![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
SUNDAY - South Perth.
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4137.jpg)
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4152.jpg)
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4167.jpg)
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4187.jpg)
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4214.jpg)
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4402.jpg)
![Image](http://i532.photobucket.com/albums/ee330/ZebedeeAU/RBAR2008/IMG_4385.jpg)
Yes - didn't you know that they implemented this fuel saving measure where they had to fly the course with no engines on the Sunday?Tyranus wrote:wooo! Great shots Zeb, though I find it disconcerting that all aircraft have their props stopped...
I'm no guru either, but yes - a very fast shutter speed means it'll make the shot look like the prop isn't moving. You can slow the shutter speed down, but then you run the risk of getting a blurry photo. If you have steady hands (which I don't) or a tripod (which I didn't have with me) you could probably slow the shutter speed down to get a more realistic "whizzing propeller" look. As it was, I went for the safe option of having my photos mostly in focus and not blurry from camera shakewritten_ficton wrote:I'm no camera guru, but isnt that part of the shutter speed? I have the same problem
I just point and shoot, I'm not into the techno camera guruZebedee wrote:Yes - didn't you know that they implemented this fuel saving measure where they had to fly the course with no engines on the Sunday?Tyranus wrote:wooo! Great shots Zeb, though I find it disconcerting that all aircraft have their props stopped...
I'm no guru either, but yes - a very fast shutter speed means it'll make the shot look like the prop isn't moving. You can slow the shutter speed down, but then you run the risk of getting a blurry photo. If you have steady hands (which I don't) or a tripod (which I didn't have with me) you could probably slow the shutter speed down to get a more realistic "whizzing propeller" look. As it was, I went for the safe option of having my photos mostly in focus and not blurry from camera shakewritten_ficton wrote:I'm no camera guru, but isnt that part of the shutter speed? I have the same problem
I only hope the qantas aircraft got to keep it's engines running...wouldn't want yet another incidentZebedee wrote:Yes - didn't you know that they implemented this fuel saving measure where they had to fly the course with no engines on the Sunday?Tyranus wrote:wooo! Great shots Zeb, though I find it disconcerting that all aircraft have their props stopped...![]()
Thanks Kyle for the advice, I'll keep all of that in mind.kylep wrote:Someone told me once, for photographing Helicopters, a shutter speed of 1/125 is good. Tried this, and now use something around that mark al the time. Gives enough blur to show the blades moving, though you won't get the full arc.
Another rule of thumb, especially without IS, slow your shutter no more than the 'zoom level' you are using. So, if you have a 200mm zoom lens at full zoom, go no slower than 1/200 for shutter speed, at hand held, to prevent blur from camera shake.
Once you have a bit more experience with your hands, camera and different conditions, you'll figure out how much you can push the boundaries.
And yes, nice shots.
Yes it is caused by the shutter speed. jjwritten_ficton wrote:I'm no camera guru, but isnt that part of the shutter speed? I have the same problemTyranus wrote:wooo! Great shots Zeb, though I find it disconcerting that all aircraft have their props stopped...