If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
I was browsing a CompUSA today and came across what looks like nearly
the perfect camera for taking photos from the cockpit. It's a Kodak V570. 5 megapixel and a 23mm equivalent wide angle lens. Here's a review: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ko...ew/index.shtml The camera's tiny, the LCD is quite large and the wide angle lens is about as wide as practical before going fisheye. -Tom |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
5Z wrote:
I was browsing a CompUSA today and came across what looks like nearly the perfect camera for taking photos from the cockpit. It's a Kodak V570. 5 megapixel and a 23mm equivalent wide angle lens. Here's a review: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ko...ew/index.shtml The camera's tiny, the LCD is quite large and the wide angle lens is about as wide as practical before going fisheye. It's an intriguing camera, but I'm wondering how well the LCD works in the cockpit. It doesn't have an optical viewfinder. The review says "As is usually the case with Kodak LCDs, outdoor visibility is very good"; however, I just bought a Kodak V550 for my wife, and I don't think it's 2.5" LCD is any better than "fair" in bright sunlight ("fair" means I usually can make out buildings and cars, so I know it's pointed in about the right direction). The V550 has an optical viewfinder, so it's not a problem, but no wide angle. It's a very nice camera otherwise, though. At the moment, I'm thinking of the Canon S80 for the cockpit, which has a 28 mm wide angle. It has an optical viewfinder and a big LCD, visibility unknown to me. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
I can tell you from experience that the viewfinder or even the LCD are
of not much use in the cockpit. I typically hold the camera too close to my face to use the LCD. I don't look through the viewfinder as that's also quite impractical. I just "point and shoot", typically tring to take seveal shots while moving the camera a bit between shots. THat's the cool thing about digital. No worries about wasted shots - unless the composition goes away. I've learned how to hold it and be reasonably sure of the approximate outcome. My current camera is an Olympus 5060WZ (Wide Zoom: 28mm). The one I used for that cover shot was a Nikon CoolPix. I had to generally hold the Nikon alongside my head to het the wide angle shots. THe Olympus works better due to the 28mm wide angle, byt I also still try to hold it as far to the rear as possible. The 23mm on that Kodak, and the MUCH smaller size would IMO provide even more "usable" shots. If it had been available when I was shopping a bit over a year ago, I would have seriously considered it. Just slip it into a shirt pocket and it's always availavble. The Olympus is relatively small, but not nearly as convenient. I have to be careful about storage and keeping it secure while flying. -Tom |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
5Z wrote:
I can tell you from experience that the viewfinder or even the LCD are of not much use in the cockpit. I typically hold the camera too close to my face to use the LCD. I don't look through the viewfinder as that's also quite impractical. I just "point and shoot", typically tring to take seveal shots while moving the camera a bit between shots. I know that works fine for scenic shots with a wide angle. I'm not sure I could make it work for pictures of another glider when the camera is zoomed to the maximum telephoto. How do pictures of other gliders work out? Of course, even a 120 mm (35 mm equivalent) zoom is not so great it has to be aimed precisely, and 5 megapixels gives some cropping flexibility. My wife's V550 has a "burst" mode which takes 5 shots over a couple of seconds, which might improve the chances of at least one good shot of another glider, even with motion from flying, turbulence, and poor aiming. I haven't had chance to try it yet in a glider. THat's the cool thing about digital. No worries about wasted shots - unless the composition goes away. No more changing film in flight! I've learned how to hold it and be reasonably sure of the approximate outcome. My current camera is an Olympus 5060WZ (Wide Zoom: 28mm). The one I used for that cover shot was a Nikon CoolPix. I had to generally hold the Nikon alongside my head to het the wide angle shots. THe Olympus works better due to the 28mm wide angle, byt I also still try to hold it as far to the rear as possible. I don't understand the reasons for this. The 23mm on that Kodak, and the MUCH smaller size would IMO provide even more "usable" shots. If it had been available when I was shopping a bit over a year ago, I would have seriously considered it. Just slip it into a shirt pocket and it's always availavble. The Olympus is relatively small, but not nearly as convenient. I have to be careful about storage and keeping it secure while flying. I agree a small camera (currently, I use a Minolta Dimage X, about the size of a deck of playing cards) is much more likely to be in the glider and get used, and safer to pilot and canopy. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
5Z wrote:
The one I used for that cover shot was a Nikon CoolPix. I had to generally hold the Nikon alongside my head to het the wide angle shots. What resolution was the Cover Shot? The SSA is telling us that only Film or Professional Digital cameras are good enough to be published??? Also, Thanks for sharing that photo with the world. it was (is) Beautiful! http://www.ssa.org/test/Covers/Cover200307_large.jpg |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
Paul Generally the shot must have at least 300dpi for magazine printing. 5Z wrote: The one I used for that cover shot was a Nikon CoolPix. I had to generally hold the Nikon alongside my head to het the wide angle shots. What resolution was the Cover Shot? The SSA is telling us that only Film or Professional Digital cameras are good enough to be published??? Also, Thanks for sharing that photo with the world. it was (is) Beautiful! http://www.ssa.org/test/Covers/Cover200307_large.jpg -- Charles Yeates ZS "Jezow" PW-6U & PW-5 http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/yeatesc/world.html |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
Charles Yeates wrote:
5Z wrote: The one I used for that cover shot was a Nikon CoolPix. I had to generally hold the Nikon alongside my head to het the wide angle shots. What resolution was the Cover Shot? The SSA is telling us that only Film or Professional Digital cameras are good enough to be published??? Also, Thanks for sharing that photo with the world. it was (is) Beautiful! http://www.ssa.org/test/Covers/Cover200307_large.jpg Paul Generally the shot must have at least 300dpi for magazine printing. Fortunately, Tom was able to persuade them to use his 2 megapixel picture, which is about 160 dpi. It takes about 7 megapixels for 300 dpi, and it's simply not neccessary if it's a high quality picture that uses the full frame. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
In article ,
Charles Yeates wrote: Paul Generally the shot must have at least 300dpi for magazine printing. Which means that 6 megapixels is good enough for printing at 10" x 6.7", which is a lot larger than, say, the Gliding Kiwi page. -- Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+- Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O---------- |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
In article ,
Eric Greenwell wrote: Fortunately, Tom was able to persuade them to use his 2 megapixel picture, which is about 160 dpi. It takes about 7 megapixels for 300 dpi, and it's simply not neccessary if it's a high quality picture that uses the full frame. As someone who designs and implements halftoning screening systems professionally (see http://www.megadot.co.nz/) I agree that using images with a dpi exceeding the lpi (lines per inch) of the halftoning screening is not necessary or useful on most natural images (people, scenery). This is typically something like 175 lpi in glossy magazines. It is pretty important though to not have the photo dpi be only slightly different to the halftoning lpi for aliasing reasons -- either make it *exactly* the same, or else make it different (higher) by a factor of 1.5 or more. Hard diagonal edges between contrasting colours do benefit from higher dpi, right up to the basic resolution of the imagesetter used (typically either 2400 or 3386 dpi). 1200 dpi is about the lower limit for really crisp looking text. Nothing looks worse than hard-edged jaggies. If in doubt use PhotoShop to resample your image to 300 dpi or 2x the printing lpi (if you know it) using bicubic interpolation. That will create enough anti-aliasing to avoid jaggies on the printed page. And the magazine editor will never know :-) -- Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+- Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O---------- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Camera for cockpit photography
One thing that I have found very useful for pictures of gliders is a
digital camera that can save images in RAW mode. Gliders are bright white, and this makes it very diffucult to get a good exposure. The glider may come out dull grey, or more likely it will be a completely washed out white ghost, with no variations in shading to suggest its shape. When saving images in JPEG, the image is not only compressed, it is also reduced from 10 to 8 bits per pixel in the camera. This effectively discards 2 stops of exposure latitude that you can use in photoshop (or equiv.) to correct exposure problems, and give the glider some shape. Unfortunately the Kodak camera apparently only saves in JPEG mode. The Olympus 5050/5060 and many others have a RAW mode that gives you a lot more control over the image by saving the data exactly as it is captured from the CCD imager, without irreversible processing in the camera. This requires a lot more memory per shot, but Moore's law is making that a non-issue. 5Z wrote: I was browsing a CompUSA today and came across what looks like nearly the perfect camera for taking photos from the cockpit. It's a Kodak V570. 5 megapixel and a 23mm equivalent wide angle lens. Here's a review: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/ko...ew/index.shtml The camera's tiny, the LCD is quite large and the wide angle lens is about as wide as practical before going fisheye. -Tom |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Camera Litigation in UK | [email protected] | Soaring | 12 | January 28th 06 07:16 PM |
What camera for pictures from a glider cockpit? | Eric Greenwell | Soaring | 34 | December 10th 05 06:19 AM |
Camera Mounts & Gliding Photography | Charles Petersen | Soaring | 0 | June 18th 05 10:35 AM |
C206H w/Leica camera mount STC for sale | Juan Jimenez | General Aviation | 9 | February 1st 05 04:59 AM |
C206H w/Leica camera mount STC for sale | Juan Jimenez | Owning | 9 | February 1st 05 04:59 AM |