Good lens for space shuttle launch?

[darren_cokin]

I'll be attending the launch of space shuttle Discovery next month,

and will have the privilege of watching from the grounds of the Saturn

V memorial, just 3.2 miles from the launch pad. (The reason for this

is an interesting story, but irrelevant to my questions, and quite off

topic for this forum.)

 

I expect this will be the only space shuttle launch I see in my

lifetime, and there is no way in hell I am going to watch it through

the little viewfinder of my D100. Yet, like many of you who read this

forum, I have this need to take pictures. So, my plan is to bring a

tripod, set the camera to continuous shooting mode, and compose the

shot by L-1 minute; so all I'll have to do is push down on the cable

release when I see smoke and it gets real loud. The camera should

fill up it's buffer with a great sequence of the liftoff, while I

watch in awe.

 

But if I'm going to do this, I really ought to have a longer lens I

think. 3.2 miles is a lot closer than the general public, but still

pretty far. I usually favor wide angle work, so until now I've been

perfectly happy with the coverage I get with just my 12-24mm and

24-120 VR. But, to frame it the way I want, I'll need at least 200mm,

or even 300mm or 400mm. (I don't really need to get a tight shot of

the launch tower, but I figure if it filled 1/3 of the frame, that

would be good.)

 

The obvious choice would be Nikon's 80-400mm VR zoom, since it would

be so versatile. I read the recent thread on this lens with great

interest. A bit concerned by reports of the flimsy tripod collar.

Also, when I tried it at a camera shop a few months ago, I was quite

discouraged by it's ability to focus. I don't intend to shoot sports,

so my autofocus needs are fairly modest (though birds are a

possibility), but it wouldn't even lock on a sign on the other side of

the showroom! Not very encouraging. Looking for some suggestions for

alternatives.

 

How does this compare with the Sigma 80-400mm? The Sigma has very

similar specs, F4.5-5.6 and an image stabilization system, and is a

bit cheaper, though it is also longer and heavier. How do the optics,

build quality, and focusability compare?

 

Sigma also has a 50-500mm zoom for the same price. No images

stabilization, but it does add a high speed motor (like Nikon's silent

wave motors). Probably more zoom than I need, and a lens with VR would

be more useful for handheld shots.

 

Anything else I should take a look at? $1,500 is about my price

limit, and I'd prefer to spend less. I also don't want something too

big and heavy (I will be discouraged from bringing a lot through KSC

security). This is one point in favor of the Nikon lens - it should

just fit in Tamrac's large modular-accessory-system lens case, while

the Sigma would need the x-large.

 

While I'm at it, I'm also going to upgrade my tripod before this trip.

I think I've decided on the Slik 713 carbon fiber legs, with their

SBH-280 ball head. Seems comparable to the Gitzo line which everyone

raves about, but is a bit cheaper. And I was happy with my old Slik

tripod. It's just a little wobbly I've noticed lately. Wouldn't want

to use it with a bigger lens mounted.

 

Thanks for sharing your opinions guys!

 

Darren

[Jerry_]

Find a place on the freeway (or a truck stop) near your home and get three miles away. Three or four trucks worth of image will be close to the going aloft shuttle. There is a lot of ground smoke at lift-off, and a 1000mm f11 Reflex-Nikkor may not be enough....

 

 

 

Good luck.

[richard_cochran]

This sounds like the ideal situation to rent a long lens. For a

lot less money, you can get some serious quality glass tailored

for the unusual job. This particular job screams for a big hunk

of expensive glass. It probably doesn't make sense to buy the

greatest lens for one single use, nor does it make sense to

buy an affordable general-purpose lens that's compromised and

less than ideal for this job in order to have something to add

to your collection when it's over.

[mark newcombe www.mcnphoto]

I agree, renting is the only answer here or add an extra 0 to your budget.

 

Regards

Mark

[grepmat]

I've shot a rocket launch before, with VIP access to as close as any mere mortal would get. All I had was a Yashica T4! I was glad I had that, but I can tell you that for any rocket launch you will need the longest lens you can get hold of. 500-1000 mm won't be too long, even on a digital SLR. Also, I'd recommend a smooth altitude-azimuth mount on a rock-solid tripod. Your typical Arca ball-head will be very awkward, and you will want something that will pan well on any axis. In addition, you will want to be able to pan fairly high in the sky if desired. [something like my ~540mm Televue Apo refractor telescope on its "Gibraltar" alt-az mount sounds right, though impractical unless you are parked on the road.] A zoom would be sort of nice, since you can pull back and get the extent of the rocket trail, but a longer fixed lens would be better. I doubt image stabilization is necessary, though as usual it would be nice if hand-held. Rockets move fast but are so far away that they are somewhat gentle in the way they climb. However, you will not want to change lenses, both due to lack of time and since you will be in the midst of an adrenaline rush and will be lucky to remember to push the shutter button (do so like mad). I strongly recommend renting what you need, as this is a unique situation. Good luck.

[jpursley]

A few semi-photographic things to keep in mind:

 

* Much of the 'smoke' (mostly just water vapor from the water under the pad) starts appearing 6 seconds before liftoff when the main engines on the orbiter ignite, but they're not powerful enough to lift the system.

 

* The whole thing doesn't move up until the solid rocket boosters ignite at T-0, and doesn't clear the tower until 7 seconds after liftoff. That's a window of at least 13 seconds of interesting stuff - don't fill up your buffer too soon.

 

* At 3 miles away, you won't hear anything until ~15 seconds after it's already happened. At this distance things will be quite loud. 8-)

[darren_cokin]

I'm surprised some of you are recommending such long lenses! Really, I think 400mm ought to be plenty.

 

The space shuttle stack itself (not counting the launch tower) is around 200 ft. If I wanted that to be 1/3 of the frame, I'd want to capture a height of 600 ft. At 3.2 miles, that's a field of view of 2 degrees. The D100's sensor is about 16mm x 24mm. Assuming I had the camera in the portrait orientation, I'd get a 2 degree vertical F.O.V. with a 340mm focal length.

 

Is my math wrong?

 

Considering the duration of my trip, renting equipment would get to be pretty expensive. So, that wouldn't really be worthwhile, considering these pictures are just for my own enjoyment. (I'm sure there will be plenty of photojournalists and a team of NASA photographers in attendance.) In any case, a long lens would be a valuable addition to my kit, that I am bound to get one eventually. This trip is just the impetus.

 

Darren

[mab]

A contrary view:

 

Space shuttle launches are among the most photographed activities on earth. If you get the very longest lens Nikon makes and put it on

a very steady tripod with a remote control intervolometer in the

zone they don't allow any people, you will produce photos only

a little worse than those published by NASA of the same launch.

 

Get the 10.5mm fisheye, mount it on a tripod at a 90 degree angle

from the shuttle lauch and with you promenently in the frame,

and take advantage of the opportunity to make a once in a lifetime

self-portrait.

[grepmat]

Darren, I won't check your math, but you might well be right at the time of launch. However, consider that at that time the rocket will be precisely at the horizon. It will be the closest it will ever likely be, and those shots will be the most corrupted by atmospheric turbulence. You may prefer or need a longer lens at least for a little later in the launch, especially since there will be no other context (like the tower and the ground) aside from smoke. Also, with due respect to Matt, my photos of Half Dome are better than Ansels (or the other 1 billion shots of it) simply because I was there to take it. As I said, all I had at my launch was a lowly Yashica T4, but at least I was there and I had fun. That should be your goal too. Cheers.

[chris m., central florida]

Or you could just enjoy the launch and then buy a poster at the gift shop :-)

 

I live in FLorida and can see the shuttle going up through my arched window in my foyer. On the days that I'm down at the beach or intracoastal waterway for a launch, the longest lens I have is a 300mm, and that doesn't come close to cutting it. 400mm + a 1.4 TC might do it for you.

[vivek iyer]

You need a high speed camera to capture launch if you want any shots that are special.

 

OT: I would wish for a safe launch/landing of the shuttle more than photography.

[darren_cokin]

Re: Chris M.

 

The causeway is around 7 miles from pad A, 8 miles from pad B. I'll be more than twice as close as that, so I won't need the teleconverter you mentioned.

 

Re: Grepmat

 

Not going to try to track the bird in flight. For that, I really would need bigger equipment than I can bring on the bus, and would be concentrating too much on the gear, rather than the once-in-a-lifetime experience. I have the modest goal of recording a sequence of the liftoff. I just want to set it up and push the button at the right time.

 

I did really like your response to Matt's comment though! You nailed it on the head! Yeah, there are going to be some wonderful pictures of the launch available, but I won't have taken them, so who cares? When I give a slideshow to my children one day, I will be showing photos I took.

 

Re: Matt Blaze

 

You know, it would be neat to get myself in the shot, and I have considered it (I do favor wide angle work, as I've said). But, OTOH I've got enough pictures of myself aboard and in front of space shuttles. I've worked on the orbiters most of my career, at the design and production facilities in California. I've been to the launch site plenty of times before, but always in the weeks and months before a launch, not during one.

 

You tempted me to post a self portrait I took aboard Discovery when I was sent to do an inspection in January, but OTOH I do look really stupid in that clean room bunny suit.

 

 

Re: Vivek's last comment

 

We're doing everything we can dude. Godspeed Discovery.

 

 

Darren

[hendrik]

Darren,

 

Try renting.

 

The 80-400 will not dissapoint you though, not now nor in the future.

 

What you said about angle af view is true. You want composition.You don't want just the shuttle and you want to do continuous shooting set up before the launch. The 80-400 will give you what you need.

 

Regards.

[watts]

I kind of agree with Matt. You are unlikely to match or better any

official NASA (or press) shots of the shuttle launch. I would be

more interested in taking a few shots which capture the mood of

the moment - possibly wide angle stuff, possibly something in

the 'normal' range. If I was in your position I'd almost certainly

just take a Leica M and a couple of lenses (something like a

24mm and 50mm). One of the most memorable shots I've seen

of a shuttle launch (which ran on the front pages of many of the

newspapers here in the UK five or six years ago - at a time when

interest in shuttle launches couldn't be lower) was a wide angle

shot showing the arc of the smoke (vapour?) as the shuttle took

off behind (I think) some suburban houses. I guess it helped

with that shot that the launch had taken place before sunrise and

the shuttle essentially lit up the sky but it demonstrates that the

best shots don't necessarily have to show the shuttle itself in any

kind of detail.

[mab]

To the person who took offense at my message and sent me

a remarkably abusive (and anonymous) email message (and to anyone else to whom I wasn't clear): I was not suggesting that this person is a bad photographer or that he not photograph the launch. I was suggesting only that he not try to compete with the "standard" NASA-issue telephoto shots, and instead find a a creative way to record the launch from the unique perspective of his experience of it.

 

(My only "keeper" from a launch photo opportunity was taken with my other body, which had a wide lens and was pointed AWAY from the rocket at the rest crowd, faces fixed in awe and wonder).

 

Sorry if I offended.

[rick_helmke]

When I photographed STS-4 from the press area I shot 2 motor driven F2's at once, no small feat since I'm naturally clumsy. At that distance I had one body mounted on a 1000mm F/11 mirror lens on a tripod and the shuttle still did not fill the frame. The second body was on a handheld 500mm f/8 mirror lens (those were all the rage at the time). I fired the 1000mm remotely at ignition and fired all 36 frames before the shuttle left the field of view. I followed it up with the 500 and ran out of film nearly as fast. The bottom line is that you need the longest piece of glass you can get your hands on even with the crop factor. You will also run out of buffer space no matter how careful you think you will be. The shuttle makes an incredible amount of smoke and noise and you won't know whether to shoot or just stand there in awe.

 

You might consider this with your budget. You can call KEH right now and pick up a motor drive and F2 or F3 or an F4s and some really long glass for less than your $1500 budget. Yeah it is film but so what. Results count and for this event and under this budget, that will get you the best results. If you don't want to keep it, turn around and sell it and get something more useful to you over time. Just a suggestion but it's what I would do in this set of circumstances.

 

Rick H.

[frank uhlig]

I am really afraid your pictures will be as boring as the news services' from 3 miles off. A flat horizon, one thingy going up, so what.

 

Not really a photographic event such as a conversation in an open air cafe, a mechanic working on a car, a flower, a view across a river, a sunset, macro stuff.

 

A total waste of film in my book: so what? But go and see if you can find any interesting angle with a 17mm lens of fellow watchers, their "Ah" sighs, ... But not the thingy going off. You will never make art of that one. Sorry to burst your bubble. But at least you will have not much return for all your long lens rental/buying fees while the economy will be happy .... of your money ill spent. What pictures do you envision getting? Visualize what you are doing before doing it is always best to understand one's pitfalls into consumerism life. Just a waste of an otherwise good photographic day, in my book. So sorry!

[rick_helmke]

Gotta disagree with Frank on this one. I've seen some of his work and it's quite good, definitely different from my interests. I have some good launch photos and have seen even more spectacular work in different publications. It has a lot to do with access.

Art? I don't know. Around here, and Frank knows this, what is art is often defined as how much time some of us have to spend on it. That doesn't make a lot of sense out of context but while there are several talented people around here with a good visual sense, there are several more with too much time on their hands. Anyway, good luck with the launch Darren. I still think you need long long glass but then I like to see the detail in the tiles.

 

Rick H.

[lex_jenkins]

First of all, feel free to buy whatever lens you can squeeze into your budget that will also be useful to you in the future. Don't buy a lens for a one-shot (literally) deal.

 

Don't worry about slow AF with the 80-400 VR. You shouldn't be autofocusing at this kind of distance anyway. AF is great for intermediate ranges and action but can seldom match the precision of manual focusing at great distances. So if you like the lens otherwise, don't let your experiences in a relatively dimly lighted store deter you. (And, yes, despite the tendency of our eyes to compensate, most camera shops have pretty dim lighting with poor color correction that is difficult for autofocusing cameras to deal with.)

 

Second, it's economically infeasible for most of us to get the kinds of photos we see on postcards, etc., where such events are concerned. It's all about access and few of us are permitted that kind of access. So don't sweat it - you probably can't even afford to *rent*, let alone buy, the kind of lens it'd take to make the launchpad seem larger than a dot.

 

Third, even if you could afford it, the distance would result in badly obscured photos due to atmospheric disturbances, heat waves, dust and plain old pollution. It hardly pays to bother with powerful lenses for ground based targets.

 

Fourth (don't worry, I'm about to run out of toes), the best way to photograph this to get postcard results would be via a remote controlled camera with the camera up as close as practical and you at a safe distance.

 

Fifth (and last toe), considering that it will be pretty impractical to get close up results, I'd try to figure out a way to personalize the shots. For example, instead of buying an expensive telephoto, I'd get low with a wide angle and photograph the other people watching the launch. That's unique and personal, compared with yet another sterile photo of a space shot with no context. The tricky bit will be trying to avoid the "ordinary snapshot" look. But that's a matter of photographic skill and resourcefulness and not dependent on expensive equipment.

[gui_carvalho]

Darren - After reading this thread I just had to add this: Buy/rent the lens you want and shoot what you want to. If you've got your heart set on trying to get a launch sequence, then go for it. And have fun doing it.

[geof_grieble]

I've watched about 20 shuttle launches from the AF Titan VIB building. Unfortunately I've

never shot from there (nervous about taking expensive camera gear into a

government controlled access building). I think it's about 3-4 miles from the 39A and it

is a sight to behold. You will enjoy. If it's cloudy it will sound much louder but your

chances for grabbing shots will be limited by the cloud layer. If it's not cloudy you will be

able to clearly see SRB separation with a decent pair of Binocs (I've used Nikon 8x32 with

success). If you're not interested in following the shuttle thru your viewfinder then

consider this.....once the shuttle climbs out of the angle of view you'll get nothing. A long

lens means it will climb out of the shot faster than it will with a shorter lens. I took this

Atlas shot with a 70-200 with a 1.4x tele (which is all I had with me at the time). I should

have waited another second or two for the rocket to climb higher in the frame. I was just

past the drawbridge (on the AF side) on the NASA Causeway to watch this launch.

Personally I think a 400mm would be about right. Make sure you don't set the camera to

AF during accent. The bight plume can screw up AF operation (I discovered this the hard

way).<div></div>

[stank]

The launch will be in the day. The exhaust from the Solid Rocket Boosters illuminates quite brilliantly in the sunlight. You will also notice shadows as the sunlight is blocked by the exhaust trails.

 

After the launch, depending on winds, the exhaust trails can make some rather interesting patterns that may often be overlooked as people are too busy packing up after the shuttle is no longer in view.

 

Enjoy, Shuttle launches are quite a treat

 

Also, look for interesting wild life in the area.

 

Stan

[abbilder]

Hi!

Go for the heavies!

 

If its just for this one day - or beter this one picture, rent the best you can get: 70-200 VR or even 200-400 VR.

 

To rent these or even both lenses a day is much cheaper than buying one of the other lenses mentioned here.

 

Best wishes,

Axel

[25asa]

"Space shuttle launches are among the most photographed activities on earth."

 

That's interesting as I've not seen one shuttle launch picture on Photonet yet. I must have missed them.

 

I'm waiting for my day at the Cape to visit. Hoping to see a launch before the shuttle program is cancelled in 2010. Todays supposed launch and cancellation only makes me wish I could get on a plane today to see it. A Saturn V launch would have been really cool. Too bad they never filmed that in IMAX.