advice

PAUL

thanks so much

behind our house we have a church and so many birds fly onto the roof so im gunna have a go at shooting some lol not shoot with a gun but with my camera lolol that sounded so mean

that way its like shooting aircraft

my local airport is about 30 mins away and what with work its hard to get up there some times

thanks again
rob

Thanks all for your contrubution to this post its has made me think alot

im going to take pauls advice (pmn) and work hard on the camera i got at the mo and get used to all the settings and what they mean

as soon as i think im ready and have achived good success with my current camera then i shall look into upgrading

thanks all once again

Hi Rob

That makes a lot of sense. Keep your costs down until you become really proficient with your current camera.

Just two more suggestions from me –

First, read the manual that came with your camera. That might sound obvious, but a lot of people dont when they begin!

Secondly, create some practice sessions for yourself. Its a good idea to think of some exercises eg trying to shoot in poor weather or trying to shoot a fast moving object or just trying out the results at different zoom lengths. Look at your manual in advance and decide on what options you want to try out. Go out and try them, but (ideally) have a pencil and paper with you so that you can make a note of the different things that you try. Then go home and check out the results. Then think of a different exercise, and so on. It might sould a bit ‘formal’ as an approach, but you might be suprised how quickly you can learn from it. Also its far better to get some bad shots when practicing than to go to an event where you really want some great pictures, only to find that they are bad!

Regards

Paul

Thanks all for your contrubution to this post its has made me think alot

im going to take pauls advice (pmn) and work hard on the camera i got at the mo and get used to all the settings and what they mean

as soon as i think im ready and have achived good success with my current camera then i shall look into upgrading

thanks all once again

Well i would suggest if you are keen on photo takeing , than go for the Canon 400d . but would not bother with the kit you have suggested . the 90-200 mm lens is not long enough for airshows etc. 300mm being the average ,

Just by the basic kit with 18-55mm lens kit and go and purchase a canon 70-300mm lens they cost around £140.

would not bother as some as stated above to go to film or learn with a point and shoot.
you will learn more with a 400D very easy and its will cost you nothing to practice and learn.
going from film to digi is a complete new step really . same can be said about a point and shoot.

try not to waste money buying a point and shoot than wanting a DSLR .
go for the DSLR and stick with it. it should last you many years to come .

And i also still shoot film and have done for over 25 years.

Hi Paul

Glad that you agree!!!

I am a bit of an ‘oldie’ now, but I spent around 40+ years using film cameras. It certainly did make one think about how a camera works. Also, given the price of films and developing etc, one tended to be more thoughtful when clicking on that button!

Interestingly, although I dont take many aviation pics nowadays, a good friend and contemporary of mine does. He moved on to DSLR some years before I did, but he still retains the lessons and skills that he learnt when using an old film SLR alongside me.

In a recent email when he was taking some aviation pics in Switzerland, he mentioned how he still tended to prefocus on the spot where he wanted to take the shot, and just generally get everything set up in advance. Alongside him were others, who, using their DSLRs on auto just tended to hold the button down and try to fill a whole 4gb card in the hope of getting one good picture!

I dont intend my comment to be critical here, after all, each to his or her own, but I do think that photography is a lot more fun when you stop and think about all of the camera settings, the composition and so on………….

Just an opinion!

Regards

Paul

Ahh, Paul, believe me I couldn’t agree more! I actually went into shooting film after starting on digital and it’s taught me a huge amount and literally changed the way I think about taking photographs. Now I think much more about composition and getting the shot right in the first place as opposed to thinking “well I’m shooting RAW so anything can be fixed afterwards”. That’s wrong; it’s much better to get it as correct in the first place than fix it afterwards.

It’s also nice to hear of people who have a love of shooting film. For all I’m young-ish (27) I’m actually something of an analogue freak. I’d rather plug my bass into a valve amp that a transistor (transistors are analogue devices, I know, but you know what I mean!) And I’d generally rather listen to vinyl than CD. Photography, when I’m shooting things other than aviation at least, is similar. I’d generally rather be shooting on film than digital.

Both work, and both have their place and their own little things that they do best, and I use both and love them both. But still… There’s nothing quite like spending a day shooting film, getting your prints back and thinking “I nailed that without having to resort to Photoshop or cropping!” 🙂

Paul

I must agree about shooting film, though. I much prefer shooting things like landscapes or general ‘scenic’ shots on film rather than digital. It makes you think much more about composition and I believe makes you a better photographer in the long run. I think film is something every photographer should have some experience of.

Paul

Hi Paul

Glad that you agree!!!

I am a bit of an ‘oldie’ now, but I spent around 40+ years using film cameras. It certainly did make one think about how a camera works. Also, given the price of films and developing etc, one tended to be more thoughtful when clicking on that button!

Interestingly, although I dont take many aviation pics nowadays, a good friend and contemporary of mine does. He moved on to DSLR some years before I did, but he still retains the lessons and skills that he learnt when using an old film SLR alongside me.

In a recent email when he was taking some aviation pics in Switzerland, he mentioned how he still tended to prefocus on the spot where he wanted to take the shot, and just generally get everything set up in advance. Alongside him were others, who, using their DSLRs on auto just tended to hold the button down and try to fill a whole 4gb card in the hope of getting one good picture!

I dont intend my comment to be critical here, after all, each to his or her own, but I do think that photography is a lot more fun when you stop and think about all of the camera settings, the composition and so on………….

Just an opinion!

Regards

Paul

I agree with PNM’s first reply 100%. There are no iffs and buts, buying a more expensive camera will not automatically gurantee better results. There are so many people out there who buy a DSLR, put it into Auto or Programme mode and hope for the best! Don’t get me wrong, the odd time you will get a half decent shot, most of the time the results will be very average.
Do me one thing, learn all about how to use Shutter Priority and Aperture Priority Modes, learn what they mean and what they will do, this will guarantee better photos!!

I actually know Rob’s decision on the whole DSLR thing anyway, but for the sake of being bored on a Saturday afternoon… I’ll continue!

Lastly buy a Nikon, slightly dearer but better build quality!

We’re getting into the deep, dank, dark and frankly quite disturbing depths of ‘brandism’ here! There are many reasons a photographer would or wouldn’t choose Nikon (or any other manufacturer), but I’m a huge believer that those choices should be made by the actual person looking for the camera, and only after he/she has actually felt and played with a few different cameras.

All cameras have their own little individual good and not so good points. Personally I have a slight preference for the Canon menus and I also prefer the way they expose. Others may feel more comfortable with Nikon, Olympus, or any other manufacturer. There arn’t really any ‘bad’ modern DSLR’s out there (only bad shooting technique and editing on the part of the user). It just depends what you’re after.

It’s extremely important that whatever camera you use feels natural in your hand. If it doesn’t, you probably won’t want to use it as much and you might end up losing interest in shooting altogether. If you find the right camera, you’ll want to spend as much time with it in your hand creating images as you possibly can!

I must agree about shooting film, though. I much prefer shooting things like landscapes or general ‘scenic’ shots on film rather than digital. It makes you think much more about composition and I believe makes you a better photographer in the long run. I think film is something every photographer should have some experience of.

Paul

If you are talking about the digital zoom, for aviation photography especially you want to stay as far away from digital zoom as you can.

It ruins photos.

For what its worth, I think that the cheapest route into serious photography is to buy an old film SLR camera and zoom lens. These are available very cheaply second hand nowadays – probably about £100 or less.

They will certainly give anyone the opportunity to learn the basics in terms of aperture/film speed etc.

Just a thought!

BTW Rob , if you go for a DSLR such as the Canon package that you are looking at, remember that the power of the zoom will probably be a lot less than you have with your current compact.

Hi Rob,

I started with the cheapest SLR money could buy in the pre digital days, what I would suggest, is to go out with and buy a secondhand DSLR and learn the basics, get a decent hand book, (I used Micheal Langfords 35mm handbook) but there many more suited to DSLR use now and practise.

You should be able to pick up a first or second generation 6 mega pixel DSLR body for £200 -£300, and a reasonable zoom lens for similar money, have a look on ebay.

Lastly buy a Nikon, slightly dearer but better build quality!

Septic.

Rob,

I think what Paul is saying is correct. When i first started out, i had quite a similar standard camera to yours, and i thought by getting a better camera, it would enable me to produce images of a higher standard. After consulting a few screeners on the Jet Photos forum, i found that i was actually not using the camera i had to it’s full potential. I spent Quite a lot of time at the airport over the summer of 2006, learning the camera i had and getting to grips with photoshop. I am pleased to say this resulted in getting my first photos accepted on JP.

In December 2006 the time came to start thinking about an upgrade. This was of course after a year of properly learning my standard point and shoot. I upgraded to the 400D and even though i had some knowledge of photography it was still a big learning curve. Using the camera, and using photoshop. It actually took me 6 months of shooting with the DSLR to find the settings that suited me best, and it took 10 months for me to be pleased with my originals, straight off the camera.

So, as you can see it isn’t just something that happens over night, it takes a fair amount of time. I have known Paul since the start of August last year and he has helped me a lot in the past 5 or 6 months. At the end of the day, you only get out of photography, what you are willing to put in. If you put the time and effort in then you will get the results you are looking for.

Tom

With these cameras set to ‘program’ in the first instance and with self focussing lenses it’s almost impossible to take a bad picture and with SLRs

I’m a screener on an aviation photo site and I can tell you with total 100% certainty that is absolutely not the case. I’ve seen so many examples of people who never spend time learning how to actually use a camera, buy a better one in the hope it will give them better photos and it simply doesn’t happen. Cameras don’t take good photos. The skill of the photographer does that and I don’t know of any experienced photographer who thinks different.

Give a crap bass player my nice £1300 G&L 5 string and it will sound crap. Photography is no different!

Just for the fun of it, here’s a quick comparison. One was taken on a £150 Fuji and the other one was taken using a £700 DSLR with a £750 lens.

The difference is clear, but the only reason both those shots both look OK is because the person who took them (me) has spent the time learning how to use a camera and editing software, and unfortunately if you want to produce the results, you must go through that process.

Skills are the most important thing when it comes to getting good results, not equipment!

Paul

Thank you so much all of you for your comments its made me look at it and think weather or not to buy 1?

how ever i feel that people put me down because of my poor pictures and 90% of myaviation users say its cause of my camera

they say a dslr camera will offer more fuctions and better prospects to shooting

john y regarding your post can you intoduce me to a camera you are reffering to?

id like to look into

thanks again
rob

You know I don’t really agree with that. It’s the sort of advice that photographic shops give simply so that having sold an inferior camera they can sell you another one in the future.

Modern DSLR’s, like the less expensive Nikon D series are the easiest cameras in the world to use, especially with the excellent zoom lenses now available. Let’s face it, photography is really only about five things; available light, composition, focus, aperture & shutter speed.

With these cameras set to ‘program’ in the first instance and with self focussing lenses it’s almost impossible to take a bad picture and with SLRs there is no shutter delay, they have longer battery life and you take exactly what you see. Well not quite. Its always a little more. They give you that little bit more picture which can be cropped off if necessary.

And you’ve got a camera that’ll probably last you the rest of your life.

Best wishes with what you choose and learn as you go mate.:)

John Y

Rob… Make of this advice what you will. It’s purely an opinion, but I’d say for the stage you’re at in photography your best path to better photos isn’t a higher quality camera, it’s more knowledge. Personally I’d stick with the Fuji for a while longer, learn a little more about how the camera actually works and then look at a DSLR. I think only when you start to get what you believe are the highest quality images possible from the Fuji, and the camera becomes the one thing holding you back, should you upgrade. Your knowledge will then allow you to get awesome quality images right from when you first use a DSLR, instead of trying to cope with the very steep learning curve you encounter when you shoot with SLR’s straight away.

Hope that helps, and as always feel free to drop me a PM or email if I can help further.

Paul

Hi There,

There is a possibility that the Canon EOS400D will be replaced by a new, improved model shortly. Canon often announces new models at large photography conventions – there is one called PMA at the end of this month and another called Photokina later this year.

Many people predict that Canon will announce a 400D replacement at PMA this month. Canon replaces old model SLRs every 18 months or so, so this prediction may be correct, as the 400D was released around August 2006.

So, you may soon be able to get a cheaper 400D, as prices will drop if a replacement is announced. You could use the money saved on better lenses.

Or you may wish to wait for the new model. Either way, I would wait to see if anything is announced late this month before making a decision on which model to go for.

Most photographers tell you that you should spend more money on the lenses, rather than the bodies. This is because technology in the camera bodies changes rapidly, so you may end up buying a newer camera body in a couple of years, but you will normally keep your lenses for manyn more years.

Regarding the lens included in the package, is it a Canon lens or another brand? You need to find out and then do some research to see whether it is a good lens or not. A good website for this is Photozone.de:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/45-canon-eos-aps-c/331-canon-eos-aps-c-lens-tests–reviews

It is a good idea to try and get a lens with image stabilisation (IS) built in, as IS lenses can result in less blurred photos – especially at the upper end of the telephoto range and in low-light conditions.

You also need to think about how much zoom you actually need, versus lens size/weight. Build quality may or may not be an issue – personally I have used “consumer” grade (ie. cheaper) Canon lenses for many years and have had no problems at all (as long as you choose the better ones). The alternatives are the very expensive “L-series” professional lenses.

I use the Canon 70-300mm IS lens, and it is excellent value for money and easy to carry about. Here’s a link:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/200-canon-ef-70-300mm-f4-56-usm-is-test-report–review

Canon also recently released a 55-250mm IS lens: http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/Canon%20EOS%20Lens%20Tests/45-canon-eos-aps-c/194-canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f4-56-is-test-report–review

Look up the lens in the package, and see whether it is any good. You also need a lens for the wide-angle range – does the package include the usual 18-55mm non-IS Canon kit lens? There is a recently released 18-55mm IS version available too. Personally, I used the 18-55mm non-IS kit lens for a couple of years. Recently, I forked out extra $$$ to buy the F2.8 17-55mm IS lens, which works great in low-light conditions (eg. hangars).

Hope this helps.

Regards,
David Eyre
Perth, Western Australia.

Is it not a currently held view in the medical profession that almost everybody experiences at least a petit mal fit at some point in their life?

Very useful, thanks BlueRobin. Much appreicated. Yeah I’m in the U.K

Hi, I assume you are based in the UK?

I am first going to assume you are interested in the JAR-PPL (A or H).

There are two classifications of medical, Class 1 and Class 2. Class 1 is for professional (or budding professional) pilots. Class 2 can be used by private pilots. Class 2 is generally cheaper and lasts longer, but you can fly privately on a Class 1 if you wish because this is of a higher standard.

On first principlies if you do go for a medical, you should be truthful and declare any past history. I know someone who lied about his health when attempting to upgrade to a Class 1 and they immediately revoked his Class 2 medical. All this goes on record of course. Somewhat messed up his desired future career as an ATCO at age 23.

As for standards, a good place to start is here

Have a good read through the requirements. You will likely need to read the Class 2 Initial page.

If you have any doubts, off of that page there is an e-mail link where you can contact the clinic at the CAA. They should be able to give you any specific advice.

If you cannot gain a JAR medical, there is a way around. With the NPPL (“national private pilot’s license”) the medical requirements are lower and are roughly on-par with being medically fit to drive a HGV. The flying time requirements are slightly lower than the JAR PPL so you will save a small amount of money though the privileges* are lower, namely you presently cannot fly outside of the UK. See the NPPL page for more information.

Was that useful?

BR

*one day I may be able to spell this word without looking it up!