Airshow disasters

desantnik

desantnik

Suspended / Banned
Messages
9,848
Name
Vlad
Edit My Images
Yes
No... not taking pics of crashes :lol: but instead my efforts...

I've got a set of really dissapointing pics from the weekend and I don't understand why.

The results are really, really soft.

I was using spot metering, centre point focusing, shutter priority mode (trying 1/500-1/1000) with either the L 300mm F4 IS or EF 70-300 F4-5.6 IS and IS in mode 2 on both lenses.

Is that technically feasible?

Are the poor results due to haze???? I didn't look particularly hazey at ground level and it was a nice bright sunny day (I have the sun burn to prove it)

What have I done wrong?? Or am I not geared up correctly for this? The pics would look alright as 6x4 prints but I was expecting somewhat more... am used to taking motorsport pics and getting a good number of keepers that are pin sharp at a 1:1 crop.
 
Sounds as if you were set up correctly, the only thing I might have done differently would be to turn IS off simply because in that sort of shutter speed range it won't have any benefit but then again there shouldn't be any problems with leaving it on.

What sort of aperture was the camera asking for at those shutter speeds?
 
Well, was down to ISO100 to try and keep the aperture wide open and got results between 5.6 through to 11, quite a few were 7.1??
 
Here we go, just from a random shot thats fairly typical of most of them, barring the usual disasters of blue sky LOL

Focus and metering point is on the outer engine nearest to you.

This is with the 70-300, 300mm F8, ISO100, 1/500, TV mode

b17-2.jpg

b17-1.jpg
 
BTW meant to add, I had it in AI Servo focusing mode, tracking the aircraft in with the button half depressed - a mistake?
 
AI Servo is the way to go. Looking at the crop I see why you're saying they're soft but at this point I can't really comment on whether it's overly soft, I'll take a look at some of mine from last year and post back later.
 
I was getting the impression on the day things weren't going too well and out of desperation I even tried the dreaded "sports mode", which seemed to choose ISO400 and 1/2500 shutter, but actually got better results.... so maybe it was just too fast action for the shutter speeds - my usual subjects are probably moving at "only" 70-100mph through corners as opposed to these which have to have been faster?

Does that sound likely?
 
How fast is IS , could it have caused high frequency camera shake on a distant object ?
 
Hi desantnik, how did you set your camera? I do not have the 350D but I do not think is that much different from the 400D. If I take jpg piccies I do have the possibility to provide some input to decide the sharpness level etc...
If you took the piccies in raw mode is a different story of course :)
 
These were all JPG's in "large fine" mode.

I haven't PP'ed any of these BTW...

Because my EF 70-300mm isn't too clever obviously at the long end, here's another example, this was with the L 300mm F4. Better than the last one definitely, but this is about as good as it got, which still aint great!

1/1000, F5.6, ISO100, 300mm (:D), aim and meter point is on the engine cowling:

fokker-1.jpg

fokker-2.jpg
 
I got the same kind of problems when I was shooting rugby with my 70-200 2.8 IS, I was also using my 300 & every shot from that was spot on focus but the 70-200 ones showed the same kind of quality as your shots above.
I am still working through getting sharpness every time but am putting it down to user error on my part due to static shots being fine & sharp :shrug:
The only other thing that I may consider affecting the shots is mode 2 IS - I imagine in motorsports that the plane of travel (no pun intended) is more level with very little variation in vertical movement - did you take any experimental shots using mode 1 or no IS at all?
Good luck :thumbs:
 
Actually I did try mode 1, again out of desperation, but the problem is that the xif doesnt tell me which had IS on and in which mode :(

It definitely wasn't total equipment failiure as I have a couple of shots of landing and taxiing aircraft that are bob on...
 
I would never ever use spot metering for aviation work. I set my camera up as follows:

Jets:

Mode: Aperture Priority
Aperture: f10
Bracketing: 3f @ +0.3
Exsposure bias: +0.3 (this gives me 3 shots at 0.0 0.3 and 0.7)
Focus: AF-C (Continuous)
Metering: Matrix

Props:

Mode: Shutter Priority
Shutter Speed: 1/320
Bracketing: 3f @ +0.3
Exsposure bias: +0.3 (this gives me 3 shots at 0.0 0.3 and 0.7)
Focus: AF-C (Continuous)
Metering: Matrix


Hope it helps.

King.
 
What is "matrix" metering? Is that full frame or centre weighted? (sorry I know nothing about Nikkon)

But, thanks, that makes sense - was looking for someone with a fair bit of aircraft experience to tell me what was wrong :D

I thought about exposure bracketing a while back, but not for aircraft... but I think it might not be a bad idea.

I tried to pull back some of the underexposed ones I had using PSCS2 but it ended up right messy. I've still no idea why they weren't metered correct mind you....
 
My personal exception to the spot metering thing with aviation is the Red Arrows - always works a treat for me with them - I am assuming because the bright red of the planes qualifies as a mid-tone?
 
I dont know what matrix is on canon but it is full frame as you put it.

I just found this little tutorial from the Nikon japan website. It is very basic but worth a read.

http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/feelnikon/discovery/cbp/cbp2-1e.htm

I personally noted this:

"During clear daytime weather with follow light, select film speed ISO 100, aperture value f/8 and shutter speed 1 / 500 sec."

Will try that next time.

King.
 
Its a 350d not the best at focusing at those distance's, Any other pics from other moving subjects, wonder if the lens isnt the sharpest? not the easiest thing to lock onto either due to the lack of colour in the subject.

What picture mode settings are you using? camera sharpness etc, and how are they after some USM.
 
I did wonder if it was a distance focusing thing. I can't say that I have ever tried taking pics of something that far away and expecting to see (or even trying to see) a good 100% crop.

Certainly some problems are to do with the 70-300 IS at 300mm, its just not that good at that end. The 300mm F4, well, that should be no?
 
BTW the faster (1/2500) ones are much better, but 1/500 or 1/1000 should be reasonable I thought... but obviously not!
 
Have you got CS3 if so do a 300% USM on it, that little image does well. J-pegs always look flat, and the 350d dosnt track well fullstop at those distance and light conditions. but i'd suspect you using very little if any onboard sharpening on that image.
 
Looking at the difference between shot 1 and 2 that you've posted I think there are a few places that you've lost a little quality. Each one on it's own would have been easily dealt with but combined it's far more pronounced.

There probably is a fall off from the 300 f4 to the 70-300.

500th may not have been quite enough to freeze the movement, it's really not far off perpendicular in shot 1.

If you're not used to pointing the camera up to the sky while you track you may not have been as steady as you are with track stuff.

Take a small loss from each of these and I'd expect to see something like the shots you've shown.

Shot 2 would certainly sharpen up into something usable and no 1 is not really not that far off either.
 
I think you've summed it up quite well there...

Well, I *think* I've got some good tips from you all for next time.

The one thing I'm still not sure about though is what sort of metering is appropriate - I know someone has suggested full frame, but in the example of the Fokker triplane above, wouldnt that wipe out the aircraft with underexposure when the sky is that bright blue (which it was btw, my two shots don't show it correctly)
 
The one thing I'm still not sure about though is what sort of metering is appropriate
Click to expand...
Personally, I'd shoot manual.

Take a reading off some grass or the back of your hand and go for it. If the histogram says you're a little too close to the left or right, budge it a bit.

Also, I'm still trying to work out why you'd use autofocus too. Surely these planes aren't getting closer than the infinity mark, are they?
 
Hmmmm you have a point there too!

Why did none of this seem to cross my mind on the day? Mind you, it never does - I always come home and think "doh! if only I had *insert really stupid mistake correction*"
 
Why did none of this seem to cross my mind on the day?
Click to expand...

Because you've obviously just not screwed it up as many times as I have. ;)

Some people say we learn by doing and that's true to some extent. I've always thought we actually learn more by getting it totally wrong. :lol:
 
dazzajl said:
Also, I'm still trying to work out why you'd use autofocus too. Surely these planes aren't getting closer than the infinity mark, are they?
Click to expand...
If you're going to go manual then go for the hyperfocal distance rather than infinity. At f/8 and set to infinity the front edge of the DoF of a 300mm lens is almost half a mile away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top