Lenses for aircraft pictures.

[Oggy]

Hi all - I am a newbie to DSLR and a returnee to photography. A couple of weeks ago, I bought myself a Pentax K20d, so please don't shout at me, that die is already cast

My question is this - I have been told that prime lenses made by the camera manufacturer give best results, but the largest Pentax prime I can find is 300mm. Would a cropped picture taken with lens be likely to produce a better result than if I were to use for example, a Sigma 150-500mm lens?

Your thoughts would be appreciated before I make another major dent in my wallet.

[Malcolm_Stewart]

Myself and partner got excellent shots of the Vulcan last June at Brunthingthorpe using 300mm lenses. I was using an Eos 1D MkIII(1.3x factor) and my partner an Eos 30D (1.6x factor).

Generally fixed focal length lenses give better results than zooms, but individual lenses may vary, so it's difficult to predict. There's also the problem of camera shake, and with long lenses this is important. Tripod or monopod to take the weight off your arms?

[Gordon_McGeachie]

Hi all - I am a newbie to DSLR and a returnee to photography. A couple of weeks ago, I bought myself a Pentax K20d, so please don't shout at me, that die is already cast

My question is this - I have been told that prime lenses made by the camera manufacturer give best results, but the largest Pentax prime I can find is 300mm. Would a cropped picture taken with lens be likely to produce a better result than if I were to use for example, a Sigma 150-500mm lens?

Your thoughts would be appreciated before I make another major dent in my wallet.

I use the Sigma 28-300 on one body and a 18 year old Sigma 400 f5.6 on another, they suit me fine, but I am looking at upgrading soon......to either the Sigma 50-500 or 170-500, or hopefully the Sony 300 f2.8

[Roger_Provins]

... or hopefully the Sony 300 f2.8

ooh ... managed to get a mortgage then

[Gordon_McGeachie]

... or hopefully the Sony 300 f2.8

ooh ... managed to get a mortgage then

Nope................paid mine off 2 years ago.........not going down that route again....


might invest in the Sony 1.4x and 2x aswell...........


when the lottery win comes in.........

[jeallen01]

Most of my aircraft shots are done at airshows, but I think a lot depends on the types of aircraft that you want to shoot, and where they will be flying .

I generally now use a 70-200mm F2.8, which gives me an effective 100-300mm F2.8 on the GX10, and then sometimes a 1.4x converter which then makes it around 150-450 F4.

That combination is not too heavy or awkward to point quickly - which is an important issue when you are trying to follow and frame a fast moving and manoeuvring plane flying round 50-100ft above the ground.

However, if you want to shoot a small "Extra 300" doing aerobatics at 1000ft+, you will need something "longer" - as previously suggested - and if you want to shoot airliners taking off at an airport, you may need something even longer still.

The problem is then that you need very fast shutter speeds, and that means operating at either very wide apertures, and/or high ISO film speed ("sensitivity") ratings - neither of which are conducive to getting sharp images. Therefore with a 150-500mm you will be shooting at around wide-open at around F5.6-F6.3, and so the performance of the lens wide open - as opposed to F11'ish - is critical. To get that sort of performance is going to cost you real money.

Whereas the 70-200mm, even with a teleconverter (you need a good one!), will mean that you are operating at 1-2 stops down from full aperture.

Anyway, a lot of the time, for close aircraft, I operate at around 150-200mm anyway, so that is fine - otherwise the aircraft are moving so quickly that I (at least!) can never keep it in both frame and focus, and the Pentax/Samsung DSLRs are not reknowned for fast autofocusing, so most focusing is manual.

Might be a different thing if I was using a Canon or Nikon with very fast autofocus, but I am not

With respect to fixed focal length lenses: they seem to work for about 1 shot in 5; otherwise they are "too short" (=> small image) or "too long" (=> you can only capture parts of an aircraft, or 1 or 2 in a formation). Also, because aircraft pass you very quickly, their size changes rapidly, so you may only get one shot with a fixed lens whereas the zoom will generally give you several more chances to get a decent image.

Finally: Have also tried tripods and monopods to reduce camera shake, but they don't work for me as they sverely restrict the speed at which you can point the camera in the right direction. However, a good rifle-type support can help, but I find the best accessory is simply to screw a small "POD" (the brand name) beanbag to the lens tripod mounting and use that to support the lens with my left hand.

[Norman]

Finally: Have also tried tripods and monopods to reduce camera shake, but they don't work for me as they sverely restrict the speed at which you can point the camera in the right direction.

Try a Wimberly or Kirk King Cobra not cheap but makes swinging a heavy/long lens around a doddle.

[jeallen01]

Finally: Have also tried tripods and monopods to reduce camera shake, but they don't work for me as they sverely restrict the speed at which you can point the camera in the right direction.

Try a Wimberly or Kirk King Cobra not cheap but makes swinging a heavy/long lens around a doddle.

As you say, "not cheap" (£341!)!!

That's out of my budget!

Also, in a lot of cases, at airshows you have to stand behind or beside quite a number of other people - and so you may have to change position very quickly to get a shot. Therefore, I would be very worried that I would stand the monopod on someone's foot, or other part of their anatomy!

John

[Dave_Cox]

My favoured airshow combination is the Pentax K10d or K20d and Sigma 50-500. The results can be seen on my Flikr page. With the camera set to continuous focusing it's ok with most subjects - from warbirds through the faster jets and even the elusive 'Extra300'.
The 150-500mm Sigma performs pretty well on the wifes Nikon kit, so would probably be just as good on the Pentax.

[Dorset_Mike]

I did the Bournemouth airshow in August mostly with a Tokina 80-400 on a monopod with a Manfrotto MN222 joystick head.

[Dave_Cox]

I did the Bournemouth airshow in August mostly with a Tokina 80-400 on a monopod with a Manfrotto MN222 joystick head.

I find tripods and monopods too unwieldy for airshows. Working handheld must cut down the number of keepers but makes panning so much easier, ISO200 on a good day keeps the shutter speeds and apertures within useable boundaries for sharp shots with good enough DOF.

[Norman]

Also, in a lot of cases, at airshows you have to stand behind or beside quite a number of other people - and so you may have to change position very quickly to get a shot. Therefore, I would be very worried that I would stand the monopod on someone's foot, or other part of their anatomy!

Those devices are meant to be used on tripods and work well. I use the King Cobra with a 600/f4 on a Manfrotto 055. The lens is completely balanced and stays wherever you leave it pointing. I'm sure you could get any large telephoto to balance properly though.



It is expensive but really helps with keeping moving subjects in frame.

[jeallen01]

Here are some of my shots from Waddington & from Duxford Flying Legends, in 2008

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33676977@N07/

Sorry but this was my first attempt at creating a Set in Flickr, and so the two shows are very mixed up.

As I said earlier, almost all of these shots were done with a GX10 and a Sigma 70-200mm F2.8, sometimes with a basic KENKO 1.4x converter.

Then some cropping and very basic tweeking in Elements 6.

Finally, from previous experience, the sheer weight of a tripod is a major disadvantage when walking around at an airshow. At a lot of these you often have to walk the best part of a mile just to get from the car park to the display area, and then there is a lot more walking to do to see the static displays (especially in the hangers).

Dragging a tripod/monopod & accessories around all the above just ain't on for me - especially when my wife is along, and I need to use a trolley to carry a couple of folding chairs and umbrellas!
(and then there is the slight problem if you are on your own and you need to use one of the portable cabin toilet facilities. They are up steps, and very cramped - so what do you do with all your kit when you get desperate?)

Until you've done it a couple of times, you really can't believe how heavy this stuff can feel after a long "day in the field", especially when you then have nearly a mile or so back to the car and then a 2-3hr drive home!

[Wheelu]

In answer to your orginal question I would think that a modern zoom, provided that the range is not too large, would give as good or better results than an older design of prime lens, but it is much more flexible.

I have used a Sigma 100-300 f4 for airshow work and have been well pleased with the results on a crop frame camera. I do not use a tripod or monopod for these shots as the required shutter speeds are generally high and the need for manoeuvrability is more important than that to keep the lens steady.

I would not recommend a teleconvertor however, as the results lack contrast and sharpness in my experience.

[Oggy]

Thanks for all the replies. This forum has been thirteen times more helpful than UKAR

I bought the basic Pentax 55-300mm with the camera, so I'll have a trip to Shoreham and give it ago.

A couple of replies have confirmed my reservations on teleconverters. Due to space and budget constraints I got one to use on my OM1 years ago, but could never get as vivid an immage as people using longer lenses.

[jeallen01]

Thanks for all the replies. This forum has been thirteen times more helpful than UKAR

I bought the basic Pentax 55-300mm with the camera, so I'll have a trip to Shoreham and give it ago.

A couple of replies have confirmed my reservations on teleconverters. Due to space and budget constraints I got one to use on my OM1 years ago, but could never get as vivid an immage as people using longer lenses.

I also have a 55-300mm Pentax lens (mainly for holidays as it is very light), and it certainly does not perform as well with my basic KENKO 1.4x teleconverter as without it, because you can see the loss of image quality at the edges, and I am also a little suspicious of its quality when wide open.
(and the lenshood is rubbish, so I use a rubber one).

However the basic 70-200mm Sigma images are of a totally different order in terms of sharpness (and also when compared to my older 80-320mm Pentax, and to my oldish 28-200mm Sigma) and the degradation is nowhere near as bad with that lens.

However I have just ordered the Sigma 1.4X APO teleconverter which is designed to work with the 70-200mm, and should show an improvement (and also, I hope with the 55-300 Pentax).

OTOH, I might have been able to comment further on that - but "PARCELFARCE" (more appropriate than "PARCELFORCE"), in their inimitable fashion, have managed to deliver it to another address entirely where it was signed for (or so they say) by someone with a totally different name!

Hopefully I will get a replacement early next week - but I am not counting on that actually happening.

[jeallen01]

I do not use a tripod or monopod for these shots as the required shutter speeds are generally high and the need for manoeuvrability is more important than that to keep the lens steady.

With respect to shutter speeds, that is quite true for jet aircraft, but definitely not for propeller-driven aircraft and for helicopters

Anything faster than about 150th/180th of a second will "stop" the blades and give a very "static" appearance - whereas what you generally want is a gently blurred image of the blades to show that they, and the aircraft, are actually moving.

That is one good point I find about the GX10 (and its siblings)- with the in-body stabilization switched on, I can pan, and shoot at low shutter speeds, without losing much in the way of image sharpness (that is, when I get it right, which is often not the case!). Certainly get much better results at these shutter speeds than with the old MZ-5N which I used to use at airshows.

[Gordon_McGeachie]

However I have just ordered the Sigma 1.4X APO teleconverter which is designed to work with the 70-200mm, and should show an improvement (and also, I hope with the 55-300 Pentax).

You may find that there are `issues` if you use the Sigma converter with the Pentax lens.............but I may be wrong on this

[Dave_Cox]

The Sigma teleconverters have the element very far forwards - we bought one to be used with a couple of my wifes lenses and it wouldn't even mount because of this, so we exchanged it for a Kenco Pro version which seems to perform very well with anything from a Tokina 100mm macro to a 150-500mm Sigma.
They will also only mount with certain of Sigmas own kenses - there's a list on there website in the spec for the converter.

[jeallen01]

Dave, Gordon

The Sigma teleconverter did finally arrive - courtesy of one of my neighbours who brought it over to-day (but their name does not match that given on the ParcelFarce receipt, so I had'nt checked with them!).

You are both quite right - it won't fit the Pentax 55-300mm or my old Sigma 28-200 for the reason you give!

Never mind, it was bought specifically for the 70-200mm zoom for the reasons previously given (and, of course, it does fit that!)

John