HS Volleyball, looking for critique and guidance

timparker_NikonD60

I am posting this here as I was torn between what forum it should go in. So if I made the wrong choice, apologies.

I am a relatively new DSLR shooter. I have a Nikon D60 with the kit 18-55 lens and I also have purchased a 55-200 4-5.6 lens. So nothing fancy as of yet.

My problem is that in my quest for knowledge and better photos, one of my sources is my boss at work (non-photo related field) but he did do some professional newspaper photography in the past from what I have been told.

I have been trying to do a little of all types of photography to get a feel for different things. I have shot point and shoot up till I purchased this and was just going through the motions. For the first couple of weeks I was Capt. Auto and didn't want to change anything on the camera. :cry

I tried some HS Volleyball shots and after doing some reading here and seeing examples, knew I was in trouble! hehe. I understand that it is tough, that not all shots are keepers. The normal stuff. On my second attempt, I listened to some/most of what my boss had told me about where I would be able to improve (up the ISO, shutterspeed, etc). The pictures did turn out much better than the first round, but.....they still are not where I would like them to be.

From reading here, I think I am not equipt well enough (both lens and knowledge of the settings to use). My boss says that I am still not getting everything out of what I have. So that is the dilema, am I still not getting everything out of what I have, or is it truly equip. that is stopping me.

I see a lot of people using 2.8 lenses for sports. My first attempt I was trying to use the 55-200mm and getting up closer in the frame, the boss recommendation was to use the 18-55mm and crop to bring it up closer.

I am just trying to get my head around which way to go, I am reading and am looking for classes/workshops in my area that I can potentially go to get more a foundation for learning.

Sorry for the long set up, but I want to hopefully make sure I am asking for the right type of critique here. Thanks in advance for any guidance you can give.

These pictures also are SOOC, no processing at all.

timparker_NikonD60

Sorry for the images not showing up, the links through to Flickr appear to work. I am attempting to figure out what I did wrong....

EDIT: I guess I spend too much time reading and viewing photos and not enough time in the support forum! found my answer, and I remember seeing it before! DOH!

johng

Tim,

Judging ONLY on these two photos and what you've stated about your equipment, here is my feedback:

First, you DO need to improve your skillset. As you already noted, you need to increase your knowledge. But also need to keep practicing and keep seeking feedback. So posting some shots here is a great step. We can give you much better feedback that way.

Eventually though, your equipment is going to be a limiting factor. HS volleyball is generally shot at ISO 1600 f2.0 or 3200 f2.8. So your current set of lenses is not capable of getting many action shots. The secondary problem is the camera body you are using. I believe there is only a single lens (50mm 1.4?) that is af-s (i.e. has a focus motor in it). And 50mm is a bit short for volleyball. A better lens, the 85mm 1.8, won't autofocus on your camera body because it requires a motor in the body. Now, if you were happy with the ISO 3200 performance of your D60 you could get a 70-200 2.8 (least expensive option suitable for sports is sigma 70-200 2.8).

Specifically on these shots:
The biggest problem is both are framed WAY, WAY too loosely. In sports photography you want very tight framing - you want the action to fill the frame. That isn't the case with your photos.
So fill the frame:


On shot 1, there's nothing going on - no action, no emotion, nothing. So there really isn't an interesting subject - frame is dominated by the gym and you can't see any expressions or emotion on the players that would make a static shot interesting.

On shot 2: The timing is too late. Your subject is the striker but the ball is already on the other side of the net, hitting the defender's hands. If your subject is the striker you want to get the shot as she hits or just after the ball leaves her hand.

As to your bosses advice about using the shorter lens and cropping - I'm not a huge fan of such advice. What you'll notice when you do that is the subject won't be in sharp focus. When shooting low light you really need to fill the frame in-camera to get accurate focus and retain subject detail. When you frame as loosely as these shots, if you crop down so your subject fills the frame, 90% of the time the resulting will be very poor quality. The problem is made worse due to image noise. When you crop heavily, the negative affects of noise are much more visible. So, while you can sometimes crop a bit in good light, in poor light, due to noise I wouldn't recommend it.

timparker_NikonD60

johng wrote:

Tim,

Judging ONLY on these two photos and what you've stated about your equipment, here is my feedback:

John -- thanks for the feedback. Hopefully I will see some more flow in, but yours pretty much backs up what I was thinking.

In my first attempt I was doing what you were talking about "filling the frame" (using my 55-200mm) but naturally since I wasn't getting all the settings right and wasn't in manual mode, I got a lot of blur/motion which made the shots extremely poor.

I am going to keep shooting, reading and learning. This isn't really my main focus but I am trying to keep all my options open. Guess I need to research more of the camera bodies and see where I will go in the future.

I will go back through and see if I got any others where I did fill more of the frame, as I know that is what I should do.

If you don't mind, what settings did you use on your two shots that you show?

johng

The jump-set was ISO 2000, f2.0 1/500. So, if I were shooting with an f5.6 lens like your lens - which is 3 stops slower my shutter speed would have been about 1/60. Way too slow. Even ISO 4000, would only get 1/125 shutter speed. Still too slow.

The kill was in a gym a little brighter. F2.8 1/400 ISO 3200. So again, if I was shooting f5.6 that would have given me 1/100 shutter speeds. Way too slow.

timparker_NikonD60

That makes sense, thank you again for the feedback and critique. I went back through all my other shots and they are all pulled back to far as I think most were shot around 55m - 70 mm using the crop later idea.

At least I know I am not crazy in my thinking. Guess I have limitations in the future to over come with the camera body then, guess I should have done a bit more research before I bought it. I started looking at the D40 and moved up to the 60.

Not going to make this a full time career right now, but kind of think that down the road it would be fun. I am having a blast shooting all kinds of different things. I will stay away from the proverbial question of what body would you recommend as that would just start a nikon.vs.canon.vs.blah.vs.blah...

johng

timparker_NikonD60 wrote:

Not going to make this a full time career right now, but kind of think that down the road it would be fun. I am having a blast shooting all kinds of different things. I will stay away from the proverbial question of what body would you recommend as that would just start a nikon.vs.canon.vs.blah.vs.blah...

A couple points.

First - keep enjoying the hobby. At this point in time, though, I would never advise anyone to try and start a career in photojournalism or sports photography. Right now there just aren't many jobs and less and less every day. And I say that as someone who is not a full time shooter so I'm not trying to protect my job. It's just the reality of the market.

Second - there doesn't need to be a Canon vs. Nikon debate. The Nikon system has some exceptional bodies. But you are correct, a little more research would have helped. The D90 (next step up) is a very capable camera. The D300 is exceptional and the D700 is astounding at high ISO. The D3 is probably the top pro sports body on the market. So, either the D90 or D300 would be a great step up. BUT, you'll still need to improve your lenses. Neither camera will work shooting volleyball with your current lenses. You'd still need to invest in either 85mm 1.8 or 70-200 2.8.

MT Stringer

John's advice is right on the money. good explanation, John.
I don't know anything about Nikon equipment so I can't offer any advice there.

It seems the gyms I have shot in vary from bad light to poor light!

I shoot on manual, 1/400 sec, ISO 3200, f/2.2 - 2.5. I actually got to shoot in a slightly brighter gym last Friday and I was able the adjust my settings to 1/500 sec, ISO 2500 at f/2.8

In the first gym (and numerours others), the 70-200 f/2.8 would be useless unless I go to ISO 6400. I'd rather not do that. So, I have beeen using a Canon 100mm f/2.0. It works pretty good. Depth of field is really narrow at f/2.2.

With that said, I just bought ( and recieved it today) a Canon 135L f/2.0. It will take the place of the 100 and help me get closer to the action. With a media pass, I can walk the floor with no problem.

So, you can see, you need a lens with a fast f stop. At least f/2.8.

Hope you find some of this info helpfull.
Mike

Here's a couple of samples.
Both shots - 1D MK III, 100mm f/2 @ f/2.2, 1/400 sec, ISO 3200

timparker_NikonD60

Extremely helpful. I guess the main thing I was looking for was the confirmation of equipment issues (not fast enough) vs. strictly user error (as my boss had some what implied).

As I think I stated before, I am just trying all types of photography right now and trying to run the gambit. I have done a little of everything so far and this was the first one that really caused issues where I wasn't getting quality near what I wanted.

I will keep shooting and will know that I have limitations in this regard. Won't stop me, but I know what to expect now!

MT Stringer wrote:

Hope you find some of this info helpfull.
Mike