What camera for pictures from a glider cockpit?

I'd like to replace my current digital camera with one better suited to
pictures from my glider, but I'm having difficulty finding one with the
features I want. Perhaps someone has solved my problem already, or at
least has a way of finding a suitable camera without days of downloading
brochures and camera manuals.

Here's what I think the ideal in-cockpit camera must have:

* Focal length: minimum 28-100 mm (35 mm equivalent) optical range
* Pixels: 4 mp (gives 2 mp with cropping to 140 mm lens equivalent)
* Viewfinder: minimum 2.5" sunlight visible LCD AND with good
visibility from the side
* Shutter lag: 0.5 second after pressing button
* Shutter: Continuous mode for at least 10 pictures
* focusing: Auto plus Manual (or settable at infinity)

Here is what would be really nice, in addition:

* Size: small and light enough to put in a pocket
* Anti-shake lens

But wait, there's more!

I'd also like to get a camera that can be attached to the outside of the
glider (wing, tail, etc). Here is what I think it must have:

* Focal length: minimum 28-100 mm (35 mm equivalent) optical range
* pixels: 4 mp (gives 2 mp with cropping to 140 mm lens equivalent)
* It must not turn itself off automatically! It's OK if an external
battery is required to achieve this.
* Wireless remote shutter actuation
* Shutter lag: .5 second
* Focusing: manual or settable at infinity
* Battery life: at least three hours and 50 pictures, external
battery OK if needed

Here is what would be very nice, in addition:

* Remote zoom control
* Battery life: 6+ hours
* Size: small and light
* wireless transmission of a reduced image to a cockpit display
(Bluetooth to an Ipaq?)

The greatest happiness would be one camera that can do both jobs, and
maybe there is one out there that can. New digital camera models seems
appear at a one-a-day rate, minimum.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

You left out the integrated GPS interface to your Bluetooth logger for
geo-locating each shot, and the integrated cell phone to call you with
that location when it falls off the wing...

Full circle now... back to cameras for flight claims perhaps?

Tongue firmly in cheek.....

Actually, there is flight viewing software from a couple of years ago
that would tie together the time stamp on the digital camera to your
flight logs. thereby allowing you to see the pictures taken at a
particular point in your flight.



Don't remember which software it was though.



Larry

"01" USA





" wrote in message
oups.com:

You left out the integrated GPS interface to your Bluetooth logger for
geo-locating each shot, and the integrated cell phone to call you with
that location when it falls off the wing...

Full circle now... back to cameras for flight claims perhaps?

Tongue firmly in cheek.....

wrote:
You left out the integrated GPS interface to your Bluetooth logger for
geo-locating each shot, and the integrated cell phone to call you with
that location when it falls off the wing...

Wouldn't you just use an ELT (Equipment Locator Beacon) or PLB
(Photographic Locator Beacon) for that purpose? Hmmm, maybe a logger
with a camera in it, so it supplies a picture of the pilot that is
flying the glider, and of the glider itself, so we won't need official
observers anymore?

Actually, I think my requirements for a cockpit camera are few, mainly a
wide angle lens for better scenery pictures, and an LCD that is
practical for aiming the camera at another glider in flight. I think
that feature will make it air-to-air pictures easier and safer.

The externally mounted camera has different requirements, and the
biggest one is that it doesn't turn itself off. My old 35 mm SLR cameras
didn't do that, but it's become a common feature in "consumer" cameras,
even in film cameras before digital became common. I'm not dedicated
enough to buy one of the expensive, large, heavy, professional cameras
that pilots like Chris Woods use, so I'm hoping there is compromise out
there somewhere.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Eric Greenwell wrote:

Actually, I think my requirements for a cockpit camera are few, mainly a
wide angle lens for better scenery pictures, and an LCD that is
practical for aiming the camera at another glider in flight. I think
that feature will make it air-to-air pictures easier and safer.

The Nikon 8400 works well for interior shots with its wide angle zoom
lens (equivalent to 24mm focal length on a 35mm film camera, or about
a 75 degree angle of view) and swing-out LCD. The cockpit of the 1-26
is a little tight for mounting, but the camera does the job -- eight
MB stills and 999 consecutive seconds of motion at 320x240 color or B&W,
and 60 sec. of 640x480 color. With sequence lengths of up to 16:39
possible, and proper editing, an interesting video could probably be
made. It will accept screw-in filters as a film camera does. I use a
daylight filter, as much for lens protection as anything else, but a
polarizing filter is worth trying.

Google Video has a short chopped-up piece made with this camera:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8599456403526520656&q=sailplane
This was a test, and the quality is atrocious due to Google's
compression for playback on the web. The original file looks good
on a desktop screen or TV.

For a pure video camera I'm still using an old bulky analog Sony
Hi-Eight, so I have no suggestions. The best place to mount that thing
inside a 1-26 is the ballast box, but it makes good pictures and I do
have a wide-angle aux. lens for it. Maybe next season I'll make a
three-hour unedited video of my fingers wrapped around the stick, with
the five point harness connector in the background. Should be exciting.


Jack

Eric Greenwell wrote:
I'd like to replace my current digital camera with one better suited to
pictures from my glider, but I'm having difficulty finding one with the
features I want.

snip Eric's fantasy :-)

Make sure what ever you get can accept a polarizing filter to get rid of
canopy reflections.

I've had a Canon Rebel XT for a few months now. It comes no where near
your size requirements but it's easy to use and takes fantastic
pictures. BTW, Canon makes an IS lens that fits it. If the technology
in the lenses is the same as Canon's IS binocs, it would be worth the
bucks IMO.
I've used these for hand-held star gazing. Amazing
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/con...mode lid=8168

Shawn

Shawn wrote:

Eric Greenwell wrote:

I'd like to replace my current digital camera with one better suited
to pictures from my glider, but I'm having difficulty finding one with
the features I want.


snip Eric's fantasy :-)

I believe a camera with a modest wide angle and daylight visible LCD
monitor is out there, but with hundreds of models available and ads that
don't mention these features, it's time consuming to find it

Make sure what ever you get can accept a polarizing filter to get rid of
canopy reflections.

I like this idea. I'll try a filter on my present camera next flight,
even though I'll have to tape it on.


I've had a Canon Rebel XT for a few months now. It comes no where near
your size requirements but it's easy to use and takes fantastic
pictures. BTW, Canon makes an IS lens that fits it. If the technology
in the lenses is the same as Canon's IS binocs, it would be worth the
bucks IMO.

There are plenty of cameras that take great pictures, and I have used a
large, heavy camera in the glider, but I'm not willing to do it anymore.
Camera technology has improved so much, and some of the cameras I've
looked at are so close to being acceptable, I remain optimistic. The
difficult feature for the smaller cameras seems to be the minimum focal
length (wide angle). Big zooms must be easier to achieve.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Eric Greenwell wrote:

There are plenty of cameras that take great pictures, and I have used a
large, heavy camera in the glider, but I'm not willing to do it anymore.
Camera technology has improved so much, and some of the cameras I've
looked at are so close to being acceptable, I remain optimistic. The
difficult feature for the smaller cameras seems to be the minimum focal
length (wide angle). Big zooms must be easier to achieve.

Forgot to mention this site:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs.asp

It has tons of info about many new digital cameras.

Shawn

Shawn wrote:

Eric Greenwell wrote:

There are plenty of cameras that take great pictures, and I have used
a large, heavy camera in the glider, but I'm not willing to do it
anymore. Camera technology has improved so much, and some of the
cameras I've looked at are so close to being acceptable, I remain
optimistic. The difficult feature for the smaller cameras seems to be
the minimum focal length (wide angle). Big zooms must be easier to
achieve.


Forgot to mention this site:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs.asp

It has tons of info about many new digital cameras.

Brilliant! Just what I was hoping for (life is good).

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

In article ,
Eric Greenwell wrote:

There are plenty of cameras that take great pictures, and I have used a
large, heavy camera in the glider, but I'm not willing to do it anymore.
Camera technology has improved so much, and some of the cameras I've
looked at are so close to being acceptable, I remain optimistic. The
difficult feature for the smaller cameras seems to be the minimum focal
length (wide angle). Big zooms must be easier to achieve.

Fuji seem to be the only company that care about wide angle in compact
cameras. I love my old Fujifilm DL-Super Mini Zoom 35mm film camera,
which has a very nice 28-56mm zoom lens, and I bought my current Fuji
e500 4 megapixel digital camera pretty much because of the 28-90mm
(equiv) zooom lens and the manual controls. Fortunately it also happens
to be an excellent camera, but is usually hijacked by my g/f. You can
see pics she takes with it at
http://www.canllaith.org/Canllaiths_gallery/ (all except the "South
Island" gallary, which was an older Sony).

--
Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------