Advice on camera

[mahagonny]

any SLR camera is fine as long as it can adjust shutter speed, automatic ISO, priority shutter program and good high pixels and, finally, the focus that allows you to "chase" a moving subject. Optics are most important. You don't need a very long lens if you have to take a close photograph so the zoom you have indicated is a good compromise. Like all zooms, of course, there is the problem of soft images at extreme focal lengths (obviously by jetphotos standards).
exuse my bad english

[Diama]

ive been using a nikon D40, with a Sigma 18-50 mm f2.8 EX DC Macro lens on it.
its basic but really easy to use with great results. I love it, I take a photo of planes, different nature, I use it for my work, take a photo of flowers and then delivery flowers Russia
you could get this set up for abot £500.

[Quebec Golf]

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM is a good lens,
It is generally considered that the quality is better than the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6, but the STM version must be purchased, the previous version is not as good.

This is very much my experience with the 55-250mm STM as well. Cheap and amazing. So sharp that I thought I got lucky with MFA on my lens-body combination, but then it was just as sharp on my new body.

A 70-200 L lens with stabilization would cost at least 7x as much as a 55-250 STM, and, in my opinion, would offer no tangible advantage for shooting airliners for screened sites. If you're looking at Canon, save your money and squeeze as many megapixels as you can afford out of a used two or three digit DSLR.

Regards,

Alex

[marfi80]

I'm writing this from the perspective of having started plane spotting less than a year ago, so still a 'newcomer'.
The camera I started with (and still stick to it) is a Panasonic DMC-FZ1000. I initially bought it for holiday, tried it out at the airport and since them I'm in plane spotting. Costs were around 500€.

It's not an SLR camera, you even cannot change the objective. However, I'm really satisfied with it and in combination with some editing software and a good monitor the screeners kindly accept a decent number of shots I take with this camera.
I'm looking into upgrading to better material now, but I still feel the Panasonic DMC-FZ1000 is a very good camera to start with (although some Canon purists might disagree here ).

Best,
marfi80

[seahawk]

A 100-400 that fits into the 500 pound budget together with a body, might be quite worn out. I also do not think a 10 year old semi-pro body from either manufacturer is a good choice, as the sensor is simply old and every entry level DSLR runs circles around them when it comes to image quality. On the Nikon side a D5100 and any successor in the series should do just fine. I got myself a D5600 for holidays and it is really amazing how good this little camera is. Sure the handling is not semi-pro style and you need to use the screen to change some settings that can be changed by pressing a button and turning a dial on the semi-pro bodies, but if you are new to photography the solution with the screen is maybe better, as it also offers you an explanation on what the setting does.

In the end we should not forget that airliners are easy subjects and pose no challenge to any modern ILC camera. They are big, usually have a clear contrast against the background and fly in a predictable way. I dare say a lot of the gear craziness you see with spotters is just wasted money.

If you think about airshow you can make an argument for a better body or if you want to to shoot challenging subjects like sports, birds or insects in flight, that is where the high end bodies shine.

[pawelm]

If you go for Canon, you can look for a used 100-400mk I L lens. You should be more than happy with it

[YsMilan]

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM is a good lens,
It is generally considered that the quality is better than the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6, but the STM version must be purchased, the previous version is not as good.

[TomJetUK]

Thanks for all your suggestions! greatly appreciated

[LX-A343]

Forget the lens in my first post. The P version does not work wit hthe D5100. Here you go: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-70-30...4656444&sr=8-7

Just another approach, if you go the Canon way. The 70-200 f/4 is a great lens, albeit only a 200mm one. The 75-300 has more reach, but I wouldn't recommend it. If you want a low cost lens which goes to 300mm, get yourself a Canon 70-300. It's affordable but with acceptable quality. I got this as a travel lens.

As for cameras, I also suggest you check the 2nd hand market for a used 40D, 50D, 60D, .... . After all, these are good cameras, still better than any 2000 or other 4-digit variants. And last but not least: save on the camera and invest more in lenses. That goes for any brand.

[seahawk]

Forget the lens in my first post. The P version does not work wit hthe D5100. Here you go: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nikon-70-30...4656444&sr=8-7

[TomJetUK]

Thank you!

[seahawk]

Or go to the Nikon side.

https://www.jessops.com/p/nikon/d5100-body-185170

and a Nikon 70-300

https://www.jessops.com/p/nikon/af-p-dx-nikkor-70-300mm-f-4-5-6-3g-ed-vr-lens-100543

[TomJetUK]

B7772ADL Thank you for your detailed explanation, really helped. I would be more than happy with used equipment. Currently looking on eBay and indeed there are some bargains with the 40d. Been looking at your photos on Jet Photos and they bring back some old memories! Excel, My Travel, Thomsonfly. Amazing airlines back in the day.

[B7772ADL]

I'd try and avoid a plastic mount body if possible, but at the end of the day i'm pretty sure you can get decent results from any of the current bodies when paired with good quality glass, which is the key. I've been editing some 20D pics from 2007 and I think that was an 8mp body, but they are paired with an L lens, and the quality combined with Photoshop 2020 makes for some very acceptable photos for JP.

If you are open to some options, I would possibly consider some used bodies. I'd pick a Canon 40D and some used 70-200 F4 L glass. I reckon you could get that for under £500 and you would get some cracking images. I have used a 40D, it's a cracker for image quality even if it gets no where near today's multi-megapixel standards.

[TomJetUK]

I'm just really undecided. I see many use the Canon 200d camera as well, I really don't know what to do :/