Maybe a thread on "photographs from a distance at spectator events" would be useful?

In a couple weeks, I will be at a 0.4 mile dirt track shooting the World of Outlaws sprint cars...at night. Regulations prevent the use of the 400mm as it does not meet the size restrictions on carry ins. So, the 70-200mm f/2.8 w/ either the 1.4 or 2.0 teleconverter will be the lens on full frame. The difficulty when shooting from the grandstands, at night, limitations on size, no light, well....the zoom with teleconverters are no doubt the only answer. I will be shooting the cars from 350' to 800' (107 to 244 meters) and as I remember I will use ISO 10,000 to get the shutter speed up with the f/5.6 or f/8 aperture.

The best lens would be the 300mm f/2.8 with TC-20EIII....mmmm.....

Bland said:
That maybe the only way I can get a shot. The FAA is making them fly 1,500 feet from the crowd beause of that crash into the crowd last year. Plus I found out there's only one road into this industrial airport. Free tickets at this Dallas/Forth Worth airport event might make it too crowded to enjoy, still thinking if I'm going or not. 5 hour drive to get there and then hours of traffic in order to get in there might just take the joy out of it.

I might be wrong but don't think so. The distance from planes to crowded is 500 feet.

I stand corrected but a complicated anwser many wavers exists and different classes of planes but in some cases there is a 1500 distance. Most of the airshow is still 500 feet. They are also restricting manuvers that could bring the plane over the crowed if something goes wrong.

framer

Well I was going to start a new post, but this is perfect, as it relates exactly to what I experienced this weekend at the Miramar Air Show.

While attending this show, I saw many photographers with some serious glass...you name it, it was out there, 200, 300, 400, 600, 800mm...ooh the joy of all that glass :P As I walked around the air strip, instead of just pulling my gear out and start snapping away, I just sat back and began to just observe what other photographers were doing and see how they went about taking shots. Hence, I was studding there style. The more I watched the action of the planes go by, I came to the realization that the 70-200 with a 1.7 tele. was the most effective setup in getting the action. The flexibility of zooming in and out was key in getting the shot of the planes flying by at such high speed when the pilots conducted their aerobatics. I feel that those that came with just their big lenses sure missed out on some of those close shot...or maybe they did not. Perhaps they have mastered their technique with such a fixed focal length lens that they know something that I don't. One thing is for sure...I will be going back to the next air-show, hell any fast action sporting events I can squeeze in to master my usage of the 70-200.

Look out PAD here I come...

SkintBrit said:

For the best shots Bland try a hitch a lift with one of the pilots!!!

That maybe the only way I can get a shot. The FAA is making them fly 1,500 feet from the crowd beause of that crash into the crowd last year. Plus I found out there's only one road into this industrial airport. Free tickets at this Dallas/Forth Worth airport event might make it too crowded to enjoy, still thinking if I'm going or not. 5 hour drive to get there and then hours of traffic in order to get in there might just take the joy out of it.

I've had some good results with a 70-300 on FF in DX crop. As msmoto and others have said, anything fast moving is tough, and shooting jets is where I hone my skill in shooting with both eyes open, with my left eye doing the sky searching. I think I must look like a chameleon! :-)

For the best shots Bland try a hitch a lift with one of the pilots!!!

My minimal experience with airplanes, Benro carbon tripod good for 39 pounds, and the Manfrotto gimbal head, using a 400mm f/2.8 with TC-20EIII, has resulted in a steep learning curve. I find catching high speed objects, cars especially, can be done easier if I "lead" the object, allow it to enter the frame, then pan at the speed necessary to maintain it in frame while shooting 10 FPS. This is with cars mainly, as they are often coming out of nowhere around a curve, over a hill, etc. I usually have my left arm hooked over the lens/gimbal, hand on the lens hood, pushing the front of the lens to do the panning.

The Manfotto is as smooth as any of the other $500-1000 gimbal heads. I have tried a fully machined aluminum model, built in Chicago, I believe, very nice, but no smoother than the Manfrotto.

But, the big disadvantage of the Manfrotto is its "U" shape, makes accessing lens controls more difficult. And, it does not really lock at an any position like the more expensive designs. For its price, however, it cannot be beat.

My guess is a 300mm f/2.8 with a TC-20EIII might be a perfect hand-held for the airplanes...

Shooting planes performing at air shows......it takes a LOT or gear, and a LOT of experience to "operate" it ! Actually, shooting anything that's moving fast is difficult, and the longer the lens you use, the trickier it gets. Probably the single biggest advantage you can give yourself, is to have a rock-steady (as in BIG) tripod, with a gimbal head. Ball heads are just great for some things, but for following fast moving airplanes, with long lenses, you may as well leave your ball head at home.

For a long time, Wimberly pretty much had the gimbal head market to themselves, and they definitely do make a fine product, but they are NOT cheap ! (I think the "logic" here is, "if you can afford a $10,000 Nikkor 600mm f/4 tele, what's another $650 for a great head to hang it on ?" Recently, it seems that almost everyone in China and Korea has suddenly started making gimbal heads, and the prices are coming down somewhat, but buying an "off brand" anything can be tricky.

Probably the lowest priced gimbal I know about, (and it's even bigger and heavier than most of them), is made by Manfroto; last I looked, they could "be had" for in the neighborhood of around $200.

I'm not sure if the fellow going to the airshow mentioned what camera body he's using, whether it's a full frame FX sensor, or a APS-c "DX"; I know this will likely start a "bruhaha" with all the "full frame" shooters out there, but as was already mentioned, you need lots of focal length to shoot planes that are a thousand (or more) feet away; with a body that uses a DX sensor, your 70-200, f 2.8 is already a 105-300mm, and with a 1.4 or a 1.7 TC, you're already getting a LOT closer. And before anyone starts "pooh-poohing" photo quality with APS-C size sensors..........let me just say, there is a certain fellow (with a very Chinese sounding name), who has over 4,500 photos on the biggest aviation related data base there is, and EVERY single one of them was taken with his "old" D-300 ! Most are photos "looking down" on airliners nearing take-off or landing. The big trick here, is being on VERY good terms with many ATC guys. ( And no tripods or gimbal heads here either ); he either gets "what he wants" from a rented helo, or "hand held" (while flying his own Cessna 172.)

Getting any kind of "in-flight" photos of performing airplanes starts with a bunch of "high end" equipment, then requires lots of experience, not only on how to use said equipment, but just as importantly, how to GET where you need to be TO use it.

Sigam 150-500mm Is a Good Buy !

Thank you! A note of caution with the 120-400 OS. It turns the canon way. Thank god I got this lens a few months before the airshow. When I was trying it out on the day I got it, I kept turning it the wrong way and its also very front heavy( even on a friends D7000) so I recommend a monopod

Thanks for the info, everyone. Great pics you two!

Bland said:
Any of you got tips for shooting Air Shows with jets? There's a big show in Dallas coming up and I need me some tips! Thanks!

Here's what the show will consist of: http://www.allianceairshow.com/Home.aspx

I can only give you advice based on what I have done. I use a 300mm (with or without 1.4x converter) and a 600mm on a tripod. Both Nikon.

The following photo's (not the best sadly) were taken with the 300mm handheld:

http://splinterofamindseye.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=48#/d28085o
http://splinterofamindseye.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=48#/d2807ze

and these with the 600mm with a tripod:

http://splinterofamindseye.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=48#/d27xg7w
http://splinterofamindseye.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=48#/d27x912

Shutter speed varied according to lighting condition while f-stop generally f4 to f8. There was no special technique involved other than panning with aircraft as it belted past. When hand-holding the 300mm I used VR in the appropriate mode and autofocus on continuous mode. For safety reasons aircraft don't do anything stupid at airshows anywhere near the public viewing area and jets generally fly slow and below the sound barrier for obvious reasons.

...and as msmoto says, compensate for the sky if necessary - a few test shots will sort that out. The last shot I refer to above (Vampire) could have done with being over-exposed by a stop or so, although it was in sunshine before it turned on me, or spot meter.

What I've said is a bit broad but if you want to know anything specific just ask.

Hope it helps in some way.

If someone hasnt said it yet, I would think the Sigma 120-400 OS would be excellent if you can find a good sharp one. http://www.flickr.com/photos/58897106@N05/sets/72157630647989722/. You can check out some pics with the 120-400 OS I have. These were taken at the Singapore Airshow 2012.

First, I am laughing at the idea...as it is far more difficult than folks realize...except I think you understand it well. My experience is the incredible relative speed increase as they get closer is the problem.

If I were doing this and could set up a tripod, I would go with about 800mm on the sticks, gimbal head, shooting 1/1000 - 1/2000 f/11. +0.3 to + 1.0 ev to compensate for the sky. Then second handheld at 300mm-400mmm at 1/1000 f/11, again +0.3 to +1.0 ev. If the sky is dark blue behind the jets...less ev (This info is for those who may not recognize the sky problem, not you , Bland)

The 800mm of course may not be available so, the 70-200mm f/2.8VR with a TC-14EII or TC-20EIII. Or the 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR is an excellent handheld long lens. At least the one I have is.

Following the darn things is always my problem and I would shoot 5 or more FPS. And, when I shoot these, I usually have about half the shots with half an airplane usually near the end of the burst. LOL

This may be a good time to use a DX crop on the D800 to get the 1.5 factor...it would reduce the file size and I would think it may increase the ability to get the plane in the frame. Oh, focus, continuous servo, 9 point. And I usually use the matrix metering as I cannot always find the place for the center point.

And this is what I would try, based upon my shooting fast cars. I actually think you already have more knowledge of this than I do, but as long as you asked....

One more thought...if it is possible to monitor the air traffic control or any communication channel for the aircraft, earphones can be useful. At the car races, listening to the race control can really be helpful in knowing what is happening and anticipating the action.

Any of you got tips for shooting Air Shows with jets? There's a big show in Dallas coming up and I need me some tips! Thanks!

Here's what the show will consist of: http://www.allianceairshow.com/Home.aspx

Next time they should use Nikon cameras. They wouldn't have to worry about failures like they did with their canons.

nice finding NSXType-R

Didn't want to start a new thread, since the mods are probably all busy culling all the D90 upgrade threads. :D

Here's a cool article on the logistics of photographing a really old plane with a really new one. So new I thought it'd be almost vaporware. :D

http://jalopnik.com/5542420/boeings-newest-oldest-airplanes-fly-together

http://www.antiqueairfield.com/articles/show/593-how-the-boeing-40-787-photo-shoot-was-done

I don't know the 80-400 but I guess it would be OK, probably heavier which is good and bad. As for the distance, it depends on the air show. In Midland, especially during the days previous to the actual air show, planes do fly-by's fairly close to the ramp, which can be as close as 100 meters. With an aircraft traveling at 200 miles per hour, low over the ground, and right before your nose, you will need quite a fast auto-focus.

During the actual air show, planes use a greater distance between them and the public, and, as NikoDoby says, you'd be close to infinity.

I have been to air shows where the planes were so high up in the sky, and so far away, that it wasn't worth taking any pictures. They looked ridiculously small in the viewfinder, even with a 420 mm focal length. When this happens, I go back to the static area and make good use of the fact that the public is away watching the air display to take pictures of the other airplanes sitting on the ground :o)

The 80-400 would be good. At an airshow the reach and quality of the lens is more important since most of the focus takes place at or near infinity anyway.

Wow, that's really sad.

Air shows really are dangerous, huh?

On another note, would the Nikkor 80-400 VR work as well? Or is the AF too slow?

Their families should take comfort in knowing they went as heroes and died doing what they loved doing the most.

This is so sad to hear !!! I have seen many crashes during air shows, and every time it makes be really and deeply sad for the poor guys who lost their life, and for their families. These two men deserve our full respect for their decision not to eject. As Niko said, the SU-27 has some very poor record for safety, at least during air shows.

Also sorry about the poor weather. Unfortunately, this is the only thing no one can control... I hope you still got some good shots !

Niko - from this what I've heard on TV, after the second barrel they lost control over the aircraft, and to save people on the airshow, they decided to sacrifice their lives and instead of eject themselves took the plane a little bit further, on inhabited land

Sorry to hear about the lost. My condolences to the families. How did it happen? Was their no time to eject?

EDIT: ITAR-TASS has a brief write up on what happened.

http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=14281943&PageNum=0

The SU-27 has a horrible safety record at air shows !

As I've wrote couple hours ago, I came back from the Radom Airshow 2009 yesterday, the show was terminated yesterday due to the weather conditions. Unfortunately, second day of performance was also terminated, this time due to the SU-27 crash. Both pilots didn't make it. This photo below is to honor their memory, and this what they done - saved lives of many sacrificing their own. To the Belarusian pilots:

Taken yesterday, just before I've left the airshow.