Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Plane panning

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tanm/3778037995/" title="Air Canada Jazz Canadair CL-600-2B19 (by Tanner.)"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3461/3778037995_dc2f537b8f.jpg" title="Air Canada Jazz Canadair CL-600-2B19 (by Tanner.)" alt="Air Canada Jazz Canadair CL-600-2B19 (by Tanner.)" width="500" height="340"></a>

Of course I could then take a shot of a plane flying above, blue sky and everything and call it panning and post it here

One other thing I'd like to comment. Panning to us means tracking the subject and using a slow shutter speed. Using a high shutter speed isn't panning, you're just following the subject and then hitting the shutter button.

Hey Tanner, who's "us" and not to nit pick but I don't really agree on your definition of what panning is. Panning in the most basic definition of the term is the horizontal movement (or rotation) of the camera and tracking of the subject so that it stays in the same location of the frame. Shutter speed has very little to do with the term other than the creative side of it by the suggestion of speed or motion. No?

Well when I got into motorsports photography, that was the term given to shooting moving objects with a slow shutter speed. I just googled "photography panning" and the results on the first page all refers to this.

So I'll stick with the terms panning and tracking but of course, everybody has their own opinion.

http://digital-photography-school.com/m ... g-subjects

Cool. Makes sense. Nice airplane shots BTW.

im still confused with the title of this thread, panning subjects that is running slow speed or panning with slow shutter speed...

did some 1/20 today @ dmcc, kinda hit or miss.. probably use a faster speed for better hit rate..

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ste823/3824963553/" title="DMCC Day 1 by StE823, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2622/3824963553_0c6578c165.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DMCC Day 1"></a>

I meant panning with slower speed.
I normally shoot birds in flight with a lot higher shutter speed while panning. Well birds have no predictable flight path

The first image of this thread was in 1/250s very slow by BIF. I doubt if anybody can do 1/20s with 300mm plus lens in panning shots of BIF.




Even at 1/1000s, the wing still shows motion as it was fast. These were consecutive shots

1/20th at 300mm is nearly impossible to do at that focal range. Given the focal range, you really don't need to try and do 1/20th of a second. Try around 1/200th and see what the results and and adjust the shutter speed accordingly, again, when you're at a farther away, you don't have to use a super slow shutter speed.

So I took this one this past weekend...

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tanm/3831197496/" title="Air Canada Airbus A320-211 by Tanner., on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2435/3831197496_d1f2d7d160.jpg" width="500" height="340" alt="Air Canada Airbus A320-211"></a>

1/25th at 400mm (or 520mm effective focal length) at some ridiculous F-stop because it was sunny. Third shot in a burst of three images with the 1DMrkIIN. First two were write-offs. Nothing new here, the slower you go the more difficult it is to get a sharp image.

That sort of keeper rate at 1/25s is sky high already. I do not have the luxury of having subject (birds) coming my way within range. Most likely they are 3 miles high. Also every time I am in the field I have the dilemma of deciding for BIF or stationary shots (of different setting completely). Your idea has given me some pointer though.

Daniel

Not impossible, just low in-focus rate

I think we are getting into a very hypothetical question. For 300mm (= 450mm in film) you could barely do it (1/20s steady subject) with a sturdy tripod and 2 second delay.
I would guess that is impossible to get pan shot of moving subject 1/20s for 450mm (FF)

I think for what you're doing for photoing birds, if they're flying randomly all over the place then faster shutter speed is what you need when tracking the bird. If you're panning and following a bird as it moves from one side to the other at a consistent direction/speed, then go try using a slow shutter. Key for panning is lots of practice.

Nothing is impossible - it depends on what you want to achieve.

Try doing it at night under the lights..........LOL

cool, looks like a toy

I took this one last weekend at the Woodward Dream Cruise in Detroit.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shaky_jt/3842601983/

I definitely need to practice this more.

shot info:
1/6 sec @ f11, 18mm (Nikon 18-200 zoom)

From the Schomberg Fair Demolition Derby earlier this year:

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/34353273@N00/3591363657/" title="DSC09167 (Large) by chris_hotwire, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2457/3591363657_caaf0bc756.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DSC09167 (Large)"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/34353273@N00/3594295312/" title="DSC02413 (Large) by chris_hotwire, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3415/3594295312_faee3fee76.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DSC02413 (Large)"></a>

David said no birds.
Somebody said no cars.
I did some football this Aug 23 afternoon. Both at around 1/40s and MF

















Daniel

that is not pan, more like motion blur

i was trying even slower pan today.. 1/10 @ 120mm AF

Well definitely panning depending on if you go with Webster. Motion blur too. The only thing I am not sure is the effect


Daniel

Webster's definition is from a more general perspective (though I couldn't find it). Google 'panning photography'.

Daniel's #2 is a pan, but #1 isn't, the grass is sharp.

what is the point of panning people? just for fun?
i always thought panning is to keep the entire subject sharp and the background is blurred to show the motion..

No clue if 'panning photography' is defined as an exercise to have the whole subject sharp. Maybe for a fast moving vehicle. But for people with limbs swinging faster than the body, having the whole subject sharp is impossible at slow shutter speed.
I think the whole thing is to make the image interesting. Whatever means attaining that does not matter much. I tried.
There are no lack of interesting images all very blurry.

This was taken this morning at fairly slow shutter speed of 1/250s

1/80th through the trees

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tanm/3887536801/" title="20090828-173622 (by Tanner.)"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2591/3887536801_a162c8ca99.jpg" title="20090828-173622 (by Tanner.)" alt="20090828-173622 (by Tanner.)" width="500" height="232"></a>