Airshow Photography

For next year, I will be doing some of the airshow photography around ontario/southern states. I am wondering what is the best lens for the money, as it will be on my digital rebel.

Also, please realize that I am 16, and I can not remortgage my house to get some really big lens I just want to know what setup is best for the DRebel for aviaton photography!

Donations would be greatly accepted if you are in the festive spirit

Thanks!

Andrew C

While the 100-400 would probably be the one to have, I guess from your message that it is going to be a bit over the top. One of the zooms to 300mm will be a good compromise. Recent reviews in a UK magazine (I can't remember which one) were harsh about the 75-300mm Canon lenses but quite favorable about the 100-300 Canon zoom. I have a far older version of this lens but it still seems to do the trick for me until I can summon the funds for the 100-400.

Hope this is of help. Enjoy the shows when the weather gets nice again.

What lenses do you have now?

Anyway, I don't know the best lens for you. I hope others can help.

(Urr...IMHO, 2 bodies are useful for airshow...)

Are you talking about this lens? 75-300 4-5.6 III USM?

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

There is not much between the 70ish-300mm lenses and the 100-400mm unfortunatelyu...

About the only thin thats in between would be the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 with a 1.4X T-con. (140-420mm f/5.6)

Otherwise I'd say your stuck with the 75-300mm.

The first airshow I did with my D30 I had the 70-200 4.0L lens. It did a great job for most of the passes and stunts. I also made sure I got there earily so I could find a spot in the middle of the viewing area so I was right where most fly bys were centered on. And I had the sun behind me as much as possible.

But I got some excellent shots with the 70-200 4.0L. The next airshow I had both the 70-200 2.8L IS and the 100-400 4.5/5.6L lenses and I left the 100-400 on all the time, even though there were times when the 70-200 would have been a better lens for the distance I was shooting.

Mike

I just shot an air show recently with my Drebel and 100-400mm lens and it work out well. I seen a few people with the 70-200mm lens. for the most part i was shooting at the 400mm range. I also seen a few people with the 300mm F4 and that would also be good. I also was switching between my 17-40mm lens when the jets flew right over head. Like sated in previous post. get there early to get a good seat as i'm sure more people will start to crowd and its hard to pan with out hitting other peoples heads. Good luck with the lens choice.

I bought my 100-400 specifically for the RI Airshow this past June. Expensive and may be hard to do at 16 but worth the effort to work and save if you are serious about your photography.

I'm sure there are other good lenses out there (as others have mentioned) and they may save you some money but not using those, I couldn't tell you anything about them.

Most of the photos, in the link (all sky shots, I think??) are with the 100-400 L

My Airshow Pics

Generally if you're trying to zero in on an individual aircraft you're going to need 300+mm, even with the cra^hop factor. For formations, and sky patterns (smoke trails, etc.) it can go as wide as 35-50 mm.If you're willing to give up on tight shots on the aircraft, a 75-300 will be adequate, but you'll be limited in how far you can enlarge it. I'd say that IS is really useful here, too.

Jon, actually, the IS doesn't work very well for airshows. I thought the same thing you did until I read the advice of another photographer that shoots a lot of airshows that said to turn IS off. I tried this with my last airshow this summer and he was right. With all the twisting and turning you do as you follow the planes and jets, it can confuse the IS and cause blur. For the more static displays and slow aircraft, gliders and parachutests it's probably ok. But I just left mine off the whole show.

Mike

Depends on who and where you're shooting. Crossovers, vertical climbs, or the like, low-speed fly-bys, quite a number of maneuvers are linear and can be anticipated, so IS in panning mode will help. It doesn't help for everything (does anything?), but it's certainly not something to shun.

johneo wrote:
I bought my 100-400 specifically for the RI Airshow this past June. Expensive and may be hard to do at 16 but worth the effort to work and save if you are serious about your photography.

I'm sure there are other good lenses out there (as others have mentioned) and they may save you some money but not using those, I couldn't tell you anything about them.

Most of the photos, in the link (all sky shots, I think??) are with the 100-400 L

My Airshow Pics

those are some GREAT shots...........would you mind sharing what your settings were (shutter etc.)?

THANKS

gramps wrote:

johneo wrote:
I bought my 100-400 specifically for the RI Airshow this past June. Expensive and may be hard to do at 16 but worth the effort to work and save if you are serious about your photography.

I'm sure there are other good lenses out there (as others have mentioned) and they may save you some money but not using those, I couldn't tell you anything about them.

Most of the photos, in the link (all sky shots, I think??) are with the 100-400 L

My Airshow Pics

those are some GREAT shots...........would you mind sharing what your settings were (shutter etc.)?

THANKS

Hi Gramps!

Not sure but I know I was shooting in shutter priority and probably 1/180th - 1/250th. I also had IS mode 2 on the entire day, figuring I'd be spending the day panning back and forth. It was the 1st real test for the lens and it made me one happy Canon camper!

I own the Cano 70 to 200 F4 L and it is a great lens. I also own the 100-400 L and like wise is a great lens but twice the price.

So thses are your alternatives.

Canon 70-200F4 L $600+
Sigma 80-400 OS ( new Image stablized) $890.00
Sigma 50 to 500 lens ( One of the sharpest on the market. $800+
Sigma 135-400 around $500+ but has great reviews
Tamron 200-500 around $800+

I tried the Tamron and was not happy with it but you may be.
I own the Canon and my friend owns the Ssigma 80-400 and both are good.

Another friend has the Sigma 50 to 500 and the pictures are awsome but it is heavy.

For air photos I think the Canon 70-200 and Sigma 135-400 are the lightest.

You can go to Fred Miranda and read reviews

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …duct=181&sort=7​&thecat=29

phili1 wrote:
I own the Cano 70 to 200 F4 L and it is a great lens. I also own the 100-400 L and like wise is a great lens but twice the price.

So thses are your alternatives.

Canon 70-200F4 L $600+
Sigma 80-400 OS ( new Image stablized) $890.00
Sigma 50 to 500 lens ( One of the sharpest on the market. $800+
Sigma 135-400 around $500+ but has great reviews
Tamron 200-500 around $800+

I tried the Tamron and was not happy with it but you may be.
I own the Canon and my friend owns the Ssigma 80-400 and both are good.

http://cgi.ebay.com …4687&item=38564​30941&rd=1

Another friend has the Sigma 50 to 500 and the pictures are awsome but it is heavy.

For air photos I think the Canon 70-200 and Sigma 135-400 are the lightest.

You can go to Fred Miranda and read reviews

http://www.fredmiranda​.com …duct=181&sort=7​&thecat=29

So if I can get the 70-200L for say, 600 CAD (about 450 USD) it would be definately worth it? I already have the 75-300, but I want better quality glass.