[Arpe]

Your website is amazing. You have done your homework there. I do not have the equipment or the finances to set myself up as a semi-pro sports photographer. The wear and tear on gear is something others don't see, even I forget about the shutter activation's climbing up each weekend. 64,440 as of this morning's cycle ride. It was 13,800 when I bought the K50 14 months ago. I find that I have cut down the 'machine gunning' an awful lot, although when the action gets serious, I tend to hit the 'fast' button.
When a club is run on volunteer labour and they struggle for funds and sponsorship each year it is hard to expect them to front up with my needs.

Thanks. I've been practising! If it's something you enjoy do it, but let them know the cost of the gear and ask for free beer!

Westpac Stadium and, I think, NZRU allow cameras of all types, but you can't use the photos for commercial purposes, that's about the only restriction from memory. Both the venue AND the sports body have rules to check on.

I played hockey all my sporting life, but don't enjoy watching it now that much, prefer rugby, and the Wgtn hockey turfs are at the other end of the city from me.

[richandfleur]

Both the venue AND the sports body have rules to check on.

That's a super important point that's often misunderstood.

Concert wise you can have the venue, the concert promotor/tour manager and the ticket vendor, each with their own terms and conditions.

[Kiwizinho]

Most of this was a GoPro Hero 4 Silver:

That Gopro footage looks nice and crisp with good colour and lighting, although there is quite noticeable curvature. I don't actually have anything to display 4K on, and HD looks pretty good anyway, so a Gopro might be an option. There are certainly things it won't do that I'd like to have, but there's also quite a bit it can do that I can't do with what I have currently.

[Kiwi645hauler]

I played hockey all my sporting life, but don't enjoy watching it now that much, prefer rugby, and the Wgtn hockey turfs are at the other end of the city from me.

That's a huge shame, Rugby to me is too stop start all the time now, plus with the rules of hockey now allowing for aerial play, the skill level of the players is incredible with being able to use overhead passes and control it. (it sucks as a defender/goalie having to defend the 3D stuff)

[richandfleur]

That Gopro footage looks nice and crisp with good colour and lighting, although there is quite noticeable curvature.

Yeah I’m not sure if the Hero 4 was running the linear fov mode at the time. That came out when the Hero 5 did from memory.

The Hero 6 has an excellent linear mode with stabilisation also. Works really well. Actually setting a narrow fov on any GoPro helps to make it less GoPro ish also too.

2.7k is a nice intermediate resolution also. Gives you something to play with for stabilisation and framing, without losing detail when you output at 1080p.

Definitely a tool for a certain job scenario, but quite impressive all the same too.

[awa355]

Well, I did something I now already wish I hadn't. Sold the K50 this morning. Feeling gutted but I don't need two camera systems and the Nikon has 1/3rd the usage the K50 has done. I got as good a price for it with a 18-50 kit lens as I would ever had gotten on Trade me, and without all the questions and postage hassles.

So now, I have a DA-L 50-200 WR , a DA 18-50 WR , a DA 55-300, a Kepcor 2x converter and a 55M f2.0 prime to move on. I will keep the old 50 f1.7 that Ross gifted me. Will list them separately in a couple of weeks. If anyone here is interested in any of the lenses, let me know. I'm going to put the money towards a 17-50/24-70 f2.8 to compliment the 70-200 f2.8 used on the Nikon.

[Kiwizinho]

Well, I did something I now already wish I hadn't. Sold the K50 this morning. Feeling gutted but I don't need two camera systems and the Nikon has 1/3rd the usage the K50 has done. I got as good a price for it with a 18-50 kit lens as I would ever had gotten on Trade me, and without all the questions and postage hassles.

So now, I have a DA-L 50-200 WR , a DA 18-50 WR , a DA 55-300, a Kepcor 2x converter and a 55M f2.0 prime to move on. I will keep the old 50 f1.7 that Ross gifted me. Will list them separately in a couple of weeks. If anyone here is interested in any of the lenses, let me know. I'm going to put the money towards a 17-50/24-70 f2.8 to compliment the 70-200 f2.8 used on the Nikon.

Depends what you want for the DA 55-300, I might be interested. Is it the straight DA or WR version? I'm still on the hunt for something reasonably sharp beyong 90mm. The PLM version has the best reviews, but only a small number, but I recall a few people here saying the DA is OK especially if you stop it down a bit.
My DA-L 50-200 is a bit of disappointment, my Sigma 70-300 is a bit better, but not great, and my F 70-200 is sharp, but suffers from halos, so something that is is a bit better than any of these I could be interested in. Price will have some impact, as if the price is getting up, I'll wait till I can afford a Tamron 70-200 F2.8 as they seem to be highly rated, but also come at a corresponding price, and even used ones don't seem to lose much value.
I'm on a K-50 myself, so whatever the best you've managed with it is probably going to be similar to what I can achieve.

[zkarj]

Depends what you want for the DA 55-300, I might be interested. Is it the straight DA or WR version? I'm still on the hunt for something reasonably sharp beyong 90mm. The PLM version has the best reviews, but only a small number, but I recall a few people here saying the DA is OK especially if you stop it down a bit.

I can confirm that the DA can produce beautifully sharp images at f/11, even on the 24Mpix KP. My SOP is f/11 and auto-ISO when I'm shooting aircraft and I'm fairly confident any problems that arise are of my own making.

These days I'm using the WR, but I I also have a non-WR which I may be looking to shift at some point, just not yet.

[finfang]

Just a couple of photos from Ruapuna yesterday.

[awa355]

Depends what you want for the DA 55-300, I might be interested. Is it the straight DA or WR version? I'm still on the hunt for something reasonably sharp beyong 90mm. The PLM version has the best reviews, but only a small number, but I recall a few people here saying the DA is OK especially if you stop it down a bit.
My DA-L 50-200 is a bit of disappointment, my Sigma 70-300 is a bit better, but not great, and my F 70-200 is sharp, but suffers from halos, so something that is is a bit better than any of these I could be interested in. Price will have some impact, as if the price is getting up, I'll wait till I can afford a Tamron 70-200 F2.8 as they seem to be highly rated, but also come at a corresponding price, and even used ones don't seem to lose much value.
I'm on a K-50 myself, so whatever the best you've managed with it is probably going to be similar to what I can achieve.

The DA 55-300 is not the WR version. I bought it 12 months ago from Aust. I have been very happy with the photos. But, my idea of a great image may differ from yours. I do not go pixel peeping at 100%, and all my photos are jpegs. It has an aftermarket screw in lens hood.

I was going to start this lens at $200 on Tme. anyone here can have it for $180 plus postage.

[NZ_Ross]

Just a couple of photos from Ruapuna yesterday.

Nice, thanks for sharing the images with us all

[Kiwizinho]

The DA 55-300 is not the WR version. I bought it 12 months ago from Aust. I have been very happy with the photos. But, my idea of a great image may differ from yours. I do not go pixel peeping at 100%, and all my photos are jpegs. It has an aftermarket screw in lens hood.

I was going to start this lens at $200 on Tme. anyone here can have it for $180 plus postage.

That sounds like a reasonable price. The Tamron 70-200 2.8 is over $1000 new, and the cheapest on Ebay are a bit over half that without shipping or GST included, so still likely to come in at close to $700 as a minimum.
$180 sounds much more like my budget for now, and if it does nice aeroplanes, that's at least one thing it will probably get used for.
Even if it hasn't got crisp sharpness all the way to 300 I'd be happy if it's good to 250 or so.

[NZ_Ross]

Even if it hasn't got crisp sharpness all the way to 300 I'd be happy if it's good to 250 or so.

As Zkarj says it is best around f11-f13. If you go back through this thread a few years back a few of us ran a set of tests on our 55-300's and that is what we found in terms of sharpness. Don't expect too much from a 55-300 wide open, and you will be ok.

I have the WR version and previously had the standard DA, both of which I used as my tele-zoom for travel. A job they have both filled well.

The image below was taken a few years ago with my standard DA 55-300, at f11 from the boat off Tokelau, with my K5. Still happy with this image

[Arpe]

Well, I did something I now already wish I hadn't. Sold the K50 this morning. Feeling gutted but I don't need two camera systems and the Nikon has 1/3rd the usage the K50 has done. I got as good a price for it with a 18-50 kit lens as I would ever had gotten on Trade me, and without all the questions and postage hassles.

So now, I have a DA-L 50-200 WR , a DA 18-50 WR , a DA 55-300, a Kepcor 2x converter and a 55M f2.0 prime to move on. I will keep the old 50 f1.7 that Ross gifted me. Will list them separately in a couple of weeks. If anyone here is interested in any of the lenses, let me know. I'm going to put the money towards a 17-50/24-70 f2.8 to compliment the 70-200 f2.8 used on the Nikon.

Welcome to the ex-Pentax/now-Nikon club! What camera have you got? One of the nice side-effects is the choice of lenses etc. that you can get 2nd hand on TM or wherever. Not to mention the far superior photos of course!

[richandfleur]

The image below was taken a few years ago with my standard DA 55-300, at f11 from the boat off Tokelau, with my K5. Still happy with this image

I get shivers from that image, as it reminds me of that TV show Lost. The one that Lost the plot about 1 season in.

Nice though, don't get me wrong