Hello all..

I am about to get into plane spotting and I decided to get a new DSLR... I have always loved plane spotting but I was either too young to follow the hobby (no money until then) or just stuck with point-and-shoot cameras.

I have been researching through the internet and came down to the above two(three) options... Nikon D5600 or Cannon 750D/760D. I know that it's not the camera but the lens that is most important.. I appreciate that. But since this is my first camera, I wanna make sure I get the right body as well.

I am leaning towards Nikon tbh but what I am afraid of is that I may have some problems with AF... Since Cannon has 19 AF points of which all of them are cross type vs Nikon's 9 cross type AF points, would Cannon be better in keeping fast moving planes in focus?? Would Nikon fail me in AF (even with AF-C on)? If I pan a plane while landing, would one of these DSLRs behave better? Or is it better to have the Nikon's HDR to get nice in-the-sun photos (in other words: not to care too much about lighting conditions)..
Also Nikon's timelapse feature is so appealing during plane spotting I wish Cannon would have that by now...

Looking forward to your recommendations/suggestions/advice.

CloudCY

I own the Canon Rebel T6i (750D in international markets). For me, it's been a perfect companion for what I typically do, as I have gathered a number of Canon lenses over the past year to expand my shooting. It's been a very serviceable camera for aviation shooting for me, but I intend on replacing it with a better camera for action, such a 7D Mark II (or it's rumoured replacement).

Both the Nikon and the Canon are fairly similar, but do note that Canon replaced the 750D with the 800D (Rebel T7i), which allows the Canon to pull ahead.

The Canon 750D has better live view performance, and the auto focus system is better. Otherwise, fairly similar camera to the D5600. The 800D is a marked improvement in almost every other way; even better auto focus system, can go shoot at a higher ISO, and a larger buffer. One thing to note is that if you plan on using the wireless system to link your smartphone with the camera, the Nikon system absolutely sucks (there's a reason why the Nikon Snapbridge client gets 2 stars out of 5 on the Google Play Store and 1.5 stars out of 5 on the iTunes!)

Also, note which system you want to get in; Canon generally has a better selection and variety of what are generally superb lenses, and at a cheaper price compared to Nikon. New lenses and accessories from third parties generally come out for Canon first, Nikon at a later date.

Thank you ThePointblank for your inputs. Does the 19 cross type AF points of Cannon play that significant role while plane spotting? In other words, will Nikon struggle with auto focusing and keep planes in focus compared to the Cannon?

Thanks for your input ThePointblank. Rebel T7i is a bit out of my budget and Rebel T6s (760D) is shipped without a lens which is a bit concerning. One question though, does the 19 cross-type AF points of Cannon play that big of a role while plane spotting? In other words, will Nikon struggle AF and keep planes in focus especially while panning (even with AF-C on)??

CloudCY wrote:

Hello all..

I am about to get into plane spotting and I decided to get a new DSLR... I have always loved plane spotting but I was either too young to follow the hobby (no money until then) or just stuck with point-and-shoot cameras.

Good idea!

CloudCY wrote:

I have been researching through the internet and came down to the above two(three) options... Nikon D5600 or Cannon 750D/760D. I know that it's not the camera but the lens that is most important.. I appreciate that. But since this is my first camera, I wanna make sure I get the right body as well.

I am leaning towards Nikon tbh but what I am afraid of is that I may have some problems with AF... Since Cannon has 19 AF points of which all of them are cross type vs Nikon's 9 cross type AF points, would Cannon be better in keeping fast moving planes in focus?? Would Nikon fail me in AF (even with AF-C on)? If I pan a plane while landing, would one of these DSLRs behave better? Or is it better to have the Nikon's HDR to get nice in-the-sun photos (in other words: not to care too much about lighting conditions).

The number of AF points are important, but the area they cover is also important. And the lens. A lens with a slow AF motor will make it hard to shoot planes in the air. For the Canon, you should make sure you get lenses with USM or STM motors. And for the Nikon, since it has no AF motor, you will need to get AF-S lenses unless you want to focus manually.

CloudCY wrote:

Also Nikon's timelapse feature is so appealing during plane spotting I wish Cannon would have that by now...

Looking forward to your recommendations/suggestions/advice.

CloudCY

CloudCY wrote:

Thank you ThePointblank for your inputs. Does the 19 cross type AF points of Cannon play that significant role while plane spotting? In other words, will Nikon struggle with auto focusing and keep planes in focus compared to the Cannon?

Cross type AF systems are better at acquiring focus faster than other AF systems.

ThePointblank wrote:

CloudCY wrote:

Thank you ThePointblank for your inputs. Does the 19 cross type AF points of Cannon play that significant role while plane spotting? In other words, will Nikon struggle with auto focusing and keep planes in focus compared to the Cannon?

Cross type AF systems are better at acquiring focus faster than other AF systems.

Totally agree with that it's about acquiring focus faster. Does that mean that Nikon will successfully acquire and maintentain focus, just a bit slower...? Or does it mean that it will struggle and sometimes not even acquire focus?

I am still trying to select one of the two but I can't make up my mind on one of the two...

In average to good light I doubt you'd notice much of a difference, however the cross-type will likely have an advantage in low light. A lot of a camera's ability to handle low light is down the the sensitivity of the focus points, though.

I think it's safe to say that the Nikon body will give better dynamic range, but Canon offers a larger selection of quality lenses. The Canon menu system is also apparently much better for beginners.

Bostrom wrote:

The number of AF points are important, but the area they cover is also important.

Very dependent on personal preference. For shooting airplanes (and almost everything else, really), I always have my camera set to use the center AF point only.

Can't say whether this makes a big difference in practice, but it makes a difference mentally for me. I know exactly which point the camera is going to use to focus, and can aim appropriately.

So while sixty-whatever AF points on the 5D3 is attractive, it's also sixty-whatever-minus-one wasted AF points for me. The ability to get consistent focus with a single point and in low light is much more important.

CloudCY wrote:

I am still trying to select one of the two but I can't make up my mind on one of the two...

Detailed technical specs honestly won't make a ton of difference to a beginner, and almost any DSLR you buy will probably do a great job. So I'd go more off of ergonomics (how does it feel, how much it weighs, ease of use, ease of menus and such) and lens selection.

I would note a better idea of the budget involved here would also be important. He's going to need a telephoto lens to effectively fill the frame, and depending on the budget, I would buy accordingly.

vikkyvik wrote:

Bostrom wrote:

The number of AF points are important, but the area they cover is also important.

Very dependent on personal preference. For shooting airplanes (and almost everything else, really), I always have my camera set to use the center AF point only.

Can't say whether this makes a big difference in practice, but it makes a difference mentally for me. I know exactly which point the camera is going to use to focus, and can aim appropriately.

So while sixty-whatever AF points on the 5D3 is attractive, it's also sixty-whatever-minus-one wasted AF points for me. The ability to get consistent focus with a single point and in low light is much more important.

I, on the other hand, prefer to use multiple points when shooting aircraft against the sky, as there is no background that can fool the AF-system (apart from the odd cloud). Using only the centre point means I have to keep the subject there. Which can be easy with an airliner on final, but harder at an airshow. But, use whatever method you like. There is no right and wrong.

If I may ask.. what cameras are you all using while plane spotting?

CloudCY wrote:

If I may ask.. what cameras are you all using while plane spotting?

I currently run with a Canon Rebel T6i, coupled to a Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens. You will find that for Canon shooters, the Canon 100-400 in both versions are incredibly popular with the air show and wildlife shooters for the amount of reach it has coupled with the superb optical quality.

CloudCY wrote:

If I may ask.. what cameras are you all using while plane spotting?

I use a Canon EOS 70D, for both photography and filming. Currently with the kit lens, an 18-135 mm zoom, and two longer primes. A 200 mm f/2.8 and a 300 mm f/4. Not the best combination, but plane spotting is not my main area of photography. A telezoom would be a good idea. I've been looking at the 100-400 mentioned above, but it is a bit expensive, as well as a 70-200 (probably the f/4 IS) or a 70-300.

CloudCY wrote:

If I may ask.. what cameras are you all using while plane spotting?

I use a Canon 5D MkII with a 17-40mm (for wide angle) and usually 100-400mm (for zoom). But I use my 70-200mm f/4 at times as well, which is a really good and sharp lens. Have had it since 2003 and it still works excellent.

CloudCY wrote:

If I may ask.. what cameras are you all using while plane spotting?

I used to use 700D and 70D with 70-200 f/4 IS II to spot. But later I change to 5D Mark II with my 70-200 to spot. I have to say this is a very good lens which can provide pretty good quality and the sharpness is nice too. But if the length that I need is very long it would little but not suitable. Thus , I also use 100-400 sometime but most of time is 70-200 f/4 I II.

Cheers,
Harry

Thanks everyone for your inputs... I have decided to go with the Nikon D5600 and a good lens (probably 70-300)! Hopefully I will be able to get some decent shots that can make it here as part of the greater collection! Hopefully Larnaca airport (LCA) will be proud of me!! Happy shooting guys!

CloudCY wrote:

Thanks everyone for your inputs... I have decided to go with the Nikon D5600 and a good lens (probably 70-300)! Hopefully I will be able to get some decent shots that can make it here as part of the greater collection! Hopefully Larnaca airport (LCA) will be proud of me!! Happy shooting guys!

A 70-300 mm is probably a good choice of focal length. Good look with the photography!

Guys would I be better off with a 55-200 rather than 70-300?? I've read that 70-300 (both Tamron and Nikkor) tend to be a bit soft on their 200-300 range.. Is this true? would 55-200 be a safer option??

Thanks
CloudCY

Unless you buy a premium 70-300 (such as Canon's excellent 70-300L), the 200-300mm range will produce anything from very soft to downright blurry images. Don't think Nikon do a 55-250(?) but Canon's version is certainly a much better bet than the Tamron/Sigma 70-300, and indeed Canon's own 75-300. To get a decent 70-300 you're going to have to spend near enough EUR600, and even then you're not top-of-the-range.

As I said above, for lens choice and general quality, Canon is unbeatable. If, however, dynamic range is more important to you, go Nikon (although it's not too big an issue for aviation).

A very popular lens for Canon shooters for a wide range of photography is the 70-200 f/4L, which used to be in the region of EUR450; however recent price hikes have seen it increase to about EUR600. Still, it's an incredible lens, even at the inflated price, and offers something that Nikon doesn't. What it lacks in reach it more than makes up for in image quality - in fact, you'd be better shooting at 200mm and cropping than shooting at the full 300mm of a cheap Sigma or Tamron 70-300.

In summary, you tend to get what you pay for, but some cheaper lenses perform very well if their limitations are realised. If you're on a tight budget, Canon's 55-250 is about the sharpest in its class, although you shouldn't realistically expect it to be super-sharp beyond 220mm. The cheap 70-300s are a waste of time in my opinion - if you do choose Canon, spend the extra cash and get either the 70-300 IS II, the 70-200 f/4L or the (much more expensive but offering superb image quality at 300mm) 70-300L.

Happy shopping!

I already ordered the Nikon D5600 so Canon lenses would not fit... I was talking about Nikkor 55-200 (not 250) which is a VR lense and in the price range I am looking at...

Sorry, my bad......

The Nikkor 55-200 VR II doesn't seem to get great reviews, but I suspect it's a lot better than the cheap Tamron/Sigma 70-300s. I'n not a Nikon user but I believe the Nikkor 70-300 is marginally better than the third party lenses.

JakTrax wrote:

Sorry, my bad......

The Nikkor 55-200 VR II doesn't seem to get great reviews, but I suspect it's a lot better than the cheap Tamron/Sigma 70-300s. I'n not a Nikon user but I believe the Nikkor 70-300 is marginally better than the third party lenses.

Thank you very much for your inputs! Really appreciate it! Let's hope that my choice will not fail me! Happy shooting!