Shooting from a Helicopter and have some lens questions

[jami_lee_tatro]

Ok, I have been trying to decide btw 24-70 f/2.8 and 24-105 f/4 IS. I'm an

Army helicopter pilot, and quite a few shots I presume will be taken from the

bird. Either at other helo's in flight (our trail birds are AH-1 Marine Cobras

which are pretty sexy...if you're into that sort of thing ;) or at

landscapes/cityscapes/Baghdad from the air.

 

Just trying to see the pro's cons of the wider aperture (2.8) vs. the IS. If

you've never been in a helicopter, the vibration will be a significant factor.

 

Does anyone have thoughts or experience in this area.

[colinsouthern]

If you're shooting aerial then sooner or later (probably sooner) you're going to need a 70-200 IS - preferably the 2.8 varient.

 

Again, the 24-70/2.8L is the other choice that's a cut above the others.

 

Don't forget to trim out the collective and hold the cyclic between your knees if you're the PF (although when I was flying light twins I confess to just using the autopilot ;)

 

Cheers,

 

Colin

 

PS: Good news - by the time we get through all the questions the 5D Mk2 should be out (we were hoping for an announcement last month, but it wasn't to be).

[jami_lee_tatro]

Little did you know that on a deployment, the true enemy is...time. I've got a lot of it.

 

Plus, no need to hold the cyclic between my knees...Blackhawk is a two-pilot aircraft.

[colinsouthern]

"Plus, no need to hold the cyclic between my knees...Blackhawk is a two-pilot aircraft."

 

That's why I mentioned "if you're the PF" (Pilot Flying in this part of the world).

 

I've never had the privilage of even flying in one - only lowly UH-1's for me. I did see a documentary on it's making though - pretty damn impressive.

 

Cheers,

 

Colin

[markonestudios]

Jami, remember that the IS on the 24-105 is only good for stationary objects. It won't help you with moving objects, so you might want the extra speed of the 24-70 because it will help keep your shutter speeds high enough.

<p>A lot also depends on what time of day (i.e well-lit, bright sunny day or twilight/dusk shots) in which case even the 2.8 might not suffice and you'll need to really up the ISO to capture the shots.

<p>The 16-35 f/2.8 might be a better choice depending on how you want to frame the shots. Wide angle lenses inherently have greater depth of field and you'll probably want that and the wide angle capability for cityscapes/general air-to-ground photography.

<p>What camera body do you have?

[jami_lee_tatro]

Don't yet, that's another issue, but I'm thinking of the 5D.

[colinsouthern]

"The 16-35 f/2.8 might be a better choice depending on how you want to frame the shots."

 

The 16-35 on a FF camera will give you the city ahead - most of the overhead panel - flying boots - knees - co-pilot ...

[ken munn]

"The 16-35 on a FF camera will give you the city ahead - most of the overhead panel - flying

boots - knees - co-pilot ..."

 

Maybe not at 35!

[colinsouthern]

"Maybe not at 35!"

 

Seriously, even at 35mm on the (1.3x crop-factor) 1D3 it's ridiculously short for general-purpose use. Great landscape lens though.

[carbon_dragon]

I'm not a helicopter pilot, but I did do some shooting from a small helicopter with the doors taken off and the two lessons I took away were that you get much better results with high ISO/high shutter speeds and no glass/plastic between your lens and the outside. Oh and you can't really change lenses or film (not a problem for you). I didn't have IS at the time, I was using a Contax Aria with a 28-70 and that worked out very well for a focal length range. I guess for an APS sensor that's something like 19-50 or so. Wish I could do that more, but not in Iraq.

[santa1]

I would go with the longer lens without question. The IS will be very helpful and most of the time you should be able to get f4 with a decent shutter speed. Helo vibration is strong enough that even with IS you'll still need a good shutter speed. IS isn't enough to over come helo movement + vibration so you'll be shooting with 1/500 or better when you can. The longer tele factor will be useful, as will the IS. Occasionally you may want f2.8 but it's my guess the IS will be more helpful than the faster lens. When it's grey and cloudy and light isn't good is when you'll wish you had f2.8 but at that point the photography isn't so great either. When it's good sunshine the f2.8 won't be a real issue. At that point (when most decent photos occur) you will be able to shoot at f4 or above.

One tip I'll give is that when shooting from a helicopter you have a lot of potential for changing light. One second the light is in back then it's too the side. One moment things are side lit, then backlit. I recommend is bracketing your exposures. Shoot in bursts of three, with +1,0,-1 bursts. It will be hard at first cause you can't really hear the bursts, but after a while you get the hang of how long you hold the button down for a burst. It won't be an HDR technique cause the images won't overlap perfectly but you'll get more keepers.

If you live in an area that is often foggy and cloudy it's a harder question because the higher shutterspeed that f2.8 allows is probably more useful than the IS in that marginal situation. gluck

[santa1]

The comment about IS not be useful for moving objects is true as far as that goes but it's roll has to do with camera shake and that's where it will be of some potential use. It is designed to "fix" the minor shake of hand-holding. I really don't know if it is useful for the kinds of vibration that a helicopter throws out, but I do know it has potential. I'd guess that most shots you'll take will favor a longer lens unless you are shooting close up copters in formation, so I'd also recommend a 70-200 f2.8 IS (my favorite lens) but you didn't ask that question...and between the two lenses you mentioned, I'd go with the longer lens if you are in an area with decent blue skies often enough that 1/500 at f4 is easy to do on a regular basis. If you were based in Seattle I'd get the f2.8. No...then I'd get an 85 f1.8 :).

[les_gyug1]

I've found for my work (a biologist doing animal surveys) that the IS helps a lot from the chopper. You are usually shooting wide open to get the fastest shutter speed possible. 1/500th is a minimum for any lens, and even faster if you are using a 70-200 or some such zoom. Even at those speeds, IS does help get more keepers. Shutter speed is much more important than lens stop/depth of field (unless it is so dark that you really need f2.8) because the lens focus distance is just about always at infinity. I'm not familiar with the helicopters you'll be flying, but if you try to use a wide-angle lens, then you end up taking a picture of the door frame and window frames instead of the subject.

 

My favourite lens was a 135/2.8 on film cameras (set to infinity focus and f/2.8, or the widest aperture that would let me keep at least 1/1000th for a shutter speed), but now use the approximate equivalent (the long end of the 17-85 zoom wide open at f/5.6) on a 1.6x digital camera, but let the camera do the autofocusing and speed setting.

 

The most important thing is to take the picture through an opening, i.e. not through the plexiglas. Plexiglas does awful things to pictures by changing colours, adding reflections, and adding lots of flare, especially if it is a curved window. Autofocus also tends to go haywire if trying to focus through plexi (too many reflections keep catching its eye). Depending on the configuration in the chopper, any opening may not be particularly convenient to stick a camera out of, and to keep your eye on the viewfinder at the same time. It would be much easier if your SLR had live-view mode and an LCD preview screen that you could move to any angle (like on most video cameras, and some older Point and Shoots), but I don't think such an SLR beast currently exists.

[KenPapai]

<i>"...remember that the IS on the 24-105 is only good for stationary objects..."</i><p>

 

Nonsense. IS couldn't care less what sort of object you're shooting. So forget that statement above.

<p>

All IS is, is a more *stable platform* to shoot your subject, regardless of static or dynamic foregrounds, backgrounds, etc. But then, everyone already knows that but those red herrings keep coming up. It's not like IS is a substitute for your shutter speed (and your brain) and knowing when to shoot say, 1/250 or faster.

[William Michael]

My comment about IS and its uses when shooting from an Helicopter are on record.

 

I have a colleague (photographer) who is a pro pilot and `part time` Arial photog: Uses Nikon, VR.

 

The point here I wish to make is: he uses no lens shorter than 300mm. (obviously he has specific shooting criteria: Arial Real Estate Photos)

 

So, whilst IS will be useful, it would serve you well to do some maths: Altitude + Field of View = what FL do I want to get the scene I want?

 

The point is, the 24 to 105 (which you are considering) might have IS, but might NOT be the correct FL (too short?).

 

I do not know the answer, just suggesting some homework for you.

 

WW

[William Michael]

I have been thinking about this post (and your others), whilst driving around delivering the boiled lollies, thongs and flip flops . . .

 

Taking all your recent questions into account and noting that most answers, (obviously), are directed to only the question asked, IMO you will get great value from this line of thinking:

 

`I am going to buy a 5D, what system of lenses do I need to achieve all these goals?: 1 & 2 & 3 short term; 1 & 2 & 3 long term.`

 

Learning will be part of that process.

 

Think macro, not micro.

 

Micro thinking is too stifling for what you need, IMO.

 

The detailed and specific answers, whilst useful and applicable for each individual question, might not address the best LENS SYSTEM to be obtained, with the greatest efficiency and lest expense.

 

Maybe this is indeed your thinking and you are just harnessing bites of information: fine, this is just my thought I wanted to share.

 

 

WW

[jami_lee_tatro]

Good comment, William. Always keep in mind though, I'm still in the learning stage. A lot of people have been combining this with my last post 24-70 v 24-105, but that wasn't the intent. I just wanted to see if anyone had aerial exp and if they did, what were some pointers and the lens they used. Before I go out and spend $$$ (okay maybe $$$$$$) I just like to do a little research. These forums are awesome because you get a lot of opinions, so thanks to all who keep replying.

 

Once I get my camera, I'm sure I'll have better posts (with pics) and then you can still tell me what I'm doing wrong... ;)

 

-jt

[markonestudios]

Hmmm... not too sure about that 16-35 argument, Colin. There's a photo I'm trying to find on the 'net that I have at home. It's an aerial shot (from a helicopter in fact) of the Chrysler Building with this glass by Vincent Laforet, shooting with a 1DIIn.

<p>Check out this link for some additional tips:

<br><a href="http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6454-6928-6929">Vincent Laforet's digital aerials</a>

[jami_lee_tatro]

Haha, this is the problem with having multiple posts in multiple tabs at the same time. The comparison of those two lenses was my original intent and I was hoping to get other opinions from those who had experience in the matter...oops. <Clarification complete...no pixels were harmed in the making of this message>

[scott_ferris]

Hi there Jami Lee,

 

I have to disagree with a bit of what has been written, but that is the nature of forums! I use the 16-35 on my 1D over 70% of the time it is not too short, one of the great things about digital shooting is the exif, you can go back and look at what you are actually using, my numbers show my shortest lens to be far and away my most prolific. I have no helicopter experience but a reasonable amount of small plane time (sailing regattas). Depending on what you want to frame I would say the 5D and the 24-105 IS would be far and away the best package. The IS WILL dampen your vibration to some extemt, I have used the 70-200 2.8 IS and the 300 2.8 IS extensively airbourne and it works very well. On a FF the 16-35 is going to give you great in cockpit stuff but the other helicopters will be specks, the 24-105 will give you more versatility and usability.

Take care, Scott.

[markonestudios]

<p><i>Nonsense. IS couldn't care less what sort of object you're shooting. So forget that statement above.</i> - Ken Papai

<p>With all due respect, Ken, unless I am totally mistaken, the IS on the 24-105L is not for the panning mode but to reduce shake for handheld shots. I've shot from fixed wing aircraft including turboprops. IS on the 24-105 would not be of much help, so I imagine that from a helicopter, it would be even less effective.

<p>Not to belabour my other point, here's the shot of the Chrysler building I mentioned, shot with the 16-35L and 1DIIn. This is a crop of the original which I mentioned I have elsewhere

[michael_sydenham1]

I've never had a problem with vibration shooting from a Bell due to using a high shutter speed. Another potential issue is rotor blades - i.e. take enough photos of the subject to ensure you'll get some without rotor blades in the photo, though it may not be an issue for your situation. I agree with the suggestion from a previous poster that changing lenses in flight can be tricky (it's easy to drop a lens on the floor on the craft, for that reason I suggest you mount a lens hood - of course that doesn't help much if you drop it through an opening :-) Good luck.

[William Michael]

>>> With all due respect, Ken, unless I am totally mistaken, the IS on the 24-105L is not for the panning mode but to reduce shake for handheld shots. I've shot from fixed wing aircraft including turboprops. IS on the 24-105 would not be of much help, so I imagine that from a helicopter, it would be even less effective. <<< (MAK)

 

I am not addressing the issue between Ken and you.

 

I am addressing this:

 

>>> the 24-105L is (. . .) to reduce shake for handheld shots. (. . . ) IS on the 24-105 would not be of much help, so I imagine that from a helicopter, it would be even less effective <<<

 

The above is, in essence is quote in tact of the thrust of your thoughts I believe.

 

Let`s go through this:

 

The man is in the chopper. He wants to take a picture of the house on the ground. He is holding the camera. The chopper is vibrating, which it is shaking the man, and the camera and the lens, RELATIVE to the scene (the house).

 

If that is not camera shake, then what the hell is?

 

This is exactly what IS is for: to reduce the blur, caused by camera movement RELATIVE to the subject.

 

Please, in regard to the above, I believe your thinking is grossly incorrect.

 

WW

[keith_lubow]

The IS won't really help you a whole ton in that situation. You still need to be trying to be still for it to work extremely well, and even then it can sometimes "miss". You also need to give it a half-sec to kick in after you touch the shutter or AF and before you take the pic. I would go for the 24-70 instead of the 24-105. The thing you need to do most is use a fast shutter speed. Try at least four full shutter speeds faster than one over focal length, and raise ISO as necessary to get there. That means at 100mm equiv. focal length (in 35mm speak), try to use a '1600 sec shutter speed. Good luck, and fly safe above all.

 

Keith

[markonestudios]

>>If that is not camera shake, then what the hell is?<<

<p>:) I'm thinking, I HAVE tried taking photos in a turboprop, and even though you will be shaking along with the machine, it likely won't be in synchrony, so IS would be of limted benefit. I understand about the RELATIVE motion and agree with you. The crux of my issue was that IS would be of LIMITED benefit while shooting from a helicopter, but of course shutter speed becomes a major player here...

<p>Just realised I forgot to post the image I wanted to show Colin shot with a 16-35L ;)<div></div>