Film Speeds

[O.P.]

I just impulse bought a Minolta Maxxum 50, a 28-200 1:3.5-5.6 zoom lense,a circular polarizer. I usually use disposable cameras, but I'm going on a ride this weekend, and the ole disposable takes pretty bad pictures through the canopy on the T28B. I should have waited and consulted/read all of you guy's advice, but it was in front of me at lunchtime. The little 150-200 dollar temporary piece of junk, got turned into a 450 dollar impulse buy piece of junk in the local camera robber hut. Whats done is done. What I need to know is what film speed and brand should I be using for...

1. Ramp Shots
2. Air to Air Formation shots through a plexiglass canopy.
3. Landing and takeoff shots.
4. Flyovers.

Something all around-ish would be cool. If not, two different speed/brands to carry around would be cool. Along with my spectacular purchase, I got a pile of 400 Fuji and some 400 Kodak "High Definition" film. I have a feeling thats not going to cut it, and the time to find is not after it's developed.

Thanks,
O.P.

[mrhenniger]

It looks like Rob has given some pretty good advice. I asked earlier about Fuji 800 ASA. It is actually a very good film, and is a definite must for dark museums. I would also suggest it be used when ever you have a zoom lense on your camera.

Mike

[Don Martin]

Just don't forget that your faster film can stop the props in your pictures. I got caught with half a roll of 400 in the camara when Sentimental Journey stopped over here in the Republic . When I arrived at the AP she was up on a hop and I'm out there happily snapping away. When I got them developed one shot(in a steep-banked turn) looked like she was augering in with all 4 engines out! Kind of creepy!
Don

[Tony C]

OK, time to highjack this thread (sorry OP)

Have to say that the D70 is a great camera and just wondering, does this information regarding the film speed also apply to digital camera settings?

Right, thread is now released back into the community

Thanks Tony

[mrhenniger]

Just don't forget that your faster film can stop the props in your pictures.

Yes, but... Use the faster film speed allow you a smaller aperature (high number, but smaller opening) than what you would get with a "slower" film in the same light. The smaller the aperature, the bigger the depth of field. Larger depth of fields allow you to compensate better in case you are slightly out of focus. This way when you are getting shots of the fast movers (or just movers in general) and don't really have time to check the focus, you have a better chance of getting a good shot.

In case you don't know... the depth of field is the range between the points closest to you and furtherest from you where the subject you are shooting will appear in focus. So the bigger you make this range, the better your chances of getting a good picture.

Always (when possible) set-up your shot by doing a focus / range check on something close to where your subject will be, before your subject is in view. This will help ensure that your subject will be in that depth of field / range when you take the shot.

A bonus is that as you make the aperature smaller, your shutter speed will be slower, allowing you to blurr those props. You tend to get prop arcs around 1/250th of a second, and good prop disks at 1/125th of a second, but each case is really different.

I too would be interested in what the photographer has control over when shooting with digital.

Mike

[bdk]

Have to say that the D70 is a great camera and just wondering, does this information regarding the film speed also apply to digital camera settings?

My Sony DSC-F707 allows you to set a fixed ASA or put it on "Auto." I'll have to experiment with this a bit...

[O.P.]

Very cool. Thanks for the advice everyone. Ok, at lunch today I'm getting some Fuji 800 for formation flying from inside the plane, some Kodak 200 for the ramp and I have 400 for flybys. I'll pick up some 400 bw for a crack at some arty farty stuff. Hopefully I'll have some good T28 stuff when I get back. Maybe Scott can post a couple in a thread for me.

Thanks,
O.P.

[Jeff]

another add on to the focussing where things will be is if you do this and can remember exactly where you are focussed it makes panning on the taxi pasts much easier especially for take offs and landings.

another trick I use is most lens have a "range guide" type thing where it has on either side of the exact focus point a series of marks showing how big the depth of field will be. so sort of goes 8, 5.6, 4, 2, l 2, 4, 5.6, 8. ( just as an example and the larger numbers give much better ranges ). I tend to try and arrange it so that the infinity symbol on the lens is at a point just past the right hand mark for the aperture I am using is not sure of the distance.
so if I am using f5.6 I'd have 2, 4, 5.6, infinity symbol, 8. that way you have everything from the left hand f5.6 mark right to infinity in focus. so might be from 10 yards to the horizon. takes some of the worry out of it for me but doesn't suit everyone.

have fun. you'll find there's a lot more you can do with an slr than with a disposable.

[O.P.]

I'm back! This was one of the best days flying yet. There were 7 T28's at Columbia this weekend. Very awesome! I met a lot of great people. Thanks for all of the advice everyone. I learned that 400 or slower will probably do it outside and in the hanger. The 800 came out really grainy. I also got some shots of the Kimberly Kaye with the new camera, a guy parked his 60 something mustang next to it and we got a couple of pictures. I also got some pictures of Tony B's T-6 and the CAF's T-6 actually in the air for the first time (for me, all the rest are hangar shots), they were coming in for a landing and the zoom actually picked them up. The T28's were beautiful. Just flying in was cool. Hearing "Columbia traffic, flight of three tango twenty eights inbound for landing""flight of two", was fantastic. Doing the break with 42juliet and Ron's T28 over that little airport rocked. We got there first. Seeing and hearing everyone else do the break over the airport was incredible. The place shook. Thanks again for all of the advice! I'll get these posted one of these decades (unless my good buddy Scott wants to post a couple here )

O.P.

[mrhenniger]

The 800 came out really grainy.

I saw your pics. You are right, the 800 was grainy. However I have to wonder if we are using the same film. Mine never came out that bad. Nice shooting though. It looks like you have a steady hand!

Mike

[O.P.]

The 800 came out really grainy.

I saw your pics. You are right, the 800 was grainy. However I have to wonder if we are using the same film. Mine never came out that bad. Nice shooting though. It looks like you have a steady hand!

Mike

Thanks! It was Kodak 800. All of the 400 came out good, even inside the hangars. The image through the viewfinder seemed dark, but the pictures inside there came out great. I have to go back and retake all of the inside pictures at livermoore with the new camera.

[mrhenniger]

It was Kodak 800.

Aaaahhhh... I have used the Fuji 800 with success. I used the Kodak high speeds a number of years ago and didn't like the results, it looks like they have not really improved. I have been satisfied with the Fuji, although it is not as nice as the 400 for the final results, but then sometimes you just need the higher speed.

Mike

[AIRIC]

Mike, The grain aslo depends on how well it was processed.

Eric

[Ollie]

Can't we make beer with grain, eh?

[mrhenniger]

The grain aslo depends on how well it was processed.

Well you learn something every day!

Mike