Discussion
My guess would be a 600mm with a 2x TC= 1200mm plus any possible crop factor from the camera body. Take that and 100% (or more) crop of the result would do the job from there.
So much for the ability to take such a shot. No doubt there will be those who'll buy the rags which print the pictures hence the motivation behind the photographers decision to try. I'd rather watch the grass grow.
So much for the ability to take such a shot. No doubt there will be those who'll buy the rags which print the pictures hence the motivation behind the photographers decision to try. I'd rather watch the grass grow.
Has anyone seen the images?
As I recall the Daily Mail article yesterday suggested they were taken from about 1000mtrs away. That's a long way.
I've used a 600mm with a 2x converter and probably an additional 15 to 20% enlargement from a lens mount adaptor all on a 1.6 crop factor body. It's not easy - even on a tripod the movement around the target area is large. Maybe if using something with incredibly high potential resolution - over 30Mpix perhaps - you might be able to get the images clear enough for recognisable use for a human subject - but I think that would be pushing it.
You might grab the shots with a telescope with image stabilisation. In which case with a suitable scope the camera required might be quite small.
Of course the Mail's distance estimate might be wrong.
I doubt that the security people would have thought the risk to be high. Nevertheless they might have advised against being even vaguely visible from anywhere other than a plane. Or maybe everyone was enjoying themselves too much to care? Who knows?
As I recall the Daily Mail article yesterday suggested they were taken from about 1000mtrs away. That's a long way.
I've used a 600mm with a 2x converter and probably an additional 15 to 20% enlargement from a lens mount adaptor all on a 1.6 crop factor body. It's not easy - even on a tripod the movement around the target area is large. Maybe if using something with incredibly high potential resolution - over 30Mpix perhaps - you might be able to get the images clear enough for recognisable use for a human subject - but I think that would be pushing it.
You might grab the shots with a telescope with image stabilisation. In which case with a suitable scope the camera required might be quite small.
Of course the Mail's distance estimate might be wrong.
I doubt that the security people would have thought the risk to be high. Nevertheless they might have advised against being even vaguely visible from anywhere other than a plane. Or maybe everyone was enjoying themselves too much to care? Who knows?
Here apparently although they look awfully clear considering the distance.
http://www.barstoolu.com/#random-thoughts/kate-mid...
http://www.barstoolu.com/#random-thoughts/kate-mid...
Pipster1969 said:
Here apparently although they look awfully clear considering the distance.
http://www.barstoolu.com/#random-thoughts/kate-mid...
Daily Mail on line says "around half a mile" away.http://www.barstoolu.com/#random-thoughts/kate-mid...
Let me see if I can find something taken at an equivalent distance - though with different subject matter.
It may take a while.
. Here's a nice pair:
LongQ said:
Who knows?
More to the point, who cares?They're some grainy, very long distance shots of some frankly disappointing breasts. Were she not potentially (I'm still betting on Camilla) a future Queen and some minor, Z-list celeb instead these shots would have been worth about 50p.
I am, however, quite impressed by our press's refusal to publish them.
it also seems a bit 18th century as well - once one paper publishes them then they are only a google away for most people, the printed ones are a complete minority.
Right or wrong there is only one way to avoid this sort of situation and that is to keep your top on (and yes I always do
)
Right or wrong there is only one way to avoid this sort of situation and that is to keep your top on (and yes I always do
)mickk said:
Cock Womble 7 said:
I am, however, quite impressed by our press's refusal to publish them.
Give it a couple of days.Meanwhile, our gutter press can act all holier-than-thou at their refusal to publish them, whilst simultaneously pouring scorn on the dirty foreign papers that do.
It's a win/win for the Red Tops.
Cock Womble 7 said:
mickk said:
Cock Womble 7 said:
I am, however, quite impressed by our press's refusal to publish them.
Give it a couple of days.Meanwhile, our gutter press can act all holier-than-thou at their refusal to publish them, whilst simultaneously pouring scorn on the dirty foreign papers that do.
It's a win/win for the Red Tops.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff