Mustang Air to Air: The Sequel
/forum/topic/600984/4141

1       2       3              4141      
4142
       4143              4533       4534       end

MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2649
Country: United Kingdom

Lovely Steve.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Given that this test clip was shot on a really choppy day, I think that I'm very close to having the production capability that I've been working toward. A run like this in smooth air and great light will be perfect. The response, to just the test clips, has been pretty startling, big market here I think.

Just the fact that my clients are now aware that I am working on this has opened up assignments. I've been commissioned to do a couple of airborne videos where we will use a helicopter mounted gimbal stabilized HD camera system. I had a meeting yesterday with the company that will provide that platform. The system of monitor and joystick controls is a little different, but I think I can become proficient with it fairly quickly. There is also the option of having a video technician manipulate the system and me assuming the role of DOP in certain cases, foreign to me but I can see instances where that might be a more efficient way to go.



20120100&utm_campaign=7701&email_id=Y2xpcF90cmFuc2NvZGVkfDkxNjdmMjI3OWU1ZWE1MjA2YTNjYTE3ZDBiYzdmNGRlNDI5fDI5Mjk2ODF8MTQzMTYwODQwNnw3NzAx


MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2649
Country: United Kingdom

Jim,

I watched the video on an iPad Air 2 which has a retina display.
One thing I noticed was that you could make out individual power lines as you flew over them.
Can you film straight ahead, rather than sideways?



MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2649
Country: United Kingdom

Given the option would you swap a 7 year old 300F2.8 IS L for the new 100-400 IS L II or keep the 300?



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Hi Mark,

Yes, I can capture that straight on "bird's eye" perspective, but so far it still has a tiny bit of shimmy in the footage. Several of my clients have said that the view is so striking, they don't care, but I'm aiming for perfection. We're designing and building a new mount that I hope removes that last little vibration. Additionally, of course, if I'm shooting from a helicopter I can have the pilot fly me sideways and get the same effect.

I thought that this would be a valuable commodity to be able to produce, but I'm overwhelmed by the interest. One of the great advantages to the system I am developing is that I can take it anywhere in the world, air to air, air to ground, air to sea, it's infinitely adaptable. Just the mention of the capability sends my clients into a brainstorming frenzy, which is a very good thing.

My entire video arsenal is composed of Sony equipment, from POV up to the FS7 and each camera has a specific niche in the process. Kind of nice that the system has come together the way it has. The challenge now is continuing to make it all as instinctively familiar to me as my still gear. This has been daunting over the past year, but extremely interesting and now that I'm beginning to see applications and results, very energizing.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Mark, and I love the 300/2.8, I'd have to say yes to your question. The new 100-400 is a wonderfully versatile lens, and the quality is everything you would expect, and then some.



Hans Li
Registered: May 02, 2007
Total Posts: 17
Country: United States

Mark, The new 100-400 is great, but if you need the extra 2 stops of light OR want that narrow depth of field, then you've got to keep the 2.8.



MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2649
Country: United Kingdom

Jim / Hans,

Many thanks. I've asked one of the retailers I use to quote me for a direct exchange. Time will see if I proceed with it.
Mark



Tim Adams
Registered: Jan 01, 2004
Total Posts: 2887
Country: United States

MMcGrath wrote:
Given the option would you swap a 7 year old 300F2.8 IS L for the new 100-400 IS L II or keep the 300?


My 300 is about that old. No way in hell I trade it for a zoom.



MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2649
Country: United Kingdom

Tim,

Thanks.

Mark



FotoBuf78
Registered: Apr 16, 2009
Total Posts: 56
Country: United States

Tim Adams wrote:
MMcGrath wrote:
Given the option would you swap a 7 year old 300F2.8 IS L for the new 100-400 IS L II or keep the 300?


My 300 is about that old. No way in hell I trade it for a zoom.


The only thing I found to trade my 300 2.8 for was a 300 2.8 II. Wouldn't trade it for anything. I have shot the 100-400 II and while nice, it is NOT a 300 2.8. I'd say keep it too.



Razor17
Registered: Oct 08, 2012
Total Posts: 465
Country: United States

Very nice Steve...



stevezzzz
Registered: Aug 01, 2010
Total Posts: 4084
Country: United States

Thanks, everyone. That Mossie image has garnered more attention in less than 24 hours than just about anything I've shot in the last few years. It was a dream come true to see it slot into position on our wing and have it fill (and I do mean fill) my viewfinder. Today's mission with the 262 and the P-51 was also wonderful, but I came for the Mossie and that's what I'll remember.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Well Mark, sorry for the obviously incorrect advice, but heck, what do I know.........? I can tell you that had I been shooting the beloved 300/2.8 for the Snake Bite assignment, I would more than likely have missed the hero shot. I hear what the boys are saying, and I love it too, but it's a fixed 300, not the end all answer to rapidly moving and changing subjects. Like I have long said, they are all just tools and I'm fortunate in that I'm not in an either or situation.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Great work Zim!



USM IS
Registered: Apr 12, 2010
Total Posts: 1699
Country: United States

MMcGrath wrote:
Given the option would you swap a 7 year old 300F2.8 IS L for the new 100-400 IS L II or keep the 300?


Maybe a kidney for a 100-400, but you would have to pry my 300 f2.8 out of my cold dead fingers.........just like my Kimber.

Mike



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Hi Mike,

I don't have my Kimber yet. JR went off to Dubai supposedly for 10 days, and he's still there a month later, hammering out several deals. My Kimber got put on the back burner. Hopefully O'Bummer won't outlaw them before I get mine!



dtw757
Registered: Jan 05, 2009
Total Posts: 129
Country: United States

USM IS wrote:
Ooooooooooh, Steve! My next favorite aircraft after the Mustang. Two Merlins are better than one! Very well captured!!
Time to go watch 633rd Squadron and get my fix.

Mike


Great movie for it's time....ever notice when you are watching the scenes (as though a go-pro is on the panel) that look backwards at the pilots, there are no Vertical Stabilizers on their planes. Just a "minor" studio goof



FlyingPhotog
Registered: May 09, 2008
Total Posts: 4775
Country: United States

Jim: Nice start with "video dabbling" .. It's a very different world but I'm sure you'll tackle it to perfection...

Mark: Have to say, keep the 300. It's just too good a chunk of glass.

Zim: I got nuthin' .. Just outstanding!

Stinson Reliant belonging to the late Bob Odegaard. I actually shot this in 2010, but having recently overhauled my website where I now group images pretty much only by genre instead of year / genre / location / moon phase / current Chinese New Year Animal, I have more flexibility to mine gems and put them up...



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 19272
Country: United States

Thanks Jay! Weebeesee, but I'm in it up to my ears and there ain't no turning' back at this point. I was just walking around the yard trying each of the six Canon Cinema Primes that I have on loan. Next week I'm being loaned the Zeiss CP lenses so I'll have a go with those. Right at the moment it's like someone loaning me a Citation X, couldn't even get it fired up One thing has become obvious, my Canon L lenses are a nice possibility in unique situations, but they are no substitute for quality cinema primes. I am light years beyond where I was 12 months ago and I expect that will continue. The more I learn about my Sony FS7, the more certain I am that I made a good choice.

That Stinson is luminescent Buddy, just a flawless image.



1       2       3              4141      
4142
       4143              4533       4534       end