« Open Mike: My New Favorite Thing (OT) | Main | Darkroom Equipment for Sale »

Monday, 20 July 2015

Comments

Wow, el concorde pasa.

An eternal regret that I did not pony up for a ticket to ride. To consider that it was designed and built in the 60s... what an achievement for its time. And what a timeless beauty.

If that 10D shot was a RAW file, it would greatly benefit from modern RAW conversion, for WB and Highlights corrections, to name two.

If I remember correctly, specs for the 10D were better than that.

The previous model, the D60, were not real good, though. The fps was 3 and the buffer 6. It took about 43 seconds for the buffer to clear. I photographed wildlife with the darn thing, not an easy task. Still, I committed to digital because of the D60 and, after about a month, no longer used film.

The 10D was a considerable improvement. It is good DPReview occasionally serves a useful function. I looked up their specs for the Canon 10D. It did 3 fps with a buffer of 9. Well, it seemed a lot better than the D60 at the time. I guess you had to be there. From that early experience, the first thing I look for is depth of buffer for any camera I am considering purchasing. And funny, it is often a spec hard to find, even at DP Review and the manufacturer's web site. B&H is often the best source.

Color was better than what you see in the Concorde jpeg. Modern RAW converters make it useful to go back to old images from cameras like the D60 and 10D. I still sell prints from both, up to 16x24.

It is good DPReview occasionally serves a useful function. I looked up their specs for the Canon 10D. It did 3 fps with a buffer of 9. Well, it seemed a lot better than the D60 at the time. I guess you had to be there.

From that early experience, the first thing I look for is depth of buffer for any camera I am considering purchasing. And funny, it is often a spec hard to find, even at DP Review and the manufacturer's web site. B&H is often the best source.

Please meld to previous post.

The next print sale?

>Remember when the number of shots you could take before the buffer choked was a significant consideration with camera models?

I use a Leica Typ 246; despite improvements on the MM / M9 cameras, I don't have to remember beyond yesterday to recall when the buffer choked...

Voltz

Digital was handicapping for field work, initially. Other than this frame being shot in the employ of a publication (likely issuing from a pool of digital cameras to avoid recurring processing costs), there wasn't much to recommend a camera that shot 3 fps with a 4 shot buffer and limited dynamic range. I'm thinking that a contemporary Canon EOS 1V film camera of 2003 was capable of 10 fps for 36 frames,flipping mirror and all, no buffer filling up or write-delay. Loaded with color neg film, he'd have had a 12 stop dynamic range and 3 stops of exposure latitude, about double the resolution when scanned. Never did quite get it why people were so gung-ho with digital so early on. (Besides the economics of running a daily newspaper, that is.) Film did a great many things superbly– some of them far better than digital did yet in 2003).

I do hope the Bristol Evening Post has the original file. In this age of digital obsolescence and commercial cost pressures, they may not have. That would be a shame.

The picture is from the private collection of an aviation enthusiast, George Rollo, formerly in the Air Force. I don't know if he has the original.

I went through the 30D, 60D and 10D pretty fast ... trading up as soon as the next model was released. It wasn't until the 20D though that I thought I had something as good as my previous film cameras.

The shot reminds me of my mantra when people ask me about upgrading now - 90% of the greatest pics ever made were taken on equipment technically inferior to what you already have. Just learn to use it.

What a wonderful photo. Highly evocative for anyone fortunate enough to have lived in Bristol.

Incidentally, the shot includes the Clifton Observatory which has a 19th century camera obscura and is great for taking in views of the suspension bridge and various beautiful buildings.


Funny how all I can think is how the helicopter must be messing up the pictures that all the folk on the ground would be taking. Except they probably weren't back then.

The Canon 10D was the first camera I can remember lusting after. After some months passed, they released the first Digital Rebel. Finally a DSLR I could afford.

I'm not sure that any of the countless cameras and lenses I've bought since then have offered "significantly" better capabilities or image quality than that minimal kit (Digital Rebel, EF 24/2.8, and EF 50/1.8) I started out with in 2003. But I've enjoyed it all, and the fun of new gear has always inspired me to get out and shoot.

Nice pic, but you can't take photos like this with a $19 camera. You'd need at least a 7D Mark II to get the same shot today.

One of the few pictures I've actually printed very large and hung on my wall was taken with a 10D.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ghosstrider/4035174217/

That was a rented camera but travelling with it in Yellowstone was enough of an inspiration to get me to make the digital leap (with a used D60).

I have a greeting card in front of me with (I believe) the identical image, printed about 6" x 4". It credits photographer Lewis Whyld, of South West News Service, 20 Nov 2003. The Bristol Evening Post was our local paper.
The greeting card is a good deal sharper than the JPEG you've posted.
In the version on the SWNS website, I can read the 'British Airways' and almost resolve the call-sign below the fin.

<http://images.swns.com/gallery/aerial-photography#prettyPhoto[gallery1]/1/>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/picture_gallery/04/in_pictures_five_thousand_days_/html/8.stm

When I was a boy I often walked or cycled to this spot, a mile or two from our home. The noise of the engines being tested at the works 3 or 4 miles away could be heard easily when the wind was northwesterly.
Later as an impoverished student, I heard a rumour of the first UK takeoff, (1968), and rushed on my 50cc moped to a railway bridge with view of the windward end of the Bristol Aeroplane Co's runway.
I gaffer-taped my Vito B f/2.8 to one eyepiece of a pair of binoculars as a crude telephoto. I got my shot, but the view was too narrow, and the focus indifferent!

Yea, credit for images can get confused over time. I shot a lot of images of Cameron's house from the Ferris Buller movie. And of course they were requested by news outlets, etc. But many were sent to them by the real estate agent. there is an image of the front of the house that is drop dead beautiful that is credited to me on the Chicago Tribune site. I did not supply the images, nor did I even know about it until a few weeks ago. The shot was actually made by Harry Callihand when the house was built. So much for credit :)

Definitely Whyld. I found this post on Twitter: https://twitter.com/lewiswhyld/status/405388405397139456

Ah, yes, my photos of the last few Concorde takeoffs out of JFK were what drove me to digital. I was shooting the bird with 400-speed Fujichrome film and the photographer next to me shot with his Nikon D100. I souped my film later that morning at our neighborhood E6 line (which went out of business a few years later thanks to people like me who went digital) then scanned my best frame and and submitted it to a moderated aviation pictures site. Moderator rejected it for being too grainy. Noise reduction smoothed the grain but made the airplane's fine detail fuzzy. The D100 shooter had his picture accepted - sharp, clean and grain-free as could be.

I reckon Lewis Whylde gets the nod:

"Lewis Whyld’s iconic photograph of Concorde’s last flight is on display at the NCTJ’s Photography Exhibition at The Guardian from 11 June to 15 July."

I was going to write something similar to Steve's post. I used the 10D up to early 2011 and the buffer held 9 RAW files. Because write times to the CF cards I had were rather slow (Sandisk cards), I ran up against that buffer often when photographing at air shows.

Like Steve, I swore that any camera I bought to replace the 10D had to have a larger buffer. The 60D has a buffer of 16 RAW files, with fast write times, and I have never exhausted the buffer.

Somewhat better image at http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Tenth-anniversaryConcorde-forefront-industry/story-20116890-detail/story.html

Still, no mention of its photographer.

I just recently sold a print of this photo, a 2003 panoramic stitch, from ca. 9 shots with a 10D @ ISO 200. Because of the dimensions, it looks rather good in a print. But you can also make out the pattern noise in the trees on the right. I shot many good shots with this camera. I ended its career by dropping into salt water. It acted very confused after that, so I set it away in a dry closet for some years. When I took it out again and fired it up, it was sane as ever! Go figure. I use it sometimes (rarely) for timelapses, and as a loaner to kids and beginners. My first DSLR!

The comments to this entry are closed.