Airshow Photography Questions

<p>Hello! I am a portrait and wedding photographer but have an opportunity to attend an airshow this weekend and would love to get some great shots of the planes in action, but am DEFINITELY a beginner when it comes to airshow photography. Here is the gear that I'll have at my disposal:<br /> Canon 7D<br /> Canon 40D (backup body)<br /> Canon 70-200 2.8 (non-image stabilized version)<br /> Canon 17-55 2.8<br /> Canon 50 1.8<br /> Canon 28-135 3.5-5.6<br /> Tripod</p>

<p>I am assuming that the 7D/70-200 2.8 is my best combination but would love a second opinion on that. Also, any tips for focusing as the planes speed past? Would AI Servo with high speed continuous be the best way to capture close fly by's? Any other tips (or corrections to my logic) are much appreciated!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>For shooting aircraft on the ground, any of those lenses will be fine. For shooting aircraft in flight, I think the 70-200 is a little short. I've only done a couple of airshows, both at a small airport in Arizona where they allowed the planes to do low passes very close to the spectators, and even then I found the 70-300 Tamron to be at 300mm most of the time, and barely adequate there. Most airports and the FAA require the planes to maintain a lot more distance from the crowd, for safety reasons. (I still don't know how the Arizona guys got away with it.)</p>

<p>As for the tripod, consider that, if you're in a crowd of spectators, someone will always be in someone elses way - either yours or theirs. Plus, you'll need more mobility than a tripod will give you, because there's always something happening somewhere other than where your camera's pointed. Think monopod...</p>

<p>For in-flight shots, the 7D is the best choice. The 70-200mm will be short for most acts.</p>

<p>I always use continuous AF (aka servo) using the "AF-Start" button on the back to start the AF (and IS, if the lens has it) well before the plane is where I want to shoot. I almost always use "all points", although many of my (steadier) colleagues use center or the center-group.</p>

<p>Here's another thread with some useful tips: http://www.photo.net/travel-photography-forum/00XQFF</p>

Pick up the aircfaft as far out as you can get them. Track them until they begin to fill the frame. Ai is ok. I use single shot, single focus a lot. Try and rent an extender if you can for your 70-200. I used a Canon 100-400 @400, ISO 400, F10 for the attached picture. I use my 5D against conventional wisdom because the larger viewfinder allows me to acquire the approaching aircraft more easily. If you can get close enough you might be able to use 200 mm focal length. Haze and atmospheric distortions can be problems with long lenses pointed into the sky. Backlight is a probem because sometimes you are forced to shoot directly into it.<div></div>

<p>I tried shots of the red arrows locally fairly recently. I was totally new to aircraft photography.</p>

<p>They move pretty darn fast, too fast for my auto focusing to be able to track. I had a few good comments and tips posted here in response to queries I had on IQ.</p>

<p>Thread is Here >> <a href="00X1yZ">http://www.photo.net/beginner-photography-questions-forum/00X1yZ</a></p>

<p>Some good comments on there.</p>

<p>Good luck,<br>

Martin</p>

Leave the tripod at home they are useless at airshows,(if you must use a monopod)you need to be mobile.Watch your shutter speed when shooting planes with props,anything faster than 1/250 will freeze the propeller(1/125 is even better but takes practice) and make the plane look like it"s parked in the sky!.Of course with jets crank up the speed.

<p>Ditto. The 70-200 is way too short for what you want to do. I've shot a number of aerial shows and 90% of the time I was at 400mm and even then, it was not enough. You should count on multiple frames (so, change your settings to continuous shooting (as high as it can get - I don't know the Canon setting). I found that single-shot AF was sufficient for my needs and I used the center point for focusing - my D3 viewfinder allowed me to easily track the planes...;-) </p>

<p>Also, I went for 1/500 and over for my shots, wanting to ensure clear images. Once I had those, then I started experimenting with panning and speeds of 1/100 or even less to get that revolving-propeller look...;-) (admittedly, that did not work well enough from the ground...)</p>

<p>Finally, I shot hand-held without a problem. This allowed me greater flexibility to move and reposition than some of the other shooters who were using monopods and tripods.</p>

In the above photo the far airplane was rolling around the other two. It would have been nice to slow the propellers but even if I tracked the inner two the rapid rate of roll on the outer airplane would have, I think, blurred that airplane or at least the wing tips. As a long time pilot what really interested me was the craziness of the maneuver and I felt lucky to capture it at all. That roll probably lasted about six seconds.<div></div>

Incidentally I blew up the above to 13x19. The blow up is quite sharp and the color is more subdued than it came out in the reduction. I find if I want truly sharp pictures whether shooting airplanes or swimming it calls for fast shutter speeds like a thousandth or a 2000th I find is better. I used to shoot birds with a shotgun and if I go to reduced shutter speeds to blur propellers like a 200th I need to track the subject for some distance before I squeeze the shutter in order to reduce motion blur as much as possible. I handhold the 100-400 with the IS on. The abova aircraft were quite close and I shot several pictures to get a couple in the frame. They were well above 400 knots when they went by.