Choosing camera (or rather lens) for this season's chase

[ChristofferB]

5 more hours of googling I think I have decided about the Canon EF-S 18-135mm as a multi-purpose/always-use lens. Although it doesn't seem to be the best at anything it will most likely not force me to switch lenses at crucial times, it will work during most light (and I will use the 55mm/1.8 when it's too dark).

I looked through a ton of old storm chasing photos I have taken and realized just a few were taken at 300mm. I think those that were (in my lens without IS) would probably have been rather decent or even better with this lens at 130 (cropped). I also realized I had taken far more structure shots and iPhone-panoramic shots than I thought so I think my number 2-camera would rather be a wide-angle rather than a 70-300mm (which I thought would be 2nd on my list).

Do feel free to comment these thoughts.

 

[Jeremy Perez]

Christoffer,

I recently picked up the 18-135 myself. For the last year and up to a couple weeks ago, I was running two Canon T3i’s with 3 lenses:

Canon EF-S 10-22:
Always attached to one camera. Gets a lot of use for panoramic structure and time lapse.

Canon EF-S 18-55 (Kit Lens):
Usually attached to the 2nd camera for most other tighter shots.

Canon EF-S 55-250:
I’d swap this one on when I need to reach farther or go for interesting compressed perspective.

Chasing in Arkansas last month, I wound up using all 3 lenses documenting the Grady/Moscow tornado. I generally chase at a distance and was about 7 miles away for that one. The 18-55 got the most action on the tornado and I had it cranked to 55 mm for most of those shots. If I had more range on that lens, I probably would’ve gone in tighter—but didn’t want to lose precious seconds changing to the 55-250 in the earlier stages. I also grabbed a few wide structure shots for the big picture with the 10-22. As it was roping out and even further away, I finally did take the time to switch to the 55-250 and got a couple more shots at 100 mm.

For upcoming chases, my hope is that the 18-135 and 10-22 will keep all the typical bases covered on the two cameras. I won’t need the 18-55 at that point (it also helps that the kit lens lost serious hit points during an unfortunate wind+tripod event last month). So I would only need the long reach of the 55-250 for much rarer storm chase scenarios, if at all…saving it for other photography subjects.

Example views are 7-8 miles out, uncropped:

EF-S 10-55 Lens at 55 mm


EF-S 10-22 Lens at 10 mm


EF-S 55-250 Lens at 100 mm

 

[ChristofferB]

Thanks! I love the photos by the way. Looking at the quality of your shots I assume you are a great photographer, this made me wonder that you must have put a long focus area (high aperture) on the first tornado shot to get the grass in focus as well. Do you actively look for framing like that or was that just a coincidence?

It seems like the wide angle is preferred by many chasers. For me, I am not sure if I would use it to much more than chasing so I am not sure if I can motivate an expensive lens for that purpose.

It really is difficult with all these trade-offs. After I decided about going with a zoom I found a 18-200 that I will try out in the store today as well. It sure would be excellent to have something that would make me never having to need a specific telescope lens. After reading about it online though it seems like the trade-off to have that much zoom on one lens makes the quality bad.

I am not sure if everyone else ends up closer to the tornadoes than I (I am an amateur who needs to rely on tour guides and chase partners to find the storms) but I often find myself really far from tornadoes and when you do get that money shot and can't zoom in - it is quite devastating.

For me the photo below is the kind of shots that I don't want to experience again. I took it at the Canadian outbreak last year and it was the first time I saw two tornadoes at once. I took it with my 18-55 at 55mm, ISO 800 (cropped 50%). Lots of brief tornadoes (after the big one) and they were all crap. I am not sure what exactly caused this mess-up but it seems like I left it on manual focus at a bad range but the entire un-cropped image is blurry so I am not sure. It could have been the ISO but ISO 800 (even with a Canon 450) should be fine, right?

I know this would not be helped much with a better lens (mess ups are what they are) but it was very hard to see that one of my most appreciated sights came out this bad. I did not really realize until I transferred it to my computer. If I would have had a better zoom (I did have my 300mm at hand but did not have time to switch) I could have realized it was blurry already in the ocular.



Camera settings are a completely different chapter that I will look into further once I have decided about cameras.

30 minutes later: Think I will go for a wide lens after all, the Canon EF-S 10-18/4,5-5,6 IS STM.

 

[ChristofferB]

Back from the camera store now and the final toll for the last couple of days is:
- Canon 760D
- Canon f/1.8 50mm (included with the camera)
- Canon 18-130mm - this will be my common lens I think
- Canon 10-18mm - yeah, I bought a wide angle after all and, boy, was it fun to play around with!

Also bought a decent quality tripod and an extra battery.

This concludes my part of this thread. Beware of new threads when I try to figure out the best default settings and setups to make sure nothing goes wrong when I have a few seconds to take that money shot! I will play around with everything first, take a few online courses etc.

THANKS everyone who helped out!

 

[chrisbray]

Hi Christoffer,
I am in the same boat so I would love to know how its working for you. How much did you pay for the 760D and the 18-130? I am looking for a new camera (and probably lenses) in the 500-700 range that is both good at taking HD video and has good low light/infinity focus for taking lightning pictures. One fried said Canon would be better than Nikon in this price range since they are better with the Video part of it.

Any other idea for this range? I currently have an Olympus e-510 that I have had since the beginning of 2008. It has two Zukio digital lenses, and I am more than ready to upgrade. I doubt the old lenses will be compatible with new bodies, not that they are great anyway, so I have to likely buy an additional lense to whatever camera I get.

 

[chrisbray]

ALso, for those who take Video, this will be my first time really using a camera to take video (just been using iPhone before). What is acceptable to you? I'm thinking 1080 at 60fps would be required/satisfactory. Is 4k video really worth the price tag?

 

[Ben Holcomb]

I had the 60D and the 18-135 and have taken most of my weather shots with that lens. For reference, you can check out my shots at https://www.flickr.com/photos/oklahomachaser/tags/canonefs18135mm/

For this year I've upgraded to a Canon 6D. The lenses I am sporting now are the Sigma Art 24-105 f/4, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, Sigma AF 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX DG and the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO.

I expect most of my shots will be either with the Sigma 24-105 or Sigma 15-30 this year.

 

[chrisbray]

Anyone have thoughts on Mirrorless vs DSLR specifically when ti comes to weather/stormchasing photography and video?

 

[Ben Holcomb]

I would say that mirrorless is going to be the wave of the future, especially as storage capacities get bigger. If you aren't currently invested in a DSLR / lenses / etc I would probably start on the mirrorless endeavor.

 

[Andrew Constans]

Yep! I shoot video on a Lumix GH4 and love it, it's an amazing camera. The two reasons I haven't shifted away from my DSLRs are because I have a lot of glass with the older screw drive AF mechanism which M43 adapters cannot work with, and buying the Metabones/M43 AF compatible versions of those lenses would involve selling my car and moving under a bridge. That being said, all DSLR/mirrorless VIDEO should be manually focused unless you're in a pinch; the AF capabilities are more for still photography in my experience.

Agreeing with Ben - If you aren't already invested in a system or are willing to go for a wholesale change out, I would suggest looking at mirrorless!

 

[ChristofferB]

Hi Christoffer,
I am in the same boat so I would love to know how its working for you. How much did you pay for the 760D and the 18-130? I am looking for a new camera (and probably lenses) in the 500-700 range that is both good at taking HD video and has good low light/infinity focus for taking lightning pictures.

I have just started to test things out. Everything is amazing compared to my old Canon 450. I will post photos on my blog and Twitter as soon as the season starts (which is May 19th for me). See links in my signature.

I bought it all in Sweden and in an expensive store since I needed the expertise (rather than buying things online) so that is not really useful information to you I think considering currency exchange rates etc.

 

[chrisbray]

I do currently have a DSLR but I am not that invested in the lenses (Zukio digital lenses that I don't think have been that great, dating from 2008).

 

[Steve Burrows]

I shoot the Canon 6d as full frame and a wide angle sense is a must under a meso. Lens I shoot with is the Canon 17-40mm L lens. Some say it's not the sharpest but I find it fine. I also have a little mirror less, the Panasonic G7 that shoots 4k. I have had a semipro Sony 4k camera but it really was to big.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Stormtrack mobile app

 

[Jeremy Perez]

...this made me wonder that you must have put a long focus area (high aperture) on the first tornado shot to get the grass in focus as well. Do you actively look for framing like that or was that just a coincidence?

Working on composition is one of the challenges I’ve set for myself. If I’m the right spot to view a tornado, Plan A is to at least document it, no matter what, even if the surroundings are bland. But then close on the heels of that is to try for interesting composition. If there are some cool elements I want to include in the close foreground, then that probably means tripoding the shot and stopping down the aperture for greater depth of field.

If you look closely at that 55mm shot, the focus isn’t ideal—the grass is actually in better focus than the tornado and background. There were two issues happening—the first is that I was at f/5.6 and should’ve been stopped down further. The second issue was setting a bad hyperfocal point. I usually use LiveView and focus manually, so I get exactly what I want and avoid mistakes with autofocus. Unfortunately, the 18-55 mm kit lens has a horribly touchy focus ring, I was trying to do too much at once and didn’t focus as far out as I intended. I put the new 18-135mm lens through a lot of use earlier this week and manual focus is awesome on that lens. Really fine adjustment is easy to work with and it removes the issue with the kit lens where the slightest touch can jiggle the ring by a couple molecules and throw things out of focus.

For me the photo below is the kind of shots that I don't want to experience again. I took it at the Canadian outbreak last year and it was the first time I saw two tornadoes at once….I am not sure what exactly caused this mess-up but it seems like I left it on manual focus at a bad range but the entire un-cropped image is blurry so I am not sure.

That’s still a great tornado experience you captured. Congratulations on that one! The softness may be a bit from focus, but looks like there is some motion blur in there too. I had that on some of my Rozel/Sanford shots and it bugged me to death. So starting in 2014, I started consistently using a tripod, monopod or window mount. When things are happening quick, the tripod may not be an option, but at least using a monopod is really fast and reduces that motion blur issue when you aren’t shooting with a fast exposure.

It could have been the ISO but ISO 800 (even with a Canon 450) should be fine, right?

800 should be pretty decent on newer cameras and let you keep your shutter speed higher. It’s still worth testing in some dim lighting between now and first chase for the new camera to see how it performs. Looking forward to seeing what you catch this year.

 

[ChristofferB]

800 should be pretty decent on newer cameras and et you keep your shutter speed higher. It’s still worth testing in some dim lighting between now and first chase for the new camera to see how it performs. Looking forward to seeing what you catch this year.

Thanks for the feedback and interesting comments on your photos. Regarding my Canadian-photo: You are right, I am happy I was there to witness it with my eyes first and foremost. I looked over that photo with my sister yesterday (who is a professional photographer) and we looked at the entire photo (the one I posted is slightly cropped) and provided some comments.

She was rather sure it was the ISO since the whole photo is very grainy. This was with my 450 (from 2009) so that could be one of the reasons. Another reason is, as you mentioned as well, a slight motion blur (which is more obvious in the full photo). I am glad I bought a tripod now.

Regarding the focus: if I look at the full photo the focus is not anywhere at all. Nothing is in focus. My sister said that it is possible nothing is in focus due to bad autofocusing or accidental manual focus - I didn't quite understand that...I mean, the focus has to be somewhere, right?

Getting a bit off topic now I guess.