Air Show Advice Needed

Hatstand wrote:

Thomas Traub wrote:

why did you use an ND-filter? With less light every autofoucus is slower, much slower!

Forget the ND-filter!

I have routinely used ND filters at dozens of airshows over many years - and I have not found AF speed to be "much slower" with them.

If they've made any difference to AF speed, it has been so minor that I haven't even noticed!

Bear in mind ND filters at airshows are only needed in bright sunlight... and typically, only 2-3 stops are used. So there is still plenty of light hitting the sensor. It's not like the camera is plunged into near-darkness and then has to struggle to AF...

The only problem I've had with a filter was with a variable ND filter on a 100-400mm, and GX80 and G80 bodies. But that didn't affect AF speed, just the AF accuracy...

i think it's a each to their own kind of thing, if you get the results you want then go for it, i'm not a big fan of anything in front of front element on a lens though......but that's just me

Hatstand wrote:

Thomas Traub wrote:

why did you use an ND-filter? With less light every autofoucus is slower, much slower!

Forget the ND-filter!

I have routinely used ND filters at dozens of airshows over many years - and I have not found AF speed to be "much slower" with them.

If they've made any difference to AF speed, it has been so minor that I haven't even noticed!

Bear in mind ND filters at airshows are only needed in bright sunlight... and typically, only 2-3 stops are used. So there is still plenty of light hitting the sensor. It's not like the camera is plunged into near-darkness and then has to struggle to AF...

The only problem I've had with a filter was with a variable ND filter on a 100-400mm, and GX80 and G80 bodies. But that didn't affect AF speed, just the AF accuracy...

I agree, and what's more, using a suitable ND filter could possibly even boost focus/shot speed, here's why: In the instance of an airshow the ND filter is only being used to reduce the excess light down to a manageable level, not to provide poor light, plus the lens doesn't have to stop down so far before taking the shot or between shots in a burst sequence, thus saving time and increasing speed. ...Just a thought that may be worth considering!

Adrian Harris wrote:

Thomas Traub wrote:

why did you use an ND-filter? With less light every autofoucus is slower, much slower!

Forget the ND-filter!

You need an Nd filter for photographing propeller aircraft and helicopters. Otherwise you can not get a slow enough shutter speed... to show some propeller blur. Frozen static propellers look so wrong when an aircraft is flying!

thx for the explanation!

Great info !

have been at the amazing Mach loop and Will be back tommorow.

Using an EM1ii with the leica pany 100-400

was wondering about 1 setting

AEL/AFL

C-AF

wich modus should be doing well ?

will be at east side

planes coming from north

flying south

when I follow them I had some problems with the exposure

wondering if it's possible to manage this in this menu ...

ilcostro wrote:

Great info !

have been at the amazing Mach loop and Will be back tommorow.

Using an EM1ii with the leica pany 100-400

was wondering about 1 setting

AEL/AFL

C-AF

wich modus should be doing well ?

will be at east side

planes coming from north

flying south

when I follow them I had some problems with the exposure

wondering if it's possible to manage this in this menu ...

Exposure compensation is your friend here   I shoot A Mode but more to the point I have the front dial set to Exposure compensation. Sometimes you have to change during a single pass.  EVF / histogram Helps here especially on long passes and / or planes that are doing rolls or climbs

another shooter I talked to (editor of a prominent aviation  journal) shoots in manual.  But he figures out his exposure early and just leaves it. He does adjust for jets vs props but the same idea, just applied twice

i don't typically use AEL but I do wonder if your exposure is being "locked in" at the first shutter but the light is changing along the pass...

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

Hatstand wrote:

Thomas Traub wrote:

why did you use an ND-filter? With less light every autofoucus is slower, much slower!

Forget the ND-filter!

I have routinely used ND filters at dozens of airshows over many years - and I have not found AF speed to be "much slower" with them.

If they've made any difference to AF speed, it has been so minor that I haven't even noticed!

Bear in mind ND filters at airshows are only needed in bright sunlight... and typically, only 2-3 stops are used. So there is still plenty of light hitting the sensor. It's not like the camera is plunged into near-darkness and then has to struggle to AF...

The only problem I've had with a filter was with a variable ND filter on a 100-400mm, and GX80 and G80 bodies. But that didn't affect AF speed, just the AF accuracy...

i think it's a each to their own kind of thing, if you get the results you want then go for it, i'm not a big fan of anything in front of front element on a lens though......but that's just me

Filters and long lenses don't alwats play nice together   I had a cheap one that basically ghosted / double imaged every shot

on the other hand slow shutter on bright days don't always play nice either

bradevans wrote:

Wu Jiaqiu wrote:

Hatstand wrote:

Thomas Traub wrote:

why did you use an ND-filter? With less light every autofoucus is slower, much slower!

Forget the ND-filter!

I have routinely used ND filters at dozens of airshows over many years - and I have not found AF speed to be "much slower" with them.

If they've made any difference to AF speed, it has been so minor that I haven't even noticed!

Bear in mind ND filters at airshows are only needed in bright sunlight... and typically, only 2-3 stops are used. So there is still plenty of light hitting the sensor. It's not like the camera is plunged into near-darkness and then has to struggle to AF...

The only problem I've had with a filter was with a variable ND filter on a 100-400mm, and GX80 and G80 bodies. But that didn't affect AF speed, just the AF accuracy...

i think it's a each to their own kind of thing, if you get the results you want then go for it, i'm not a big fan of anything in front of front element on a lens though......but that's just me

Filters and long lenses don't alwats play nice together I had a cheap one that basically ghosted / double imaged every shot

on the other hand slow shutter on bright days don't always play nice either

quite the dilemma

The plane was modified during restoration -

"The Aero Legends Spitfire NH341 Code DB-E has been restored and converted to a dual cockpit T9 version by the experts at Historic Flying Ltd (HFL), Duxford."

JerryGNYC wrote:

The plane was modified during restoration -

"The Aero Legends Spitfire NH341 Code DB-E has been restored and converted to a dual cockpit T9 version by the experts at Historic Flying Ltd (HFL), Duxford."

Thanks for the info so it is not in orignal form a money spinner for flights for passengers at £2500 now i do not want in my picture .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/58365044@N05/

paul cool wrote:

JerryGNYC wrote:

The plane was modified during restoration -

"The Aero Legends Spitfire NH341 Code DB-E has been restored and converted to a dual cockpit T9 version by the experts at Historic Flying Ltd (HFL), Duxford."

Thanks for the info so it is not in orignal form a money spinner for flights for passengers at £2500 now i do not want in my picture .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/58365044@N05/

I understand your sentiment. Hopefully the modification was done with the best of intentions. Maintaining these old planes, even if they are only used as static displays, is a costly endeavor. With a bit of luck, any funds raised will be used to maintain this and other aircraft, and educational purposes as well...

Regards,

-Jerry

JerryGNYC wrote:

paul cool wrote:

JerryGNYC wrote:

The plane was modified during restoration -

"The Aero Legends Spitfire NH341 Code DB-E has been restored and converted to a dual cockpit T9 version by the experts at Historic Flying Ltd (HFL), Duxford."

Thanks for the info so it is not in orignal form a money spinner for flights for passengers at £2500 now i do not want in my picture .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/58365044@N05/

I understand your sentiment. Hopefully the modification was done with the best of intentions. Maintaining these old planes, even if they are only used as static displays, is a costly endeavor. With a bit of luck, any funds raised will be used to maintain this and other aircraft, and educational purposes as well...

Regards,

-Jerry

Of course but still for the rich just jealous really ,but still not over keen on the double bubble look of the canopy.

Yes there are many projects that need funding the mosquito is  one i would like to see also if they can get the sea vixen air worthy again i doubt but can wish .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/58365044@N05/

paul cool wrote:

JerryGNYC wrote:

paul cool wrote:

JerryGNYC wrote:

The plane was modified during restoration -

"The Aero Legends Spitfire NH341 Code DB-E has been restored and converted to a dual cockpit T9 version by the experts at Historic Flying Ltd (HFL), Duxford."

Thanks for the info so it is not in orignal form a money spinner for flights for passengers at £2500 now i do not want in my picture .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/58365044@N05/

I understand your sentiment. Hopefully the modification was done with the best of intentions. Maintaining these old planes, even if they are only used as static displays, is a costly endeavor. With a bit of luck, any funds raised will be used to maintain this and other aircraft, and educational purposes as well...

Regards,

-Jerry

Of course but still for the rich just jealous really ,but still not over keen on the double bubble look of the canopy.

Yes there are many projects that need funding the mosquito is one i would like to see also if they can get the sea vixen air worthy again i doubt but can wish .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/58365044@N05/

Yes, it's quite a princely sum, is it not?

There used to be a fellow operating a two-seat P-51 out of Teterboro Airport, in New Jersey. It was $250 USD for a 30-minute ride. Nowadays, it's over $1,800 USD for the same ride courtesy of the Commemorative Air Force's P-51... The insurance costs must be tremendous these days. I should have spent the $250 back then....