DSLR Camera Photography Tips

[wonderboy]

Whenever I don't have much to fly at our monthly club launches, I like to drag my DSLR along with me and take pics. I've been using a Nikon D50 with the Nikkor 70-300 VR (non-DX) lens and having a lot of fun and getting pretty good shots. Yes, this camera is ancient and was one of the earlier Nikon consumer DLSR cameras but I've loved using it (I've got over 18,000 shutter clicks).

At our last launch, the D50 just wasn't focusing right and giving me some general grief so long story short, I upgraded to a Nikon D7500. Just taking shots around the house and during thanksgiving with family around let me know that this is night and day a huge upgrade. One thing I'm most excited about (which maybe seems silly given how much better this camera is) is the faster shooting rate from something like 3 pics a second (if even that) on the D50 to 8 frames a second. So I expect I'll (hopefully) get more shots with the rocket actually in the frame.

Now to the point of my thread: what tips do people have for getting good shots? Anything from general technique to specific settings for the Nikon would be appreciated.

My thoughts on camera settings are:
1. Aperture wide open to allow the fastest shutter speed possible
2. Bump the ISO up a bit to better facilitate #1 above
3. Use continuous autofocus (Nikon, and I'm assuming other brands, let you choose if the camera only focuses once when you partially depress the shutter, or continually)
4. Metering: Seems that center weighted or spot metering would be best so that a bright sky doesn't result in under-exposed rockets

What thoughts do you have if you shoot using a DSLR camera?

 

[jderimig]

Whenever I don't have much to fly at our monthly club launches, I like to drag my DSLR along with me and take pics. I've been using a Nikon D50 with the Nikkor 70-300 VR (non-DX) lens and having a lot of fun and getting pretty good shots. Yes, this camera is ancient and was one of the earlier Nikon consumer DLSR cameras but I've loved using it (I've got over 18,000 shutter clicks).

At our last launch, the D50 just wasn't focusing right and giving me some general grief so long story short, I upgraded to a Nikon D7500. Just taking shots around the house and during thanksgiving with family around let me know that this is night and day a huge upgrade. One thing I'm most excited about (which maybe seems silly given how much better this camera is) is the faster shooting rate from something like 3 pics a second (if even that) on the D50 to 8 frames a second. So I expect I'll (hopefully) get more shots with the rocket actually in the frame.

Now to the point of my thread: what tips do people have for getting good shots? Anything from general technique to specific settings for the Nikon would be appreciated.

My thoughts on camera settings are:
1. Aperture wide open to allow the fastest shutter speed possible
2. Bump the ISO up a bit to better facilitate #1 above
3. Use continuous autofocus (Nikon, and I'm assuming other brands, let you choose if the camera only focuses once when you partially depress the shutter, or continually)
4. Metering: Seems that center weighted or spot metering would be best so that a bright sky doesn't result in under-exposed rockets

What thoughts do you have if you shoot using a DSLR camera?

1. If you can pan you don't need extremely fast shutter speed. Wide open aperature costs you depth of focus and more lens aberations getting to the sensor plane. Practice paning.
4. If the light doesn't change, take a reading off your hand and fix the exposure at that value. The same light reaching your hand will be illuminating the rocket all the way up.

 

[DigBaddy]

1. Throw the Nikon away.


I shoot with Canon stuff...I had to

Aperture wide open depends on the lens. If you're on a super-fast lens, you may lose enough depth of field.

I tend to shoot in shutter priority. The fastest lens I'll shoot with is F/4 so that mode plus auto ISO usually works well. Exposure compensation usually ticks toward the positive side by 2/3-1 stop to help with bright skies. All depends on what you have in each frame.

Yes, servo focus mode with a smaller zone should help stay locked on.

Also, back up and use a longer lens. Camera movement speed upward is reduced; making for more success and not needing crazy high shutter speeds. Trying to be close equals frustration.

Practice. I still suck at it, but am getting better the more I shoot rockets...

 

[neil_w]

Also, back up and use a longer lens. Camera movement speed upward is reduced; making for more success and not needing crazy high shutter speeds. Trying to be close equals frustration.

I think this is the #1 key to great launch shots, and the reason why photographing launches with a phone is so frustrating (although you can still get good shots when the rocket is on or near the pad).

 

[mh9162013]

Glass...it's all about the glass.

It seems like you want a large aperature and fast auto-focus. It appears you also want healthy zoom-ability. To get all of those things, you're gonna have to pay a pretty penny for a nice zoom lens.

You can save a bit of money and go aftermarket, though. I heard companies like Tamron and Sigma make great lenses.

 

[cls]

Listen to the LCO about what the motor is. Your trigger finger will be lazy on the Black Jacks, and hypertwitch on Warp 9. That just takes practice.

Stop down the exposure a bit. Really. The flame is so bright, 4500 degrees, it blows out all the pixels, and the photo doesn't show nach diamonds etc. Getting that detail takes real skill. Even the pros don't always get it.

(Canon also here.)

 

[DigBaddy]

Also, shoot in RAW so you can recover highlights and shadows in processing.

 

[K'Tesh]

*DO NOT* use a 35mm DSLR camera's autofocus feature when in a commercial tourism submarine (such as the ones that operate out of Waikiki). *IF* you can even get an object in focus, it will be too far away for a good image by the time it does. That is, *IF* you can even get the camera to take the damn picture. Manual focus isn't any better. Better idea is to go with digital video. Don't ask me how I know this...

 

[ep29030]

Unless you have a great, fast lens, the sharpest focus on most lenses is 1-2 f-stops from wide open. So for my 70-200 f/2.8, that is about f/4.0-5.6. I’ve found that i eliminate lens “hunting” by getting the rocket in focus on the pad, then switching off the autofocus on the lens for the shots. And getting back with a longer lens helps, too. I use either my 70-200 f2.8 or I drag out the beast—an older 100-300 f/2.8. Look at some of the older manual focus lenses to get good glass on the cheap. People don’t appreciate what is required for great action photos.

 

[jadebox]

Also, shoot in RAW so you can recover highlights and shadows in processing.

I turn raw off for launch photos since it slows down the number of frames and frames per second in burst mode.

 

[jadebox]

I’ve found that I eliminate lens “hunting” by getting the rocket in focus on the pad, then switching off the autofocus on the lens for the shots.

I was just going to suggest that. Usually I am able to manually focus and track the rocket after the launch. But most of the time I am lazy and happy to just capture the liftoff.

 

[jadebox]

And the biggest tip ... Take lots of photos and only show the best ones to others.

 

[DigBaddy]

I turn raw off for launch photos since it slows down the number of frames and frames per second in burst mode.

That's a good point if one is depending on burst mode.

 

[ep29030]

Expect to delete most of your photos. My time is too precious to waste it on anything less than a 4-star photo. If it doesn’t make the cut, just delete it and focus on adjusting the great pictures to make them better. I keep 5-10% of the photos I shoot, and sometimes less than that.

 

[ep29030]

Another thing: a rocket launch is as much about the experience as the launch. Get pictures of people holding their kits in line, loading the pads, the range workers, LCO, RSO, people with rockets in the back of their vehicles, working on rockets on a table, rockets on display by the cars, vendor trailers etc. Sometimes those are some of the best photos you will have, and they help the viewer to experience the whole event.

 

[ep29030]

Glass...it's all about the glass.

It seems like you want a large aperature and fast auto-focus. It appears you also want healthy zoom-ability. To get all of those things, you're gonna have to pay a pretty penny for a nice zoom lens.

You can save a bit of money and go aftermarket, though. I heard companies like Tamron and Sigma make great lenses.

It IS all about the glass, and the third-pary lens makers have improved their game in the past years. I have an older Sigma 100-300mm f/2.8 that takes mighty fine photos, has a 1.4X matching teleconverter, and costs about 1/3 the price of the comparable brand lens (that can’t do the zoom). I would definitely consider Sigma or Tamron lenses to save money. But always read reviews before you buy—like all lenses, some are better than others.

 

[wonderboy]

This is awesome guys, thanks for all the tips! So much to comment on...

I 100% agree on the people part of the launch. After having some trouble at the last launch capturing rockets in flight, I focused more on simply capturing the people and activity around the launch site. I had a lot of fun with that.

My lens is definitely not on the high end, it's the 70-300 4.5-5.6, but I have managed to get some good shots with it. It does have the in-camera image stabilization and is the non-DX lens (meaning it is the older full frame lens not the newer Nikkor digital specific more compact lens). I'm sure my ratio of good to bad is lower than if I had a faster lens, but like was said before: I'll just click away and throw away the bad ones.

I'm definitely keeping my eye out for a higher end lens. The price point on these is typically just a bit outside of my discretionary budget limit. I like the advice though about looking at the 3rd party brands, as the big names do seem to get a premium price.

The panning during the flight is something that I've managed to do a couple of times. And that is 100% great advice (I've thought the same) that you need to know the propellant and general expectation of how fast the rocket is going to accelerate to anticipate the motion. With respect to getting a great liftoff photo or getting a great in-flight shot, do you typically just try to focus on one or the other? I can see some of the techniques being more effective for one but maybe not working for the other, such as getting pre-focused and then turning off AF for the launch. I agree that overall, I need a lot more practice.

Once I'm home I'll post up some of the shots I've gotten at our launches. I also have one really cool shot from my RC plane flying days where I got a panning shot of a giant scale cub where I intentionally used a slower shutter to blur the background, but required careful panning to keep the plane sharp... it's probably my best shot (out of THOUSANDS) that I've taken.

Thanks again to all for the great discussion and advice.

 

[jadebox]

Another thing: a rocket launch is as much about the experience as the launch. Get pictures of people holding their kits in line, loading the pads, the range workers, LCO, RSO, people with rockets in the back of their vehicles, working on rockets on a table, rockets on display by the cars, vendor trailers etc. Sometimes those are some of the best photos you will have, and they help the viewer to experience the whole event.

That may be the best advice.

At our model rocket launch, I sometimes get permission from the RSO to take photos from the range looking towards the attendees so I can get photos with the rockets in the foreground and people in the background. And you can stand behind others so they are in the foreground and the rocket is in the background. I like to do this especially when a young person is pressing the button to launch their rocket.

And don't spend your entire time looking through a viewfinder! Take time to watch directly with your own eyes and enjoy the experience. When my own rockets are being launched, I put the camera on a tripod or ask others to take photos so I can watch the launch.

 

[ep29030]

Yes, I hate the fact that you get what you pay for. Each new round of digital sensors gets better, so newer camera bodies are more sensitive, meaning you can get away with smaller lenses—an f/4 instead of the f/2.8, so you can make trades in body cost vs lens cost. I still have the older full-frame pro lenses. I’m not in the mood to drop another $8-10K to get new pro-level glass for a shutterless body. For now, I plan to upgrade my body to a late DSLR to maximize the lenses I have. Sometimes we get so enamored with the new, shiny toys that we forget those old ones took great photos as well (and at less cost). Some old pro bodies will do 20+ frames a second at 14-20MP per image. Any image that is 3+ MP in size can be made into an 11x14 image. Think high-end older cameras and lenses to save money and still get great action shots.

 

[jadebox]

I'm definitely keeping my eye out for a higher end lens. The price point on these is typically just a bit outside of my discretionary budget limit. I like the advice though about looking at the 3rd party brands, as the big names do seem to get a premium price.

A while back I received some unexpected money and decided to use it to buy a better lens. Shopping around, I discovered that the money wasn't enough to get a better lens than I already had. There is a big jump in cost from a good lens to a great lens! So, I am going to stick with what I have.

An alternative to buying a faster, longer, bigger, fancier lens is to rent one. It isn't cheap, but if you only need one for occasional events, it can make sense. And it is a good way to try out a specific lens before buying it.

There are places that rent by mail, but we have a really good rental place near us. For one launch, when I was launching my first L motor, I rented one of those giant lenses that needs to rest on a tripod - the kind football players like to run into on the sidelines. I got some really nice shots with it.



I had been considering buying a lens like it. But, in spite of how nice the photos were, I couldn't imagine lugging around such a large (and expensive) piece of equipment. I decided I can just rent it again if I want to use it.

 

[DigBaddy]

Just a warming with Sigma. I happily use many of their lenses; and they've overall been really great. The issue I had that soured me was when the zoom stuck on my 10-20mm EX lens last year (one of my absolute favorites). I bought it in 2009. It's not horribly old, and their EX line was the cream of the crop.

I set out to get that lens fixed. Filled out their online repair form and it didn't prevent me from requesting it. Provided me the address to send it to for repair. With added insurance it wasn't too cheap to ship.

I then get a note from them that the lens was "beyond service age" - meaning, it's old enough they didn't want to fix it. I expressed dismay and they only offered a discounted price on a lens not as wide - not even a comparable lens. They did ship the lens back to me.

10 minutes and I had it disassembled and found the cause, a backed out slider in the cam; likely not tightened down enough with they fixed an element centering issue right after I bought it (and under warranty). It was a pretty easy fix; even though I'm not an expert in this stuff. But still, it's intimidating opening up such a complex piece of equipment with many tiny parts.

So, they may cost less, but fixing them down the road may be a challenge. I can't say I'd buy another Sigma, but My 10-20, 17-70, 18-300 and 150-600 are really great lenses....when they work

 

[FredA]

Shoot RAW. JPEG assumes too much and throws away too much data.

Stop down one or two stops. Most sensors have good DR and can dig into blacks, but you can NOT recover blown highlights.

Autofocus on the rocket on the pad then TURN OFF AUTOFOCUS (unless you use back-button focus, which you should)

And yes, good glass is worth the price of admission. Bodies come and go, but glass is forever. Collect good glass.
Especially for DSLR users - lots of nice used glass out there as people upgrade to mirrorless.
Which reminds me - I have a ton of F-mount to sell.

 

[jadebox]

A little off-topic, but when looking at new cameras, don't get hung up on the number of megapixels. That's mainly a marketing thing. Cutting a pizza into smaller slices doesn't make the pizza bigger or taste better.

That analogy fails a little because more pixels does help the processor clean up an image a little more, but generally a larger sensor and better lens do more to produce a better photo than more pixels.

Sony just introduced a new mirrorless camera that eliminates the rolling shutter issue and other problems that have made me tend to stick with an SLR in spite of the many advantages to a mirrorless camera. The new A9 III looks to be the ultimate camera for rocketry photos right now, but it is way too expensive for me and wouldn't work with my lenses. But, the price will come down and other manufacturers will adopt the technology (probably by using Sony's sensor).

 

[FredA]

Match your Mega-Pixels to your desired print size.
Printers want 300DPI - do the math.
You can halve that with upscalers and being a bit forgiving on IQ, but that's the target.

If you're only showing on a TV at 4k or on a computer monitor at 1080P, you don't need more than the entry MP's.

However, if you want to crop hard because you didn't get close enough with the mounted lens, then you want more MP's.

Note - more pixels are bad in many ways - don't buy if you don't need.
Pixel "buckets" are smaller so less DR.
They also put more pixels inside the circle of confusion for a given lens, so they will be "less sharp" and similarly, test your technique.
Plus they change the Bokeh and diffraction behavior of a given lens, generally for the worse.

Choose wisely.

 

[aerostadt]

Does anyone have any tips for seeing the image in the screen for outside video? I have a Canon EOS Rebel and when I switch to video finding the image switches from the small view finder to the screen. The trouble for outside video is that the screen seems to be swamped by daylight and is too bright to clearly see the image.

 

[ep29030]

The rule for print is 300 dpi, for displays it is 75 dpi (dots per inch).

 

[FredA]

The rule for print is 300 dpi, for displays it is 75 dpi (dots per inch).

Well - that's changed a ton with Apple's retina's all holding a perceived 300dpi at regular distance and really spanning about 225 to 325 in their macbooks and ipads and mid-400's for iPhones.
I target 125dpi for my display output. But then again, I try to target the correct pixel count for a target so dpi becomes moot.

 

[Tractionengines]

All great advice.... one thing I'll add but it may be outdated. (Lugging fancy camera gear around with young kids didn't work so well, so I'm mostly phone photos for the last 10 years.)

FILTERS....

A POLARIZING FILTER IS A MUST HAVE. You can turn the front ring to get deeper blue skys, and whiter clouds, while reducing glare from reflections, so paint jobs POP. But if your not going to tune it, take it OFF. Having it at the wrong angle will make the above worse instead if better.

Also, especially useful on bright days, sand, dry lake beds, or snow/ice, is neutral density filter. It will knock down the "brightness" of the light entering the lens. That gives the cameras sensor range more room to work without being saturated. The brighter it is, the darker ND filter you use. (Shooting on a frozen lake covered in snow, the cameras sensor gets "snow blindness", just like our eyes, but usually not permanant.)

 

[jadebox]

And keeping a polarizing or neutral density filter on your lens is also a good way to protect the lens.

 

[suborbital]

A while back I received some unexpected money and decided to use it to buy a better lens. Shopping around, I discovered that the money wasn't enough to get a better lens than I already had. There is a big jump in cost from a good lens to a great lens! So, I am going to stick with what I have.

An alternative to buying a faster, longer, bigger, fancier lens is to rent one. It isn't cheap, but if you only need one for occasional events, it can make sense. And it is a good way to try out a specific lens before buying it.

There are places that rent by mail, but we have a really good rental place near us. For one launch, when I was launching my first L motor, I rented one of those giant lenses that needs to rest on a tripod - the kind football players like to run into on the sidelines. I got some really nice shots with it.

View attachment 617595

I had been considering buying a lens like it. But, in spite of how nice the photos were, I couldn't imagine lugging around such a large (and expensive) piece of equipment. I decided I can just rent it again if I want to use it.

Amazing photo!