Personal camera for Airborne Photographer (AP)

Started by edwardd20, May 04, 2012, 08:15:15 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

edwardd20

When I trained at NESA in 2010, I learned about the Nikon D200 and the Garmin eTrek. That worked great. However we only have one in the wing (IL). The other Wing camera is a D90 that doesn't accept an external GPS for GeoTagging (I don't want to go the route of matching the GPS and camera photos up later).

I'm looking to purchase my own DSLR camera with a similar but more modern setup. I was wondering if anybody can suggest something specific or point me to a good blog or podcast.

What I would like is a good DSLR with Bluetooth so I could get a Bluetooth GPS (easily available for iPads). The GPS would sit up front in full view of the satellites and connect wirelessly to the DSLR providing live GPS tagging of the photos. To me it sounds simple but I can't find anything like it.

Suggestions? Thanks.

Ed

1Lt Edward Danley
GLR-IL-189

lordmonar

IIRC there was a directive that went out about NOT using personal cameras for AFAM photo missions.

PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

wuzafuzz

I'm not aware of a directive prohibiting personal cameras, but I have heard a lot of talk (clarifications) recently about not sharing photos taken on any AF funded flight.  Even those taken on personal cameras or phones, whether or not the photos are requested in the mission requirements.  Pretty sunset on a AF funded flight?  Enjoy it, but don't share a photo of it.

As far as personal cameras go, from what I've seen the Canon brand only provides for attached GPS at the pro level D-SLR cameras.  Nikon allows GPS with less expensive cameras such as the D7000, D3100, etc.   The D7000 is on my wish list right now.   Some other brands may offer similar features.  I wish Canon allowed GPS on cheaper bodies, because I already have Canon lenses and accessories.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D3100-vs-Nikon_D7000

"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

davidsinn

Sony has a sub $400 camera(DSC-HX100v) with 30x optical zoom and built in GPS.
Former CAP Captain
David Sinn

denverpilot

I've been very happy with my switch to the Sony A-series SLT (Single Lens Translucent - they use a prism instead of a moving mirror) cameras. The A-55 with a good lens does a very nice job. The A-77 a family member owns is stellar at everything.  Makes a mediocre photographer look like a pro with a much more expensive Nikon or Canon.

The current Sony SLT tech is basically Minolta's engineering which always was impressive. The cameras will use many old Minolta AF lenses.

The admonitions regarding ownership of the photos is appropriate. I keep anything shot for CAP in separate folders and never part of my stream of personal photos. I also consider them expendable once appropriate photos are uploaded to WMIRS.

(By the way, I believe there's a time zone bug in WMIRS if your camera does the date/time stamping in the EXIF data automatically in Zulu time. Watch the timestamps if yours does. The A55 has a built in GPS and stores location and time in the EXIF data. It appears to me that the time presented after upload is one hour off during daylight savings time. The conversion happening on the server is not DST-aware, I assume.)

The Wing cameras are semi-useless and I'll tell you why.  You don't get good at photography by not practicing. And you need to practice with the camera you're going to use. You need to know it intimately. How to quickly set modes and manual settings, how to force it to infinity and stop auto-focus from an aircraft at altitude with a long lens attached, how to quickly review photos after taking them either on-board the camera or on a laptop screen via tethering. (Or maybe one of those fancy EyeFi memory cards. That's a nifty gadget if you've practiced with it.)

Another problem with the Wing gear is that it isn't depreciated nearly fast enough in ORMS. Damage a four or five year old camera and be on the hook for many hundreds of dollars higher than even the most cherry/pristine version of that camera is worth on the real used market? No thanks.

Another route to go is Squadron-based/owned camera gear. It's accessible enough to get folk's hands on it for extended periods of time and build a training curricula around. Our Squadron is starting to experiment with this concept.

Camera tech changes quickly. Most SLRs depreciate almost fully in real resale value in about 3-5 years, max. Closer to 3 on the low end, 5 on top of the line equipment. Lenses also depreciate at wildly different rates as the body does.

I even cringe a little suggesting the A55 other than I know it has come down in price since I bought mine. The A77 took away its top-billing status in Sony's lineup. This happens every year in almost all manufacturer's lines. Nikon has had a few year of doldrums but seems to be correcting their slowdown in releases for bodies in the mid-high "prosumer" market.

Anyway, I digress.  The Sony A-series are very nice, if you're willing to spend the bucks.  I enjoy mine. It also happens to serve CAP, but I don't tell folks to run out and spend that kind of money unless they truly do enjoy photography.

edwardd20

Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 04, 2012, 09:15:39 PM
As far as personal cameras go, from what I've seen the Canon brand only provides for attached GPS at the pro level D-SLR cameras.  Nikon allows GPS with less expensive cameras such as the D7000, D3100, etc.   The D7000 is on my wish list right now.   Some other brands may offer similar features.  I wish Canon allowed GPS on cheaper bodies, because I already have Canon lenses and accessories.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D3100-vs-Nikon_D7000

The Wing D90 is one camera that won't work live with an external GPS where the D200 did. The D7000 the article says it basically the same as the D90. Too bad. That one kicks it off my list of options.

edwardd20

Quote from: denverpilot on May 06, 2012, 07:26:34 AM
I've been very happy with my switch to the Sony A-series SLT (Single Lens Translucent - they use a prism instead of a moving mirror) cameras. The A-55 with a good lens does a very nice job. The A-77 a family member owns is stellar at everything.  Makes a mediocre photographer look like a pro with a much more expensive Nikon or Canon.

I too am an old Minolta user. I was favoring the A-55 but I see it is no longer listed. I need to adjust to the new model numbers. They seem to change every 6 months, even faster than computers.

edwardd20

Quote from: davidsinn on May 05, 2012, 02:02:38 AM
Sony has a sub $400 camera(DSC-HX100v) with 30x optical zoom and built in GPS.

I have actually been considering a non-DSLR with a good lens like this. However I want the ability for an external GPS so I can shoot from the back seat of a C172 or C182.

sdcapmx

Our wing does allow personal cameras on a case by case basis.  Also before you get wrapped up hooking a GPS to the camera you may want to try using a good datalogger and using the ARGUS website to process your photos and merge your tracks to the photos.  We have done this with great success with thousands of photos for FEMA and other organizations.

AMOD makes a good, easy to use affordable model.

edwardd20

Quote from: sdcapmx on May 06, 2012, 04:28:42 PM
Our wing does allow personal cameras on a case by case basis.  Also before you get wrapped up hooking a GPS to the camera you may want to try using a good datalogger and using the ARGUS website to process your photos and merge your tracks to the photos.  We have done this with great success with thousands of photos for FEMA and other organizations.

AMOD makes a good, easy to use affordable model.

I was trying to avoid the datalogger approach. I don't like to do steps when one should be able to do it. Especially with the explosion of today's Bluetooth GPS's

wuzafuzz

Quote from: edwardd20 on May 06, 2012, 02:02:26 PM
Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 04, 2012, 09:15:39 PM
As far as personal cameras go, from what I've seen the Canon brand only provides for attached GPS at the pro level D-SLR cameras.  Nikon allows GPS with less expensive cameras such as the D7000, D3100, etc.   The D7000 is on my wish list right now.   Some other brands may offer similar features.  I wish Canon allowed GPS on cheaper bodies, because I already have Canon lenses and accessories.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D3100-vs-Nikon_D7000

The Wing D90 is one camera that won't work live with an external GPS where the D200 did. The D7000 the article says it basically the same as the D90. Too bad. That one kicks it off my list of options.
The D7000 will work with GPS.  Nikon even sells a GP-1 GPS unit as an accessory for that camera.
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25468/D7000.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-System

I'm not saying the D7000 is better or worse than other choices presented.  Only that GPS is an option on that camera.  The Sony camera that Denverpilot mentions sounds pretty nice, especially with the built-in GPS.

It is absolutely true that its difficult to become proficient with a camera you rarely use or even see.  You do not want to be fighting the camera when you're getting tossed around in the limited space in the cockpit.  The only reason I stick with Nikon is I used their cameras all day, every day, when I was a crime scene tech and then for fun for years afterward.  17 years as a Nikon shooter, so when I pick up the D200 assigned to my squadron, it fits like a glove.
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

edwardd20

Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 06, 2012, 04:59:53 PM
Nikon even sells a GP-1 GPS unit as an accessory for that camera.

The problem withe GP-1 is that the cord is only about 6 inches long. It won't clear the wings to get a GPS signal.

Eclipse

In a briefing presented last year by CAP-USAF and 1AF, it was made clear that all photographs taken on an AFAM are the property of the
USAF/1AF, and may not be released without the joint permission of the USAF and the customer.  I don't recall if they made any distinction between
"Here's the ICP" and "Here's the wreckage."  I'm reasonably sure that it was a public briefing and I will post it as soon as I can find it.

During our eval in Feb, all cameras had to be checked in with the IC, who would consider whether to grant permission for their use, though the
practical reality of that is clearly a challenge.

At the BISC class 3 weeks ago, it was pointed out that a lot teams carry inexpensive disposable cameras because the NTSB and other agencies can
impound a camera with crash photos as evidence - not something you'd want to happen to a $1000 DSLR.

Real-time GPS is a nice feature, but the average $150 point and shoot with a 10x(+) optical zoom is more than adequate for the types of photos
we generally take.  The higher pixel densities of today's "junk" cameras means that even AP's with lower skill levels can take usable photos.

My 3Mp Casio from 10 years ago still takes excellent photos, runs on AA's, and I would not be heartbroken if it were impounded.  My Nikon 5700 (the original SDIS camera), chatty lens and all, does everything necessary from the air - I use a Garmin 3+ on a knee board to record flight tracks and waypoints.  Granted that's a little "steampunk", but it works.

Quote from: edwardd20 on May 06, 2012, 05:06:31 PM
The problem withe GP-1 is that the cord is only about 6 inches long. It won't clear the wings to get a GPS signal.

The Garmin 3+ has a similar issue, I got a 6ft coax cable with a suction cup on it and stick it to the window.

"That Others May Zoom"

wuzafuzz

Quote from: edwardd20 on May 06, 2012, 05:06:31 PM
Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 06, 2012, 04:59:53 PM
Nikon even sells a GP-1 GPS unit as an accessory for that camera.

The problem withe GP-1 is that the cord is only about 6 inches long. It won't clear the wings to get a GPS signal.
So buy a compatible GPS that permits a longer cable, or a Bluetooth connection..  Third party GPS units are probably cheaper anyway. 
http://terrywhite.com/techblog/unleashed-gps-bluetooth-geotagging-solution-for-nikon-dslrs/
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

wuzafuzz

Quote from: Eclipse on May 06, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
At the BISC class 3 weeks ago, it was pointed out that a lot teams carry inexpensive disposable cameras because the NTSB and other agencies can
impound a camera with crash photos as evidence - not something you'd want to happen to a $1000 DSLR.
I wonder if that's more urban legend than actual practice.  I've taken photos numerous times that the NTSB put the "habeas grabus" on.  They were perfectly happy to accept the negatives or picture card.  Can't think of a legitimate reason to take the camera when you can get all the data from the storage.

I would readily hand over a picture card.  Anyone desirous of seizing a personal camera better have some legal paperwork authorizing said seizure or it's not happening.  Having said that, if the folks in a position of authority DO decide to grab the camera, it could take some legal wrangling to get it back.  As a general rule bureaucrats can't be depended on to act reasonably.  (I say that as a former gov't employee!)
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."

edwardd20

Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 06, 2012, 05:35:38 PM
So buy a compatible GPS that permits a longer cable, or a Bluetooth connection..  Third party GPS units are probably cheaper anyway. 
http://terrywhite.com/techblog/unleashed-gps-bluetooth-geotagging-solution-for-nikon-dslrs/

Now that's what I'm looking for. Thanks!

edwardd20

Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 06, 2012, 05:46:03 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on May 06, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
At the BISC class 3 weeks ago, it was pointed out that a lot teams carry inexpensive disposable cameras because the NTSB and other agencies can
impound a camera with crash photos as evidence - not something you'd want to happen to a $1000 DSLR.
I wonder if that's more urban legend than actual practice.  I've taken photos numerous times that the NTSB put the "habeas grabus" on.  They were perfectly happy to accept the negatives or picture card.  Can't think of a legitimate reason to take the camera when you can get all the data from the storage.

I would readily hand over a picture card.  Anyone desirous of seizing a personal camera better have some legal paperwork authorizing said seizure or it's not happening.  Having said that, if the folks in a position of authority DO decide to grab the camera, it could take some legal wrangling to get it back.  As a general rule bureaucrats can't be depended on to act reasonably.  (I say that as a former gov't employee!)

At NESA we were taught to be prepared to simply turn over the camera cards. But should all be spelled out ahead of time as part of mission planning. The AP needs to understand what all is involved. Unfortunately most of the time it is MS not an AP taking the photos and they haven't received that particular training.

Eclipse

Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 06, 2012, 05:46:03 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on May 06, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
At the BISC class 3 weeks ago, it was pointed out that a lot teams carry inexpensive disposable cameras because the NTSB and other agencies can
impound a camera with crash photos as evidence - not something you'd want to happen to a $1000 DSLR.
I wonder if that's more urban legend than actual practice.  I've taken photos numerous times that the NTSB put the "habeas grabus" on.  They were perfectly happy to accept the negatives or picture card.  Can't think of a legitimate reason to take the camera when you can get all the data from the storage.

I would readily hand over a picture card.  Anyone desirous of seizing a personal camera better have some legal paperwork authorizing said seizure or it's not happening.  Having said that, if the folks in a position of authority DO decide to grab the camera, it could take some legal wrangling to get it back.  As a general rule bureaucrats can't be depended on to act reasonably.  (I say that as a former gov't employee!)

I agree, though that assumes the card is removable - the iPhone, for example, does not have removable storage, so the expedient thing to do might be
to impound it, especially if the photos were sensitive for some reason.

I can't say I know of this happening personally, but this was from the Chief of the AFRCC, so they see a lot more wrecks then we do, just something to
consider, especially when you can buy a throw-away digital camera for next to nothing these days as well.

"That Others May Zoom"

Spaceman3750

#18
Quote from: Eclipse on May 06, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
In a briefing presented last year by CAP-USAF and 1AF, it was made clear that all photographs taken on an AFAM are the property of the
USAF/1AF, and may not be released without the joint permission of the USAF and the customer.  I don't recall if they made any distinction between
"Here's the ICP" and "Here's the wreckage."  I'm reasonably sure that it was a public briefing and I will post it as soon as I can find it.

I learned that this weekend, at which point I made the mistake of saying "Huh? Where does it say that?" to the wing king (who was sitting in the room)... One of these days I'll learn to shut up and color.

wuzafuzz

#19
Quote from: Eclipse on May 06, 2012, 05:52:59 PM
Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 06, 2012, 05:46:03 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on May 06, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
At the BISC class 3 weeks ago, it was pointed out that a lot teams carry inexpensive disposable cameras because the NTSB and other agencies can
impound a camera with crash photos as evidence - not something you'd want to happen to a $1000 DSLR.
I wonder if that's more urban legend than actual practice.  I've taken photos numerous times that the NTSB put the "habeas grabus" on.  They were perfectly happy to accept the negatives or picture card.  Can't think of a legitimate reason to take the camera when you can get all the data from the storage.

I would readily hand over a picture card.  Anyone desirous of seizing a personal camera better have some legal paperwork authorizing said seizure or it's not happening.  Having said that, if the folks in a position of authority DO decide to grab the camera, it could take some legal wrangling to get it back.  As a general rule bureaucrats can't be depended on to act reasonably.  (I say that as a former gov't employee!)

I agree, though that assumes the card is removable - the iPhone, for example, does not have removable storage, so the expedient thing to do might be
to impound it, especially if the photos were sensitive for some reason.

I can't say I know of this happening personally, but this was from the Chief of the AFRCC, so they see a lot more wrecks then we do, just something to
consider, especially when you can buy a throw-away digital camera for next to nothing these days as well.
Absolutely true, if the camera has on-board storage that can't be removed, the camera may disappear for a while if the photos can be considered evidence.  What I don't know is whether photos can be seized as evidence if no crime is suspected.  No idea how that would work for a plane crash when there is no suspicion of foul play. 

Single use film cameras used to be great for that kind of thing.  I used to carry one of those when I was a cop.  Believe it or not, they are still available.  Would still make a reasonable addition to a ground team pack.  Lightweight, no batteries, disposable if needed.

Of course, a camera will almost certainly be seized, along with any photos it contains, if there is reasonable suspicion it was used to commit a crime.    Been there, done that.  The rest of the time, the photos themselves may be evidence, but the tool used to take them...usually not.

It's also possible there is an Air Force instruction, statement of work, or some other such document that we are bound by when acting in the performance of our CAP duties.  If something like that exists that puts our personal cameras in jeopardy in some circumstance, I would love to know about it.  Can't make informed decisions without all the info!
"You can't stop the signal, Mal."