FireGryphon wrote:I'm kind of hyped about the shots you're going to get from the 70-200x1.7. With the monopod that will be a killer rig for shooting small planes at long distances. It would be interesting to put the 1.7 converter on the 18-200. That'll still be (sorta) wide enough for regular shots and reach pretty far out, too.
Whatever you do, I want some pics
UberGerbil wrote:With fast-moving subjects auto-focus tends to let you down when you need it most, and with slow-moving subjects you don't really need it anyway, so if you assume you're going to be doing manual focus the teleconverter might not be a big problem. But yeah, check pro photo rental places in your area to see what it would cost to rent a serious long lens for the weekend.
I don't know about RC aircraft, but I know from shooting full-size prop planes you generally don't want a shutter speed higher than about 1/125, because when you go much higher you get frozen props in the photo rather than a nice blurred prop disk, which looks really weird (like the engines have shut down in flight). And yes, that means you have to be good with panning to get a clear shot of the aircraft. It may not be as big of a deal with much smaller aircraft, as the props may be spinning faster (considering the upper limit on prop speed is having the tips go supersonic, which is a function of both RPM and size) but it's something you may want to test before you're shooting "for real."
Although... 120" wingspan? Holy crap, that's getting into the "carrying Hellfires over Waziristan" range of RC aircraft.
You know, I'd kind of forgotten about this, but ten years ago I flew into the EAA AirVenture at Oshkosh (highly recommended if you ever get the chance, assuming you're at all into airplanes) and I brought along my Sigma 170-500 lens. I even had a 1.7x teleconverter to go with it. I hardly used it. Yes, there were a few shots I got that I couldn't have gotten otherwise, but the field-of-view was so small with the thing fully-zoomed that it was really difficult to get usable photos during flybys. Of course I was dealing with aircraft that were going considerably faster, though I was also further away. But I found that my 70-300 Nikor (sometimes with the TC, but mostly not) was a much better lens for this purpose -- especially on the cloudy days, and most especially in terms of carrying around. Though "ease of carrying" was a big consideration because I was walking around a lot more than you would be -- walking to the end of rows upon rows of parked aircraft takes a lot more effort when the scale of the models in question is 1:1SecretSquirrel wrote:I'll have to look at the Sigmas. My immediate thought on the 50-500 was "jack of all trades, master of none". I just can't imagine a lens with that range being very good at any setting, but I'll go read. My normal lens rental place doesn't carry them, but I'll see if anyone in town does.
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 4 guests