I shall acquire a new lens!

I have secured and allocated funds for a lens to extend the life of my current camera for years to come. Also, I shall be increasing the range that I can photograph at to 300 mm. This will open up new spots so I can get new angles on aircraft, get better closeups of portions of the aircraft, help reduce poor lighting in long range 200 mm. shots, and possibly provide a better quality photo than the current one (It’s 9 years old now).

This also means no replacement camera for at least a couple more years.

Waiting for an exceptionally good deal to pass along. If one doesn’t come soon, I’ll go ahead and get it at the normal/expected $.


Nice can’t wait do you have a Facebook page or something for your photos?

Finally! A new lens!

@belfast_spotter: https://www.flickr.com/photos/planespottingphotos/

@Henrik_B: If my undrrstanding of the problem is correct, the dots will not go away.

Have you tried it yet? The dots are really bugging me. Also, isn’t this supposed to be in just RWA?

I’ve invested a couple hundred short of $1,000 for the camera body, a couple hundred for the 200 mm. lens and now another couple hundred for a 300 mm. lens. Getting the sensor cleaned costs a couple hundred last I checked. Photoshop CS6 costs some unkown but much cheaper amount. I’d rather get CS6 to fix the dots (But first I need to learn how to do it).

Regarding moving to RWA, I’ll move it there for now because it’s the safe option. The spotting category includes photos of planes that you took yourself. Since then though, people have put topics about spotting under the category. I thought this fell under the latter but RWA does seem more correct if viewed by looking at the category description. The only way to solve this is… @philippe Can the spotting category include posts about planespotting?

Photoshop might not work too well because those dots are never where you can easily healing brush them away.

1 Like

What camera do you use? I can really recomend the nikon 70-200mm F2.8 or the 55-300mm (a bit cheaper but also very good)! when in use with a dx (not full frame) cam you can get 450mm out of the 300mm sense and 300 out of the 200mm one. ;)

I use D40X with 50-200 currently (DX lens). IIRC I also have an 18-50 for some shorter range work.

450 mm. out of a 300 mm. lens ;)? PM me. we must discuss

1 Like

Oh, you need to learn ;)
I’ll gladly tell you here, since everybody gets to learn something there

There are two possibilities of sensors you can have in your mirror dslr. dx and fx (like nikon calls them). ALL lenses, even the dx one are measured in mm, the more mm the more zoom, but I’m sure you know that. the mm is the true distance between f point ans sensor of the lens (or something like that) therefore the larger it is the larger the sense needs to be the larger the mm are.
Principle: dx lenses cn only be used for dx cams, fx lenses can be used for dx and fx cams.
since dx sensors are a crop out of the fx sensors you crop into the picture with a factor of 1.5, so the real mm you’ll get are 1.5 higher than written on the lease when using a dx cam. Now dx lenses are cheaper since, the are made smaller, fx cams will see a black around the images when used with dx lenses.
About ps6, when you’re a student you’ll get 50% off. CS6 costs about 1000 bucks. My suggestion is don’t save with he lenses. combination cheap cam with high sense is always better than the other way around ;) about your cam costing a short of 1000 bucks, I hope you didn’t buy to for that price in 2015 o.O you could have gotten a D5200 or even a D7200 for that price!

Thanks man. I have a 9 year old camera body which uses Dx

you can also use fx lenses ;)