Popham airfield, 26.2.2012

A few from today... getting used to the replacement Bigma (the AF packed up on the first one, a few weeks after I got it). More practice required, clearly, but I think I'll make friends with it yet.


[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/IMGP0910.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/IMGP0922.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/IMGP0943.jpg[/IMG]

And another one...

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/IMGP0919.jpg[/IMG]

The trick is to have the exposure long enough to get some prop blur, while not ending up with camera shake.

Subjectively, the OS in the lens seems a little better than the SR in the body for these. Not enough of a sample to be sure yet though.

Whilst I am no expert I reckon that you are getting the mix of prop blur/ shutter speed correct

I was thinking of getting a bigma for my K7,are they prone to packing up?
also the pictures looks a bit soft,do you use a tripod?

I had the AF pack up on mine, shortly after buying it. It was replaced under warranty, and the replacement has been fine.

Prone? I don't know if it's any more prone to failure than anything else.

If they're soft, I'd say it's my technique, rather than anything else that's at fault.

But a tripod? For fast moving aircraft? Erm, no. Unless the aircraft path is extremely predictable, a tripod is impractical for most aircraft shots.

The main thing that makes it difficult is that unlike jets, with propeller-driven aeroplanes, you have to keep the shutter speed slow, since with exposures much shorter than 1/200s, you freeze the prop which looks rubbish.

Inevitably, hand-held shots with long lenses and long exposures will tend to suffer a bit from shake.