Thunder Mustang Gallery (link)

[W J Pearce]

A little earthquake won't slow me down. Some of these have been on this site before but now they are 50% bigger, 11 photos in all.

Thunder Mustang

Bill Pearce

[W J Pearce]

Make that 12 images (no, is wasn't a rounding error, I forgot one).

BP

[T. Adams]

Shutter speed

I notice on the EXIF data that most of the flight shots are at 1/500th. The prop still looks good though. I know most use the rule of thumb not to go any faster than 1/250th. I was suprised the prop was still fairly blurred. Do you get a lot more keepers at 1/500th? I know I'm always shooting at 1/250th, but I'm using a 70-200, or 300mm prime with converters, and not that monster 50-500.

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: Shutter speed

Originally posted by T. Adams
I notice on the EXIF data that most of the flight shots are at 1/500th. The prop still looks good though. I know most use the rule of thumb not to go any faster than 1/250th. I was suprised the prop was still fairly blurred. Do you get a lot more keepers at 1/500th? I know I'm always shooting at 1/250th, but I'm using a 70-200, or 300mm prime with converters, and not that monster 50-500.

Tim, I've been "cheating" with my 50-500 up to 1/320th and getting "OK" blur. Interesting thought going up to 500.. Not quite as much blur as I'd like, and I'm not sure if John runs a higher prop RPM than the "big boy's" either..

I'm sure it would help (going to 500) Now that I've been using the VR feature on the 80-400, I've been cheating down the other direction.. but VR is not all that effective when panning or shooting fast action up close..

I wish Nikon had made the 80-400 a bit faster..

Nice shots Bill!

Wayne

[W J Pearce]

Thanks for the kind words guys, I appreciate you having a look.

I don't know how the RPM compares on the Thunder Mustang to the big guys but... because the TM prop is a smaller dia., I think it would make sense that he could run a higher RPM and still keep the prop tips around the same speed.

Although 1/500 is a bit high, it still does achive a nice bit of blur. I woud like to go slower but I find it too difficult with the sigma. You will also notice few of the pics I put up are above 423mm; the sigma gets difficult once again. But then there is that shot at 366mm and 1/60..... whatever.

I get far more keepers at 1/500. You can see that buy looking at the names of the images in either the Thunder Mustang, Dago, or any other gallery I do from now on. The names of the images are how the camera named them (sequential). John made one pass with the Thunder Mustang, I took 7 shots, 6 of them are in the gallery. One was too soft.

That's why I like the site where I out up the galleries. It has good thumbnails, you can select the size of the photo (good for dial-up), it lists the shooting info, so others can see what was going on and how I cheated.

Thanks,

Bill Pearce

[rpzo]

The rule of thumb that I've always used for minimum shutter speed is that it should be no less than 1 over the focal length (1/fl) in order to prevent lens shake. Anything less than that and you will need either VR/IS technology, a tripod\monopod, or a very steady hand. Panning will allow you to get away with a slower shutter speed provided your technique is good.

Not that you can't get a good, clear, telephoto shot at a slow shutter speed, as Bill has proven, but your odds are decreased significantly.

Bill, where you hand holding the ground shot of the TM (DSCF2840) that was set to 366mm @ 1/60th? If so, that is amazing. You are a human tripod.

Personnaly, I like to use a monopod whenever possible. (However, I might not need it if I drank a little less coffee.)

The attached was shot at 1/60th using a 210mm lens on a monopod. Almost a full arc...

Rick

[W J Pearce]

Yes that shot was handheld. I think that shot can best be described as .... lucky. For slow shots, I try to kneel. Judging by how much of the belly is visible, I'd say I was kneeling, using my knee as a tripod.

Thanks for looking.

Bill Pearce