Best Handheld Camera for Flight Videos

[rtwatkins]

Hey Capt. Mike, are you using a tripod when filming... or are you holding the camera by hand?

watching your videos you seem very stable & fluid when tracking the planes so I've wondered...

[OV10]

Hello RT,
Here's your answer.

http://www.hobbysquawk.com/forum/the-lounge/hobby-squawk-events/42070-on-the-road-to-nefi?p=42381#post42381

[rtwatkins]

yep, that would do it :P thanks OV10

[rc-eflyer]

Just about broke the piggy-bank today and bought a Sony FDR AX33 today. The battery is charging as I write this but I did play with it quite a bit at the store and could see how nice the thing is. I did a TON of research and hours of YOU_TUBING before deciding on this guy. The main two features that I really like are EVF (electronic view finder) and the B.O.S.S. image stabilization. It also has a nice feature of being able to assign a function to a nice big ring on the lense for real time adjustment. When you look into the front of the camera and move it around you can actually see the lense moving around on a gimbal!! I bought a Canon vixia hf700 last week and tried it out at the field this past weekend and had pretty poor results so it's going back. Trying to track a plane with an lcd panel in full sunlight is extremely hard to impossible to do. Really excited to give this thing a try at the field this coming weekend and I'll report back and try to put some up on YT. This thing better work........I could've bought a couple of very nice planes from Motion for what this cost me :rolleyes:

Steve

[Alpha]

Holy Necropost, Batman!

I'm bringing this thread back from a nigh-three year hiatus because recently I've noticed an increase in content creation from several fellow Squawkers. Let's revisit the idea of sharing what we're learning about filming and photographing our birds!

I'll kick it off with a few lessons I've learned over the past three years about photographing model aircraft:

1) I learned early that better gear doesn't guarantee better photos. Resist the urge to buy more gear before you learn the basics on how to use what you have. I'm still learning so I still use an inexpensive five year old Sony A6000 and basic lenses like the Sony 50mm F1.8 and Sigma 30mm F1.4 Prime lenses for stills and close up video. For in-flight video I use a Sony 55-210mm lens that can be found on Craigslist or eBay for $150. I'm saving for a sharper telephoto, but only after I've mastered the basics. A lot can be done with a $500 budget and some thrifty shopping on Craigslist or eBay for lightly used setups like mine.

2) Modern cell phones can capture great photos of aircraft on the ground, so don't be bashful to share what you have. Something is better than nothing!

3) Composition adds interest to how a photo is staged. I found the Rule of Thirds very interesting.



4) Photographing a moving aircraft is where things get a little tricky. If starting out with a modern mirrorless camera or DSLR, using the Shutter Priority setting helps when photographing a moving subject. The other settings are handled automatically by the camera. If you're in bright light, using the Shutter Priority setting allows you to control the shutter speed. A higher shutter speed (1/500, 1/640, 1/1000 of a second) help freeze motion and reduce blurring, but at the cost of darker images.

5) Learn the Exposure Triangle, which is the relationship between Aperture, Shutter, and ISO. In general: the lower the ISO the less grainy the image. The faster the Shutter speed the less blurry the image. The wider the Aperture the more separation between a sharp subject and a blurry background. At first it seemed like rocket science but after a few YouTube videos and an hour outside with a camera, it all makes sense rather quickly. It freed me from using the Auto setting and significantly expanded my understanding of how cameras work. As RC pilots, we're used to finding the balance between speed, weight, and flight duration. The Exposure Triangle is similar in that it describes the balance between three factors and how there are tradeoffs and advantages at each stage of interaction. Stare at the table below long enough like I did!




6) Down the road, learning about Depth of Field and Hyper-Focal length is worth the effort. It isn't necessary, but it adds a deeper layer of understanding.

7) Photography is about Light. In our hobby, that's encouraging since we're outdoors all the time. So start shooting!



We've also received lots of comments about the increasing production value of our official content, which adds editing to the conversation beyond photography gear itself. I don't know anything about editing, but perhaps those of you with experience will chime in.

One of the things I want to try more of is onboard cameras. I'm really inspired by those of you whose videos use onboard cameras like RunCam and the fancy Insta360. We use onboard cameras during flight testing and prototype evaluation to observe flying surfaces, wing flex, etc, but I've yet to really rig up a camera ship for video. And don't even get me started on chase drone footage.... I have not idea how guys like Alex do that!

[Turbinefancy]

Excellent post Alpha! Very helpful pointers to improve photography skills. I will use it as a reference for further study. Thanks!

High end cell phones have amazing cameras/software that essentially does all this for you. Even have digital zoom that go up to 6x without compromising much on resolution. And screen captures from videos are good substitutes for shooting stills on fast moving aircraft - may not be good enough for large format print, but decent enough for social media post.

For RC aircraft ground photos, getting down low enough to position camera, plane and horizon at a realistic scale elevation is key to make a model appear real.

[Bajora]

I would agree with the closing line of the post above ... My number one rule when shooting static shots of models is to never shoot down on a model if you can help it (although rules ARE of course meant to be broken at times ;) ). The best looking (read as most realistic) static shots are when you "see" the model from the same level that your eye would if it was a real, full size aircraft.

Also, when shooting in-flight shots, I like to set my cameras to shutter priority. I have the most success with a shutter speed of 1/500 to 1/640 of a second. With the model moving across the skies in front of you, it will be easier to get crisp, in focus shots. With it coming straight at the camera or away from the camera, it will be more difficult to get in focus shots; the model is covering a lot of distance relative to the camera's position. But it can be done if you slow the model down.

[Alpha]

Argh, you're right, Bajora, I edited my original post, thanks! Shutter Priority is what I meant to say, not Aperture Priority.

I've found it difficult to find consistent information about what RC filmmakers use to film RC aircraft in flight. Most of the YouTube channels don't specify their gear or their settings. So, I ended up finding the closest analog to what we're trying to do, which is, incidentally, the hobby of photographing real birds. Called "Birding", the hobby is apparently very large and it's easy to find many forum discussions concerning gear, settings, and other tips and tricks to capture an eagle in flight or a hawk about to snatch its prey. I've adapted many of their techniques in terms of shutter speed, how to track moving subjects heading toward you or at angles away from the camera, rear focus button, how to read a histogram, etc, into how I shoot our RC models. I'm by no means good at it, but it breaks the monotony of all the test flights to be able to let someone else fly while I try to snap crisp photos.

[crxmanpat]

Wow, this is all great information! I've struggled to get good in-flight shots of planes, particularly jets, and especially fast jets. A lot of the above info will come in very handy!

I'm currently running a Canon EOS Rebel T6, with a Canon 75-300mm zoom lens. Next time I go out I will try playing around with some of the above settings. Half the time I seem to get good shots, the other half they are blurry. Especially if there's background other than blue sky (like during landings). Here's some shots that illustrate what I'm talking about. This is Tony Quist's Skymaster Couger from the AZ Jet Rally last year. This is such a beautiful model and Tony flew it superbly, so I was keen to get some good shots. Some were good, some not so much.

[Alpha]

Nice shots, Pat! You captured the model well and I really like the colors and overall composition! What settings are you shooting for mode, shutter, and ISO?

To underscore my assertion that pricey gear is required for acceptable shots, consider that the attached pictures were taken with an old Canon 50D and a cheap zoom lens. Even with a gray plane moving at 90mph through a gray sky, the photos came out well enough for use on online platforms, which is where we consume most of this kind of media. Similar to Pat's Canon T6 setup, on the used market this is only about $350-$500 of gear, and not to mention even though it's an older camera it still holds well for photography in other areas of general life (kids, events, etc) so it should be easier to convince the wife to buy it because it's not just for your birds filling the garage. I still prefer the $900 Sony A6400 because of its significantly faster autofocus and other modern features, but still, don't think that good photos can't be achieved with sub-$500 setups.



Regardless of what camera you have, try these default settings that were used for this photo above:

Mode: Manual
Shutter Speed: 1/2000
ISO: Auto
Aperture: f/5.6
Focus: Auto Focus Continuous ("AF-C")
White Balance: Auto ("AWB")

Try that, then adjust depending on your exact conditions. If the available light is low, you may need to decrease your shutter speed to 1/500 or 1/640. If the light is bright, you can benefit by increasing your shutter speed to 1/1000 or 1/2000. Leaving the ISO setting on Auto will allow the camera to decide how much ISO to use to properly expose the shot. The more ISO, though, the grainer the photos, so everything is a balance. As Bajora said (as the resident expert in my book), slow flying planes directly impact your camera's settings. Slower the plane means the slower the shutter speed and/or lower the ISO/grain required to capture a sharp photo. So beyond gear and gear settings, practice with a pilot who can bring the bird "low, slow, and close".

Now, sharpness isn't the only goal in RC model photography. Sometimes, a little bit of softness in the image adds more realism, because in real life there's usually a great deal of haze or other atmospherics going on between the lens and the aircraft. In our photos, to reinforce that same relative scale, the aircraft are actually very far away. The photo above, for example, with a Raptor in flight at that altitude and relative angle.... the photographer is very far away. Accordingly, I'm learning to not simply hunt for sharpness. The picture below is slightly soft, having been taken at 1/1600 sec shutter speed at ISO 160. But in this case the "motion blur" imparts more realism to the shot.



Also, play with darkness, shadows, and distance to make a photo feel more "real". In the shot below, the photo is grainy, not sharp, and not really usable as a "product photo", but it does look more realistic to me because I don't see the control hardware and overall the relative distance to my eye feels accurate. The light off the engine humps and how other areas are diffuse or draped in shadow also help complete the effect. This was shot with the same camera as the other photos, but this time the shutter was increased to 1/2000 and the ISO was dropped to 125. The result was a darker, moodier photo. The focal length was zoomed to 235mm to the overall sharpness dropped, too.



Once the model is on the ground and moving slower, you can get the model closer to you and use more conventional "portrait" settings with low focal length, low ISO (100-320), and low shutter speeds (1/125-1/400). In the picture below, the operator is zoomed all the way to 250mm and the aircraft is still moving so the shutter speed is still high (1/1250) to reduce the hand shake. Evenso, the picture is relatively sharp while still conveying a sense of reasonable forward motion. And all with cheap gear.

[crxmanpat]

Alpha,

Up to now I typically used either full auto mode, or Sport mode. That's why sometimes I'd get good shots, and sometimes they'd be blurry. I looked at the manual settings on my camera, and the lowest aperture setting I have available is f/4.5, but I can increase shutter speed all the way up to 1/4000. I'm going to try some shots today with these settings:

Aperture: f/4.5
Shutter: 1/640
ISO: 200
White Balance: 5200K (daylight setting)

I may play around with shutter speed some, going up to 1250.

[Alpha]

Sounds good, Pat. Let us know how your results differ as your shutter speed differs.

Regarding aperture, that's a whole 'nother can of worms... Depth of Field. Basically, the lower the F number, the narrower the area within focus, with the space between you and that area (foreground) and the space behind that area (background) both being blurred. If you want more of your shot in focus, increase the F number (a "slower" aperture). Doing so reduces the amount of light coming into the sensor, meaning the ISO needs to go up (if set to Auto, your camera will calculate that for you). Lower F numbers, i.e. faster apertures, are more artistic because the background can be blurred out if the model is on the ground. In the context of a Bird In Flight, middle ground apertures such as F4, F5.6, F8 work well enough to capture the entirety of the model. You wouldn't want only the canopy in focus with the tail out of focus during a head on shot, for example, so keep the F number a little higher. Your F/4.5 is basically set it and forget it so don't worry. My lenses are fast down to F1.4 so I need to be careful.


Here's an example below shot at F5 and you can see how the subject is in focus but the background is blurry. If the aperture was slower, say F10, the background would also be in focus. So it's a bit of an artistic choice, but can also be a practical one. If there's trash in the background at my test field, I blur it out with F2.2. If you're in Arizona with a beautiful background during a landing shot and you want it to be as in focus as the plane itself, shoot at F8 or higher. Many cameras can go to F16+ but that's just unnecessary and IQ ("image quality") degrades.





All lenses are different, too, as far as their "sweet spot" for focal length (zoom), and aperture. Quality usually degrades at the extremes. I looked up your lens on DXOmark.com and paired it to a Rebel T5 and you can see where the sweet spot is in bright green, below. Yellow is good and red is not good. For comparison, the much more expensive 70-200 F4 shows a bit more green, but still red overall, so we can see that it isn't just the lens but the sensor and body, too. But regardless, these are just numbers --in your photos, they look good to me and if we have to sort through 80% of our pictures to find a good one, that's still better than 500% more camera gear investment.



https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...11_870_255_870

[WrightBrosRC]

Hi Guys, and thx Alpha for reviving this thread! I looked at this thread a while back when I joined Hobby Squawk and it was dated for sure and I hadn't made any advances yet on my own to share. Tech changes so rapidly that it is difficult to stay on top of the options available.

I'm a photography novice/hobbyist and have been experimenting just cuz I love RC and the two hobbies are a match made in heaven! My photographic ideas are moving toward concepts developed by many new "toy" photography artists I see on YouTube with action figures and such. I still record the standard flight duration videos especially for flight review and critique of piloting skills/maneuvers, etc. but there now more of a distinction between videos I create to review flights and videos created for entertainment.

I have no less than 5 cameras in my bag when I go to shoot. DSLR, Hand Cam, Samsung Galaxy, Insta360 and Mobius and I have also developed an odd assortment of stands, jigs, mounts, spacers, etc.. that another photographer might not consider handy.

The thing that seems to help me the most is I am self taught and dont follow the norm. I end up discovering new methods others may have missed. The thing that seems to impede success is that I am self taught and do not have a photography background on which to rely upon. LOL! Except for the 360 cam, all of my cameras are nearly 4 or 5 years old. The cameras help of course, but setting up your shots for success is the key, not always how good or expensive your camera is.

I'm developing some product that I believe is cutting edge and uniquely valuable advertising for vendors in this market. I am actively seeking to connect with any RC manufacturer(s) for continued research and development. ;)

-Den

[Alpha]

WrightBrosRC, I really like your close-up shots like this B-24 of yours, and also the *tight* formation A-4 and Bearcat photo you posted in the other thread. What did you use to shoot those? What were your settings? Did you tidy them up at all in post? The colors really "pop".

[WrightBrosRC]

WrightBrosRC, I really like your close-up shots like this B-24 of yours, and also the *tight* formation A-4 and Bearcat photo you posted in the other thread. What did you use to shoot those? What were your settings? Did you tidy them up at all in post? The colors really "pop".

Thx Alpha, the DSLR and tripod are essential with timing the key most difficult factor. I basically set up the shot, including manual focus etc and fly the aircraft into the shot. I try to open the shutter exactly when the aircraft is/are in the exact point of which I set the camera focus. There are a few more secrets, can't reveal everything, lol, but the color is not manipulated at all in post. Post is typically just cropping and waterrmark.

The color is related directly to the magic hour and the current sky. You may already know that some Hollywood producers spend $100,000 on getting set up for a 5 minute shot. When shooting outdoors in natural light, there is this natural lighting moment that happens with about an hour window or so, in the late afternoon, when everything else is also in alignment.

The result is I get a few rare successful shots and delete thousands of worthless ones.

I have found ways to repeat it much more reliably and easily just in the past few days. A break through of sorts.

I now have the ability to do a perfect precise, 5 aircraft, tight formation, Blue Angels or Thunderbirds type formation photo with RC aircraft. I just need 5 pilots and five photogenic RC aircraft to assist me. I have a few pilot volunteers so far. The realization is coming closer but I'm a retired disabled vet and pursue my passion on a shoestring budget.

-Den

[Alpha]

Your second F-15 photo really resonates with me, Den! The grain and shadows remind me of the tarmac in the '80s. Good memories!

I tried a rented Sony 85mm f1.8 yesterday during a break in the weather. As a prime lens, the sharpness was quite impressive, but its fixed focal length wasn't useful for in-flight photos. It's a good focal length for video, though. I'll have to wait to post the photos/video though.

One of these days I want to try the Sony FDR-AX53. The "BOSS" system is reputedly very good. The small viewfinder worries me, though. Our hobby doesn't seem perfectly suited for any one type of gear, so as WrightBrosRC said, often there's a lot of tinkering and personalization to setup rigs that do what we want, how we want it. Part of the fun, I guess!

[Spinny Testaverde]

Holy Necropost, Batman!

I'm bringing this thread back from a nigh-three year hiatus because recently I've noticed an increase in content creation from several fellow Squawkers. Let's revisit the idea of sharing what we're learning about filming and photographing our birds!

I'll kick it off with a few lessons I've learned over the past three years about photographing model aircraft:

1) I learned early that better gear doesn't guarantee better photos. Resist the urge to buy more gear before you learn the basics on how to use what you have. I'm still learning so I still use an inexpensive five year old Sony A6000 and basic lenses like the Sony 50mm F1.8 and Sigma 30mm F1.4 Prime lenses for stills and close up video. For in-flight video I use a Sony 55-210mm lens that can be found on Craigslist or eBay for $150. I'm saving for a sharper telephoto, but only after I've mastered the basics. A lot can be done with a $500 budget and some thrifty shopping on Craigslist or eBay for lightly used setups like mine.

2) Modern cell phones can capture great photos of aircraft on the ground, so don't be bashful to share what you have. Something is better than nothing!

3) Composition adds interest to how a photo is staged. I found the Rule of Thirds very interesting.



4) Photographing a moving aircraft is where things get a little tricky. If starting out with a modern mirrorless camera or DSLR, using the Shutter Priority setting helps when photographing a moving subject. The other settings are handled automatically by the camera. If you're in bright light, using the Shutter Priority setting allows you to control the shutter speed. A higher shutter speed (1/500, 1/640, 1/1000 of a second) help freeze motion and reduce blurring, but at the cost of darker images.

5) Learn the Exposure Triangle, which is the relationship between Aperture, Shutter, and ISO. In general: the lower the ISO the less grainy the image. The faster the Shutter speed the less blurry the image. The wider the Aperture the more separation between a sharp subject and a blurry background. At first it seemed like rocket science but after a few YouTube videos and an hour outside with a camera, it all makes sense rather quickly. It freed me from using the Auto setting and significantly expanded my understanding of how cameras work. As RC pilots, we're used to finding the balance between speed, weight, and flight duration. The Exposure Triangle is similar in that it describes the balance between three factors and how there are tradeoffs and advantages at each stage of interaction. Stare at the table below long enough like I did!




6) Down the road, learning about Depth of Field and Hyper-Focal length is worth the effort. It isn't necessary, but it adds a deeper layer of understanding.

7) Photography is about Light. In our hobby, that's encouraging since we're outdoors all the time. So start shooting!



We've also received lots of comments about the increasing production value of our official content, which adds editing to the conversation beyond photography gear itself. I don't know anything about editing, but perhaps those of you with experience will chime in.

One of the things I want to try more of is onboard cameras. I'm really inspired by those of you whose videos use onboard cameras like RunCam and the fancy Insta360. We use onboard cameras during flight testing and prototype evaluation to observe flying surfaces, wing flex, etc, but I've yet to really rig up a camera ship for video. And don't even get me started on chase drone footage.... I have not idea how guys like Alex do that!

Nice post to kick this thread off again Alpha. As the videographer and editor for Motion RC along with 3 years of doing this for another RC company, I figure I'll throw any useful information I can into this thread. It would be even better if there was anything specific anyone wanted to ask as far the shooting, editing, drone chasing, cameras, and everything else that goes along with media production for Motion RC.

I'm going to list a few pointers that could help our fans make better videos;

1. Decide if you are going to be editing the footage at all or if it is going straight from your SD card to a video streaming platform. Now I have been using Adobe Premiere for 10 years so it is hard for me to help pick out free a editing software but I'm sure some other posters can help in that regard. If you care about getting video to share you should add learning the basics of a video editing software. Even if you are using just to trim the first 2 minutes of your video before your taxi and take off you will gain a lot more potential viewers if the video jumps right into the action. If you want to get editing it starts at the field, starting thinking about the video you want to create and shoot to edit it. Shoot some ground shots, b roll of the field itself, the pilot, pretty much anything the you can use to help bring the viewer closer to what it was like to be there at the moment.

2. It is not easy to getting footage that is exposed properly, in focus, and with good framing. When we are out shooting at the field for our videos I am moving around a lot depending upon the location of the sun, the wind influencing the flight pattern, the type of shot I'm going for, If I'm using a stabilization rig or tripod. Like anything else it takes practice and experience to get better at tracking various speed planes coming at you from different angles. Sometimes I'm standing at eye level, laying on the ground, standing on a ladder, behind the pilot, on the far edges of the runway, pretty much anywhere that the field will let me stand. There is a big difference between randomly shooting a plane flying around and having a plane for a video shoot. Having your pilot communicate with you is a must, if you aren't ready and anticipating certain maneuvers before they happen it is going to be difficult to get a clean shot.

3. Camera choices and settings. I have mainly used DSLRs to shoot video with the exception of a $ony F$700. For the Sony, Canon, and Panasonic DSLRs I have used none of them had automatic settings that got the job done in my eyes. DSLR video shooting requires full manual control over ISO, shutter speed, white balance, aperture, frame rate, zoom, and focus. That is a lot to juggle in an uncontrolled environment like a flying field so if you want to shoot with a DSLR it is going to take practice and set up. I have different combinations of ISO, shutter speed, and framerates on hotkeys on our GH5 to be able to quickly switch between modes for example 1080p60 low light, 1080p60 bright sunlight, 1080p120, 4k60, timelapse mode, tilt shift timelapse mode, night lapse mode, etc. I feel like most the videos I see from fans are from a handycam of sorts which will get the harder parts of job done (automatic focus, exposure) but will come up short when trying to shoot cinematic footage.

Okay I'll add more to this later but that is enough for now. If you have any questions ask away.

[WrightBrosRC]

Having a dedicated/uninhabited place to film, a pilot that can fly with some organized precision, and a seperate camera operator is a great start. Having a camera operator that can follow an aircraft with some visual appeal is even more ideal, however, the vast portion of my vids exist for the generous help of whomever is standing near and not flying or from just recording random flights of others. There are a few guys that are familiar with a camera if they happen to be at the field/event and even fewer precision minded pilots. It would be great to work with a dedicated team with a plan to create a specific desired result.

My method has evolved from wanting better quality while operating under the DIY necessity. Operating everything increases the amount of control I have and when things are set up right, the success is really amazing.The downside is set up time and repeatability. I've tried a few sensors for timing things but now trying a foot switch for the DSLR and misc stuff I want to animate while flying.

What nobody sees... I have decimated three aircraft this year getting great shots while juggling everything. The Pitts is still doing fine, but I crashed it eight times during the video and photo shoot of my recent effort. The photo below is seconds (maybe two seconds) before crashing. The natural lighting was changing too as the increasing set up time ticked by and the flash (not being used) had been left on auto. The result is great on the Pitts making it really pop but washing out the crawler and skeleton.

[Alpha]

I’ve been testing a new camera and so far have been having encouraging results with it. Some of you in the market for a camera is well suited for our hobby might want to add this to your list of possible investments. There are many YouTube videos espousing the virtues of this camera as an ideal “All In One”, so research more there. No camera is perfect, but so far this one is impressing me.
For our hobby, or at least quasi-amateur RC guys like me whose workflow involves capturing serviceable content for use on various multimedia platforms, we want a camera with:

1. Fast autofocus to track moving targets in the sky against bright backgrounds
2. Quality video (HD and 4K)
3. Stabilization (bonus)

Lenses transmit light to the camera’s sensor and have a major impact on the images the camera produces. In an ideal situation, multiple lenses are required to cover the range of intended framing.

1. Wide angle lens (~16mm-35mm) for close up stills and ground video (unboxing, ground stills)
2. Portrait lens (~30mm-50mm) for overall ground footage
3. Telezoom lens (~85mm-135mm) for midrange stills and general in-flight video
4. Telephoto lens (~100mm-300mm+) for far away in-flight stills

Buying an ILC (interchangeable lens camera) gives operators the flexibility to swap lenses. ILCs can be had for under $500-$1000, but invariably compromises are made in some of the capabilities listed above. For example, “Kit” lenses such as what I’ve been using in my Sony A6000 setup, which includes the camera, a portrait lens and a telephoto lens, can get you fair enough results for well under $1,000 total. However, if I wanted to add a quality telephoto lens I’d be looking at $1,200-$2,500 just for the lens… OUCH. I’ll never have the inclination, budget, or desire to pay that much for a lens for a hobby. At the same time, the lower image quality of my current setup becomes more apparent especially because the kit lens’ ability to track, focus on, and shoot sharply a moving model airplane is severely lacking.

This brings me to the camera I’ve been testing recently. The camera is Sony’s RX10 Mk.IV. It is a "bridge camera", meaning it uses an integrated lens, and has a very wide focal range from 24mm to 600mm all in the same camera. The main advantage of this camera for someone like me is that it negates the need to buy multiple lenses: wide angle lenses for indoor product shots (24mm-50mm), medium telezoom lenses for airplane video (50mm-100mm), and telephoto lenses for faraway still photos in flight (100mm-300mm+). If I were to buy separate lenses for my Sony A6000 to cover all of these focal lengths, I would end up spending ~$3,000-$4,000 in lenses alone, and also have to worry about carrying around several lenses when I travel.
Instead, the RX10 IV provides an “all in one” solution with a single zooming camera, lightning fast autofocus (0.003 seconds), incredible 20 pictures per second, and 4K video with onboard lens stabilization. It’s available new for ~$1,500 but the one I’m using was found used for around $1,100 USD which is still very expensive for an amateur like me, but it is far cheaper than $4,000 and can be used for many more things outside of the Hobby. Capturing sporting events, photographing boisterous kids in sharp focus, general YouTube content (for y’all with your new up and coming YouTube channels). If I do end up keeping it, I would justify it by the fact that the $1,100 for the camera is cheaper than it would cost if I bought a single lens with a lot less range.

But enough of my rambling, let’s see actual results: Here are some photos from a rare bright and blue day in China to demonstrate the camera’s capabilities. These photos are .JPEGs, straight out of the camera, without any editing whatsoever.

First, a shot of the Dora being held still, to set a baseline for sharpness on a stationary object. The subject is satisfyingly sharp.




Second, a shot of the Dora flying level against the clouds. Even though it’s flying at ~60mph, the model’s sharpness even when zoomed in is still very nice compared to the first image. Foam cells and even the individual 0.5mm tips of the mold flowers can still be seen at ~80 feet way, yet there is also a tiny bit of motion blur so we know the model is in motion and not Photoshopped.



Third, here is the L-39 moving at ~100mph during a sustained knife edge pass. Zoomed in a bit, the lens is still sharp, even though I missed the center focus point.



Fourth, here’s a miss on my part… the model was flying faster than I could track it and pan, so the framing isn’t perfect and I missed the center focus point to capture "The Shot". Nevertheless, user error aside, this image shows the camera’s ability to focus on a fast target moving toward the camera (very difficult) and still be able to capture an image sharp enough where the text on the decals can be read, and the foam cells can be seen. Even the difference in sheen between the clear waterslide film and the adjacent foam can be seen on the vertical stabilizer's decals (closer to the actual center focus point). Try doing that with an iPhone.






There are many other features in the Sony RX10 IV that are great for other use cases (super slow motion), that I won’t likely ever use. Its weaknesses, such as poorer low light capability, isn't a concern for my use case since we're normally flying when it's bright outside and for indoor photoshoots I have an artificial lighting setup. One of the reasons not to buy the Mk. IV is that I’ve also heard that there are rumors that an updated RX10 Mk.V is coming soon, implying that the Mk.IV’s price will drop even further before the end of 2019. ‘Worth considering.

[WrightBrosRC]

Thats great info Alpha. Fred and I were talking about this camera. Its a difficult process to upgrade photography gear. When you find something that works well for specific things, you tend to keep them a long time. Its hard for me to let go of a known quantity to try something new. Also, once I am invested in a camera and lenses, another product must be significantly better than what I have on have to consider making the expensive change in cost and learning to make the move forward. It can be a tough decision. I appreciate the info you share on this thread. I picked up a few antique foot switches to aid in controlling my odd assortment of automation and special effects. I'm working on a realistic ground strafing photo at the beach. It has potential but having timing issues. thx. -Den