Le Mans question

I'm a newbie going to Le Mans for the first time this year.

Just wondering if there is any point in investing in a mid-range digital camera with a 2x-3x optical zoom? Would this be of any use in capturing halfway-decent shots of the cars? Anything superior would be outside my budget.

As regards location, I have requested tickets for Tribune 03 and also intend visiting Mulsanne and Arnage. (BTW, How long does the ACO take to mail you back the bill?)

A camera with that zoom will help if you take photos in the paddocks and at tech inspection, but not much at the track trying to take photos of the race, unless you can get pretty close...

Dret - what are you doing here ?
You are supposed to stick to OWH !

I have a camera similar to what you are asking about. I have an Olympus C2100UZ. It has an optical zoom of 38-380mm and a 3x digital zoom. I rarely use the digital zoon because of the resulting pixelation.

What you will need to capture decent action photos with a digital is some manual functions. I can adjust to some degree the aperture and f-stop of my lens and film speed to capture more light faster, however, you also capture more erroneous (white noise, etc.) information this way. Panning is tricky compared to my 35mm as the camera takes a split second to actuate the aperture. You need to predict your point in space a little sooner than usual. Of course, the nice thing is you can look at your image and make changes immediately instead of finding out a week later that all your pics were bad.

Things I looked for in a digital camera are...

As much memory as you can afford. I have two 128MB Smartmedia cards for mine. This allows me 252 jpeg images at 1600 x 1200 pixels per card. These can be printed 8 x 10 easily and can be enlarged to 11 x 17 if the image is really good. The card can also hold 24 uncompressed tiff images that are immense files with fantastic detail, but the file size increases file write time and uses up the card fast. My camera can also shoot 330 seconds of video in 35 second blocks. The resolution is not particularly great but suffices for generating the impression of the event.

I also looked for a caemra I could use screw on filters with. Using filters (polarizers, graduated density, etc.) go a long way in getting better shots. In racing the sky can sometimes be bright enough to wash out the detail of a racer. A circular polarizer helps to reduce glare and dim the incoming light a little. A graduated density filter can be used to allow light in below the horizon while limiting glare above.

Hope any of this helps.

Thanks for your detailed reply, KC. Most of the cameras in my price range seem to have only a 160mm optical zoom, as opposed to the 380mm on your camera. Would you say this would be inadequate for getting good shots from public viewing areas?

Its not too bad. If you were in the US, I'd say no, because they keep everyone so far back over here. But outside North America there are tracks with great viewing areas and I think you could make do with 160mm. Obviously its impossible without accreditation to get photos like the pros do, but I bet you can get some nearly as good.

I never cease to be amazed at the quality of the digital cameras that are around these days. I'm seriously considering adding one to go with my EOS.

If you have the money, Nikon and Canon both make digital SLRs. They have everything their film counterparts have, but use a CCD to take the image. They are expensive and usually seen in the hands of pros. I am sure that the other manufacturers have similar units. I know Minolta has several pro/consumer cameras with huge megapixel rates.