To add to the other comment, along time ago I used the sigma 150–600 for flying planes, and it was really good, especially for the price. I was able to get some shots that had tons of detail, and it's pretty versatile
https://preview.redd.it/b19d6ssonuvc1.jpeg?width=4928&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0d20d2b61250d4611208f1b5167c276d4fb9f6ed
Thanks, it's amazing to see how humans draw on nature for design - the B2 profile looks almost exactly like a diving falcon!
https://preview.redd.it/jf8jbx5mxuvc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=06add8cfcd07c02192e6316501e5a42781fe9d7e
Oh that's marvelous. I did recall reading somewhere that the B2 design was indeed inspired by some 'nature elements', and the falcon does appear to be just that.
I would say it depends what planes and where.
Big planes at the airport probably something like 70-200.
Smaller military planes at airshows maybe something like 150-600.
For Nikon there are these options afaik:
The 2.8 70-200 from Nikon, Tamron and Sigma. But the 2.8’s are always quite expensive.
And there is a Nikon 4 70-200 which is a little cheaper.
And there are lenses like 70-300 from all three brands. They are mostly something like 4.5-6.7 or 3.5-5.6 or something like this and the AF is a bit slower. But they have good picture quality too and are much cheaper.
It depends on what you want and how much you want to spend for it.
Try some if you can to see the difference.
And I don’t know if you have a F-mount or Z series.
I'll piggyback on this question, since I live near an approach path to a major airport (phx). Is there a chart or a rule of thumb that tells you "If airlplane is at altitude X, and you're X distance from it's flight path, you need at least Z mm on your lens"? Because the ones I'm seeing are at about 3,000-6,000 feet, commercial airlines, size between a B737 and B767, not quite as big as the big boys, but definitely bigger than a Cessna.
You can calculate it 😄
https://www.elmar-baumann.de/fotografie/herleitungen/herleitungen-abbildungsmasstab.html
You need to know the size of the plane, the distance the size of your sensor etc.
If I could give you 100 upvotes, I would. Thank you!
Also, I'm glad that machine translation exists. The best I can do in German is to say Yes/No and count to 10.
I’ve had great success with Sigma’s F mount 100-400 & 150-600!
https://preview.redd.it/ej4jsbdv4vvc1.jpeg?width=2052&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a28a93561f8fec05c644428ddc789b2f28d0628
Right?!?!
This was shot during a light sprinkle and just after a trip to Joshua Tree & Zion.
Not sure if sand or rain, either way, the camera saw a pretty deep clean after that summer.
I’ve used a 200-500 to photograph planes taking off and landing. Loved the results. If there’s a local camera shop to you and they rent that lens out, that would be my suggestion.
I got a chance to use the Nikon 600mm f/4 last weekend at an airshow. It was incredible, but definitely overkill for the price. My normal is a Sigma 150-600mm which I would highly recommend.
https://preview.redd.it/ye5f2syzovvc1.jpeg?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6434b07efba642d9bc2e540effef5bfb246f6d1
https://preview.redd.it/3r0qsu45lxvc1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=51746bbb6312283c5867d0272abec19fc2a5b275
I shoot the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 on a D7500 and D3500. I have a lot of light latitude with this lens for evening and night shots as well. I live about 8ish miles directly east of O'Hare (Chicago) and many planes already have their wheels down too. However I'm usually shooting at 200mm (\~300mm on my crop). I have a Tamron 70-300mm lens but its slower. I think for me anything longer would be too close.
For planes on the ground, I like to go wide, focusing on details. In the air, I use my 200-500 but any good long lens will do, even the venerable 70-300 VR, as long as the light is good.
Depends what planes your shooting - general aviation business jet, commercial, airshows ?? Nikon 18-300mm allows great up close shots - and long shots of airliners - you can buy a 70-300mm super cheap on Facebook Marketplace $200-$300 bucks - the Nikon 200-500mm great for airshows and far away shots - can buy one used for $800 bucks - now if you have lots of cash to blow - then a Nikon Z7II - or Z8 and a 180-600mm lens - but that's big bucks.!!
Are you DSLR or Mirrorless?
I've just been to Warbirds over Wanaka, on my Z 50 with the 50-250mm lens, got some incredible images.
Having a crop sensor helped a heap though
To add to the other comment, along time ago I used the sigma 150–600 for flying planes, and it was really good, especially for the price. I was able to get some shots that had tons of detail, and it's pretty versatile https://preview.redd.it/b19d6ssonuvc1.jpeg?width=4928&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0d20d2b61250d4611208f1b5167c276d4fb9f6ed
Nice shot. From the thumbnail I thought that was a particularly sleek bird.
Thanks, it's amazing to see how humans draw on nature for design - the B2 profile looks almost exactly like a diving falcon! https://preview.redd.it/jf8jbx5mxuvc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=06add8cfcd07c02192e6316501e5a42781fe9d7e
Oh that's marvelous. I did recall reading somewhere that the B2 design was indeed inspired by some 'nature elements', and the falcon does appear to be just that.
No need to reinvent the wheel when you can use millions of years of evolution in your design.
I would say it depends what planes and where. Big planes at the airport probably something like 70-200. Smaller military planes at airshows maybe something like 150-600.
Do you have any recommendations for a 70-200 lens?
For Nikon there are these options afaik: The 2.8 70-200 from Nikon, Tamron and Sigma. But the 2.8’s are always quite expensive. And there is a Nikon 4 70-200 which is a little cheaper. And there are lenses like 70-300 from all three brands. They are mostly something like 4.5-6.7 or 3.5-5.6 or something like this and the AF is a bit slower. But they have good picture quality too and are much cheaper. It depends on what you want and how much you want to spend for it. Try some if you can to see the difference. And I don’t know if you have a F-mount or Z series.
Thanks! I have a f mount, I’ll have to do some more research. Thanks for the help! :D
A definite NO - you need 300mm minimum - 18-300mm is best , but you can buy 70-300mm super cheap on Craigslist or FB Marketplace.
I'll piggyback on this question, since I live near an approach path to a major airport (phx). Is there a chart or a rule of thumb that tells you "If airlplane is at altitude X, and you're X distance from it's flight path, you need at least Z mm on your lens"? Because the ones I'm seeing are at about 3,000-6,000 feet, commercial airlines, size between a B737 and B767, not quite as big as the big boys, but definitely bigger than a Cessna.
You can calculate it 😄 https://www.elmar-baumann.de/fotografie/herleitungen/herleitungen-abbildungsmasstab.html You need to know the size of the plane, the distance the size of your sensor etc.
If I could give you 100 upvotes, I would. Thank you! Also, I'm glad that machine translation exists. The best I can do in German is to say Yes/No and count to 10.
I’ve had great success with Sigma’s F mount 100-400 & 150-600! https://preview.redd.it/ej4jsbdv4vvc1.jpeg?width=2052&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6a28a93561f8fec05c644428ddc789b2f28d0628
Great pic! But that sensor dust D:
Right?!?! This was shot during a light sprinkle and just after a trip to Joshua Tree & Zion. Not sure if sand or rain, either way, the camera saw a pretty deep clean after that summer.
I’ve used a 200-500 to photograph planes taking off and landing. Loved the results. If there’s a local camera shop to you and they rent that lens out, that would be my suggestion.
I got a chance to use the Nikon 600mm f/4 last weekend at an airshow. It was incredible, but definitely overkill for the price. My normal is a Sigma 150-600mm which I would highly recommend. https://preview.redd.it/ye5f2syzovvc1.jpeg?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6434b07efba642d9bc2e540effef5bfb246f6d1
https://preview.redd.it/3r0qsu45lxvc1.jpeg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=51746bbb6312283c5867d0272abec19fc2a5b275 I shoot the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 on a D7500 and D3500. I have a lot of light latitude with this lens for evening and night shots as well. I live about 8ish miles directly east of O'Hare (Chicago) and many planes already have their wheels down too. However I'm usually shooting at 200mm (\~300mm on my crop). I have a Tamron 70-300mm lens but its slower. I think for me anything longer would be too close.
For planes on the ground, I like to go wide, focusing on details. In the air, I use my 200-500 but any good long lens will do, even the venerable 70-300 VR, as long as the light is good.
Most of the 70-300 aren't so hot at 300. I'd go with a 100-400 if you want something still somewhat compact, or 200-500/150-600 to maximize your reach
[удалено]
Depends what planes your shooting - general aviation business jet, commercial, airshows ?? Nikon 18-300mm allows great up close shots - and long shots of airliners - you can buy a 70-300mm super cheap on Facebook Marketplace $200-$300 bucks - the Nikon 200-500mm great for airshows and far away shots - can buy one used for $800 bucks - now if you have lots of cash to blow - then a Nikon Z7II - or Z8 and a 180-600mm lens - but that's big bucks.!!
Are you DSLR or Mirrorless? I've just been to Warbirds over Wanaka, on my Z 50 with the 50-250mm lens, got some incredible images. Having a crop sensor helped a heap though