Lens length?

[VintageRacer]

What length of lens is mostly useful for RC photography? I'm looking at the new Nikon 85mm f1.8 prime which looks nice and wondering if it would a decent choice or is longer preferable?

The wide aperture would allow for some good shutter speeds indoors but then I guess focus would be seriously critical.

I use a cropped sensor btw.

[julianb]

200-300mm zoom for RC aircraft.

Indoor photography is hard work!

These pics were taken with a Canon 450D and 200mm Tamron zoom. I'd recommend a faster lens though.

Currently looking at a Nikon D7000 and the latest 28-300 zoom...lots of $$$$ though...

cheers

J

[jimmy]

The 70-200 afs vr nikkor is the best all rounder for RC - I got mine very battered and abused from adorama, for about £750 - I'd love a new one but this works OK, just has stiff zoom ring.
Before that I had an 80-200 AFD - the AFS version of the 80-200 is supposed to be great. Either are pretty fast focusing though, as long as your camera has a focus motor.

I've used a D3 for action stuff since 2007 and find the 70-200 is nice on the wide end, but a bit short on the long - so bought an ancient 300 2.8 last year to make up the long end - its a 1980's lens so its slow and not great but useful sometimes.

I've not used the 85 1.8, I've had a brief play with an 85 1.4 afd - nice but I wouldn't buy it for RC action stuff really. The lack of any zoom function I'd find a bit limiting as you can't always pick where you stand/sit/lay at a track.

I think you'll definitely be able to get some magical shots with it - its far and away better than any kit lens, that's for sure. But as far as 'the best' all rounder goes, it's easily the 70-200 vr.

[mark christopher]

my camera has max of 1600 iso for indoor use, which would make it better, a better lens or a camera with higher iso?

[poopers]

Originally Posted by mark christopher

my camera has max of 1600 iso for indoor use, which would make it better, a better lens or a camera with higher iso?

Depends on what lens you're currently using, but generally a faster, bigger aperture, lens would be more advantageous imo. Even with these modern super high iso ratings, the pics aren't great when you get that high, best to have a whole lot more light in the camera from a fast lens.

[eyeayen]

+1 to what poopers has said above.

Canon have just released the 5D MkIII so the previous mark 2 and even the mark 1 models are cheaper than ever. Because these camera's use a full frame sensor ( one that's the same size as a 35mm negative as opposed to a normal APSC sized sensor which is about two thirds that size ) you can shoot in dimmer conditions. That said if you can't afford a decent lens to go with it the FF sensor will really show it up. Depends if you can make money from photography or have just won the lottery if you want to splash out on a really good camera.

However... In today's market of constant tech and everything else almost any DSLR will be very good, the lenses are what really make the picture ( and the photographer obviously ).

If you've got about a grand spare the Nikon D7000 is a cracking piece of kit !