$11,000 in Camera Gear Destroyed in a Split Second at Drag Race

Mark J. Rebilas was shooting a drag race with a remote camera rig recently when an out-of-control dragster flew into the rig at high speed. In a split second, he lost $11K worth in camera gear, including a Nikon D700 with battery grip, a Nikon 400mm 2.8 lens, and a Pocket Wizard Plus receiver. He should have outfitted the rig with an “ejection seat”.

If you’ve ever wanted to see what the innards of a Nikon 400mm look like, check out the above video.

(via f stoppers)

  • Adam Mayfield

    That brings a tear to my eye. Hope hes got insurance!

  • Ranger9

    Yeah, but think how glad he must have been that he was shooting remotely instead of standing behind the camera!

  • Evan Ashenhurst

    Adam and Ranger 9 both have very valid points, but I am sure he is more thankful for the remote shooting then he is for his insurance, Lenses can be replaced, Lives cant

  • Guest

    for nothing… what the point of shooting remotely this king of stuff with a so long lens. He could have shot from a safe place non remotely! this would have been niiiiiiice with a ultra wide lens!

  • Pepsi_vt9

    Oh my god, 11,000$…

  • Guest

    Most of the time photographers are not allowed beyond a certain point on the track (usually past the tree from my experiences in shooting drag racing), so to get shots of the car coming towards the camera further down the track at track level have to be taken remotely. Anything from the stands, etc, would have a funny angle to it.

  • Jhracer3

    How many people noticed the Lotus Elise he was putting stuff in? Yeah, I think he probably owns a few cameras…

  • Deejaydoubleyou

    Not to be a dink or anything, but it was a Corvette not an Elise. But yeah I still agree with what you said!

  • Tyler Webb


  • charlie

    I think that if he had been standing there he could have moved when the car got out of control and both his life and his camera could have been saved… Im just saying

  • Kris Jon Boorman

    I think the guy with a) a boot full of camera gear and b) a smile on his face after seeing 11,000 bucks destroyed knows what hes doing.

  • Photosophy

    Ah heck, that’ll buff right out.

    But on a serious note, would insurance cover this?
    What with ins. cos being what they are, they would argue that he left the equipment unattended in a location of extremely high risk. “Owner liable for damages due to deliberate placement of equipment in circumstances of excessive perils.”

    But then he’s probably got a policy specifically tailored to the nature of his work…

    If not, he’s probably got a ton of gigs from the publicity that will buy him lots of new gear. :D