Car photography

[COKE CAN]

Which lens(es) is/are good for car photography? Seeing as that will be what I practice the most.

[mr.photoguy]

depends... for shows, you may want a wide angle, and a polarizer to take out some of the reflections. I have heard some people say that even a 18 or 17 mm is not wide enough.

[COKE CAN]

depends... for shows, you may want a wide angle, and a polarizer to take out some of the reflections. I have heard some people say that even a 18 or 17 mm is not wide enough.

It will mainly be single car photo's. I don't attend car shows, if I attend anything it would be a track event.

[COKE CAN]

The first set of lenses I was looking to pick up was the Sigma 2 lens kit, 28-80/70-300 4-5.6 or something of the sort, and a 50mm f/2.8. I just bought my DRebel, and I am a college student, I don't want to break my bank.

[mr.photoguy]

I hear you on that. as for the 50 1.8 .. it's a good choice. I have one, and used it once to do my car just for tests, I was semi-happy with it. I guess I am a low wide angle guy.
hm.. what Aperture rating is the 28-80 sigma... ?

[Adam Hicks]

Get a 10-22. I shoot for an automobile enthusiast heavy gloss magazine here in Texas. I use the 28-75 2.8 and the 10-22 95% of the time... unless we're talking track work, in which I love the 100-400L at f7.1+

Adam

The 10-22 buys you perspective shots like this which are more interesting than a flat standard shot...

http://fotop.net/adam12hicks/MSR_Feb_2005/Roberto_wide_on_one_car

[COKE CAN]

Get a 10-22. I shoot for an automobile enthusiast heavy gloss magazine here in Texas. I use the 28-75 2.8 and the 10-22 95% of the time... unless we're talking track work, in which I love the 100-400L at f7.1+

Adam

The 10-22 buys you perspective shots like this which are more interesting than a flat standard shot...

http://fotop.net/adam12hicks/MSR_Feb_2005/Roberto_wide_on_one_car

I'm not looking to be a pro yet, I'm just looking for the basic lenses.http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif

[iwatkins]

One lense I use a lot for car shots is the Canon 28-135 IS. It works well and with IS allows hand holding longer at dusk.

Also use the Sigma 12-24 for the wide shots, close up for the wacky effects.

When cars are on track, I tend to stick with the 100-400L.

Cheers

Ian

[COKE CAN]

Appreciate the info guys!

[musthavemuzk]

i ment to add this link in your the srt4 thread of yours.
http://www.cobracountry.com/fototips/home.html

i was linked to this last summer late, but have not reread it since i got a real camera. which i should do now.

Monty

[Salleke]

i ment to add this link in your the srt4 thread of yours.
http://www.cobracountry.com/fototips/home.html

i was linked to this last summer late, but have not reread it since i got a real camera. which i should do now.

Monty

In the above mentioned link i read a sentence from that website that says:
"Trust us: we're far more experienced at editing and optimizing digital images (and we're better equipped with top-of-the-line image-editing/ JPEG-optimizing software) than you're likely to be."

Witch software they mean by that top-of-the-line image-editing / JPEG-optimizing software? Is there better software for editing and optimizing JPEG pictures then let's say PHOTOSHOP CS?

[PhotosGuy]

I'm not looking to be a pro yet, I'm just looking for the basic lenses. If you're interested in on the track shots, look at some of IndyJeff's, or Kenny's shots. You'll have probably have to multiply the focal length by about 2X 'cause they can get a lot closer to the cars than you will be able to.
There is NO best lens for track shots! Some corners you can get close & use a WA. Other times you need a 1000mm to compress the action. I know every "best" place at my local track to get the shot I want. Find a track near you. Walk around it. See what will work. ;-)

[IanBMW]

There is a new book out called How to Photograph Cars, I am actually about to start reading it. You should pic it up. It already helped me the other week at the track.

[IanBMW]

http://www.pbase.com/ianbmw/image/28631109.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/ianbmw/image/28631342.jpg
By the way the kit lens isn't too shabby for the money, first pic 18mm, second 22mm. Oh and neither where with polarizer filter. Otherwise the colors would have been much better looking.

[PhotosGuy]

Shot with the kit lens:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/Car%20Stuff/40-FordDeluxeCoupe_frt_0102.jpg

[skyphix]

Shot with a 50 1.8 Mk1

http://non.skyphix.com/2005/Cars/Small/STiJunkyard-1.jpg

I like medium zooms (200mm) for car photography, though.

[Rebel]

For tracking (car to car) I use a wide angle - 28-135, 18-55 etc. For Panning, I can't live without my 70-200L f/4

http://www.pbase.com/cmanaginged/cars

[DaveG]

In my opinion there's no such thing as a lanscape lens. Any lens can shoot a landscape in a different sort of way.

I think that this is true for car photography (and MOST photography) as well. With the super wide angle approach you need something in the foreground - like the car - and it can be very effective. Or you could use a long telephoto, get good "portrait" compression perspective and eliminate the foreground/sky.

Where you will get into trouble is when you use a super wide angle and have nothing in the foreground and the car sits some distance away from you. Unlikely as it sounds that car will start to assume the perspective of a longer lens but the foregound is a waste. You ask why is "their" wide angle car photography effective but mine isn't? And it's simply that you are too far away.

So I think that any lens will take a good shot of a car if you use it carefully.

[raylks]

Panning a car is fun! Just make more "motion" to your car model!


http://images3.fotop.net/albums3/raylks/unassorted/MG_0371.jpg

http://images3.fotop.net/albums3/raylks/unassorted/MG_0371.jpg

[where1]

Here is a shot I took with the 18-55mm lense at 18mm and a polarizing filter. I was pretty close to the car when I took the shot.

http://www.bytephoto.com/photopost/data/500/1910Yenko.jpg?730

[Mycroft]

DAMN, that's a nice car!! :cool:

[eosster]

Wow nice shots everyone, I am thinking about getting a Tokina 12-24mm F/4. I think it will serve well for automobile shots.

[COKE CAN]

http://files.bighosting.net/qr32469.jpg

I took this Saturday at a local show.

DRebel w/ Canon 50mm f/1.8 II

[cmM]

i think the wider the better....
My 17-40L has served me well :)

http://www.cmuntean.net/images/feb20aut/feb20aut27.jpg

[COKE CAN]

i think the wider the better....
My 17-40L has served me well :)



Yea, well, well.... whateva! :)

[Cadwell]

For static shots around the pits and paddock I use something wide angled. Either the 17-40mm f/4L outside or the 24mm f/1.4L for indoor use. As a lower cost option one of my friends uses a Tamron SP 17-35mm which works well. A polarizer is pretty much essential.

For track side work you generaly need something in the order of at least 300mm. I use a Sigma APO 120-300mm f/2.8EX (often with a 1.4x TC) or a Canon EF 100-400mm L IS when I don't feel like lugging the bulk of the Sigma about. Two of my friends have a Sigma APO 100-300mm f/4EX which is a very nice lens for a reasonable cost and does a good job of motor sport photography.

Some (lots of) samples are in gallery ukmotorsportpics.com (http://gallery.ukmotorsportpics.com/)

[musthavemuzk]

been busy with other things so i have not been around to give this a looksy.
i see some great pics and some good advice.

i finally got some cash so i am shopping for glass.
i also have a couple people interested in me shooting their cars.

looking forward to that as well as getting some feedback on them.

Monty

[rg-tom]

whilst not fantastic, the kit lens will do you well until you can afford L glass / the 10-22:

http://twilight-photography.co.uk/gallery/Canon_EOS-20D/Cars/3.jpg

Taken with the kit lens :)

Cheers

Tom

[milou]

http://milouvision.net/photos/IMG_0047a.jpg

50mm f/1.8 is nice for abstract motor shots

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

I've never shot car photography or anything, but from the looks of it that kit lens is doing a decent job! Another lens you could take a look at is the Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8. I've taken a few pics with it at the store once or twice and I liked what I saw. Feels great, looks great, takes great pictures. Or so I've heard... It's also very wide and costs around $450.00. Very good price for a very good lens. Take a look; http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=303166&is=REG

If it was me making this decision, that'd be my choice, but I don't know what your budjet is....

[musthavemuzk]

for my self and my take on it the kit lens does a fair job. though you cannot use it everywhere and you need to stop it down a bit. cannot use it wide open either.
http://monty.soundillusions.net/index.php
there are 2 gallerys from car shows. both indoors both used the kit lens. the first one sucked bad and the second one just sucked a little bit.
i was unsure of what to use for settings at both of them, so i just kinda went with it. the shots are not terrible, but the first show, toppers, i had alot of blurry shots as i went AP mode and i tried to keep iso down to 200. though it did slip to 4 and 8 on occasion. but i ended up with alot of blurry shots due to low shutter speed. i tried to keep aperture at 5-5.6. low shutter as in 1/10 or so. flash did not always fire as i expected it to either.
the other show, primesteel, i had learned a little bit and this time i went in full manual. keeping iso at 4oo and bumping to 8 on occasion. aperture stayed around 5-5.6 again though shutters stayed around 1/60. some even faster and up to 1/125. again the flash did not work as i thought it would.
so less blurry pics but still not great
i have used the kit lens outside and it has worked well when there is plenty of light and can stop to 8 or so.

Monty