More Pics......

[Paganman2011]

I have been trying my best today to get some half decent pictures of aircraft on airways, I tried these two with AF as manul focus is just not working with such small subjects and I only have to be out very slightly with the manual focus guide and I end up with a horribly out of focus plane.
I have found that the camera will focus as long as the plane Is a certain size so It can focus on It, but as my pics show even with the right setting we set for the Fz100 = noise -2, sharp + 2 etc, but because of the Pixal noise Again and a small subject I just cant get a sharp plane In focus.

Mind you I suppose I have to consider both were at 30,000 feet and about 15 miles away, but still a mile away from what a dslr can achieve.

[Grounded]

I suggest you wait until they are lower, This one of a Cathay Pacific plane was at about 3000 ft, I don't remember my camera settings, keep trying.

[jjdog2]

Those are hard shots, I have tried a few time but with not much luck.

jj

[Paganman2011]

Originally Posted by Grounded

I suggest you wait until they are lower, This one of a Cathay Pacific plane was at about 3000 ft, I don't remember my camera settings, keep trying.

Hiya, thanks for that and nice picture of the Airbus, my problem Is where I live Im stuck with high level airways with a minimum hight of 25,000 feet as all are leaving the country going out over the Atlantic.
I tend to use just the normal zoom length without the digital or EZ extention as I am concearned about adding to the loss of detail that I susspect they would? or am I mistaken their? have you any experience of using the EZ extention with any sucsess for planes or similar?

P.

[Paganman2011]

Originally Posted by jjdog2

Those are hard shots, I have tried a few time but with not much luck.

jj

I know I have chosen a hard subject but Its my hobby and I flat refuse to get a DSLR even if I could have afforded one (half decent body like a canon rebel or nikon d40, with a superzoom plus a 1.5 x convertor to get to FZ's 600mm) = mega bucks and I dont think the IQ would be considerably better anyway as dslr superzooms at the cheaper-ish end are not as good as prime lenses L series.
Mind you I am wondering If the Fz150 or 200 would cope any better with my hobby

P.

[saly]

Paganman, I think you are really expecting too much from your camera. No camera can capture anything that far away, let alone a bridge camera. I honestly don't think you will too much better with even a DSLR at that distance.

Also, try AF in multi-area focus mode. It will find the plane in the air and focus on it for you, provided there is nothing else in the sky.

[Paganman2011]

Originally Posted by saly

Paganman, I think you are really expecting too much from your camera. No camera can capture anything that far away, let alone a bridge camera. I honestly don't think you will too much better with even a DSLR at that distance.

Also, try AF in multi-area focus mode. It will find the plane in the air and focus on it for you, provided there is nothing else in the sky.

Thank you for the comments, I took this pic off an aviation forum and It was taken with a pro DSLR with a long pro lens.

[saly]

That is pretty impressive, but using extremely expensive equipment. You can't expect to get photo like that from a bridge (sensor is too small), or even standard DSLR without a super long lens. Did the article list the equipment used?