Ditto. There are tricks you can learn, like following an object for a crisp shot, or holing that camera still while a moving object goes past to get a blurred look (to show speed) but a lot of it is also an art. We probably all know someone who, no matter how many times you tell them, they still cut the tops of peoples heads off! [:@]

Another thing that a lot of people don't realize is that you might shoot a hundred pictures to get 10 or 12 really good ones. This is one of the best features of digital photography! No more paying for developing the bad shots!

I took 596 shots in the last 3 days. [X(]

thanks

I am far from a professional as I still learn new things all the time. But I've spent a few years now photographing events for RCU, and here as some of the things I've learned that have helped me
[*]You're going take A LOT of pictures - Like Mike said, you're going to take a lot of pictures to get just a few usable shots. I read an article on photography and they say that pros usually approach 20% usable pictures, meaning that only 20% of what they shoot is usable and the rest get thrown away. Amateurs and the rest of us are closer to 10%-15% usable pictures. The nice thing is that in the digital age it doesn't cost anything to throw away a picture. So do be afraid to shoot a lot of pictures.[*]Practice practice practice. The guys in my club are tired of seeing my camera at the field. that's where I go to practice shooting before I get to an event. One key to getting good pictures is to know your camera and how to make all of your adjustments on the fly, that comes with practice. Also, just like muscle memory helps atheletes it also helps in taking pictures as you track and shoot planes in motion.[*]The "Perfect" shot - I see a lot of guys always fitzing and futzing around trying to get that "perfect" shot. Forget it. You're wasting time and missing a lot of good shots. This goes exactly with what I said above. Remember, you're only getting 10%-15% of usable, so spending time trying to get that "one great shot" is usually a wild goose chase. Just shoot your pictures and you'll be suprised when you pull them off the camera in that you may have very well got that "one shot" you were looking for to start with[*]Histograms - learn to use these. I didn't have a clue what they were until a guy in my club who has been a professional photographer for 30 years explained what they were. Once you start using these your shot quality will improve 5 fold. Get your manual out and read on using the histograms and how to adjust your camera exposure accordingly.[*]Learn to use the apeture and exposure compensation adjustments on your camera. They will make your shooting a lot better once you stop trusting that little guy in the camera to make all the adjustments. For shooting planes I keep the camera on "sports" modes and then make my apeture or shutter adjustments accordingly.[*]Quit looking at the damn LCD - I see guys all the time press the button and then look at the LCD. This is a waste of time because while you are looking at the LCD there are 4 or 5 shots that you just missed. And what good is looking at it going to do anyway?? You either got the shot or you didn't, looking at it isn't going to change that. There are only 2 times I'll look at the LCD: 1) Checking the Histrogram 2) when I am trying to get a particular shot I'll look at the LCD to see if I got the shot I was trying for. Now I may scroll back through the pictures when I'm not doing anything else, but when I'm taking pictures I forget the LCD is there and concentrate on taking the pictures.[*]Never delete directly from the camera unless it's absolutely 100% positive it's a poor shot. Otherwise wait until you get the pictures downloaded to your PC. The LCD is the WORST place for viewing the quality of a picture. What looks good on the LCD may look horrible on the PC, and vice versa. There are a lot of shots that can be "saved" with a little photoshop work.[*]Forget about VR. A lot of guys buy lenses with VR as they think it takes good pictures. Well it might very well do that, but it slows down the camera shooting speed because the camera has to stop and lock in the lense. My "good" lenses don't even have VR on them. Develop and practice a good "stable platform" stance when holding your camera. If you learn to hold the camera steady you can get as good of results as the VR would get you, and you'll be able to shoot faster.[*]Ergonomics - this kind of goes with the above in your stance. You need to have a comfortabe steady stance in holding the camera. I wear a carpel tunnel wrist brace when I shoot pictures. Not because I have carpel tunnel but because it braces my wrist when I hold the camera. If I don't use it my wrist starts hurting, and when that happens I have a hard time getting good pictures because of the pain. you have ot be comfortable to be able to shoot good pictures.[*]keep your lenses clean. this goes without saying[*]get a good UV filter for your lense. While it does have a benefit in your pictures the value of this filter it more for protecting your lenses. It's a lot cheaper to scratch a $10 filter than a $1,000 lense. nuff said!!!!

Hope this helps

Ken</p>

My flying buddy got a new Helicopter so we went to the field to get some shots, and again, a very challenging day and this time it was the wind with that wittle bitty heli. It didn't help that he thinks he is Curtis Youngblood. lol I couldn't get him to settle down for some decent close up shots.

Oh...VERY VERY nice shots there Garry. Well no flying for us today - South Easterly wind coming up with gusts.

I have to add one thing to this...

Don't waste time looking at the LCD after each shot, BUT look at it after each series (I.E., a plane is coming in for a low pass. You shoot 5 or 6 pics. The plane finishes the pass. Now look at the LCD).

The one time I didn't bother to look at it, I still had my camera set for shooting pics of night-flying the week before and wasted an entire day shooting over-exposed pictures! [:@]

So don't miss shots by checking the LCD after each time you pull the trigger, but check it periodically to be sure your exposure is correct.

Mike,
 Yes, that's what I meant when I typed that. Thanks for clarifying. I see guys that look after every time they press the shutter button. wastes so much time doing that , and you miss a lot of good shots

Ken

Some really great tips here!

What I learned when I got semi-serious about photography is that the key is to take lots and lots and lots of pictures. Even if you think you got the shot, I always try to take some more just to be safe. You'll quickly realize that only taking a couple of pictures just doesn't cut it. When I first started I would get very discouraged because most of my shots I didn't like. Well it was because I just wasn't taking enough. Now that I take a ton, I get a lot more decent usable pictures.

My introduction to RC flying came when I stopped at the local field one day to take some pictures. While I still prefer the quality and work-flow of film for most of my photography, it would be expensive to shoot airplane pictures so I use a Nikon D1X. The Nikon system allowed me to purchase lots of older lenses and accessories which still fit even the latest cameras so my setup for most of the in-flight shots consists of a 300mm lens followed by two 2X doublers, and the camera mounted loosely on a sturdy tripod and ball head. With the crop factor of the camera this gives me an 1800 mm lens equivalent. It took a lot of experimentation and practice before I could regularly capture good images. This lens set-up means manual focus so I preset the aperture and shutter speed and focus as I follow the plane. With the very narrow field of vision and depth of field afforded by this combination I discovered the only way to follow the planes was to keep both eyes open. It took a couple weeks but eventually I was able to coordinate my eyes to follow even fast planes in flight and still catch them in the viewfinder. I've included a few shots taken this way. For landing and take off shots, I usually use and 80-200 or a 300 mm auto focus lens. Shots taken in close or or high speed passes don't allow for manual focus unless you pre-focus on a spot and shoot when the plane enters that area.

One of the things that makes for a nice shot (planes or otherwise) is to leave room in front of the plane for it to have somewhere to go. Remember the "rule of thirds" Clouds add a lot and give a sense of altitude and movement to the shot. With a long lens, formation flights become easy because they can be photographed from further away.

After a part season of taking pictures, I caught the bug and now have about 10 planes that I fly myself. I still try to get some pictures now and then.

A big ditto to giving the subject a "Place to go" - leave a little space in front of the plane when you crop the image

nhblacksmith, nice shots! Now you should get a copy of photoshop (if you don't already have one). With a little touching up, you can really bring out the detail

I do have Photoshop and several other high end editors. I just didn't want to spend the time retouching these photos just to post on the web. I use a calibrated screen and because of color space diffrences the color never looks the same on the web anyway.

Yea, I do web stuff for a living, so I know what you mean

These are really excellent suggestions and tips for someone wanting to know more about photographing RC planes in action.</p>

I use a a Canon 5DMk2 with a 70-200f2.8/IS. Two things that I do that I have not heard mentioned are...</p>

1. Practice keeping your elbows in tight agaiant your body and view finder/eye cup right up against your forehead when shooting. This really goes a long way to stanbilize the camera and reduce camera shake a great deal (for those non IS lenses.)</p>

2. If you have the ability to shoot in raw mode (or raw + high-res JPEG) and don't mind the extra effort of prcoessing raw... raw will give you the useful advantage of recovering/improving those few shots when the exposures were at best marginal.</p>

Another tip... shoot from different angles/perspectives. Such as getting low/lying down to get landing shots.</p>

Anyway, just a few other ideas.</p>

Smooth landings,
John
</p>


</p>

nhblacksmith - incredible photos! Minn..photoshop can do a lot to a photo - I must just stop being so lazy with it.

Of the planes we usually fly there is this P47 which I struggle to snap...I usually end up with very little shots which I can use. Especially when it starts blending with the mountain. I took these photos with my 18 - 55mm lens.

Struggling to get this one uploaded lol hope this works

Hmm, leave room for the plane to go somewhere, eh? Someone should tell the pilots that too .

(In fairness, this picture doesn't end in the tragedy that it looks like, it's actually a shot from a series of pictures of the plane flipping over on landing, with minimal damage resulting.)

Korps, Yes, Photoshop IS cool, isn't it

lol Piper your comment gave me a good laugh so early in the morning.


lol MinnFlyer - where has the plane gone[X(] must have been the trees that ate it

Just thought i´d add my findings..

I managed to find myself a bargin on ebay of a 2nd hand Tamron 70-300 1:4-5.6 LD lens.
Attached it to my D80 and. WOW.
Definately recomend this lens to anybody looking for a basic lens. Autofocus could be a little faster but I can live with it fine..
Its definately a case of putting the camera in shutter priority, lowering the speed, depending on the heli/plane
I quickly realised that one heli doing 3d would have a higher rotor speed, and so could use higher shutter speed, for the same effect as another heli in normal mode, I´d need a lower speed for the same effect... Obviously this ment a LOT of shots were binned due to hand-shake... but the ones I kept are SO nice with the "moving" blades, rather than the ones in sport mode where htere is only slight bluring of the blades.

here are some of the results! More practice to come! I´m the one catching the merlin, and the extra is mine.

[link=http://picasaweb.google.es/ceecrb1/240410?feat=directlink]picasa web album[/link]

If y'all have never shot with a real telephoto, Ie: something with a high speed fixed barrel focal at 2.8 or better, you'll die the first time you do.


I shoot with a 1d MkII(it's not about the MP for me, that sensor is plenty dense enough) and a 70-200 2.8L


With the slower focus lenses, learn the lag on your AI servo and learn to track. If you can get a hand held shot of a swallow or scissor tail in flight with a kit lens, you've learned in flight tracking correctly(I've done it one time, it's still the coolest in flight shot I've ever done, and was with a rebel XT and a 18-55 kit lens....)


I will say this as well.......don't buy into this "shoot it 2/3 of a stop under exposed and adjust the .Raw later".

I will also offer a thought from someone who used to sell cameras(me) on IS. IS is a cool thing to have on a lens, but remember: ONLY aperture will stop motion blur. IS will only stop your hand shaking, and by the time your shutter speed has dropped low enough your hand effects it, a moving subject is blurred. If it's the difference between a 2.8 non-is lens, and a slower f4 or variable 4-5.6 IS lens, take the 2.8 EVERY time.

While I'll agree with most of what you say, I'm not sure I'd quite go this far. Obviously, this is going to depend on what people really need. The average person out there probably really doesn't need a 2.8 lens, especially in a longer lens where those get pretty pricey and heavy. And for many people, the IS is indeed fairly useful. Know what you're going to shoot, and make your decisions based on that. For me, I'm a big fan of the canon 70-300 IS. Yeah, it's a little slower, but it's still an awfully nice lens for a non-L lens. And for me, for what I tend to shoot, I'd rather have the longer slower lens (plus $700) than the 2.8L 70-200 lens. But then, I don't have the budget for the 1D either . I won't lie and say I never had circumstances when I wish I had a faster lens though, although most of the time when I do I'd be ok with a shorter lens.

Most of my R/C plane shooting has been done with that 70-300 is. In general these conditions tend to be under fairly bright, sunny days. I've never felt the lack of a faster lens has been a big issue for this. I've even managed to take a few bird photos in the last year and a half that I'm truly proud of. Of course, most of those haven't been flying, which is just as well, I'm lousy at tracking birds in flight .

But anyways, I'm not saying it was bad advice, I'm just saying that one should think about one's needs before spending the money on something that may be overkill for them.

As far as I'm concerned, lenses are never overkill....

It's not just the IS that's an issue with better lenses, it's focal speed and accuracy. The L is not mandatory either. I've compared the sigma offering to my L on a 1ds MkIII(not mine) in a tet bed situation, and found very minimalistic differences.

As far as IS being useful: what are you doing that it improves a shot that is not already motion blurred? Hand holding down into the 1/100th shutter range is fairly simple, and below that blurr becomes an issue from simple motion. I've just never been in a situation, save one wedding in particular, where IS did anything for me, and that was a still shot of a bride and groom indoors. It did allow me to close the lens down a bit, and compensated for my flash dying as I snapped it, but they where stock still. I just don't find it useful in any sports activities, especially in a poorly lit stadium or rodeo arena, where the large element and lower aperture come in so handy. It's also very easy to drop a 1.4 or 2.0 tele onto a 70-200 and get a nice ~300-400 f4 or f5.6 lens.

In honesty, if I was the OP, I would never have bought the 50d. The 30 is well MORE than capable of what he's doing. I shot for nearly two years with a rebel with this L hanging off the front, and took some truly good quality(we wont talk composition.....purely a equipment discussion LOL) shots with it. The MkII simply fell into what I needed from a speed and performance standpoint. I come from an old school of photography where a body was simply needed to be capable of the minimum of what you needed, everything else is LENS. Equipment is about 10% of the shot, the other 90% is the shooter.

I have often wondered about the lenses and how some can take such fantastic photos. The only problem for me is that for the amount of photos I am interested in and the time I have to take photos makes me prioritize my budget differently. Without spending mega funds I limit my cam budget to a certain area. Yes, I would love to have a high-end lens, but just for average "Joe" photography? After all, I want to spend as much time flying as possible and less time with the camera although I do enjoy getting a few shots when on vacation and that occassional moment that you don't want to miss.

I have an Alpha a300, DL 18-250, DL 18-70 (kit lens), and 70-300 (kit lens). I really enjoy the digital camera since I come from 35mm film! I have messed around with my camera settings many times and my best shots have always been when "all the stars align" for lack of a better term I have found that more than often it is all about the individual behind the camera. Some times the accidentally good "shot" happens. So many factors to include and angle and light is major as far as I can tell.

Once you really learn how to use light to your advantage and see the finished shot in your mind's eye and are truly familiar with your camera it makes all the difference. That is why someone can take a shot with a cheap point-and-shoot digital and come out with an unbelievable photo.

I know a gentleman with a mid-range point-and-shoot and his photos are simply fantastic for the equipment he has. I bet his entire gear is less than $500.00. I have watched him shoot a number of times and I notice how he gets into a certain position according to the sunlight and angle. It amazes me, but yet I know this is a major piece of the puzzle. And just think, he does not have all those "extra" camera settings to adjust for shooting.

I am oft astounded how a professional can come out and set up a photo shoot with all the high-dollar lenses and equipment and yet this fellow with his mid-range point-and-shoot can get some photos better in many cases! I admit he won't be able to zoom out and catch the eye of an eagle at 500 yards but for what he has it is incredible. Sort of blows spending tons on big buck lenses if you don't really have the need

If I were a professinal photographer I would buy the best I could afford as that would be my livelyhood, but for a weekend warrior I have to balance planes against camera lenses and right now planes are winning!

I don't totally agree with the 10:90 ratio in all photography exercises. I think when you start shooting "still" subjects, then yes, then it's more to do with the person taking the shot than the equipment, since you have time on your hands to "create" a good shot.

However when it comes to shooting fast moving subjects I think it's got a little more to do with the equipment you shoot with since you don't have the time to compose a shot - if you have to take the shot - you have to. Yes of course I'm not saying you simply just focus and press the shutter, but I do think that you are not able to compose that "artistic" shot like you can with "still" subjects. You just don't have the time to adjust aperture, shutter, bringing in another object into the frame to give it that "artistic" effect. Now here is where a good camera comes in handy. If a camera can take decent shots, lets say on auto, and it's a decent lens you can get "proffesional" looking shots all with the equipment doing almost all of the work for you.

I have a SLR camera and I'll be quite honest, even though I get sometimes - "now what do you have an SLR camera for" , a lot of times I shoot at AUTO mode - only because the AUTO mode of this camera takes really good pictures. Although I love shooting manual (this is where a person starts doing more of the composing of what the photo will look like afterwards) it's just to much if you start shooting planes in an area where you have a lot of colour variation like dark spots etc. You set the camera for the dark area and lets say you miss the shot you have to readjust for the lighter side of the runway for instance. We as humans just don't always have that speed to do that adjustment properly and a camera with a good auto function (leaving it up to the equipment) makes life a lot easier sometimes.

"Still" subjects I prefer going manual since I like to create shots which has another object in the foreground and I like to play with lightning and depth, but 50% of the time if I shoot fast moving planes I use auto.