Nikon D40 lenses feedback

[Nathan]

Hello all,

A week or so ago I asked for some feedback on the Nikon D40. Well, I got great news as that is the camera I am going to get! Im more excited about getting then when I got my first car! I can't wait to get it.

I am getting a really good deal on it and the package includes a free cleaning kit and tripod.


Now, to my next questio nis on lenses as I would like to have anotehr one besides the 18-55. There are two lenses I see that I like but have no idea if they are aircraft friendly.

The first one is a Nikon 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G-AFS VR lens.

The second one is a Nikon 55-200mm F 4.5 6G ED AF-S DX.

Are these lenses anything I should look into? Besides these could anyone suggest some good lenses to me that would be good for taking pictures of airplanes at airshows?


Thanks,
Nathan

[Pat]

Hey Nathan-
I have a D80 (love it!); mine came with a 18-135mm and I purchased a 70-300mm zoom earlier this week. I'm writing from Midland, TX where I plan to try out the new 70-300mm lens tomorrow. I woud think this lens would be preferable to the 55-200mm for aerial shots. I'll try to post some pics tomorrow evening if I can figure out how.

-Pat

[JDK]

The second one is a Nikon 55-200mm F 4.5 6G ED AF-S DX

200 mm (max) is just simply too short for almost any airshow work, unless you have special access. 300mm isn't great, but it's just about usable.

As ever, the equipment's an over-discussed part of photography. Great photographers have 'vision' and those greats in aviation make sure they get in the right place at the right time - that takes organisation.

And before anyone says "but I just want to..." - sure. You'll achieve the standard you set. Pictures you want to show other people will take effort, planning and learning. They can also be taken with a pinhole camera, it's not the kit, it's the rest, starting with a desire for quality.

Lecture over.

[kmiles]

I have recently bought a D40X and I have the second lens that you mention the 55-200. It comes in at less than half of the 70-300, and in my opinion a better overall lens. With the 300mm being at the minimum end of the scale for air show work, I am going to rent a 400mm for $55 a week when there are big events scheduled. The 400mm is a $1500 lens, so there is no way that I could afford to buy it at this point when I will only need it 2-3 weekends a year. I have used the 200mm at the two shows that I went to this year, and was able to get some decent shots as long as I was in the front row on the crowd line.

Ken

[vg-photo]

I used a non-VR Nikkor 70-300 for a little over a year for air shows and found it to be quite acceptable. The longer the reach, the better, but you still need good glass before lens length.

I got to try the Nikkor 80-400 VR lens at Chino last year. I liked it, but thought it was a bit pricey for what you get. I then tried the Sigma 50-500 and loved it. It's about 1/3 less than the Nikkor 80-400, although it does not have any VR.

Look at places like DPReview for lenses and what people think of them.

[McKConnor0307]

The first thing anyone contemplating a camera gear purchase has to ask themselves is "what am I going to use this camera for"?, and then, "what type of pictures do I want to take?" With the flood of so many good digital cameras now in the market, virtually anyone can take a decent picture. So, with so many 'decent' pictures out there, my goal is to not take a picture like everyone else, and that is much easier said than done. If airshows and aircraft are what you are targeting then you need to tailor your lens selection appropriately. Focal length, obviously is critical. A 300 would be a bare minimum. A 300 with a teleconverter is a possibility. Once the planes are in the air, the more lens you have the better. Obviously, once the aircraft reach a certain height, you are only going to get a shot of the underside anyway, so you don't need telescope-like length. The immediate area of take off and landing is where you can get something nice. You can wander around the tarmac with a 300 and get some nice shots, with a tighter perspective, and therefore much more impact than 99% of what everyone else is shooting. Depth of field will really come in to play. You want to shoot as shallow as possible when nothing is moving to try and separate your subject from any distracting backgounds. That will make the image pop. Shallow depth of field is costly, however. A used 300 2.8 will cost over a grand, at a minimum. The zooms are not as fast, but even at 4.5, you should be able to get an acceptably shallow depth of field and let you isolate your subject better. Here is where you can make a difference between your pictures and the hoard of other digital point and shoot photos out there. These cameras are no doubt shooting on automatic, and the camera wants as much depth of field as possible and you end up with a technically good picture, of, well, everything in the county, and that makes for a dull image, in my opinion. Moral of the story is to shoot wide open when possible. Now, when the planes come to life, a whole different story. Now, you need a sense of motion, obviously with the props. Frozen props mean, well, not a plane actually flying, at first glance. So you need a shutter speed of 125th or less, and now it gets tricky. Hand holding a 300 plus lens at 125th or a 60th of a second trying to photograph a moving subject is not easy. Depth of field is not a big concern because you should pan with the aircraft, giving you some motion blur. This does two things, gives you a sense of movement and keeps your image popping out of the background. The solution is to shoot a lot of frames, keep smooth and pray. A tripod is also a possibility, just harder to twist and move the camera when tied down. The lowest possible ASA will help you shoot at a high f-stop(16 or higher) and a slow shutter speed in daylight.
I think the bottom line is really looking at a lot of pictures and deciding what style you like. Then, you figure can figure out what type of lens can get you those types of pictures.



This is an example of depth of field problems. I am stopped down to F16 waiting for the plane to take off. Shutter speed is 60th or so. Lens is a 300 2.8 with 1 .5 converter. The problem, though not big, is the power pole sticking up through the top turret. I need the depth of field to lower the shutter speed and blur the props, but it can lead to distractions like this pole. I waited until she moved and then shot this:(cropped)




I now have a bit of motion blur, some prop movement and no pole!
You really have to pay attention and watch your backgrounds.

Good Luck!

[vg-photo]

You can get reasonable prop blur of planes flying at 1/400. Yes, it's better at the lower speeds, but if someone is just starting, it's better to go at a higher shutter speed to develop your technique before moving to slower shutter speeds. If you have the technique down first, your percentage of good shots at lower shutter speeds will be higher.

Shoot, experiment and have fun!

[Nathan]

Well, I scratched the D40 and am now getting a D80! It's official too because its on order! Yoohoo!!

[mustangdriver]

Congrats nathan. I think you will love the results.

[muddyboots]

Nathan, you've got a good lens. It'll take you a couple of years to "outgrow" it, and then only if you find yourslef turning into a real camera junkie. The old saw still stands: the better the glass in the lens, the better the photo. Nowdays it is optical grade plastic, but it's still valid. So you're right to ask around about lenses. The old farts know what they are talking about.

Last edited by muddyboots on Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[vg-photo]

Old fart? I resemble that remark!

Congrats on the D80. I picked one up locally a couple of weeks ago. I'm still dialing in a few of the settings as there are a couple right out of the box that just flat annoy me. I guess I'm still a control freak when it comes to my photography.

[RareBear]

Most Nikon digitals have a focal length factor of 1.5 due to the smaller size of the image sensor. On a D-80, a 300mm lens will have an effective focal length of 450mm. The maximum aperture remains the same. Thus a 200mm f2.8 on most Nikon digitals will be the same as a 300mm f2.8.

This is good on the telephoto end, but hurts on the wide angle end, since a 24mm lens becomes a 36mm lens. That's the reason for the newer lenses with the wide end in the 10-18mm range.

Walt

[Nathan]

Thanks all for the help. I can't wait to get the D80. The only downfall of it was that my pockets are empty now!


I've decided that the lens I will get in t he future will be the Nikkor 70-300mm VR.

Cheers,
Nathan

[muddyboots]

You might think of picking up a higher zoom instead, so you aren't doubling u on your abilities. Remember the comments about how you really really need a 500mm? Think about that puppy next