Photography - equipment, help hints

[Airframes]

Well, I got some reasonably good results, some bad results, and some passable results! The latter were my fault, due to stiff hands, although partly the design of the 70-300mm lens barrel, resulting in slight camera shake (non stabilised lens) and therefore not quite sharp.
The bad results were varied - out of focus due to the setting used, or slow re-focus of the lens, with the worst being a total 'white out' of the background, but with the subject being pin-sharp and nicely exposed. This seems to be an inability, under certain conditions, to expose correctly overall, again depending on settings, and was prevalent in AF-C, spot metering, shutter priority, but did happen in manual, the latter mainly my fault (see below), although by the end of shooting, was beginning to think a problem had developed. These results were when shooting against bright, white cloud, so no doubt metering would be affected!
I found the best overall settings were in Auto mode, manual shutter and aperture, although by the end of the air show, some results were poor, probably due to my inattention because of heat and fatigue.
As expected, results in full auto were mixed and varied, but I was disappointed at the lack of instant control in AF-C etc. This, however, might be a deficiency of the Sigma lens, as the motor could take a second to re-focus in some cases - far too slow for fast-moving subjects.
All the above refer to ground to air shots of the displays, the static shots, or moving ground subjects being fine.
The main thing was, that the field was so crowded, with long delays even getting in, that most of the time, the closest I could get to the crowd line was 500 metres back - so around 800 metres from even the runway!
Some shots were taken about 300 metres from the runway threshold, although the angle of view was not the best, with a good proportion of shots taken from around 850 metres from the runway - the display axis being another 200 metres beyond this!
But the main thing, I've learned a little more about the camera, and its controls, and at least I now know what settings don't suit this type of photography!
Oh, for the advantages of a DSLR, with the instant versatility of a 35mm SLR !!

 

[evangilder]

Actually, with a flash, F/1.4 will be okay if the aperture is higher. The key is that the higher aperture lenses have a larger opening to let light in, so if you put the lens at say f/8 with the flash, it should give some good results. You will want to practice with it and try different settings to get an idea. Try a fairly dark bathroom and set something up to photograph. Dont use full light. A good way to do it is to go into a bathroom at home that does not have a window and leave the hall light on to give you a dim light. Photograph things with the flash and try different settings. This will give you the best way to find out what works and what doesn't.

In addition to aperture settings, also try different ISO settings. You'll find that higher ISO shots will have more grain (noise) and there will be a point where the higher ISO quality starts to diminish. It varies from camera to camera, so you will have to experiment. It sounds like a lot, but trust me, once you have done this, you will know your gear WAY better than reading the book, and you can delete the shots that don't work. But always review them on the computer screen before deleting. Sometimes the back display will show a so-so shot that actually looks great on the screen. Conversely, you may have some that look great on the camera screen that are soft on review on the screen.

The more you experiment, the more you will learn. And once you have done that, you will have a much better idea of what setting you will use once you get on site. The USAF museum is cavernous, and with the black ceilings, it can swallow up the flash, so be prepared to do a few test shots on site to get the look you want.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

Thank you Eric, I learned something. Now........................if I can just retain it.

 

[GrauGeist]

lol Aaron...practice (or so they tell me) is the best teacher of all...and that is where a DSLR rules over film...you can practice the hell out of it and have instant gratification (instead of waiting and paying to see your results)...

Alot of my extreme floral shots are grabbed with my 100mm MACRO with a setting between f/8 and f/22, my bee shots are usually around f/8, which will give great detail of the bee and any nearby bloom, but drops out the BG (and in some cases gives great Bokeh results)

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

You are sooooo right Dave. But you do have to remember some of this stuff. If you don't, you forget that it's there to be used.

 

[evangilder]

Hence the reason you just keep doing it. One thing the military is famous for is doing something over and over and over. When you do that, it becomes second nature and you don't even think about it. That's why its a good idea to shoot different things, with different light and different environments. It forces you to do things differently. Keep doing that and it starts to become second nature how to set up and shoot.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Say, if any of you guys happen to be at the NMUSAF on 7/22 at 7:30am, PLEASE LET ME KNOW!

Seriously I really appreciate the tips and advice as this is something totally new to me and I appreciate you gents taking the time to educate me!

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

I will do that Eric. Thanks again sir.

 

[evangilder]

Anytime. Photography is a lot of fun, and I believe that anyone who wants to get into it can learn from people who have been doing it a while. When I first started in the digital realm, I had a lot of folks help me out to make my shots better. I always look to pay it back by helping anyone who asks.

Here is a couple of shots to show how using fill flash can change your shot. For both of these, I had the camera settings the same, but one was with flash and one was without. The difference is subtle, but noticeable. One thing I will point out is that the studio light bulbs are compact flourescent, so there is a little blue in the non-flash version. Filtering could tone down the blue, and I would do that if I was going to publish the photo, but I just resized and added text to these to illustrate the differences. Notice the on-board flash evened out the bluish hues and gave a more true color representation.

 

[vikingBerserker]

double post

 

[vikingBerserker]

Very interesting!

Ok I have one more question in regards to the fixed lens I'm looking at: 50mm 1.4 vs 35mm 2.8 Any suggestions which would suite my needs? I could not find a 35mm 1.4 that was reasonable priced.


Edit: Or do I just bite bullet and spend the extra couple $100s for a 35mm 1.4

 

[evangilder]

Tough call. F/1.4s are nice, but I find the f/1.8 I have is better at f/2.8. The far extremes of a lens are usually the weaker spots. For any lens, unless you have a full frame camera, you need to put a multiplier of about 1.4 to any lens you get. So a 50mm on a digital SLR is like a 70mm on a film camera. A 35mm lens would be closer to a real 50mm film lens (about 49mm). It's a matter of personal choice, but for me, if I had a choice between a lens that would get the whole subject with a little extra versus a lens that I can't squeeze the entire subject into, I would much rather crop than attempt to stitch together multiple shots.

You might also look into any local shops that do lens rentals. That can be really helpful to make a decision. That way you can try it before you buy it.

 

[vikingBerserker]

THANKS!

 

[Airframes]

Eric (or anyone else), do you have experience with Nikon (Nikkor) lenses on DSLRs?
I used my Sigma 70 -300mm lens (no image stabilisation) for the first time, at the air show last Sunday, on the Nikon D 3100. Overall, it seems OK, but in all modes using auto focus, the motor is slow to re-focus, taking between a quarter to probably just over half a second, maybe longer, to lock on. I'm just wondering if the Nikon VR lens, which, of course, also has image stabilsiation, would be quicker.
When using the Nikon 18 -55mm VR lens, things were much better, although I haven't yet used that lens in shooting conditions similar to the air show - bright sky, some large, bright cloud backgrounds, and UV haze at infinity - which not only caused a few focusing problems, but some metering problems too.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Everything but the tripod came in! The lens are Pentax's: 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL "WR" Zoom Lens SMCP-DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED "WR" Lens. The flash is the Sigma EF-610 DG SUPER. The small object is the wireless flash.

I still need to get Polarized filters, figure out which fast lens I want to get and a bigger bag.

 

[GrauGeist]

Nice setup!

As far as filters go, you can use a "circular polarizing" filter with great results. Being "circular" means you can control the polarizing abilities.

I just looked at my tripod for the first time since the wreck and discovered that the head at the swivel is damaged beyond repair...and it was even laying on the floorboard at the time of the accident!

So now I need to add that to the long list of things to be replaced

 

[Shinpachi]

A nice camera, vB!
You look a winner

 

[evangilder]

Looks good, VB. I'll let you decide on filters as I don't use any. It's a matter of personal choice, but for me, it's one more reflective surface to flare with the wrong light.

Terry, I use Nikkor and Sigma lenses and the problem you are having is across all lines with the non-servo lenses. Nikon lenses are AF or AF-S. AF-S indicates that the lens has a servo in it for the auto-focus. It makes a huge difference. The AF lenses work well, but without the servo, there is a motor in the camera body that drives a worm gear that is used to auto-focus the lens. The easiest way to tell is to look at the camera body. When you press the button that releases the lens, you will see what looks like a small flat-blade screwdriver tip that retracts when you press the button. AF lenses (without servo) will have a slot for that tip. AF-S lenses will not. Plus they will focus much faster and silently. The VR is a nice addition, especially at long focal lengths.

For metering problems, there can be a number of issues with each mode, depending on light and what you are shooting. Matrix metering tries to average everything in the shot, so if you have a bright sky and the light is behind the aircraft, you will get a silhouette. Spot metering will meter based on a specific spot, which works well, to a point. If you have a highly polished airplane that glares as you press the shutter, and the glare hits your spot where you are metering, you end up with a night shot. But on hazy gray days, that might be your best bet. I typically use weighted center spot, which take the center and a small section from there to meter. I find this the most accurate for what I shoot (in Southern California, sunshine is pretty abundant).

AF-S lenses focus faster and are almost silent while focusing, but they usually come at a premium price because of the built in servo. The good news is that there are times when you can find good deals on used ones.

 

[Airframes]

Thanks very much indeed Eric, that's answered the questions, and confirmed some of my thoughts.
The Sigma 70 -300mm lens is fine overall, but does suffer from the lack of servo, and also, at the extreme range of the lens, it registers a lot UV haze, even with a 1A filter, and is therefore not quite pin-sharp. The next grade of UV filter would possibly cure most of the haze problem, but I think I'll seriously consider buying a Nikkor AF-S 50 - 300mm lens if I intend to get back into aviation stuff again. Either that or a dedicated telephoto, just for this type of work. The Nikkor lens, at extreme range and with a 1A filter, was much clearer and sharper, but of course we're only talking the equivalent of 82.5 mm, compared to eqwivalent of 450mm.
The Sigma lens came with the 'package deal' when I bought the camera, with the whole bundle of camera, Nikkor 18-55 VR lens, Sigma lens and card at a 'knockdown' price at the time, so it couldn't be refused!

 

[evangilder]

Kit lenses will get you some nice shots, and are great for people learning to compose the shots and develop their eye. The more expensive lenses will give you even better photos. You really appreciate them the most when you have learned with a kit lens. That's not to say there is anything wrong with the kit lenses at all. I had a 28-80 Nikkor kit lens that I used for a couple of years on my air-to-air shots that netted me some fantastic shots.

I like my Sigma 50-500mm, despite it's bulk and lack of VR. I just have to be very steady when shooting with it. Plus, I can get a macro shot from 6 feet away! Nikon makes an 18-300mm lens now with VR that I wouldn't mind having. Lighter than the Sigma and good range for the smaller shows. I have the 18-200mm with VR that I use for all my air-to-air work these days and as a great general use lens.