Plane Spotting Lens (Canon)

MichaelAwkward

MichaelAwkward

MichaelAwkward

Soldato
Joined
22 Jul 2014
Posts
3,908
Location
Oxon
Hi all,

I'm looking for recommendations for a good telephoto lens to use for aviation photography. I've never done it before but Southampton Airport is around the corner.

I currently have a 100D, and my budget is as little as possible.

I've narrowed it down to the 70-300 IS USM or 55-250 IS STM, or something like the Tamron 70-300 Di VC... any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I have the Tamron 70-300 DI VC. It is a great lens, very versatile and was my first 'big' lens.

All of the following were taken with it on a 550D: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tubolard/sets/72157645554571444/
More taken with the same lens on a 400D:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tubolard/sets/72157645226353691/

I'm now using a 300L prime on a 7D, but haven't really used it in anger. I've only made it to Coningsby once and Doncaster twice and they were some very snatched shots in sub-zero temperatures:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tubolard/sets/72157650325457416/

Although I have the prime, I'm not thinking of retiring the Tamron as it is so useful.
 
Yeah, that's what I thought. No IS either unless I pony up even more.

I've found the 55-250mm IS STM for little over £100, might give it a go rather than the Tamron at more than twice that. Reviews say it's optically decent (as good as the Canon 70-300 IS USM apparently), just doesn't have the build quality of the alternatives.
 
55-250STM should be pretty decent IQ wise for the money but definitely might lack reach.

I bought the 70-200mm F4L as my first longish lens and it just made me want longer ones :)
 
I've used a 70-200 F4L on my 40D for aviation for a few years now. The longer reach isn't always required and the image quality is always spot on.

I'd rather have quality over reach as you can always crop.

IMG_1800-2 by Bacons Pics, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
IS isn't really needed for airshow photography (although some may argue that point, most things I've read state it isn't)
 
IS is probably more use at an airshow for helicopters and prop planes, which you typically shoot with a much lower shutter speed so that the rotors / props have some movement in them.

Shooting jets, you generally use the fastest shutter speed that you can and accordingly IS becomes less important.
 
I started off with a 55-250 before moving up to the 300. Eventually ended up replacing the 55-250 with a 70-200 though when finances permitted. Use mine almost exclusively for low level aviation.
 
Food for thought, thanks guys.

I won't be using it exclusively for aviation, more just for dabbling as well as everything else teles are good for. Don't think I can justify an L lens yet so I'll take a punt on the 55-250 STM for £125. Also think it'd be better suited to the 100D body I have at the moment. A heavier L lens would look a bit silly :P
 
Last edited:
MichaelAwkward said:
Food for thought, thanks guys.

I won't be using it exclusively for aviation, more just for dabbling as well as everything else teles are good for. Don't think I can justify an L lens yet so I'll take a punt on the 55-250 STM for £125. Also think it'd be better suited to the 100D body I have at the moment. A heavier L lens would look a bit silly :P
Click to expand...

Big lenses are never silly :P For £125 you're getting a lot I think and then you can start saving for that new 100-400mm mk2 if you want more range ;) hehe
 
So I just bought a used 70-200 F4 L (non-IS) off eBay for £339.99... the lens is in pretty good condition from the photos (although the hood is a bit worse for wear - hopefully this is a sign that it's been a good lens for someone who's now upgraded). I figured that it's better to spend the extra now rather than struggling to sell the 55-250 at some point in the future.
 
Last edited:
The 70-200mm F4L is very nice but the 55-250mm STM or USM mk2 versions are pretty decent too for the money :) Don't think you would have been disappointed by either tbh.

The F4L is sharp :D
 
On the 100D...

CIdSny8.jpg


:D:D

Really pleased with the condition, there isn't a mark on it. Everything works nicely so far as I can tell. The photography from the bay made it look a lot worse. From the code, it was made in Utsunomiya, Japan in August, 2004.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom