What is a good lens for cosmetic aerial photography

<p>My first day on the forum so here it goes. I will be purchasing a Nikon camera for cosmetic aerial photography. I intend to photograph between 500' to 1500' in most cases and would like some input on camera selection and lens. I'm currently on a very limited budget, and I really mean limited. I need to keep the initial cost under $1500. After a couple of photo jobs, I hope to be able to invest in upgrading. <br>

I'm leaning towards the D90 body with the Nikon 18-105mm lens. I'm thinking the D90 is a good selection due to the 12.3mp and the stabilization in the Nikon lens too. Would the less expensive lens like the Tamron work well for this type of endeavor? Are there other range of lenses I should consider such at th DX18-200mm or DX18-55mm? Maybe a less expensive camera with high mp count?<br>

Thanks for taking the time to read this.<br>

Paul Morel</p>

<p>For this kind of photography I'm not sure if any of the zooms you are thinking is a good solution. I'd rather try one or two primes, used eventually to reduce the costs. A not so expensive but very good option is Voigtlader (Cosina) 20mm/f3.5 Color Skopar. You can also look on KEH or eBay for some old and unexpensive manual focus AIS Nikkors from 20...24...28mm range. Wide open are not very good but stopped down at f8 or f11 could work very well. For this kind of photography I believe that focusing manually is not a problem at all. At some points the new AF-S 35mm/f1.8 DX from Nikon could be a good and affordable solution too.</p>

<p>D90 is a very good camera and you can go for it. An used D300 could be even a better option to have old AIS lenses metering on it.</p>

<p>Cosmetic aerial photography? That's a new one for me. I guess you'll be taking pictures from an airplane or a hot air balloon?</p>

<p>Since you intend to do this professionally, why not rent a combination of bodies and lenses and see what the results are. There is always time to spend the lot on any of the goodies brought to us by Nikon.</p>

<p>Furthermore what do you want to shoot. Details or broad overview scenery? E.g. Tele or wide angle? Rent is what I would suggest again.</p>

<p>the D90 will just be great for the purpose and you can grow with it professionally.<br />but you need a better lens than the kit. you can get the nikon 35mm f/1.8 and the<br />sigma 50-150mm f/2.8, maybe going over by a few dollars of your budget. or skip the 35mm for now.</p>

<p>I don't have a clue what exactly you're asking... But, I do know I used to use a Hasselblad often with 100mm lens, which is almost perfect geometrically along with a rented Gyro-stabilizer mount. What is "cosmetic Aerial" photography? So maybe a long normal and normal like a 50 1.8 and a 35 1.8 would do this for you. I think geometrically those would be quite good, you could read some reviews on various sites to help determine which lenses you consider have low distortion. I think you need to explain all this better so we can better understand, what subjects, what's the objective, what's the finished product.</p>

<p>Can you give a bit more information as to what you will be shooting, the lighting conditions, and perhaps what size prints you will be making?</p>

<p>Reminder if using modern zooms and fancy ED/AF lenses. Since they have no set infinity point on the focusing scale, wouldn't you have to refocus with AF for every shot? I guess that's what the AF-equipped pros do. Also, many of the zooms(the Nikon 24-70 comes to mind) are not parfocal---the infinity focus-point changes as you zoom, again necessitating a refocus every time you zoom. Seems as if it'd be much easier/reliable to have a lens that can be locked at infinity...for most aerial shots with non-long lenses you'd never have to refocus.</p>

<p>I have no idea what you mean by 'cosmetic aerial photography'.</p>

<p>But if you were talking about aerial photography in general, you need to remember you'll be shooting at infinity and on a single plane of focus. For which reason I'd forget about any zoom lens and get a good quality moderate telephoto prime. You'll get optimum results shooting around f5.6. Anything more stopped down pushes you into too slow shutter speeds. Anything more wide open can lead to insufficient micro contrast and softness in the corners. Set the lens on infinity and leave it there. (Experienced aerial photographers often use tape to stop the lens from creeping focus - which can be a problem with high levels of vibration from helicopter doors or open cockpits. And you'll definitely need the tape if you're using a cheaper lens without a damped manual focus ring).</p>

<p>Shoot manually. Meter once and use the same exposure for all shots of a given scene. Only meter again if the light is changing quickly, or if you're flying over very different types of terrain.</p>

<p>With my print customers:</p>

<p>***Cosmetic aerial photography means one shoots images to sell property and buildings.</p>

<p>Or one is "selling a city" or track(s) of land for industrial development.</p>

<p>You want to list that old movie stars home in Mailbu; Hidden Valley that cannot be really seen from the street. Your shot of the hideaway pad; tennis courts; pools; the balcony that one sits at with a babe and watches the sunset in the Pacific.</p>

<p>You get that shot of some Montana Ranch over a big lake with the mountains; as hot listing used to sell the premier place for 34 million. You have Mrs Walton at a picnic table serving turkey with John Boy.<br /> <br /> You are not shooting stuff for scale purposes; it is for show; to hawk/sell/promote the place/house/harbor/land track/new dream boat community/ranch Pondarosa</p>

<p>You shoot the Miami waterfront lot with dock and pool; you have the James Bond dreamy boat with some babes as some icing.</p>

<p>Cosmetic aerial photography is usually not straight down like a B17 aero ektar shot for a ball bearing factory; it is Oblique.</p>

<p>Usually they include the horizon; or some cool reference one wants to "tie" the hawked property too.</p>

<p>Thus if a new industrial complex; the tie might be 3 things that service it; ie railroad; barge canal; interstate; maybe a snowpeaked mountain for weekend snow skiing as an added lure.</p>

<p> Maybe the seller has a Marina to hawk in Destin; or hunting lodge in Alabama; or an old mall in Chatsworth to sell; or a defunct high tech factory in Anywhere USA. </p>

<p>Congrats, have never heard the term Cosmetic Aerial Photography in my 20 year career shooting with a lot of aerial work. It sounds like you are an amateur who has just decided to "Give it a go" with aerials on tap. Not sure who your clients are or what your area of specialty is, but considering your clients will spend anywhere from $200 an hour for fixed wing and up to $4,000 an hour for helicopter charter, you might want to consider more professional gear than a D90 and a kit lens. <br>

Here is my version of "Cosmetic Aerial Photography" as I soak up the sun on approach following a 90 minute flight last Saturday. This charter cost the client $5,800, D90's and kit lenses need not apply with temps right around -45F windchill....</p><div></div>

<p>Aerial Photography ??? I just shot an insurance claim where the snow caused a cave in on 300 Million worth of aircraft - There was a stop work order until I took the chopper over Dulles Airport VA for survelliance photos . . .<br>

Limited budget with a chopper @ 500.00 per hour is for the light hearted. Equipment used - - -<br />D700 - 70-200 2.8<br />D300S - 24-70 2.8<br />32 GIG Extreme III<br />GYRO on the D700<br>

Zooms are essential when dealing in tight spaces where an airport restriction may be an issue . . .<br /><br />I hope this helps - even tho the truth may be expensive . . . It was for me :-)<br>

ed</p>

<p>Daniel;</p>

<p><br /> real estate folks often just what to know in dollars what it costs to deliver the cool image; to hawk the item/land/house. Thus the "dollars per hour" quote doesnt work; that want to know an actual quote. Thus if on your regular route you can fly over X's property and thus deliver a final 4 image for 500, 1000, 2000, 5000 bucks the want the number fixed.</p>

<p>Paul; In the low end arena there are folks using radio controlled airplanes and balloon on still days with a dslr attached; or tethered hot air balloons too.</p>

<p>The general public often has no clues on what even a dumb Cessna costs to fly; let alone a helicopter. I get all sorts of goofy calls from folks thinking it only costs 100 bucks to shoot some fancy looking aerial shot.</p>

<p>Daniel; In Los Angeles (Granada Hills) there is a company who does this</p>

<p>called *drumroll* : "COSMETIC AERIAL IMAGING"</p>

<p>Thus maybe to a person from California or talks Valley talk; cosmetic aerial sounds cool!<br /> <br /> Daniel; Here is one in Florida:<br>

<br /> <br /> http://www.skypiximaging.com/cosmetic-aerial-gallery.html<br>

<br /> They use better saleman lingo than me ie "show case your property"<br>

<br /> I have had folks as me if I can print "cosmetic aerials" in printing; and I too was abit confused once</p>

<p>Back in the 1970's a lady in the Southeast used a screwmount Pentax at 1/1000 second; and just shot alot of the popular buildings; was buds with the Real estate crowd; plus sold images for postcards. She told me that often 1/1000 was not high enough; so she banned too.</p>

<p>Thanks for the response everyone. Kelly, you hit the nail on the head with your explaination of "cosmetic aerial photography". I'm an amatuer photographer who flies also and want to incorporate both part time. I think that commercial realtors might want to use an aerial photo to help illustrate the land or building they are selling. I'm not planning for any award winning shots. I felt the Nikon D90 would be a pretty basic and inexpensive camera to get started with. Lots of great information on this forum and I'll soak up as much as I can. Thanks for the support.</p>

<p>Wow, we use aerial aerial photos from time to time in our office. Normally from stock, but we also have them flown. They used to cost us about about 350 for a pretty large print and I think the lowest they would fly was 1500. Their plane used a built in specialized camera that was dampened and they were pretty good. Of course they still use film:) I don't know of any professional company in LA/Orange County where the guy is hanging out the window with a dslr, but then I obviously don't know much about it and I haven't had anything flown for 6 or 7 years.</p>

<p>I sometimes rent a pilot to take photos of trains, and have also gone on helicopter rides to take "nature" photos. Some thoughts. I would not use a so-called "prime" lens for this because I find I'm often zooming in & out. The most important thing is shutter speed and I like to shoot at 1/4,000 sec. or even 1/8,000 if I can. That makes the shots crisp. A VR lens won't really help you since you need to be shooting fast shutter speeds anyway to avoid blur from the plane's movement. I also find a lens that is moderate telephoto to telephoto seems to work best. A wide angle is just too wide and I don't get any details. Focus is really pretty easy and I've never had a problem. The main thing is getting enough shutter speed. When I take my shots I find I mostly use my D300 and Nikon 17-55mm f2.8. I also sometimes use Nikon 70-200mm f2.8, but the problem with a really long lens is I quickly get air sick looking through the viewfinder. Probably the best choice for having just one lens would be the Nikon 28-80mm f2.8. To save money, buy a used Nikon D200. It will work fine at ISO 400 and can get shutter speeds faster than what the D90 can. An f2.8 lens does help the lens to focus quickly and is nice to have when light levels are low.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>Kent seems to have - NOT enough personal experience - in a helicopter -<br>

VR Essential ACTIVE<br />Two Bodies<br />D700 and<br />D300S<br /><br />NEED WE SAY More?<br /><a href="http://www.richardcrouse.com/">http://www.richardcrouse.com/</a><br /><br />For Fun Photos LQQK here:<br>

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/OrbitalWarpDrive/201002FEB27WIPOrbitalPhotoMissionUNcutD700">http://picasaweb.google.com/OrbitalWarpDrive/201002FEB27WIPOrbitalPhotoMissionUNcutD700</a>#</p>

<p>Although I am an ATP with almost 8000 hrs of flying time the only aerial photography I have done was from a blimp. I did get a great Medium Format picture of the blimp on it's side trying to land in gusty wind. They are soft so they bounce a little, no damage. I spent about two hours in the blimp as a newspaper photographer and they went where I asked them to go along the New England seacoast. It then was all film so I can't post anything without going to find the negs and some work to scan. I used a couple of Canon film bodies, probably an EOS 1n and also a Bronica ETRSi. We got low enough that I got very detailed oblique (Kelly's word) pictures of a light house. Some of the pictures were used in a book. Shutter speeds have to be fast enough to stop movement from engine vibration. My biggest problem was keeping the horizon level. I also had a Canon 70-200 2.8L which I used to great effect to shoot my own home from about a thousand feet. The lighthouse was shot with a Bronica 75mm lens as I remember. We were quite close. After shooting that landing and then riding through another landing I decided that I never wanted to try to fly a blimp. Landing it is like trying to pick up a wet bar of soap. I admire those who do it. I think you need a couple of lenses. You cannot go below a thousand feet in certain areas and you probably would need something longer than 105 mm if you are doing individual properties. The blimp was great because they can go really slow or almost stop while you take pictures. It was great experience. Much better than shooting from a chopper I would guess. </p>

 

<p>I'm an airline pilot as well, and I've flown with a copilot who did a side gig of renting his own plane to shoot golf courses -- he could underbid the guys who weren't pilots! He used a 5D and 24-105/f4. He shot in boring noon day light to get the shutter speeds. If you want "cosmetic" I agree you'll need a lens with a lot of speed. Have fun!</p>

<p>Ed--</p>

<p>When shooting at 1/4000 to 1/8000 sec. shutter speed, will VR even react fast enough to work? At those shutter speeds I haven't seen any difference between using/not using VR. Shutter speed seems to trump everything else. If shooting under 1/1000 sec., VR might help, but jiggles from a plane seem pretty random. Never shot that slow from a plane though. I rent a plane/pilot about three times a year, for the past 8-10 years. They are cheap around here. (Under $100 per hour.)<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p><em>"D90's and kit lenses need not apply with temps right around -45F windchill"</em><br>

For an inanimate object such as a D90, it's the ambient temperature that counts, not the windchill (unless you are interested in how quickly a warm D90 cools down to ambient).</p>

 

<p>years ago i had a short contract stint with the government [non-combat, so can i say the essence of cosmetic is present? :-)]. i only had the D70s and the old nikon 70-210mm af-d. i was tethered to a blackhawk with half of my body hanging out the side. the combo worked, no VR there, no fancy gear..... later the D200 worked with the same lens, same assignment.......later, much later, the D90 with the sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 worked, too!</p>

<p>maybe not with the kit lens but surely the D90 can apply. it won't melt in the heat and freeze up in the cold. you have to start from somewhere, paul. and it doesn't have to be with the most expensive gear in the market. you'll have fun and a feeling of accomplishment with the D90.</p>

<p>Pretty much the standard amateur responses here I guess.<br />Since I have no idea who Paul Morel is or where he is based out of, I am going to forgo giving super specific details of how I operate on these jobs since it is proprietary to my style of shooting. But I will say this, I use a combo of digital, film, in lens VR, Kenyon Gyro, lenses that are both fast prime and zooms anywhere from a 14-24 to a 200-400. I put safety first by taping off buckles, use industrial climbing harnesses with large pick off straps, lanyards for gear bags and gear, etc. <br />Consider getting hefty liability insurance since you are doing a very dangerous thing in attempting to shoot real estate aerials *and* watching your air space as you fly. If something bad were to happen on a commissioned job, god forbid, you could be financially ruined or worse.<br />While aerial photography can be and is often fun, it is somewhat dangerous for the innocent lives below, so professionalism is paramount. Read: this is not the realm for the amateur or hack.<br>

This is not wedding photography.</p>

<p>Dupe post, mods please delete..</p>