I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses, both VR. One of the lenses is
300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may not be the top of the line
qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that probably won't make much difference
anyway.

http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6

John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!

In article ,
says...

I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses, both VR. One of the lenses is
300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may not be the top of the line
qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that probably won't make much difference
anyway.

http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6

John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!

Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....

On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses, both VR. One of the lenses is
300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may not be the top of the line
qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that probably won't make much difference
anyway.

http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6

John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!

Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....


I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of filling
more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.
They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their faces,
could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going to get
much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a
picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not going to
see much at 100 yards.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

On Thursday, 14 November 2013 16:47:03 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

says...



I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses, both VR. One of the lenses is

300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may not be the top of the line

qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that probably won't make much difference

anyway.



http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6



John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....





I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of filling

more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.

They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their faces,

could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going to get

much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a

picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not going to

see much at 100 yards.



--

Religion: together we can find the cure.


Not to mention the auto focus during video recording.
I read recently that the newly released Canon D70 has video focusing comparable to camcorders.
If a person was serious, that step up to a $1600. camera (price advertised locally) might be worthwhile.

On the other hand I've seen the Sony mid range camcorders advertised at $1000. or so claim that their sensor is the same as the pro models.

On 11/14/2013 4:14 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:00 PM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 16:47:03 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

says...



I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses,
both VR. One of the lenses is

300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may
not be the top of the line

qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that
probably won't make much difference

anyway.



http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6



John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....





I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of filling

more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.

They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their faces,

could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going to get

much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a

picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not going to

see much at 100 yards.



--

Religion: together we can find the cure.


Not to mention the auto focus during video recording.
I read recently that the newly released Canon D70 has video focusing
comparable to camcorders.
If a person was serious, that step up to a $1600. camera (price
advertised locally) might be worthwhile.

On the other hand I've seen the Sony mid range camcorders advertised
at $1000. or so claim that their sensor is the same as the pro models.


When we take video on the track it's mostly for review in the practice
room... Not trying to see serious detail. For photos, we would mostly be
in the 10 - 50 yard range....

The devil is in the details.

In article , says...

On 11/14/2013 4:55 PM, Hank© wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:14 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:00 PM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 16:47:03 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

says...



I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses,
both VR. One of the lenses is

300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may
not be the top of the line

qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that
probably won't make much difference

anyway.



http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6



John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....





I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of
filling

more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.

They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their faces,

could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going to get

much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a

picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not going to

see much at 100 yards.



--

Religion: together we can find the cure.


Not to mention the auto focus during video recording.
I read recently that the newly released Canon D70 has video focusing
comparable to camcorders.
If a person was serious, that step up to a $1600. camera (price
advertised locally) might be worthwhile.

On the other hand I've seen the Sony mid range camcorders advertised
at $1000. or so claim that their sensor is the same as the pro models.


When we take video on the track it's mostly for review in the practice
room... Not trying to see serious detail. For photos, we would mostly be
in the 10 - 50 yard range....

The devil is in the details.

The point is, to get good video in our sport it takes more than a hobby
camera... We do however get pretty good photos with pretty simple
cameras. Those of you who have followed me for years might note that all
the pics I use and post (and I do post some great shots) are being taken
with a nearly ten year old Kodak D40, but it does have a Kreuznach
Variogon lens with a 10x optical zoom... The best a track side
photographer can hope for is some pretty good photos, and some Video
that is a lot better up close than the far parts of the track... Not to
mention, if you do take a vid of a race, you edit out the parts where
the riders are too far out, or otherwise out of view for FB or whatever,
but realistically, we are not looking for posting quality, just need to
see enough to coach at home or trackside between moto's....

A 300mm lens at 300 yards, you'll see a speck.

Due to the 'crop factor' on my D5200, a 300mm lens would roughly be equivalent to 450 mm lens on an old 35mm camera.
I believe that would be approx equivalent to a 9x binocular.

On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 18:45:30 -0500, Charlemagne wrote:

On 11/14/2013 4:55 PM, Hank© wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:14 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:00 PM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 16:47:03 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

says...



I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses,
both VR. One of the lenses is

300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may
not be the top of the line

qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that
probably won't make much difference

anyway.



http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6



John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....





I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of
filling

more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.

They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their faces,

could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going to get

much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a

picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not going to

see much at 100 yards.



--

Religion: together we can find the cure.


Not to mention the auto focus during video recording.
I read recently that the newly released Canon D70 has video focusing
comparable to camcorders.
If a person was serious, that step up to a $1600. camera (price
advertised locally) might be worthwhile.

On the other hand I've seen the Sony mid range camcorders advertised
at $1000. or so claim that their sensor is the same as the pro models.


When we take video on the track it's mostly for review in the practice
room... Not trying to see serious detail. For photos, we would mostly be
in the 10 - 50 yard range....

The devil is in the details.

The point is, to get good video in our sport it takes more than a hobby
camera... We do however get pretty good photos with pretty simple
cameras. Those of you who have followed me for years might note that all
the pics I use and post (and I do post some great shots) are being taken
with a nearly ten year old Kodak D40, but it does have a Kreuznach
Variogon lens with a 10x optical zoom... The best a track side
photographer can hope for is some pretty good photos, and some Video
that is a lot better up close than the far parts of the track... Not to
mention, if you do take a vid of a race, you edit out the parts where
the riders are too far out, or otherwise out of view for FB or whatever,
but realistically, we are not looking for posting quality, just need to
see enough to coach at home or trackside between moto's....

Notice the rocks in the center of the upper left picture. Those might not be 300 yards away from the
camera, but they're a good distance. I'd estimate a good 150l yards, thinking I'd need a good 8-iron
shot to get there. Could you use more detail? Probably. But, the 300mm lens gives you much more
detail than the 55mm does, regardless of what Loogykisser says!

http://www.digitalartform.com/archiv...oto_and_w.html


John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:05:06 -0500, John H wrote:

On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 18:45:30 -0500, Charlemagne wrote:

On 11/14/2013 4:55 PM, Hank© wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:14 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:00 PM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 16:47:03 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

says...



I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses,
both VR. One of the lenses is

300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may
not be the top of the line

qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that
probably won't make much difference

anyway.



http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6



John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....





I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of
filling

more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.

They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their faces,

could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going to get

much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a

picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not going to

see much at 100 yards.



--

Religion: together we can find the cure.


Not to mention the auto focus during video recording.
I read recently that the newly released Canon D70 has video focusing
comparable to camcorders.
If a person was serious, that step up to a $1600. camera (price
advertised locally) might be worthwhile.

On the other hand I've seen the Sony mid range camcorders advertised
at $1000. or so claim that their sensor is the same as the pro models.


When we take video on the track it's mostly for review in the practice
room... Not trying to see serious detail. For photos, we would mostly be
in the 10 - 50 yard range....

The devil is in the details.

The point is, to get good video in our sport it takes more than a hobby
camera... We do however get pretty good photos with pretty simple
cameras. Those of you who have followed me for years might note that all
the pics I use and post (and I do post some great shots) are being taken
with a nearly ten year old Kodak D40, but it does have a Kreuznach
Variogon lens with a 10x optical zoom... The best a track side
photographer can hope for is some pretty good photos, and some Video
that is a lot better up close than the far parts of the track... Not to
mention, if you do take a vid of a race, you edit out the parts where
the riders are too far out, or otherwise out of view for FB or whatever,
but realistically, we are not looking for posting quality, just need to
see enough to coach at home or trackside between moto's....

Notice the rocks in the center of the upper left picture. Those might not be 300 yards away from the
camera, but they're a good distance. I'd estimate a good 150l yards, thinking I'd need a good 8-iron
shot to get there. Could you use more detail? Probably. But, the 300mm lens gives you much more
detail than the 55mm does, regardless of what Loogykisser says!

http://www.digitalartform.com/archiv...oto_and_w.html


John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!


Should be '150 yards', not 150l yards.

John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!

On 11/15/13, 9:40 AM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/15/2013 9:26 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 08:05:06 -0500, John H wrote:

On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 18:45:30 -0500, Charlemagne wrote:

On 11/14/2013 4:55 PM, Hank© wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:14 PM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/14/2013 4:00 PM, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 14 November 2013 16:47:03 UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/14/13, 3:36 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

says...



I was just at Costco. They had a D5200 on sale, with two lenses,
both VR. One of the lenses is

300mm, which helps get out there a little anyway. The lenses may
not be the top of the line

qualitywise, but unless you're turning pro photographer, that
probably won't make much difference

anyway.



http://tinyurl.com/l43oaw6



John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



Yeah, that 300mm lens should work real well at 300 yards.....





I don't know what the point is, even if the lens were capable of
filling

more than a tiny speck of the sensor with a ride at that distance.

They're covered from head to toe with gear, you can't see their
faces,

could be anyone out there. Even at 100 yards, you're not going
to get

much. Stand at one end of a high school football field and take a

picture of a person at the other end of the field, you're not
going to

see much at 100 yards.



--

Religion: together we can find the cure.


Not to mention the auto focus during video recording.
I read recently that the newly released Canon D70 has video focusing
comparable to camcorders.
If a person was serious, that step up to a $1600. camera (price
advertised locally) might be worthwhile.

On the other hand I've seen the Sony mid range camcorders advertised
at $1000. or so claim that their sensor is the same as the pro
models.


When we take video on the track it's mostly for review in the
practice
room... Not trying to see serious detail. For photos, we would
mostly be
in the 10 - 50 yard range....

The devil is in the details.

The point is, to get good video in our sport it takes more than a hobby
camera... We do however get pretty good photos with pretty simple
cameras. Those of you who have followed me for years might note that
all
the pics I use and post (and I do post some great shots) are being
taken
with a nearly ten year old Kodak D40, but it does have a Kreuznach
Variogon lens with a 10x optical zoom... The best a track side
photographer can hope for is some pretty good photos, and some Video
that is a lot better up close than the far parts of the track... Not to
mention, if you do take a vid of a race, you edit out the parts where
the riders are too far out, or otherwise out of view for FB or
whatever,
but realistically, we are not looking for posting quality, just need to
see enough to coach at home or trackside between moto's....

Notice the rocks in the center of the upper left picture. Those might
not be 300 yards away from the
camera, but they're a good distance. I'd estimate a good 150l yards,
thinking I'd need a good 8-iron
shot to get there. Could you use more detail? Probably. But, the
300mm lens gives you much more
detail than the 55mm does, regardless of what Loogykisser says!

http://www.digitalartform.com/archiv...oto_and_w.html


John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!


Should be '150 yards', not 150l yards.

John H. -- Hope you're having a great day!



For what we are trying to accomplish, it looks like the 300 mm will get
the distance we need...


At 300 yards? Really?

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.