You have to buy what you can afford, you also have to remember the lens is more important the body of the camera, better glass = better images.

 

 If I was the OP I would purchase the best lens with the longest zoom I can afford, I would also stay with canon lenses as these work, Sigma are cheap for a reason, I had a 170-500 Sigma, it was left to me when my father passed away, I used to hold my office door open as that is all it was fit for unless you wanted your images to look blurry.

 

 You can't go wrong with the 70-300mm IS lens from Canon, this is as close as you will get to "L" quality for around £300.

 

 As for cropping in to make the images bigger, this is where a better body would help, more advanced sensors = less noise, try keeping your ISO at 100 this will also reduce noise and allow you to crop in closer.

I'll post some images later from my Sigma just to show how misleading the above post is

If you're a pro or made of money, stick with Canon, if you're a keen amateur on a budget there is nothing wrong with going down the Sigma route

Not made of money Brimma, I bought my 100-400 second hand for £400, just look at the classifieds you will find them out there for reasonable money.

Not made of money Brimma, I bought my 100-400 second hand for £400, just look at the classifieds you will find them out there for reasonable money.

Buying used can always be a bit of a lottery though

Buying used can always be a bit of a lottery though

 

I have to agree with your comment yes, you should always take your body and use the lens before you commit to buying it, difficult if it is an Ebay purchase.

That is my point though as the camera is quite old now (7 or 8 years old) and it cost as a kit less than £400 if my memory serves me right.  I don't really want to be paying out loads more on a new lens for it only to be used two or three times a year but would like to have the option of something better.  Justifying such an expense is difficult with so little usage.

 

I have just checked some of the pictures and I was using ISO200 with an F stop of F/32 and an exposure of 1/40 sec at the full length of 250mm.  As I say the pictures are too big to put on here for you guys to see and if I use software to reduce their size it will only make them worse.  With it being on AV setting it should sort out the shutter speed but perhaps I was going for too high an exposure thinking larger the number smaller the hole and if being brilliant sunshine. 

 

So can anyone answer the question should I still be using IS or just knock it off and then use a setting where I can change the shutter speed?

This is a shot taken on Friday at RAF Coningsby on my Nikon D7000 with Sigma 50-500mm zoom

 

Exif details - 210mm, f10, 1/200 sec for prop blur, ISO100

 

First is a slight crop of the original to centre the aircraft, the second is a close crop to show detail

 

 

 

 

 

Not a very helpful post from an avid photographer

I run a Sigma 18-250 for most situations, but if I want to get closer (ie making the planes bigger) I have a Sigma 50-500

Touché!

Taking photos of planes is inherently easier when they're close by as this one must be due to your 'slight crop' @ 210mm. If it had been at the other side of the airfield then you'd still be needing a substantially bigger crop with the 500mm.

That's why I said that people will still struggle with a 'substantial' zoom as planes don't normally come closer just because you want them to! Any sort of cropping will magnify the imperfections that are present so if it's at all possible, try to fill the frame 'optically' before resorting to computer enhancement.

A bridge camera will always have the edge on zoom capabilities but loses out on sensor size so, at some stage in the 'distance to object', there'll be a crossover point between SLR & bridge cameras. Or to put it another way, between lenses that can only go up to 500mm and those that can go way beyond that figure.

Thanks for the input Guys much appreciated.  I am going to have a look at a few options.

 

Great photo Brian.  Didn't realise you were there mind you there were several hundred in various places including parked on the double yellows all over the pace.  We were down by the mound at the far side of the runway where the Typhoon kept setting off car alarms.

Thanks

I was on the mound too Parked fully on the grass verge without a yellow line

Was it you that had a barbie going?   I knew there would be a lot of folk there but was surprised at just how many.  well worth it though even if I did have to leave to get back for work before the end.

No, I was stood just at the top of the walkway up with an Australian sun hat and sunglasses

Well if you had an Aussie hat on you should have had a Barbie mate.

With regards to taking photos of the plane, the old rule of thumb was 1/FL (on a full frame camera) so if using a 50-250mm at full zoom, you wouldn't go above 1/250 (adjusting for a crop camera means 1/250x1.6 ie 1/400. Even with image stalilisation, there is a limit to how slow you can go before you will get blur. also if you are on a tripop/monopod, IS can cause minor blurring (on some lenses) as the motor tries to correct for movement that isn't there.

 

Even though my 50-500 has OS (sigma's version of IS) I still try to aim for the 1/fl to minimise movement blur.

 

There are times when I change it though ie for prop blur or when panning

I am beginning to understand the 1/FL bit now but as I say I am shooting on AV (Aperture Priority) so it does not give me the choice of setting speed because it does it for me.  So should I be using Manual setting instead?  I use AV mainly for photographing trains where you need the FOV to keep as much as possible in focus.  I am guessing that with the aircraft that isn't so much of an issue but as I say I am only guessing hence the questions.

I am beginning to understand the 1/FL bit now but as I say I am shooting on AV (Aperture Priority) so it does not give me the choice of setting speed because it does it for me. So should I be using Manual setting instead? I use AV mainly for photographing trains where you need the FOV to keep as much as possible in focus. I am guessing that with the aircraft that isn't so much of an issue but as I say I am only guessing hence the questions.

Have you got a TV mode as that's shutter priority so will let you choose the shutter speed and the camera will select the appropriate aperture to give you the correct exposure assuming the usual parameters of the subject being niether predominately too dark or too light. If you have scene modes on your camera see if there's an action or sport mode which will do a similar job.

If you want prop blur (and you really do need it otherwise the engines look like they've stopped working), you need 1/200 sec shutter speed or slower, but as kilted says, the slower you go the more chance there is of blurring the subject

Just remember to change your settings when the fast jets come along

Let me chime in, if I may.  First... kit.  I have a Nikon D7100 and D200 (as well as an old D70s "for back-up").  My long-reach lens is a Sigma 100-300 f/4 (I also have the matched 1.4x teleconverter, but this is rarely used).  I am a big fan of Sigma - I have a few of their lenses (the 100-300, 10-20, 105 macro plus a cheapie telephoto zoom).  I almost always use the 100-300 on a monopod, which allows for steadier low shutter speed images (the prop-blur being the classic requirements, but also for speed blur when shooting moving cars/bikes etc).

 

I almost exclusively use Av when shooting, because depth-of-field is my normal control preference.  That said, I happily use Av to control shutter speed (ie, if I want a faster shutter speed, I open it up).  I will also use spot metering and exposure compensation to alter exposure - I have the AUTO-ISO set so that if shutter speed drops too low the ISO will bump up to hold the shutter speed above a set limit.

 

After decades using cameras and with an 'O'-level in photography, I almost never use manual settings.  I can and I will if the situation demands it, but the sort of shooting I do often leads to changing conditions and I know that if I have some automation in the exposure then I won't accidentally shoot a whole sequence over- or under-exposed.

 

I have read in many forums people wanting to use manual settings, as if this somehow validates them as a photographer or will magically present some special exposure settings, but most will simply twiddle the dials and settings until the exposure is what the camera is telling them is correct... may as well have let the camera do it!  As I said, it is worth knowing how all the functions work and staying on top of exposure with various tweaks, but it is easy to miss a shot because you are bogged down with settings.

Just a thought.  On my old film slr I had a 2 x converter.  Would one of them be worth getting to use on the odd occasion I need it rather than invest in a bigger lens?

Just a thought.  On my old film slr I had a 2 x converter.  Would one of them be worth getting to use on the odd occasion I need it rather than invest in a bigger lens?

 

 

That will depend 

 

Some (not all) lenses lose the autofocus function with a converter, and have to be focused manually - they also let less light into the camera, so may not work well in low light

Well if you are looking at fast stuff be it bikes jets or whatever autofocus is a must I would think.  Another on my option list but would prefer a lens.  May see what I can find in our local shop and have a natter.  Is there still a second hand shop in Lincoln Brian?  I seem to recall there was was on Silver Street or Clasketgate.

Just saw this - I'd strongly recommend going to a proper camera shop (preferably a local shop rather than a branch of a chain) since they'll usually let you play with kit before buying, and will often come up with little sweeteners like free T-mounts for Tamron or cats, free UK or skylight filters... Ok, that's maybe £5 when you're spending £100, but the feel-good factor is more than 5%.

 

Also, up to 200mm, I'd look at zooms (since the OP has a 28-55 a 70-210 nominal looks good) or for flying aircraft and indeed wildlife a 500mm F5.6 catadioptic wouldn't be over large.

Well if you are looking at fast stuff be it bikes jets or whatever autofocus is a must I would think. Another on my option list but would prefer a lens. May see what I can find in our local shop and have a natter. Is there still a second hand shop in Lincoln Brian? I seem to recall there was was on Silver Street or Clasketgate.

London Camera Exchange have two branches in Lincoln, one on Silver Street opposite the bookshop, and one on High Street near Argos

I certainly wouldn't recommend a fixed 500mm lens purely for it's lack of flexibility

Cheers Brian.  I think a ride across to Lincoln is called for this weekend after all.

Well if you are looking at fast stuff be it bikes jets or whatever autofocus is a must I would think.  Another on my option list but would prefer a lens.  May see what I can find in our local shop and have a natter.  Is there still a second hand shop in Lincoln Brian?  I seem to recall there was was on Silver Street or Clasketgate.

Definitely think about a zoom unless absolute sharpness is a must. I would stick with the big three lens manufacturers for Canon - Canon, Sigma and Tamron. Any one of those will give good results with Canon edging it especially with the L range lenses (albeit with a large price difference).

 

I have the sigma 50-500 OS and it manages to perform perfectly adequately for most events. Having used it and its predecessor (170-500 borrowed from a friend), they focus quickly enough for most things, have pretty good sharpness and contrast.

 

One thing is to try the lens with your camera - there can be slight focus issues which although the lens and camera are both within specification (both focussing in fractionally different planes) can amount to the combination missing focus slightly. Unless using a mid to high end DSLR (with focus adjustment capability), they can cause images to look poor but these (if apparent) can normally be resolved with trying 2 or 3 different lenses.