-so. I did have a little better luck at Dayton a few weeks ago at the
>> Dawn
>> Patrol Rendezvous. The 70-300 is very nice, and the image stabilization
>> is
>> great! I really like my D80 too.
>>
>> The Dr1 is full scale. The DVII is RC
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e183/mbealmear/DPR2007/DSC_2421web.jpg
>>
>> http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e183/mbealmear/DPR2007/DSC_2507web.jpg
>>
>> "Peter.D.Evans" <orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com> wrote in message
>> . 109.144...
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
>>> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten
>>> the
>>> bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for
>>> lens
>>> that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good
>>> clear
>>> images of aircraft on display.
>>>
>>> Cheers in advance,
>>>
>>> Pete
>>
>>
>
>
>

Pete,
Here are a few more with the 70-300IS. These were taken at Old
Warden/Shuttleworth Collection.


"Peter.D.Evans" <orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com> wrote in message
. 109.144...
> Hi all,
>
> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten the
> bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for
> lens
> that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good clear
> images of aircraft on display.
>
> Cheers in advance,
>
> Pete

Peter.D.Evans wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten the
> bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for lens
> that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good clear
> images of aircraft on display.
>
> Cheers in advance,
>
> Pete


I have a Sigma 50-500 Bigma

GREAT LENS

A lot of people on Fencecheck have them they are light and have a great
range and do not suck in dust.

I've been a lurker for years, but finally feel like I have something
worthwhile to comment on - and an aviation-related photo to go with it.


I also have a Bigma. It's a terrific lens, especially on my new Canon
40D! I recently decided to sell my Nikon D70 and all the lenses,
flashes, extension tubes and all the rest.

The final straw was shooting the Cape Cod airshow with the D70 several
weeks ago.

I didn't have the Bigma for that show. I had the Sigma 170 - 500 mm,
and I will issue a caution about both Sigma lenses. It turns out that
they both focus BEYOND infinity.

I had so much trouble with the Nikon D70 failing to autofocus quickly
(hunting for focus), I set it to manual focus and spun the focus ring to
infinity - or so I thought. It wasn't immediately obvious due to the
severe haze - everything looked foggy anyway. About 250 shots later I
discovered the error. VERY frustrating.

So far, I really like the 40D and the Bigma. They're a great
combination, if somewhat heavy. They focus very quickly and are a real
joy to use. I expect it will work very well for my next airshow.

Whatever lens you decide to get for airshows, make sure you get one with
the high speed focus, i.e., USM. And pay attention to that focus ring if
you decide to use manual focus!


Attached is a shot of a hot air balloon rising up from the gorge in
Quechee, Vermont. I sure wish I had this setup for the airshow...

Charlie

Charlie wrote:
> I've been a lurker for years, but finally feel like I have something
> worthwhile to comment on - and an aviation-related photo to go with it.
>
>
> I also have a Bigma. It's a terrific lens, especially on my new Canon
> 40D! I recently decided to sell my Nikon D70 and all the lenses,
> flashes, extension tubes and all the rest.
>
> The final straw was shooting the Cape Cod airshow with the D70 several
> weeks ago.
>
> I didn't have the Bigma for that show. I had the Sigma 170 - 500 mm,
> and I will issue a caution about both Sigma lenses. It turns out that
> they both focus BEYOND infinity.
>
> I had so much trouble with the Nikon D70 failing to autofocus quickly
> (hunting for focus), I set it to manual focus and spun the focus ring to
> infinity - or so I thought. It wasn't immediately obvious due to the
> severe haze - everything looked foggy anyway. About 250 shots later I
> discovered the error. VERY frustrating.
>
> So far, I really like the 40D and the Bigma. They're a great
> combination, if somewhat heavy. They focus very quickly and are a real
> joy to use. I expect it will work very well for my next airshow.
>
> Whatever lens you decide to get for airshows, make sure you get one with
> the high speed focus, i.e., USM. And pay attention to that focus ring if
> you decide to use manual focus!
>
>
> Attached is a shot of a hot air balloon rising up from the gorge in
> Quechee, Vermont. I sure wish I had this setup for the airshow...
>
> Charlie
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Apparently, I need to figure out how to make that image smaller...

Charlie

Peter.D.Evans wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've bitten the
> bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome recommendations for lens
> that will enable me to make the most of this camera for taking good clear
> images of aircraft on display.
>
> Cheers in advance,
>
> Pete


Some points:

Shutter lag will kill you, so if you can do it buy a digital camera with
the least possible lag and shoot single frames after carefully leading
and framing the target;

Closer is always better for individual aircraft; back in the days when I
took a lot of air to air photos, I used a Nikon F body hooked to a 500mm
Nikkor Mirror lens. Those lenses are out there if you can find one.
They were the sharpest of the Maksutov-theory construction; the 1000 and
the 2000 mm Nikkor lenses could only be used from a tripod. Remember
that you don't always need the latest refractor type lens (as opposed to
the reflector style of the Maksutov-Theory lenses) and you don't need
Zoom lenses if you constrain your picture taking to specific subjects
and poses at one time. Zoom lenses are inherently less "sharp" than
apocromatic lenses, which are less than acromatic, which are less than
non-stabilized mirror lenses. The ideal, of course, would be a Leitz
Apocromatic 1000 f2 lens hooked to an Alpa body with motor drive,
shooting Old Kodachrome ASA 25. There was a series of those lenses
specially made for the CIA back in the 1960's which had a
gyro-stabilizer device which circled the lens. It was so rock steady
when it was speeded up to to working revolutions (or whatever gyoscopic
stabilizers do) that it was difficult to pan a moving target. I've used
that lens on some surveillances with Roxal-X Pan film (ASA 1200) pushed
to ASA 12,000 in a hot developer bath and single-chromatic lamp flashing
during development, that worked pretty good. I remember one timje in a
night club in Okinawa where the system actually caught the mid-air spurt
of a certain bodily fluid as the young lady of the night furiously
massaged a certain member of the SUBJECT'S body, grappling it into
submission... I forget what happened to the SUBJECT but that photo was
famous in the annals of military intelligence back in the 1960's.

OK, another point, use color film or settings of the highest possible
speed, that you can without sacrificing grain and enlargement. Remember
that the closer you can get to the subject by using a telephoto lens,
the less you have to crop. This wasn't a problem back when I used a
Fairchild K-series hand held 70mm camera with the ten inch lens. I
could actually see the extended middle finger of the Soviet Bear tail
gunners as I homed in on the new tail gun radar antennas.

There are some marvelous pictures here taken by real experts --
profession air show photographers -- I am sure they can offer better
advice than can I. Anyway, good luck.

Cheers,

Dave

Hi there Mike...

> I got my D80 this spring for a trip to the UK to take in a couple of
> airshows and a number of museums. I got the Nikon 70-300Is lens and it
> is nice. But, for the serious photographer, probably something more in
> the 500mm range would be preferable. I could only afford the 70-300.
> :) The weather didn't cooperate for the UK airshows, so my photo's
> there were so-so. I did have a little better luck at Dayton a few
> weeks ago at the Dawn Patrol Rendezvous. The 70-300 is very nice, and
> the image stabilization is great! I really like my D80 too.

Thanks for the feedback...

I am planning, when funds allow, to purchase a Tamron SP AF200-500 to
bridge the gap from 200 to 500mm, but to say that the subject of lens vs
£££ (or $$$) is a minefield is the understatement of the century! The
subject of light conditions here in the UK is about the only feature beyond
my control but I am looking forward to trying out my D80 for the first
time...

Thanks again,

Pete

> I have a Sigma 50-500 Bigma
>
> GREAT LENS
>
> A lot of people on Fencecheck have them they are light and have a
> great range and do not suck in dust.

....this along with the Tamron SP AF200-500mm is on my wants list, unless I
win the lottery that is!

Cheers

Pete

Hi there Charlie...

> I've been a lurker for years, but finally feel like I have something
> worthwhile to comment on - and an aviation-related photo to go with
> it.

Thanks for the feedback. With all the wonderful imaages posted here, I'm
surprised that the subject of cameras/lems doesn't rear it's head more
often.

As I've mentioned elsewhere on this thread, the Bigma has already tickled
my fancy, albeit at a price that is currently beyond my means. I have a
feeling that something in the 18-200mm or 70-300mm range will be a good
place to start. I really want a good quality jack of all trades lens that
will not often be anywhere else but connected to the camera. Once I've got
the hang of whichever lens I decide to get, I can then look at adding
something bigger.

Out of interest, do you use a monopod of a tripod when shooting using the
Bigma?

Thanks again for the comments...

Pete

>
> Apparently, I need to figure out how to make that image smaller...
>
> Charlie

Here you go.

Peter.D.Evans wrote:
> Hi there Charlie...
>
>> I've been a lurker for years, but finally feel like I have something
>> worthwhile to comment on - and an aviation-related photo to go with
>> it.
>
> Thanks for the feedback. With all the wonderful imaages posted here, I'm
> surprised that the subject of cameras/lems doesn't rear it's head more
> often.
>
> As I've mentioned elsewhere on this thread, the Bigma has already tickled
> my fancy, albeit at a price that is currently beyond my means. I have a
> feeling that something in the 18-200mm or 70-300mm range will be a good
> place to start. I really want a good quality jack of all trades lens that
> will not often be anywhere else but connected to the camera. Once I've got
> the hang of whichever lens I decide to get, I can then look at adding
> something bigger.
>
> Out of interest, do you use a monopod of a tripod when shooting using the
> Bigma?
>
> Thanks again for the comments...
>
> Pete

Believe it or not, I've been using the Bigma hand-held most of the time.
Surprisingly, it's physically smaller than the Sigma 170 - 500 (which
I also mostly hand-held.

For an air show, I don't think a tripod or even monopod would give me
the flexibility to follow a fast-moving aircraft.

That said, I'm in the market for a monopod for nature, long-range
portraits, etc.

I can hardly wait for the next air show...

Charlie

Oviedo wrote:
>> Apparently, I need to figure out how to make that image smaller...
>>
>> Charlie
>
> Here you go.
>
>
>
Thanks, bro.

As you can tell, it was pretty misty. I shot this about 7 AM, and the
fog had not completely burned off yet. It was pretty dramatic to see it
live, but I bet the fall foliage looked better from the balloon!

It's hard to beat Vermont in the fall.

Charlie

Hi again Charlie...

> Believe it or not, I've been using the Bigma hand-held most of the
> time. Surprisingly, it's physically smaller than the Sigma 170 - 500
> which also mostly hand-held. For an air show, I don't think a tripod or
> even monopod would give me the flexibility to follow a fast-moving
> aircraft.
>
> That said, I'm in the market for a monopod for nature, long-range
> portraits, etc.
>
> I can hardly wait for the next air show...

Hand-held eh? Wow, you must have arms like Popeye and roack like steadiness
to boot! Of course, it really does boil down to personal experience,
comfort and confidence in your ability to use the combination...

On the spur of the moment tonight I've gone and won an auction for a Sigma
170-500 for £265, so I too am now looking forward to next years airshow
season. All I need now is a good quality general purpose lens to cover 18mm
to 200mm... for static display and general use...

Cheers

Pete

Maple1 > wrote in
news:J7JUi.151090$Da.123704@pd7urf1no:

> Peter.D.Evans wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Having unsuccessfully tried to use my Panasonic FZ7 and its appalling
>> shutter lag especially when taking pictures of the flying, I've
>> bitten the bullet purchased a Nikon D80 body. I would welcome
>> recommendations for lens that will enable me to make the most of this
>> camera for taking good clear images of aircraft on display.
>>
>> Cheers in advance,
>>
>> Pete
>
>
> I have a Sigma 50-500 Bigma
>
> GREAT LENS
>
> A lot of people on Fencecheck have them they are light and have a
> great range and do not suck in dust.

I have a Bigma, too - it is a great lens, but 'light' isn't the first word
I would use to describe it. Mine has also managed to suck in a little
dust that has settled on the internal elements. Not enough to make any
noticeable effect on images.

Love it, though!

Bob ^,,^

"Peter.D.Evans" <orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com> wrote in
. 109.144:

> Out of interest, do you use a monopod of a tripod when shooting using
> the Bigma?

I handhold, but the Minolta Maxxum 7D DSLR I use it on has sensor-based
image stabilization. Even with sensor crop factor making it essentially a
750mm, I get consistently sharper shots than with my old Sigma 500 on 35mm
Maxxum 9xi bodies.

Bob ^,,^

The ability to hand hold the Bigma is inversely proportional to the
length of time I hold it.

The stark lack of Popeye arms is what has me thinking monopod. Still,
I'd like a better solution for air shows.

You'll like that 170 - 500mm. It's a really neat lens, and you'll never
look at a bird, airplane or even the moon again without thinking about
grabbing that lens!

Just remember that bit about beyond infinity focus and have a blast with it!

Charlie

Hi again Charlie...


> You'll like that 170 - 500mm. It's a really neat lens, and you'll
> never look at a bird, airplane or even the moon again without thinking
> about grabbing that lens! Just remember that bit about beyond infinity
> focus and have a blast with it!

I can't wait to try it! Looks like I'll have to take advantage of an old
friend who owns a bed & breakfast in the Lake District and hang around the
places Rusty does to get his excellent low-flying RAF shots...

As and when the combination gets used, I'll post the results here...

cheers m8

Pete

Hi there Bob...

> I handhold, but the Minolta Maxxum 7D DSLR I use it on has
> sensor-based image stabilization. Even with sensor crop factor making
> it essentially a 750mm, I get consistently sharper shots than with my
> old Sigma 500 on 35mm Maxxum 9xi bodies.

It's a matter of trying the combination hand-held and seeing what the
results are like. For whatever reason, I just always thought this
combination (or any large lens for that matter) would need either a monopod
or tripod for best results. I'm still going to purchase a decent monopod
just for good measure as spending four hours on a flight-line following
everything in flight and shooting away is bound to have a tiring effect on
the arms...

Cheers

Pete

> Attachment decoded: P-51D NL51KD 44-73436 Olympic Flight Museum
> OLM 6-18-06 01.jpg

Very nice indeed Bob.. good clear filling of the shot there! Just the sort
of results I'm going to be looking at - was this shot handheld?

Cheers

Pete

"Charlie" > wrote in message
. ..
> The ability to hand hold the Bigma is inversely proportional to the length
> of time I hold it.
>
> The stark lack of Popeye arms is what has me thinking monopod. Still, I'd
> like a better solution for air shows.
>
I think a monopod is a great choice whenever you have a camera/lens that
needs a little more stability than handheld can provide. It's quick to
turn, if it's tall enough, you can tilt and pan instantly. I got a manfroto
monopod and quick release head and the same head on my tripod for easy
changing if necessary.

Rob

Hi again Bob...

> Handheld, and just about falling over backward as I was shooting
> rather straight up as the P-51 banked over the tarmac I was standing
> on. Another testament to the 7D's image stabilization is that I have
> a pretty badly screwed up back, and have a fair bit of trouble just
> standing still, much less doing a smooth track on a fast moving
> aircraft...

Very nice indeed! I love a good ol'P-51 in a metal finish with good
weather! Can't wait to see what results I get with my combination...

Below is the best of what I was getting with my Panasonic FZ-7.
Ground/static shots were no problem whatsoever, but display images were
another thing altogether!

Cheers

Pete

I took tons of airshow pictures with my Minolta XG-1 and X-700 film camreas.

Here's a shot of a Huey flying over my house the other day. Nikon D80,
Nikon 18-200mm VR lens at 95mm. F8 1/1000sec ISO 400 equivalent. Cropped
in *a lot* with PhotoShop. Held in very shaky hands, too.

The damn thing's got more controls than the Space Shuttle but it's got a lot
of potential. I just hope I do.


Regards, PLMerite


"Bob Harrington" > wrote in message
...
> "Peter.D.Evans" <orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com> wrote in
> . 109.144:
>
>> Hi again Bob...
>>
>>> Handheld, and just about falling over backward as I was shooting
>>> rather straight up as the P-51 banked over the tarmac I was standing
>>> on. Another testament to the 7D's image stabilization is that I have
>>> a pretty badly screwed up back, and have a fair bit of trouble just
>>> standing still, much less doing a smooth track on a fast moving
>>> aircraft...
>>
>> Very nice indeed! I love a good ol'P-51 in a metal finish with good
>> weather! Can't wait to see what results I get with my combination...
>>
>> Below is the best of what I was getting with my Panasonic FZ-7.
>> Ground/static shots were no problem whatsoever, but display images
>> were another thing altogether!
>
> Beautiful...
>
> But yeah. My first digital camera was a Sony CD1000 back in 2001. It was
> okay for static subjects, but all-but useless for aerial photography.
> Between the shutter lag, the long blackout of the viewfinder during image
> capture, and the single shot buffer that took around 8 seconds to write
> the
> image off to the CD-R...
>
> Nice toy at the time, but I had to stick with the Minolta film SLRs for
> flying displays.
>
> Bob ^,,^