Both scenes remind me of "Flight of the Phoenix," with Jimmy Stewart.
Jan-Arie wrote:
Hey Tail Dragging, couldn't find if anyone had given you the right answer to your dad's photo's.
No 1 is a Avro York and
Wings Engines and landing gear are from the Avro Lancaster
In the colors of Skyways of London.
No 2 is a SNCASE SE.161 Languedoc in Air France colors
The SNCASE SE.161 Languedoc was a French four-engined airliner produced by SNCASE (Sud-Est). Developed from the Bloch MB.160 and known in the late 1930s as the (SNCSO) Bloch MB.161, the SE.161 was in service with Air France and the French military after World War II
Jan-Arie wrote:
Hey Tail Dragging, couldn't find if anyone had given you the right answer to your dad's photo's.
No 1 is a Avro York and
Wings Engines and landing gear are from the Avro Lancaster
In the colors of Skyways of London.
No 2 is a SNCASE SE.161 Languedoc in Air France colors
The SNCASE SE.161 Languedoc was a French four-engined airliner produced by SNCASE (Sud-Est). Developed from the Bloch MB.160 and known in the late 1930s as the (SNCSO) Bloch MB.161, the SE.161 was in service with Air France and the French military after World War II
( Taken from Wikipedia )
Jan-Arie...I want to know your research secrets. Impeccable! I want to know the search words you used to get to the correct Wiki article. Of course, it could be as simple as you have seen these in museums and have total recall memory.
Ray Swindle wrote:
Jan-Arie...I want to know your research secrets. Impeccable! I want to know the search words you used to get to the correct Wiki article. Of course, it could be as simple as you have seen these in museums and have total recall memory.
Good evening Ray, nowadays you can use google to search for photo's.
Right click and search with Google lens.
In case of the French plane I'm came by it by chance, somebody online had found a poster with all the old type planes on it.
All ready saw some photo's of the Avro York some time ago pretty cool stuff..
JWilsonphoto wrote:
ISAP is working on an outing at Old Rhinebeck Aerodrome this Fall, should be something a little different.
That would surely be worth a good road trip. I visited the airshow at the Mid-Atlantic Air Museum a couple of times - that was lots of fun with some really fun displays.
We had a symposium on the East Coast years ago, and it was a great one. We spent a day at Mid-Atlantic and a day on the field at Oceana. Reps from Canon and Nikon made presentations, Nikon introduced the D800, and, much to the Canon Reps chagrin, I ordered two of them. Our pre-covid symposiums were great events to attend, the camaraderie alone was worth the time and effort.
JIII and I took a hike this afternoon, he wanted to photograph birds and turtles. We loaded up and spent three hours having fun together. He was shooting with the 100-500 mounted on his Dad's RP body, and I had the 200-800 on one of the R5II's. I tellin' Ya, there has to be a weak spot in that lens, but I have not discovered it yet!
Oh yeah, I decided to give James free reign on our adventure. Once or twice his focus point got bumped over into the corer, I helped with stuff like that, other than that he was completely free to compose and capture. I think he did pretty darn good..........
Jim,
Glad you’re liking the 200-800. These long zooms have had a reputation for getting a little soft at the long end of the range - have you had any issues with that? How is the balance when the lens is fully extended? Certainly looks like a lighter and more manageable alternative to the EF 800 5.6 which I have.
Quite a bit of what I have captured with the 200-800 has been at the long end, much of it at the full 800mm, sharp as a tack. Depending upon one's perspective, the lens could be described as large, or bulky, but if you are used to big white primes, you don't even think about it. I had the EF800/5.6 for years, got some wonderful images with it, but ultimately sold it due to weight and somewhat limited usefulness due to atmospheric distortion. The RF200-800 is such a great lens, and at $1800, you just don't have that haunting thought of $17,000 sitting on a shelf for much of the year.
Canon was in the process of sending me a new RF800/5.6 to shoot with when Chandler asked me about the RF200-800. I told Canon that I appreciated the loan, but that it had become unnecessary due to the capabilities of the 200-800. I would guess that the RF800/5.6 has incrementally faster AF, but I don't know that for a fact, and it probably has slightly more pleasing bokeh at F/5.6. The question becomes, are those slight advantages worth the price of admission. I chewed on those questions for a year before my RF600/4 arrived and obviously decided that the cost was, in fact, worth it and my thinking hasn't changed in that instance. As focal lengths get longer, the number of times you will reach for it diminishes, unless you are a 100% wildlife shooter or something similar, so you have to weigh that against the investment, especially considering the alternative options available today.
I kind of keep track of how quickly a piece of equipment amortizes itself, my RF600 did it in a year +-, not sure the EF800 ever got there, the RF200-800 did it in a month.
Jim,
many thanks for your response, and your images are quite convincing. I use the 800 primarily for the eagles up by Conowingo Dam, and then it is on a tripod. I can still swing my 16 year old 500 f/4 around, but the 800 is a no-go. At a little over half the weight of the 500, the 200-800 looks very attractive, and it is much more of a take it on a hike lens than the 500. My wallet will blame you, young man
