Last installment from Cherry Point. All the shots of this AV-8B Harrier II I got are unsharp, I blame it on heat shimmering.. Even a fair amount of sharpening could only do so much. This was its last demo performance so whatever shots I got will be the last time.
Douglas,
I would be happy with these shots. Take a step back from your monitor and they'll look just fine. It's the memory of this last flight for the Harrier that matters most, and when you said blurry, I looked and said, Ok - I need to get my eyes checked...
BTW, after all the waiting on the RF 200-800, I’m going to pass. I was thinking about it last night , and, given the fact that I can slap a 1.4 on my 100-500 and have similar reach, or on the 600 for that matter, spending a couple of grand for that lens doesn’t make much sense . I’ll save my nickels for the next body release, which appears to be imminent.
gerov wrote:
Douglas,
I would be happy with these shots. Take a step back from your monitor and they'll look just fine. It's the memory of this last flight for the Harrier that matters most, and when you said blurry, I looked and said, Ok - I need to get my eyes checked...
Gero
---------------------------------------------
Bill Gass wrote:
Nice shots Douglas and you cleaned up really good.
Love the head on one, almost thought it was a Vulcan at first till I saw all of it.
Thank you guys! Gero, you are correct, memory is more important than sharp pictures in this case. I wish I had been into airshows when the F-14s were still flying. Bill, I wish I had the privilege to shoot in those lighting conditions!
JWilsonphoto wrote:
BTW, after all the waiting on the RF 200-800, I’m going to pass. I was thinking about it last night , and, given the fact that I can slap a 1.4 on my 100-500 and have similar reach, or on the 600 for that matter, spending a couple of grand for that lens doesn’t make much sense . I’ll save my nickels for the next body release, which appears to be imminent.
Jim, did you see the Canon R1 specs accidentally leaked by Adorama? Not sure if it's the real specs though.
Douglas L wrote:
Jim, did you see the Canon R1 specs accidentally leaked by Adorama? Not sure if it's the real specs though.
Every article/announcement I have seen has associated the R1 with "sports". If that is true, the sensor resolution will more than likely be in the 30 mp range. Sports photographers do not need high resolution sensors, we want sensors with quick auto focus and high ISO capabilities along with file sizes we can quickly transmit over the internet.
Douglas L wrote:
---------------------------------------------
Thank you guys! Gero, you are correct, memory is more important than sharp pictures in this case. I wish I had been into airshows when the F-14s were still flying. Bill, I wish I had the privilege to shoot in those lighting conditions!
Back in the day when I was in at Sub Base in San Diego I would go up to Miramar to watch the F-14. They would break for final right over the Navy Picnic area across the freeway from the main base. It was amazing to watch them break and the wings would sweep forward. All those times I went and I never grabbed a camera. Talk about lost opportunities; they were so low you could almost count the rivets. Sigh...
Ray Swindle wrote:
Every article/announcement I have seen has associated the R1 with "sports". If that is true, the sensor resolution will more than likely be in the 30 mp range. Sports photographers do not need high resolution sensors, we want sensors with quick auto focus and high ISO capabilities along with file sizes we can quickly transmit over the internet.
You are right. If I don't need to crop so much in bird photos, 30 MP is plenty for me.
---------------------------------------------
RobMoser wrote:
Back in the day when I was in at Sub Base in San Diego I would go up to Miramar to watch the F-14. They would break for final right over the Navy Picnic area across the freeway from the main base. It was amazing to watch them break and the wings would sweep forward. All those times I went and I never grabbed a camera. Talk about lost opportunities; they were so low you could almost count the rivets. Sigh...
Rob
The other plane I wish I had seen flying is the SR-71. I saw the U-2 flying a couple years ago but it's no Blackbird.
Douglas,
Fantastic job with the Harrier. Heat distortion is the enemy of airshows and long lenses. I guess we need Topaz to add "heat distortion removal".
That's another reason I decided to pass on the 200-800, that long end is so adversely affected by the atmosphere that it really limits opportunities, and not having the "L" elements and coatings will only exacerbate that problem. The reviews are very good on the lens, but if you already have a 100-500 and an RF600/4, it seemed like a waste of money.
I have a love/hate relationship with Topaz, sometimes it's just what the Dr. ordered, other times it introduces more artifacts than one can tolerate.
Douglas L wrote:
Yes, "Rebel" Aimee. I got to say this though, of all the F-16 flying I have seen, the Belgium demo pilot is out of this world. He flew his f-16 like an RC plane, unbelievable maneuvers. He had over 5000 hours flying F-16.
Jup that is Steven ''Vrieske'' De Vries,
Unfortunately no demo anymore because of Transition to the F35.
. Even a fair amount of sharpening could only do so much. This was its last demo performance so whatever shots I got will be the last time.
