Indoor Sports

bendruckerphoto

I am planning on shooting some indoor sports at my high school this winter (namely basketball), and was looking for some advice on whether my equipment will cut it. I currently own a D50, which is obviously inadequate for indoor sports. I am planning on purchasing a D300 in around a week, giving me around a month to learn it before basketball season. I own a 17-55 f/2.8 as well as a 35-70 f/2.8. The gym is poorly lit, even for a high school gym. Flash is something I'd prefer to avoid, both from a convince standpoint and a cost standpoint.

My concern is that the f/2.8 aperture will not be fast enough to get shutter speeds around 1/500 sec or so, even at high ISOs. I could see shooting up to ISO 3200. From the samples of the D300 I have seen, the noise at ISO 3200 is acceptable for my uses of these images. Will f/2.8 be good enough? Or should a rent/buy a fast 50mm or 85mm lens? It would be no problem to pick up a 50mm f/1.8 if that extra stop and change would be vital to getting the type of shutter speeds I will need.

Ann McRae

baseballboy828 wrote:

I am planning on shooting some indoor sports at my high school this winter (namely basketball), and was looking for some advice on whether my equipment will cut it. I currently own a D50, which is obviously inadequate for indoor sports. I am planning on purchasing a D300 in around a week, giving me around a month to learn it before basketball season. I own a 17-55 f/2.8 as well as a 35-70 f/2.8. The gym is poorly lit, even for a high school gym. Flash is something I'd prefer to avoid, both from a convince standpoint and a cost standpoint.

My concern is that the f/2.8 aperture will not be fast enough to get shutter speeds around 1/500 sec or so, even at high ISOs. I could see shooting up to ISO 3200. From the samples of the D300 I have seen, the noise at ISO 3200 is acceptable for my uses of these images. Will f/2.8 be good enough? Or should a rent/buy a fast 50mm or 85mm lens? It would be no problem to pick up a 50mm f/1.8 if that extra stop and change would be vital to getting the type of shutter speeds I will need.

I shoot Canon, so can't comment on camera.
Indoors (soccer, volleyball, basketball once) I typically use f2.0 or 2.2. ISO 1600 would let me get 1/640. (Not the current venue though).
I don't think 50mm will be long enough. Canon has an 85mmf1.8 that is great - Nikon Also a 135mmf2.0.

bendruckerphoto

Ann McRae wrote:

I shoot Canon, so can't comment on camera.
Indoors (soccer, volleyball, basketball once) I typically use f2.0 or 2.2. ISO 1600 would let me get 1/640. (Not the current venue though).
I don't think 50mm will be long enough. Canon has an 85mmf1.8 that is great - Nikon Also a 135mmf2.0.

Nikon also offers an 85mm f/1.8. The f/1.4 version is regarded as one of Nikon's sharpest lenses. You're probably right that 50mm is too short. I may end up just getting an f/1.8 version though, since it's so cheap. If it doesn't come in that handy for sports, it's not a big deal. The 85mm f/1.8, at $400, is a more serious purchase.

jonh68

I will disagree on the 50 1.8 being to short for basketball. I shot with a 85 1.8 last year on the D50 and wished I had a 50 for shots under the basket. It really depends on how close you can get.

Having the D50 and D300, I would not consider that an upgrade in regards to noise performance. I actually like the D50 better and you may be better off getting a program like DXO which corrects noise based on the specific camera.

I think you would be better off spending the money on a 85 1.8 or 50 1.8, and getting a Sb-800 for bouncing the light off the ceiling or backwall if flash is permitted. That is what I did for BB last year.

If high noise performance is desired, the D700 is the camera to get. Otherwise, I would not upgrade to another camera if high ISO performance is the only reason.

Go to KEH.com for good used lenses. You will save bucks on getting a used 85 1.8 there. That's where I got mine for around $300.

i_worship_the_King

I'll toss in that I shoot the 50mm f/1.8 prime all the time for basketball. I normally take a post near the ground (one knee? kneeling perhaps?) with a shoulder against the wall pads in our gym. Gives a good range for near side jumpers and far side drives.


Shot with ISO 640, 1/250, f/1.8

Should have shot it ISO800 to get that last nip of blur out.

bendruckerphoto

Having the D50 and D300, I would not consider that an upgrade in regards to noise performance. I actually like the D50 better and you may be better off getting a program like DXO which corrects noise based on the specific camera.

I have to disagree with you on that. Not only is the D300 less noisy at high ISO's, but the grain structure is much cleaner. It is easier to clean up in PP, whereas the D50, with a blotchy grain structure, tends to give noise reduction programs a hard time. Also, I can't add noise reduction for every image to my workflow. It would take me too long. For noise reduction, I am only willing to use what's built into Lightroom 2, and then take a few select images into Noise Ninja if necessary. In addition to the better ISO performance, the D300's autofocus will also help a lot. I find that the limited AF points of the D50 as well as the lack of predictive focusing makes me miss a lot of shots, even outdoors in strong light.

I thank the two members who commented on the 50 f/1.8 being long enough for basket shots. I will definitely be picking one up in the coming weeks. I am thinking that I'd use the 35-70 for longer shots of people taking jump shots near the 3 point line. I could alternate between the 35-70mm and 50mm, or I could use the 50mm on the D50 and the zoom on the D300 or vice versa. Anyone have an opinion on which combo would work best? Also, is my 17-55 of any use? The backboard in the gym is very close to the wall, so I'd probably be very close to the baseline. Also, the school just installed some high power fluorescent fixtures over the weekend, but only on one side. That side is surprisingly bright, but the other side is still very dark. If the home team was on the bright side, that would really help my concerns with lack of light a lot.

jonh68

Personally, if you are getting the 50 mm 1.8, the 35-70 will be useless on another body in the type of shots you get because the 50 is already right in the middle and it's a matter of moving back or forward a couple of feet. A 70-200 or 80-200 2.8 would be more useful on a second body.

About the D50 to D300 noise: yes the d300 is better, but it smooths out detail. You are going to find NR is going to be a necessity on the D300 as much as the D50. I thought the same as you did before I got my D300. If you want a game changing camera, save up for a D700. I just don't think the extra cost of the D300 beats a better lens if you want better low light, high noise performance.