Reading mode: Light Dark

Airshow Lens Help

Go to last post
Well many thanks people you may have just saved my life the 55-300vr is actually slightly cheaper i dont suppose anybody could email me some images taken with the 55-200 lens have they my email address is [email protected]. Many thanks indeed it really is appreciated
 
Jonny,

I think you posted the same question on UKAR?

I fully understand the reason for recommending the 55-200VR. I've never used it, but I'm sure you'd get some good shots with it - and it would probably make a fine general purpose zoom. You'd also get really nice pictures of aircraft taxiing past you with it. Given your budget, it is a very rational choice.

If you want to look at what people have produced with it, you could have a look on Pbase
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon/af_s_dx_vr_zoom_nikkor_55_200_4_56g_if_ed

The problem is that, certainly at British airshows, you never get very close to the flightline. Given that aircraft like Spitfires and Mustangs are major draws at UK airshows, they never get close enough to the crowd to fill the frame with a 200mm when flying. They usually require a significant crop even on my 400mm. Suntan's demonstration of photographing the FA18 is fair enough, but it is much bigger than a Spitfire.

If you want a feeling for the field of view that 200mm will give you at a major UK venue, you could have a look at some pictures I took at Duxford on 35mm film with a 300mm lens - this has a field of view similar to the 200mm on DX.
http://www.pbase.com/anthony/duxford_warbirds_1999

You'll see you get nice views of parked and taxiing aircraft, but for flying, the aircraft will fill rather a small area of the frame. Sally B would probably crop out just fine, but I'd be really worried about trying to get a Spit.

Anyhow - over to you. If you can wait, my suggestion is to save up for the Nikon 70-300 AFS VR. I know it is twice the price, but for airshow use, I really think it is a much better option.

Cheers,

Anthony.

--
http://www.pbase.com/anthony
 
Mike Neary said:
But if you must have instant gratification,
Click to expand...
Hey now, for all you know he has been putting a few dollars aside for this for the last year or two.

It can be helpful to point out options that are close to the intended price bogy, in case someone is not aware of the options, but lay off judging someone else's spending justification.

-Suntan
 
Suntan said:
Suntan said:
But if you must have instant gratification,
Click to expand...
Hey now, for all you know he has been putting a few dollars aside for
this for the last year or two.
Click to expand...
... which means he could continue to do so, right ?

Come on. The difference in price between the 55-200 VR and the 70-300 VR is about $250. I know it can take a while to save up that kind of money if you're financially stretched, but most folks who can afford a DSLR should be able to find this kind of money in a few months.
Suntan said:
It can be helpful to point out options that are close to the intended
price bogy, in case someone is not aware of the options, but lay off
judging someone else's spending justification.
Click to expand...
Hey - I said the 55-200 VR is an optically sound choice, didn't I ?

Is there anything wrong with mentioning that the 70-300 VR would be a better choice because of the longer reach and faster AF ?

Keep in mind I am not recommending a $1500+ lens here, like some other folks on this forum would :)

Cheers

Mike
Suntan said:
-Suntan
Click to expand...
 
frontal_lobe said:
Anyhow - over to you. If you can wait, my suggestion is to save up
for the Nikon 70-300 AFS VR. I know it is twice the price, but for
airshow use, I really think it is a much better option.
Click to expand...
Yes. Forget the cheap Sigma/Tamron 70-300 options. The Nikon 55-200 VR is better: optically fine, fits the budget, has AF on the D60 - but it's too short in a lot of situations.

The 70-300 VR is the way to go if you're on a budget. It's worth saving for.

Cheers

Mike
 
jwmachon said:
Right u have all twised my arm 70-300 VR its is now
Click to expand...
Good decision :)
jwmachon said:
what are these
teleconverters any good for airshows? and is the follwoing a good deal
Click to expand...
I would not recommend a teleconverter on these budget zooms. TCs are designed for high-end lenses with fast apertures. You usually need at least an f/4 lens to be able to use a 1.4 TC and still retain AF; a 1.4 TC makes you lose one stop of aperture, a 2.0 TC loses two stops.

TCs generally degrade sharpness, so you want to use them only on exceptionally sharp lenses to begin with. On a 10 MP sensor like your D60, you will not be happy with the output of a TC on your 70-300. Better to crop the image instead.

Get the 70-300 VR, you will be quite happy with its performance. It's a fabulous lens for the money - one of Nikon's best bargains!

Cheers

Mike
 
All of the zooms we have been discussing are f5.6 at the long end. That is the f-stop that Nikon regards as the top for autofocus.

TC-s are fine on a big fast lens but you end up losing too much light to make them good at fast or following focus for moving subjects.

I think you would find them unsatisfactory.
 
Anthony

Good to hear your experience at Duxford; I'm hoping to get there this year. Is there anywhere else in the UK where you can get a bit closer?

Also nice to see the grain! Modern digital noise doesn't really compare . . . .
 
Mike Neary said:
Suntan said:
Mike Neary said:
But if you must have instant gratification,
Click to expand...
Hey now, for all you know he has been putting a few dollars aside for
this for the last year or two.
Click to expand...
... which means he could continue to do so, right ?
Click to expand...
What if he doesn’t want to spend more than that? I wouldn’t buy an expensive lens just for a one day trip to some airshow if I wasn’t overly interested in the subject (I’m saying hypothetically of course).
Mike Neary said:
Come on. The difference in price between the 55-200 VR and the 70-300
VR is about $250. I know it can take a while to save up that kind of
money if you're financially stretched, but most folks who can afford
a DSLR should be able to find this kind of money in a few months.
Click to expand...
I’ve spent quite a bit on camera gear too, but I’m still going to justify a lens purchase based on how much use it will get. If I was a person that didn’t really expect to use the 100+ range all that much (aside from going to one airshow) I wouldn’t spend an extra $250 to get the 70-300vr. (And the 70-300vr is over twice the price of the 55-200vr. So yeah, relatively speaking, I would consider that a big cost difference.)
Mike Neary said:
Hey - I said the 55-200 VR is an optically sound choice, didn't I ?

Is there anything wrong with mentioning that the 70-300 VR would be a
better choice because of the longer reach and faster AF ?
Click to expand...
Not at all, that was what I meant by saying there is nothing wrong with suggesting other lenses in case the person is not aware of them. Let the person decide if they are worth the extra money.

I just think that using comments like “if you must have instant gratification” because a person says they don’t want to spend too much is rather unnecessary.

Without knowing the OPs situation, I won’t continue to use his example, but use my own. I have a 70-200vr, because I prefer to shoot in that range. I have no problem spending money on lenses if I think it is justified. I’d like to have a 16-60ish f4 with similar PQ to the 70-200vr and I have commented about it before in a few posts. What normally happens next is about 4 or 5 posts saying that I should just man up and buy a 17-55. While I would probably enjoy owning a 17-55, I don’t really want a big 2.8 for that range as I rarely shoot it and when I do, I normally have good light. Further, it is not a matter of just “waiting and saving up more for it,” I surely could “afford” the 17-55 right now. I don’t want to spend that much money for one, because it wouldn’t get used enough to justify it.

A lot of people on these boards continually tell people that if they are interested in lens X that they should really be looking at lens Z (which is invariably much more expensive) then they start up with the notion that the person should just wait to “save up the extra” before buying. Then they tell them that they are making a foolish purchase for the sake of “getting something now.”

All I’m saying is that when a person asks for some guidance for a lens in a certain price range, just offer them some insight (and yes, suggesting more expensive lenses with a reason for why they should look into them is perfectly sensible) and let them decide for themselves.

-Suntan
 
One other thing, whatever lens you do get. Make sure you give yourself enough time to become proficient with it. Get out and practice panning with it. If you’ve never shot in the 200 to 300 range before, you may find it somewhat difficult to keep moving things in the viewfinder.

Would highly suggest trying to practice tracking things as they fly over your head. It is much more difficult than objects moving along on the level ground.

-Suntan
 
I agree very strongly with this. When I got my D300, I headed off to my local airfield to practise with settings and to work out how the thing operates. If there's somewhere near you that you can go to practise, I strongly recommend it. Lot of fun too.

Anthony.

--
http://www.pbase.com/anthony
 
DaiG said:
Anthony

Good to hear your experience at Duxford; I'm hoping to get there this
year. Is there anywhere else in the UK where you can get a bit closer?
Click to expand...
I really enjoy the small shows. You can get (a little) closer to the action, and they are a lot of fun. Unfortunately with rising fuel prices/insurance, plus health and safety regs, quite a number of the small shows are being cancelled. My favourite show for years was my local one at Woodchurch in Kent - but the burden on the organizers proved too much and it is no more.

On a more positive note, I'm planning to get to Dunsfold in Surrey and Shoreham (near Brighton) this year. Shoreham is great because you can stand close enough to the aircraft to get blown about when they start up, and it has a spectacular backdrop.

One thing you might do is to check out the listings of what shows are on near you and then look on UKAR to see what the photo opportunities are like.

http://www.airshows.org.uk/2008/calendar/index.html
http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/shows/showdate.htm
http://forums.airshows.co.uk
DaiG said:
Also nice to see the grain! Modern digital noise doesn't really
compare . . . .
Click to expand...
Ha! I'm with you there. I'm still a fan of silver halide black and white films. I had a great day recently using a borrowed Leica and snapping through a bunch of Tri-X and Delta100. I just love the look, and the thrill of looking at a newly developed roll of film through a loupe on a lightbox is still there. But digital just works so well...

Cheers,

Anthony.

--
http://www.pbase.com/anthony
 
I'm really hoping to get to Duxford in May (18th I think) ....... I heard that this should be one of the first airshow outings for the Avro Vulcan. I hope she makes it, what an icon and what a machine :-D

Here are a few from duxford last year. Cr@ppy overcast conditions but IS(VR) did help a lot with the props ....... oh and the panning as well ;-)

(1 x RED missing after bird strike)!





















Cheers - Mark
--

 
I think I recognise some of those! That pair of Spitfires is one I snapped as well:



Here's hoping for better weather this year

Anthony.

--
http://www.pbase.com/anthony
 
Nice one Anthony (thinks ........... where did you find that ray of sunlight :-)

Lets hope that XH588 will be showing and the sun is out.
--

 
jwmachon said:
Whats the best focus setting for it to be on at airshows dynamic ??
Click to expand...
I think that is something you'll probably have to work out for yourself. On the D70, I generally found that AF-S worked better than AF-C. But on the D300, I've found (in the limited practise I've had so far) that AF-C works great. This is something I recommend you just go and try out for yourself at a local airfield if you can.

--
http://www.pbase.com/anthony
 
Thanks so much guys whats the best af area dynamic closest or single point what is each of this focuses used for

Also what are the metering settings matrix, centre weighted spot

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top