Re: More Stuff
Posted: Mon May 10, 2021 2:14 pm
A place to discuss the world of Wapsi Square
https://forum.wapsisquare.com/
Thanks. I had shutter set at 160. Lens is a 200-500 telephoto. Nikon equipment.lake_wrangler wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:29 am Out of curiosity, what shutter speed did you use, in order to get the slight motion blur on the propellers like that? Those are some nice photos.
I have decent upper body strength, but I still find I shake a fair bit if I'm not careful. Even if I try to exhale, then take the shot, while resting my elbows on my chest...Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pmRight now I tend to have about a 15-20% keep rate for photos. The heavy lens and moving subjects are challenging to work with for me. Maybe if I was able to graduate from 12oz curls to something heavier, I might develop the upper body strength to take better photos!
I have seen a trick, once, I forget where, whereby you tie a string to your camera, at the midway portion of the string, and have the two ends make loops where you can insert your feet. It won't help support the weight, but it is said to help steady the camera, as you hold the string taunt with your feet.Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pmI've seen people with tripods for supporting the really big lenses. I'd think that too can be challenging as the aircraft cross at different altitudes and arcs, would be taxing on legs for squatting down to catch subjects at the high side of arcs.
That's quite good! We used to figure 2% was fair.Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pm . . . Right now I tend to have about a 15-20% keep rate for photos. . . .
We used to use the reciprocal of the lens length . . . for a 200mm lens, 1/250th or faster (when hand-holding).Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pmThe heavy lens and moving subjects are challenging to work with for me. Maybe if I was able to graduate from 12oz curls to something heavier, I might develop the upper body strength to take better photos!
I've seen people with tripods for supporting the really big lenses. I'd think that too can be challenging as the aircraft cross at different altitudes and arcs, would be taxing on legs for squatting down to catch subjects at the high side of arcs.
Intersting trick. I'd just hurt myself getting tangled in the string.lake_wrangler wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 7:21 pmI have decent upper body strength, but I still find I shake a fair bit if I'm not careful. Even if I try to exhale, then take the shot, while resting my elbows on my chest...Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pmRight now I tend to have about a 15-20% keep rate for photos. The heavy lens and moving subjects are challenging to work with for me. Maybe if I was able to graduate from 12oz curls to something heavier, I might develop the upper body strength to take better photos!
I have seen a trick, once, I forget where, whereby you tie a string to your camera, at the midway portion of the string, and have the two ends make loops where you can insert your feet. It won't help support the weight, but it is said to help steady the camera, as you hold the string taunt with your feet.Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pmI've seen people with tripods for supporting the really big lenses. I'd think that too can be challenging as the aircraft cross at different altitudes and arcs, would be taxing on legs for squatting down to catch subjects at the high side of arcs.
I haven't tried that yet, so I can't speak for the results.
Jets are a little easier, just have to worry about focus and keeping them in the viewfinder. Prop jobs need slower shutter speed to get that "prop blur" or they simply look like a well-done model hanging from the ceiling. I've not tried any night photography, it does look rewarding when you get it just right.FreeFlier wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 7:58 pmThat's quite good! We used to figure 2% was fair.Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pm . . . Right now I tend to have about a 15-20% keep rate for photos. . . .
We used to use the reciprocal of the lens length . . . for a 200mm lens, 1/250th or faster (when hand-holding).Hansontoons wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:23 pmThe heavy lens and moving subjects are challenging to work with for me. Maybe if I was able to graduate from 12oz curls to something heavier, I might develop the upper body strength to take better photos!
I've seen people with tripods for supporting the really big lenses. I'd think that too can be challenging as the aircraft cross at different altitudes and arcs, would be taxing on legs for squatting down to catch subjects at the high side of arcs.
I could usually go a couple of steps lower if I had a good position, and even slower with a rest.
I used to do night work . . . IIRC, I've taken exposures up to 15 minutes. Obviously, that requires a solid tripod.
--FreeFlier
Does B/W image help with memory?AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Sun May 09, 2021 10:13 pm That nose kinda reminds me of something in a sci-fi movie - Space Wars, or something like that?
I was poking around in a military warehouse in Germany and found some old ones that were made out of coconut shells. Maybe you can find one of those to add a bit of variety from the plastic and metal ones.Alkarii wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:34 pm Ha! The canteen pouch I ordered arrived. While it is certainly different from the canteen pouches I was issued in basic, it will hold the metal cup with the older metal canteen (not sure how old, but it definitely predates the plastic ones with the drinking valve that connects to a gas mask), and I'm quite certain I could even get one of the old stoves that would fit with the cup and canteen in the pouch. The pouch also has two pockets on the sides, and while I'm not exactly sure what they were intended for, I'm going to put some water purification tablets in there (which is what I suspect the purpose of those pockets to be). I'm not sure if I should get a second canteen pouch, as I have two hydration packs, plus a 3L hydration bladder that is going to go into my rucksack. The only reason I might get a second is because I had been issued two in basic, along with a cheap version of a Camelbak (it was actually called a Hydramax; one of the packs I have at the moment is one of those).
I'll begin-Catawampus wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 2:27 pmI was poking around in a military warehouse in Germany and found some old ones that were made out of coconut shells. Maybe you can find one of those to add a bit of variety from the plastic and metal ones.Alkarii wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:34 pm Ha! The canteen pouch I ordered arrived. While it is certainly different from the canteen pouches I was issued in basic, it will hold the metal cup with the older metal canteen (not sure how old, but it definitely predates the plastic ones with the drinking valve that connects to a gas mask), and I'm quite certain I could even get one of the old stoves that would fit with the cup and canteen in the pouch. The pouch also has two pockets on the sides, and while I'm not exactly sure what they were intended for, I'm going to put some water purification tablets in there (which is what I suspect the purpose of those pockets to be). I'm not sure if I should get a second canteen pouch, as I have two hydration packs, plus a 3L hydration bladder that is going to go into my rucksack. The only reason I might get a second is because I had been issued two in basic, along with a cheap version of a Camelbak (it was actually called a Hydramax; one of the packs I have at the moment is one of those).
Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate?Hansontoons wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 3:10 pmI'll begin-Catawampus wrote: ↑Tue May 11, 2021 2:27 pmI was poking around in a military warehouse in Germany and found some old ones that were made out of coconut shells. Maybe you can find one of those to add a bit of variety from the plastic and metal ones.
I was under the impression that coconuts are tropical...
I dunno - i used to get decent results blown up to 8 x 10 {defined as shots i'd be happy to show off} with a 210mm zoom, back in my full-frame 35mm days, at 1/125 or 1/60. {Of course, i was fifty years younger then.}
It depends on your steadiness . . . I have gotten good results at 1/8th with a 135mm*, but the reciprocal rule is easy to remember and good under most conditions.AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Wed May 12, 2021 3:22 amI dunno - i used to get decent results blown up to 8 x 10 {defined as shots i'd be happy to show off} with a 210mm zoom, back in my full-frame 35mm days, at 1/125 or 1/60. {Of course, i was fifty years younger then.}
These days with my APS-format Nikon D5300 with the VR lenses, i can get decent shots my 200mm zoom handheld down to about 1/30.
Yeah, it works that way . . . sounds like he was more of a studio or industrial pro than a event pro. It's a significant difference.AnotherFairportfan wrote: ↑Wed May 12, 2021 3:22 amDamn, i wish i still had copies of the shots my folks used in the print ad covering the opening of a new bank in Cape Fear NC that they were doing PR for - about 1970.
They had hired a local pro to shoot the opening; Dad {who had, at one time or another, been a semi-pro photographer himself} took one look at the guy and working asked me what i had in my Olympus PEN FT {half-frame SLR} - which happened to be Plus-X {ASA 125 B&W, for those not familiar with it}. He told me to sort of hang out in the bank lobby after the ribbon-cutting and take all the available-darkness candida i could and he'd pay for processing and take any that he thought they could use.
As it turned out, the full-page - maybe double-page? - ad that they took in the local paper later that week used several of my shots from inside the lobby {including one Little Old Lady i stalked for several minutes before i got the Perfect Shot} ...and the only shot they used from the local pro was an exterior shot of the ribbon-cutting.
Not that i'm saying that i was better then he was, but i was shooting without flash with a small camera, so i was able to get shots of people actually looking around or doing business ... and he had a Pentax with a strobe that looked like it belonged on the Yellow Submarine's coning tower - a Strobonar, as i recall - and people tended to spot him and either duck or pose.
I was working with a 50 - 90mm zoom on the FT - the equivalent of 70 - 125mm for full frame.