LeSving wrote:
due to “teleløsning” (have no idea what the English word for that is, but happens every spring when the frozen dirt thaws) at ENMO
I don’t think English has a specific word for this other than the more general “thaw”. Swedish does, of course – “tjällossning” – which I believe literally corresponds to “teleløsning”.
Moved the Savannah to ENVA for the Easter due to “teleløsning” (have no idea what the English word for that is, but happens every spring when the frozen dirt thaws) at ENMO. Got a message that there was space in a hanger later in the evening, moving it tomorrow. Bought a cheap car protection cover, which looks cool with a little wind 
Did my first IR revalidation
Sunday morning
wake up 03.30Z
takeoff 04.51Z
land 05.27Z
I was hopimg to catch the full moon and the rising sun together.
No joy, too much cloud.
A great flight nontheless.
Photos not great, taken with my phone
To get what you want the slower the shutter the better. But with a moving object that will be quite difficult as you would have to shut the iris down which will make it difficult to see to follow the object with an SLR.
It would be easier with a range finder on an old Leica🙂
I have a few shots with 1/250. I see your point.
What I definitely don’t like is having a prop with a solid color but slightly blurred edges (at even higher speeds). And the best IMO would be to see the whole disk just like the eye sees it (although it becomes almost invisible). On my pic I deliberately used 1/60, and got about half the disk which is already something.
1/100 will nearly remove the prop. 1/80 usually removes a 3B prop at 2400rpm completely. 1/250 is for the “best artistic effect”. Remember that only proper cameras (DSLRs or video cameras with a real shutter) do this right. Phones are basically useless. It’s been posted – including videos.
Always shoot “down sun” for the easiest light conditions i.e. the subject aircraft usually north of the camera aircraft (“camera ship” if you are trying to impress 
) in northern hemisphere.
With a phone you can get quite presentable pics but the prop usually looks pretty crap so needs to be retouched. This was probably a £1000+ Iphone
Thanks for the advice !
The issue is that I want to see a blurry prop, so I need a ~1/100 speed. The aircraft is moving as well, so I’ll try to pan slowly and closely follow it (even if it makes the sky somewhat blurry), hence the fluid head. It’s also useful for e.g. landing videos, and can be used as a regular tripod by making it stiffer.
For multi-exposures, I’m not a pro yet but I’ll be sure to check it out. For this picture I think the sky vs aircraft exposure is ok (and there is no saturation, even in the final image). I used gradient just to add somewhat of a dramatic effect to the bottom part of the sky.
@maxbc sorry I was thinking more of moving images. A still from a tripod may be better without digital stabilisation. The faster the shutter speed the sharper the image but it will stop the prop.
Are you thinking of the old motor racing trick of panning with the image, in which case you will need to practice with a fluid head otherwise you can easily fall over🙂
If you are thinking of letting the aircraft enter frame and then shoot, you might consider using a cable release.
You might also consider doing 2 or three shots at different exposures then use one of the photo editing software to get a darker sky and the aircraft exposed correctly. So often the sky gets bleached out otherwise. With a moving object this tends to work better than trying to use a ND grad filter on a moving object because the grad can often be seen.
Previous threads on shutter speeds
1/250 is normally best for formation photos, for the “ideal” prop picture.
