Scott Monument, what nonsense.

It's clearly Thunderbird 3.

Hmm, well doubly damn good then.

Now, not that I'd discuss anything but Pentax here, but just hypothetically, I have an illusion of having seen a Tornado with the wheels coming up, with a few shots following.

Whatever camera they were taken with, was that the AF keeping up?

Hmm and some more hmm then, if so....

Excellent Tornado. Excellent light on the Chinook and the Black Cats too - I've pretty much given up photographing helicopters if the background is white. Nice light on the Lynx, too - shame about the tail rotor.

Good captures all though, the Black Cats beautifully done. Forgive my suspicious mind, but they seem very close.. there's no layering going on there is there by any chance?

The first one of the synchro pair is very nice too, especially with the ship in the background. Unusual to see that angle too.

The panning shots of course suffer from the same thing as all mine do as well - the blurring of the one you're not panning on. The more like that I take, the more it annoys me, and I'm thinking of trying to freeze both of them next time round. About 50 times harder, of course.

Somehow it's more off-putting with the Stearmans, probably because the blur is worse at the longer exposures needed for prop blur.

My fave is the Tornado I think, but then I'm very biased in favour of fixed wing. It's much better than the ones I took of the Tornadoes at Dunsfold the other week. (I'll post a couple more from that bunch when I get a chance - I've been away for the last week).

Thanks for posting, I always look out for your aeroplane pictures.

Send me some Pentax engineers. The idea of a quick and possibly not so light punch is very appealing at times.

Wouldn't it be ironic, if the next APS-C from Pentax had much better AF, but 24MP with correspondingly poor high ISO performance.

(Context: I'm on a bit of a Pentax AF downer at the moment, having spent a week in the Lakes where the K-5/17-70 would randomly refuse - persistently - to get an AF lock on perfectly good, well-lit, high contrast scenes that I would never have imagined would have caused a problem in a million years.)

Let's hope Clarky hasn't really been waiting for the last five years for that excellent advice

- Electronic Level: function to set zero point
- Predictive AF (not just faster)
- Smaller AF points
- Dedicated video button
- AF during video
- More sensible video codec (to reduce the ridiculous file sizes)
- Return to Key/Lock design of the K10/20 card door
- Allow catch-in-focus with AF lenses without A/M switch

I like the second one - it's an interesting angle, and the golden light on the face is very attractive. The splidge of bonus lipstick under her lower lip is a little distracting, as is the fringing in the OOF high contrast areas, but both of these could be dealt with very easily.

I can't see what's special about the first one though - sorry. The 'leaning foward with hands clasped behind' look seems a little awkward; the light looks flat, and unlike the second, there's not much texture to the hair. Can't see it, I'm afraid.

I agree with Pentaxophile that she looks like she's really posing for someone else.

Ah but this is my point. If a Lakes picture is exposed and composed well (and many (including most of mine) aren't), then that's never my reaction. I may not look at it for long, but my reaction is never that negative.

Yours may be, which is what I mean by different things seeming tired to different people.

Have you any idea of my capacity for chocolate??

What, not even if they're of aeroplanes?

Just kidding - it's true, of course.

Sadly, once I've invested my time and effort into taking an image, editing it to its best effect, and then publishing it somewhere, I often don't have the energy left to realise that it's precisely because of all that, that I'm a lot more interested in looking at it than anyone else will be.

Love the new sig, by the way. I think I prefer the irony of the old one, though.

Yes, even being at the very front of the crowd, the cars were a long way away - I think you'd have to be a real enthusiast to enjoy them much.

I went for the aeroplanes, and also for the privilege of, unlike at other airshows, being able to arrive by air.

I got a few half-decent shots during the day, though as it clouded over during the afternoon, the light became fairly rubbish.

Here are a couple.. first the Sea Fury and the gorgeous Hunter.

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Dunsfold%202012/IMGP5491.jpg[/IMG]

Jet Provost...

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Dunsfold%202012/IMGP4674.jpg[/IMG]

And the superb Mustang and Spitfire - a fantastic display of close formation flying.

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Dunsfold%202012/IMGP5235.jpg[/IMG]

As was the Red Bull pair, Paul Bonhomme and Steve Jones..

[IMG]http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t244/chris5gd/Aviation/Dunsfold%202012/IMGP5171.jpg[/IMG]

I've got some more if anyone's interested.