Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Telephoto Lens Requirements for Shots like KJFK Canarsie Climb

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Telephoto Lens Requirements for Shots like KJFK Canarsie Climb

    I've got a standard Canon EF 75-300 f4-5.6 III lens that seems to do the trick for 95% of all the aviation photos I want/can take. I have experienced firsthand the limitations of the lens at 200+ in terms of softness of the photo.

    Most recently, I experienced it when trying to photograph some planes departing on the Breezy Point or Canarsie Climb out of JFK (see attached). So, I'm wondering if there are some recommendations on a good telephoto lens that can handle distanced shots like this: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10066791. Seems like most people are using 100-500 or 100-600mm lenses to capture these types of photos with clarity. Not knowing much about the different lens offerings, I'm wondering if anyone can guide me in the right direction for something that would be able to handle shots like this from afar. Looking to get some suggestions before I go out and spend $1k+ on a new lens.
    Attached Files

  • #2
    In your case using the Canon system, there are many choices. I would personally recommend the Sigma 150-600mm C which is an affordable "super telephoto" lens that can definitely handle shots like the Canarsie climb. It has great build quality and is relatively affordable at only 900 US.

    Comment


    • #3
      As a user, I can recommend the Tamron 150-600g2. From what I've heard from fellow spotters the Sigma S 60-600 is also really good, but bit pricier. Just be aware, that at this distance, the long focal lenght is imporatant, but the quality of air plays even bigger part. It just has to be as perfect as possible, whitout any haze etc, to get sharp shots.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks to both of you. Do you guys also have a more middle-of-the-road telephoto lens like I do (55-300mm)? If so, have you replaced that lens with the super telephoto lens or do you have specific uses for both?

        Comment


        • #5
          I have 3 lenses, 2 long ones and a wide one. Ofc it all depends on your spotting locations. If you can't get really close, there's no point in having let's say 50mm on wife end, as you will rarely use it. If you are looking for something in the middle, you may also check the 100-400mm, should be more versitle, especially if you have crop sensor camera. I used the 100-400 on my trip to LHR (crop sensor) and AMS (full frame), and it was more than enough of what I needed.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by pawelm View Post
            I have 3 lenses, 2 long ones and a wide one. Ofc it all depends on your spotting locations. If you can't get really close, there's no point in having let's say 50mm on wife end, as you will rarely use it. If you are looking for something in the middle, you may also check the 100-400mm, should be more versitle, especially if you have crop sensor camera. I used the 100-400 on my trip to LHR (crop sensor) and AMS (full frame), and it was more than enough of what I needed.
            Are you considering your 100-400 and the 150-600 as your "long lenses?" When you make reference to crop sensor and full frame, are you referring to the camera body you used for/at each of those airports?

            Comment


            • #7
              Yup, 100-400 and 150-600 are the long ones. I uses 100-400 with my old Canon 7d in LHR, and same lens with C6mk2 at AMS. In both cases you can get close to the aircraft, and in both cases that one lens was enough.
              LHR: https://www.jetphotos.com/showphotos...d&sort-order=0
              AMS: https://www.jetphotos.com/showphotos...d&sort-order=0

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by pawelm View Post
                Yup, 100-400 and 150-600 are the long ones. I uses 100-400 with my old Canon 7d in LHR, and same lens with C6mk2 at AMS. In both cases you can get close to the aircraft, and in both cases that one lens was enough.
                LHR: https://www.jetphotos.com/showphotos...d&sort-order=0
                AMS: https://www.jetphotos.com/showphotos...d&sort-order=0
                ah, thanks. Nice photos by the way.

                So, I guess I could upgrade my 55-300mm lens and go 100-400mm while also getting the 150-600mm lens. But this would be very costly, so I can only afford 1 new lens. Couple scenarios to illustrate:

                1. I upgrade my 55-300 to go to 100-400mm and it captures 95% of my shooting
                2. I add the 150-600mm lens to my bag and I now have 100% of all my capabilities on hand, but have to switch lenses (maybe?)

                So I can never really get "that" close to airplanes where I really use anything under 100mm. With that in mind, would the 150-600mm be the most versatile option that would allow me to capture most planespotting photos while also allowing me to capture the "Canarsie Climb' photos that would be ~<5% of my shooting adventures? OR, should I just target the 95% of my shooting and go upgrade to a 100-400mm lens (example: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM)?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Maybe you should look for a place, where you can rent a lens, and see what suits you best.
                  You also need to take weight into consideration. My Tamron is almost a 1kg heavier than C100-400, and it's much bigger. It may be a problem when you go for the whole day of shooting. I bought the 150-600 not only for airport spotting, but also for high altitude overflights and wildlife shots. If I'd take those out of the equasion, I'd probably stick with 100-400. You have few options here, used Canon 100-400 mk I, which is good, but it's 23 years old construction. You can have the Tamron or Sigma, which are new, with very good optics, great image stabilization, and there're around 800USD, at least in Poland. You may also try the C100-400mk2, which according to tests is the best of them, but it's at least 3 times more expensive than Tamron or Sigma, and I'm not sure if it's three times times better.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Invested in a Nikon 18-300 f3.5 - f5.6G Ed VR. Fitted to my Nikon D7200 and it’s become my go everywhere camera / lens combo. Well, it would be if I was allowed to go out everywhere ! Poxy Covid !!!
                    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by pawelm View Post
                      Maybe you should look for a place, where you can rent a lens, and see what suits you best.
                      You also need to take weight into consideration. My Tamron is almost a 1kg heavier than C100-400, and it's much bigger. It may be a problem when you go for the whole day of shooting. I bought the 150-600 not only for airport spotting, but also for high altitude overflights and wildlife shots. If I'd take those out of the equasion, I'd probably stick with 100-400. You have few options here, used Canon 100-400 mk I, which is good, but it's 23 years old construction. You can have the Tamron or Sigma, which are new, with very good optics, great image stabilization, and there're around 800USD, at least in Poland. You may also try the C100-400mk2, which according to tests is the best of them, but it's at least 3 times more expensive than Tamron or Sigma, and I'm not sure if it's three times times better.
                      Do you have any experience with the C100-400 mk1? My readings seem to suggest that the MkII is the creme de la creme, but the Mk1 is a classic. In your opinion, is it worth the $1800-ish to get the MkII over $8-900 for a MkI? (I think I've convinced myself to upgrade to the L-series Canon lens since 99% of my shooting will be within that 100-400mm range)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I own the mk1 for almost 8 years, and I really can't say anything bad about it. It's sharp, and the "pump action" zoom is great, you can change focal lenght in no time.
                        There's one "but", which sooner or later may or may not occur - the awsome "pump" may get stuck in one position, and you won't be able to zoom it. It happened to me. Canon service fixed it in a week for an equivalent of 250$. Apart from that I had no problems with it.
                        As I said, you might wanna check the Tamron or Sigma 100-400mm. They will be as sharp as the L mk1, and they will have better IS. Not that the one in Canon is bad, if you're not planing to make 1/30s hand held shots, which is doable anyway, it is good enough.
                        As for the Mk2 - it's better than the old one, but Canon got crazy with that price tag. If I had the money, I'd buy it, beacuse probably it's the best lens for our needs. However I'm sure that you will be very satisfied with the mk1 or the ones from T or S.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by pawelm View Post
                          I own the mk1 for almost 8 years, and I really can't say anything bad about it. It's sharp, and the "pump action" zoom is great, you can change focal lenght in no time.
                          There's one "but", which sooner or later may or may not occur - the awsome "pump" may get stuck in one position, and you won't be able to zoom it. It happened to me. Canon service fixed it in a week for an equivalent of 250$. Apart from that I had no problems with it.
                          As I said, you might wanna check the Tamron or Sigma 100-400mm. They will be as sharp as the L mk1, and they will have better IS. Not that the one in Canon is bad, if you're not planing to make 1/30s hand held shots, which is doable anyway, it is good enough.
                          As for the Mk2 - it's better than the old one, but Canon got crazy with that price tag. If I had the money, I'd buy it, beacuse probably it's the best lens for our needs. However I'm sure that you will be very satisfied with the mk1 or the ones from T or S.
                          Very appreciative for the advice. Nothing against Sigma or Tamron, but I keep gravitating toward the OEM lens. I'm currently just doing planespotting and for the foreseeable future, I don't see myself getting into any other kinds of photography. Given that, I ruled out a 100-600mm lens for another time. In the meantime, I'm looking for a MkI at a good price with reasonable quality. I guess in my opinion, if Im going to spend $800 and choose between Canon or a third-party, I'm inclined to go with Canon's trusted and proven optics over a third party. I'm sure I could be convinced otherwise haha.

                          Is the stuck "pump" issue a prevalent one for MkI owners? I haven't read much on that in my research.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by raceface29 View Post
                            Is the stuck "pump" issue a prevalent one for MkI owners? I haven't read much on that in my research.
                            By stuck pump I meant jammed tight/loose ring, which allows to use pump zoom. I don't know if it's common issue, but from what I've found out it happens. In my case ring got stuck at "tight" at 100mm, and trust me, there was no way to change focal lenght. Apart from not being able to zoom, it was still able to take photos. Despite that, I'm still recommending it, beacuse it's a very good lens.

                            An about third party lenses. I'm not trying to convince you to them, but consider this. As a Tamron user, I can say, that it's built quality is as good as Canon's, and it's as sharp as Canon. I assume that the T100-400 will be the same. Plus, it would be a brand new lens with warranty, and you can fine tune AF to perfectly match your camera, fix back/front focus issues and some other stuff with the tap-in console. I did that, very helpfull feature.

                            And probably most imporant thing: do not rush, take your time, if you will have an oppurtunity to test gear, do it. Even Canon's L series lenses may vary in image quality between copies. Take it easy

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by pawelm View Post

                              By stuck pump I meant jammed tight/loose ring, which allows to use pump zoom. I don't know if it's common issue, but from what I've found out it happens. In my case ring got stuck at "tight" at 100mm, and trust me, there was no way to change focal lenght. Apart from not being able to zoom, it was still able to take photos. Despite that, I'm still recommending it, beacuse it's a very good lens.

                              An about third party lenses. I'm not trying to convince you to them, but consider this. As a Tamron user, I can say, that it's built quality is as good as Canon's, and it's as sharp as Canon. I assume that the T100-400 will be the same. Plus, it would be a brand new lens with warranty, and you can fine tune AF to perfectly match your camera, fix back/front focus issues and some other stuff with the tap-in console. I did that, very helpfull feature.

                              And probably most imporant thing: do not rush, take your time, if you will have an oppurtunity to test gear, do it. Even Canon's L series lenses may vary in image quality between copies. Take it easy
                              Hey pawelm , much thanks for the advice!

                              So I'm not sure if I mentioned it earlier, but I've got the Canon EOS Rebel XTI camera body which has a crop sensor. My original question on this thread was to see what lens I needed to be able to take distanced shots like the JFK Canarsie Climb departure protocol. Now that I think about it, my camera has a 1.6x crop factor. Originally, I was thinking about trying to get myself into the 150-600mm Sigma/Tamron lens, mainly because it seemed like I needed to be somewhere around the 300-450mm focal length for those shots.

                              Now, my last post was suggesting that I would stick with the 100-400mm length (whether Sigma/Tamron or Canon). I was getting ready to just deal with the fact that my max focal length would be 400mm and that I should avoid maxing out my focal length whenever I shoot, but considering I have a crop sensor camera, my effective focal length with this lens would really be 640mm. Assuming my understanding is correct, this removes the need for me to go out and get the 150-600mm lens, right? If I never really need 500-600mm in focal length, then the 150-600mm lens is really excess to any of my requirements. Just want to make sure I understand this correctly before I go make my purchase.

                              Your "do not rush, take your time" advice was timely and handy haha!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X