how many mm do you use?
Forum rules
- Flanker27
- Scramble Die-Hard
- Posts: 743
- Joined: 07 Mar 2007, 15:46
- Type of spotter: mainly mil or it has to be Russian
- Location: Twenthe
- Contact:
how many mm do you use?
As I am looking for a 2nd lense to go with my EOS400D (present 17-85) for shooting a/c, mostly outside fenses, useful at Axalp (coming up) and most airshows, I am interested in what you guys use and why. I am mainly interested in the mm question. How much do you need where. I know you can take reasonable shots with 100-200 mm if you just use them for desktop at most places. And 500mm the thing gets pretty heavy, but if you got it, do you use it and when? So around what position is your lense used most frequently?
Thanks already for you responses.
Thanks already for you responses.
Michel
EOS200D, 18-135 IS, sigma 50-500
EOS200D, 18-135 IS, sigma 50-500
- Alpha Kilo One
- Scramble Master
- Posts: 4511
- Joined: 25 Apr 2005, 16:17
- Type of spotter: F5
- Subscriber Scramble: Jein 😉
- Warthog 71
- Scramble Senior
- Posts: 482
- Joined: 09 Mar 2005, 14:20
I'm using a 300mm, half of the time in combination with 1.4 TC. For shooting outside the fence this is sufficient at most airbases, but for airshow photography you can never have enough mm's. The only problem is that the weight increases with the number of mm's which isn't helpful.
In the end, it's always a matter of compromising between focal length, weight, and the amount of money you are willing to spend.
In the end, it's always a matter of compromising between focal length, weight, and the amount of money you are willing to spend.
Greetz,
Patrick
Patrick
-
- Scramble Master
- Posts: 3073
- Joined: 20 May 2003, 18:46
- Subscriber Scramble: Kleintje Pils
- Location: Leusden
- Contact:
Same goes for me, but on basevisits I often use the 70-200 f4.0 and since two months also the 24-105 f4.0...SquAdmin wrote:I'm using a 300mm, half of the time in combination with 1.4 TC. For shooting outside the fence this is sufficient at most airbases, but for airshow photography you can never have enough mm's. The only problem is that the weight increases with the number of mm's which isn't helpful.
In the end, it's always a matter of compromising between focal length, weight, and the amount of money you are willing to spend.
Remco Donselaar
- Iwan Bogels
- Scramble Addict
- Posts: 2385
- Joined: 06 Sep 2002, 06:59
- Subscriber Scramble: Iwan Bogels
- Location: N 52°13"31.2 E 4°29"57.5
- Contact:
Hi Michel,
If I read your original image correctly, you are looking for an extra lens to use besides your "standard" 17-85mm. And for this purpose you are asking others which lens they use most. But maybe this is not such a good question......
Why ? If Mr.X has a 100-300mm lens only, his answer is likely to be 300mm. But if you ask him which lens he would like to use, he might just answer 400mm because he has been dreaming of 100-400mm. And my own answer to your poll-question would be 200mm, because in quantity most of my 30.000+ digital shots were made with a 70-200/2.8 (platform & taxi shots) instead of longer lenses. But for action shots I just love my 400mm, which is 6 kg in weight. This lens is likely to be regarded as "too heavy" to most of you, but it's worth every kilo to me. Unfortunately the size of this monster restricts me from bringing it on all my trips, so my fixed 300mm is the most logical replacement.
My advise to you would be to look for a good 100-400mm, which will offer you flexibility, quality and range. But I don't know if the price and weight of this lens are limiting factors for you. That's just my 2 cents worth.....
Good luck on you decision,
Iwan
If I read your original image correctly, you are looking for an extra lens to use besides your "standard" 17-85mm. And for this purpose you are asking others which lens they use most. But maybe this is not such a good question......
Why ? If Mr.X has a 100-300mm lens only, his answer is likely to be 300mm. But if you ask him which lens he would like to use, he might just answer 400mm because he has been dreaming of 100-400mm. And my own answer to your poll-question would be 200mm, because in quantity most of my 30.000+ digital shots were made with a 70-200/2.8 (platform & taxi shots) instead of longer lenses. But for action shots I just love my 400mm, which is 6 kg in weight. This lens is likely to be regarded as "too heavy" to most of you, but it's worth every kilo to me. Unfortunately the size of this monster restricts me from bringing it on all my trips, so my fixed 300mm is the most logical replacement.
My advise to you would be to look for a good 100-400mm, which will offer you flexibility, quality and range. But I don't know if the price and weight of this lens are limiting factors for you. That's just my 2 cents worth.....
Good luck on you decision,
Iwan
-
- Scramble Rookie
- Posts: 98
- Joined: 13 Mar 2003, 19:42
- Subscriber Scramble: E. Schoonderwoerd
Like Iwan, I would go for the 100-400 mm. With the 17-85 you allready have, you would have a nice range with a slight gap of 15 mm. But then again it all depends on your demands of taking pictures.
A 70-200 mm is faster due to the aperture. On the other hand (i.m.h.o) the noisecontrol of cameras are pretty good, so you can boost your iso. In that case I prefer a sharp picture with some noise and grainy look, instead of pictures with motionblur.
Maybe you can lend a lens from someone and try it out, which will suit you the best.
For some pictures with the 100-400 you can check out the photoforum "full wets at Meiringen".
Good luck.
Emile
A 70-200 mm is faster due to the aperture. On the other hand (i.m.h.o) the noisecontrol of cameras are pretty good, so you can boost your iso. In that case I prefer a sharp picture with some noise and grainy look, instead of pictures with motionblur.
Maybe you can lend a lens from someone and try it out, which will suit you the best.
For some pictures with the 100-400 you can check out the photoforum "full wets at Meiringen".
Good luck.
Emile
- warthog64
- Scramble Addict
- Posts: 2118
- Joined: 16 Feb 2003, 09:23
- Subscriber Scramble: Nope
- Location: Woudenberg. the Netherlands. 52O 05'02,5"N 5O 24'40,4"O
- Contact:
I mostly use my 100-400,
see,
http://www.scramble.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31153" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I now also use my 70-200 4.0L IS, for closer aircraft,
see,
http://www.scramble.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33594" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
see,
http://www.scramble.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31153" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I now also use my 70-200 4.0L IS, for closer aircraft,
see,
http://www.scramble.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=33594" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
WH64
___│ØoØ│___
Some things up!
___│ØoØ│___
Some things up!
- sfeyenoord1
- Scramble Addict
- Posts: 1567
- Joined: 05 Mar 2006, 17:40
- Type of spotter: An enjoying one
- Location: Boskoop (Zuid-Holland, Nederland)
- Contact: