Newbie sports shooter soliciting advice (swimming, basketball)

dsloan · January 20, 2011

Hello sports shooters,

I volunteered to photograph my alma mater's athletic events this weekend so I could gain more experience photographing sports, and I want to make sure I'm ready to shoot from the start of the events.

First I'm photographing a swim meet, then a basketball game (or two, men's for sure, possibly women's).

I've never been to a swim meet before, so I'm unsure of the kinds of positioning I will be able to attain around the water. As for basketball, I will probably stick close to the baselines/corners.

My main concerns are regarding minimum shutter speed, and the use of auto ISO. What do you, as an experienced sports photographer, usually do? Use auto ISO to stay above 1/xxx of a second, or just stay on manual mode at a locked shutter speed and ISO?

I'm shooting with:

Nikon D300s + grip
18-200 3.5-5.6 VR
85 1.8D
35 1.8G
Monopod
processing in LR3

I'm leaning toward keeping the 85 on the camera most of the time due to the aperture, but am concerned with the focusing speed. I know that by using the 18-200, I will probably be at ISO 1600 or 3200 to get the shutter speeds I want.

I also want to use the optimum focus mode. I have mixed opinions about the 3D tracking, but I supposed it would work well if I wanted to follow one person. Otherwise, 51 point AF should do the trick, right?

Thoughts? Suggestions? Tips when photographing these specific sports?

Any input would be much appreciated. Thanks!

Daniel

johng · January 20, 2011

Daniel - you're going to have a tough time with swimming - you don't have a proper lens. While the 85mm has a wide enough aperture, 85mm is awfully constraining. A 70-200 2.8 is a much better fit. A big part of shooting sports is using the right tools for the job. If you can rent such a lens then do it. Otherwise you'll have to get by with the 85. The biggest issue is going to be you'll be very limited in your shots. Here's a post in another forum where I provided some advice for shooting swimming. The only thing I'll say is you are now limited - you don't have the focal length to shoot all the lanes - shoot only when your subject can fill 1/2 the frame - which at 85mm won't be a lot.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1002&message=36210397

dsloan · January 20, 2011

johng wrote: »

Daniel - you're going to have a tough time with swimming - you don't have a proper lens. While the 85mm has a wide enough aperture, 85mm is awfully constraining. A 70-200 2.8 is a much better fit. A big part of shooting sports is using the right tools for the job. If you can rent such a lens then do it. Otherwise you'll have to get by with the 85. The biggest issue is going to be you'll be very limited in your shots. Here's a post in another forum where I provided some advice for shooting swimming. The only thing I'll say is you are now limited - you don't have the focal length to shoot all the lanes - shoot only when your subject can fill 1/2 the frame - which at 85mm won't be a lot.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1002&message=36210397

Wow John, I can't thank you enough for that information. It is exactly what I needed to know. I wish I could get my hands on a 70-200 for this, but it probably won't happen by tomorrow. If I weren't donating my time but rather being paid, then I would consider spending the money to rent one.

Is using my 18-200 and bumping up the ISO out of the question? The photos will be used primarily for display on the athletics website, not for large prints.

Here's a link to the pool I'll be shooting: http://legacy.lclark.edu/dept/vtour/pool.html

Thank you again so so so so so much.

johng · January 20, 2011

unless it's the best lit pool in the nation, then there's no way you'll get the shutter speeds you need with f5.6. Plus you'll have focus issues. What are the exact needs - you said it's for the website - do they just need a few sample photos or is it a gallery of the event? If they just need some sample shots for the site then that's much more doable as you can plan to just capture a certain number of shots and can concentrate on the lanes/positions to get you those shots with the 85.

dsloan · January 20, 2011

They currently do not have anyone covering sports events with any consistency, and since it is something I am interested in and feel like I could excel at, I basically said "I'll volunteer my time and do my best to come to all the events I can, all I ask for in exchange is credit if you decide to use one of my photos".

If you take a look at their website, www.lcpioneers.com, it appears that they don't put a priority on documenting events with photos, and therefore have fairly inconsistent coverage and quality of photos. In my opinion it looks like they have someone out there with a D40 + 18-55 shooting jpeg with no editing. As a former athlete of the school (golf, table tennis), I had 2 photos of me on the website throughout my 4 year athletic career, and they were underwhelming. There's no reason (aside from budget, I suppose) why they can't have a great high-resolution gallery of most events. All they need is someone to take the photos. I could even host them on my smugmug and they could link to their gallery on my page instead of integrating it with their site.

So to answer your question, they'll basically take what they can get from me - they don't have a gallery planned for the event nor were they needing sample photos (although I'd argue that they do). From what you've said, though, it sounds like I'd be much better off sticking with the 85mm lens during the swimming portion, and aside from getting a wide shot of the pool, I should leave the 18-200 in the bag.

edit: forgot one thing - should I shoot at 2.8 with the 85?

OldGuy · January 20, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

They currently do not have anyone covering sports events with any consistency, and since it is something I am interested in and feel like I could excel at, I basically said "I'll volunteer my time and do my best to come to all the events I can, all I ask for in exchange is credit if you decide to use one of my photos".

If you take a look at their website, www.lcpioneers.com, it appears that they don't put a priority on documenting events with photos, and therefore have fairly inconsistent coverage and quality of photos. In my opinion it looks like they have someone out there with a D40 + 18-55 shooting jpeg with no editing. As a former athlete of the school (golf, table tennis), I had 2 photos of me on the website throughout my 4 year athletic career, and they were underwhelming. There's no reason (aside from budget, I suppose) why they can't have a great high-resolution gallery of most events. All they need is someone to take the photos. I could even host them on my smugmug and they could link to their gallery on my page instead of integrating it with their site.

So to answer your question, they'll basically take what they can get from me - they don't have a gallery planned for the event nor were they needing sample photos (although I'd argue that they do). From what you've said, though, it sounds like I'd be much better off sticking with the 85mm lens during the swimming portion, and aside from getting a wide shot of the pool, I should leave the 18-200 in the bag.

edit: forgot one thing - should I shoot at 2.8 with the 85?

Hi Daniel,

JohnG has made some important points. I sometimes shoot swimming with my 85, (but mostly my 70-200), at either 2.5 or 2.8 with good results. But you must be able to get pool-side. Here is how I handled the shoot: In a six lane pool, I chose the individual(s) or relay team I wanted to grab. If they were in lanes 1-3, I shot from the lane 1 side; if they they were in lanes 4-6, I shot from the lane 6 side. Also, for the free-style and back-stroke, shoot from the side to catch the arm strokes. For the breast-stroke and fly, shoot from the ends of the pool (which is also good if you don't have a long lens because you can wait until the swimmer is almost right on top of you before firing). Get low, low, low and watch out for splash on the turns.

I also use flash on occasion when the dungeon lights are too poor but never at the start and never during diving!!

Good shooting!

dsloan · January 21, 2011

Excellent info, thank you. I think I'll have pretty good access to the edges of the pool so I should be able to take at least a few good photos.

I came very close to buying a used nikkor 70-200 2.8 today for $1300 (it's an investment, right?!?) listed online at the local pro photography store, but upon calling i learned that it had been sold that MORNING. Probably a good thing as I don't technically have the money, but I know that's a great price for that lens and it would come in handy often, so I was preparing myself to borrow the money I needed from myself and pay it back over the next couple months.

I'll be sure to post results once I have everything edited.

Thanks!

PatLovell · January 21, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

Excellent info, thank you. I think I'll have pretty good access to the edges of the pool so I should be able to take at least a few good photos.

I came very close to buying a used nikkor 70-200 2.8 today for $1300 (it's an investment, right?!?) listed online at the local pro photography store, but upon calling i learned that it had been sold that MORNING. Probably a good thing as I don't technically have the money, but I know that's a great price for that lens and it would come in handy often, so I was preparing myself to borrow the money I needed from myself and pay it back over the next couple months.

I'll be sure to post results once I have everything edited.

Thanks!

A 70-200 2.8 is the staple lens of every sports shooter. You would use it for every sport you shoot.

mercphoto · January 21, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

There's no reason (aside from budget, I suppose) why they can't have a great high-resolution gallery of most events. All they need is someone to take the photos.

You hit the nail on the head with the whole budget thing. Its why they don't have any consistent coverage or good photos.

You're an alma mater. I strongly advise you set an agreed upon value of these photos with the school and get a monetary value for the donation of your time and photos. Then take the tax deduction.

dsloan · January 21, 2011

PatLovell wrote: »

A 70-200 2.8 is the staple lens of every sports shooter. You would use it for every sport you shoot.

oh I know. It is the lens I lust after daily, but I simply can't afford it (yet). This will be my first sports shoot and I'm donating my time, so if I begin making money from these things it will be the first lens I buy.

mercphoto wrote: »

You're an alma mater. I strongly advise you set an agreed upon value of these photos with the school and get a monetary value for the donation of your time and photos. Then take the tax deduction.

This is interesting as I hadn't thought about this possibility, but I suppose it could work more to my benefit. I was considering the possibility of selling prints to the students or parents, but if I were to do that then it wouldn't be a tax write-off I'm guessing. Hmmm

mercphoto · January 21, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

This is interesting as I hadn't thought about this possibility, but I suppose it could work more to my benefit. I was considering the possibility of selling prints to the students or parents, but if I were to do that then it wouldn't be a tax write-off I'm guessing. Hmmm

Probably not if you went that angle. I honestly have no idea. But if you do decide to sell, make sure the college can't give away or sells those photos as well. In other words, make sure only the college uses those photos and does not become a second retail outlet for your images.

PatLovell · January 21, 2011

mercphoto wrote: »

Probably not if you went that angle. I honestly have no idea. But if you do decide to sell, make sure the college can't give away or sells those photos as well. In other words, make sure only the college uses those photos and does not become a second retail outlet for your images.

Bill brings up a valid point. Even if you are shooting this for free, you should draw up a contract between you and the University. You should cover usage, copyright, etc... If you don't, I'm sure they will use the photos however they want and probably setup a gallery and sell them through Replay Photos.

You should check with the University as far as selling photos to parents and students, some Universities have policies against this since they own the likeness of the student athlete while they are attending.

RickJohnsonPhotography · January 21, 2011

I'm no where near an expert, or even very experienced, but for college basketball in the gym where I shoot, I set aperture priority and ISO 6400 & f2.8--this gives me a shutter speed of about 1/800. For my tastes, this is the best combination of noise, dof, and ability to stop motion. Normally, I shoot from where the arc intersects the baseline on the right side of the basket. And I typically use a 70-200, although I occasionally use a 50, 85 or 300.

jhefti · January 21, 2011

RickJohnsonPhotography wrote: »

I'm no where near an expert, or even very experienced, but for college basketball in the gym where I shoot, I set aperture priority and ISO 6400 & f2.8--this gives me a shutter speed of about 1/800. For my tastes, this is the best combination of noise, dof, and ability to stop motion. Normally, I shoot from where the arc intersects the baseline on the right side of the basket. And I typically use a 70-200, although I occasionally use a 50, 85 or 300.

I'm just an amateur too, but I tend to push the ISO as well. It all depends on your camera. I shoot most of my sports with a canon 5DmII, and its low light qualities are quite good. I also set everything to manual and adjust accordingly, as often low light situations can be uneven and thus difficult to meter.

Oh, yes...get a 70-200/2.8 whenever you can; it is a fabulous lens!

dsloan · January 26, 2011

Hey all, just thought I'd update you with a select few shots from the basketball game I covered. A 70-200 2.8 WILL be my next lens, even if it's the Sigma non-stabilized version. All of these were with the 85 1.8 or the 35 1.8, and it was very restricting.

I took about 700-800 photos during the basketball game, and kept 34, haha.

I like this shot because the opposing team is just sitting on their butts

dsloan · February 8, 2011

swimming photos, all with the 85 1.8

normally i don't do stuff like this, but i like it:

any comments or suggestions are welcome.

and by the way, i did finally get a 70-200 2.8!

mr peas · February 9, 2011

Kickin' some butt with that 85mm! I'm venturing into this sports photography territory as well. I've shot countless motorsports, but mainly in day-time. So the telephoto I used (Sigma 70-300mm) was sufficient, however, once I started shooting night-time events, I had to upgrade to a 70-200 2.8L IS. Its a great investment so long as you know you'll be using it often. Looking forward to more photos and reading more advice in this area of the forum

JustinThyme · February 9, 2011

Not too shabby for a first go at it but you are going to have to get a bit better before you can sell these.
Most images fall into one of 3 categories.
Soft
OOF
motion blur.

The color and WB appears to be controlled but you need to get the shutter speed up and work ont he BB compositions. Landscape for BB doesnt pan out very often. Try and not chop off body parts and use the rule of 3rds.

Last image is the best composition IMO but nothing is clearly in focus suggesting camera shake or very poor optics.

jmphotocraft · February 9, 2011

Nice work! I think you will definitely sell some. Maybe not to SI, but some parents will eat them up.

For basketball I've had good luck with Manual mode and shutter speed of 1/500. Expose for the faces, set it and forget it. That way the camera meter doesn't get fooled by random stuff in the background.

dsloan · February 9, 2011

mr peas wrote: »

Kickin' some butt with that 85mm! I'm venturing into this sports photography territory as well. I've shot countless motorsports, but mainly in day-time. So the telephoto I used (Sigma 70-300mm) was sufficient, however, once I started shooting night-time events, I had to upgrade to a 70-200 2.8L IS. Its a great investment so long as you know you'll be using it often. Looking forward to more photos and reading more advice in this area of the forum

I admit that I did crop quite a bit on some of the shots, but thank you for the compliment.

JustinThyme wrote: »

Not too shabby for a first go at it but you are going to have to get a bit better before you can sell these.
Most images fall into one of 3 categories.
Soft
OOF
motion blur.

The color and WB appears to be controlled but you need to get the shutter speed up and work ont he BB compositions. Landscape for BB doesnt pan out very often. Try and not chop off body parts and use the rule of 3rds.

Last image is the best composition IMO but nothing is clearly in focus suggesting camera shake or very poor optics.

Could you be more specific, please? I know some of them show a bit of movement (like the swimmer's arm moving), but which photos are actually out of focus or soft (ok i found one... #15 going up for a layup)

I did crop several of these because of how limited I was shooting with just the 35 1.8 and 85 1.8 and used a tiny bit of noise reduction, which may add to the soft effect.

The landscape BB shot I'm pretty sure I cropped that way because of how the player was moving laterally, but I see that it could've been better vertically.

jmphotocraft wrote: »

Nice work! I think you will definitely sell some. Maybe not to SI, but some parents will eat them up.

For basketball I've had good luck with Manual mode and shutter speed of 1/500. Expose for the faces, set it and forget it. That way the camera meter doesn't get fooled by random stuff in the background.

Thank you - I'm currently working on getting the word out that I'm taking these. The "communications/media director" of the athletic department is not very receptive to my ideas for sharing these with the athletes and parents. I don't really care much about selling them, I just want people to see them!

I made the mistake of using auto-ISO throughout the evening which gave me some over and some under exposed shots. I had to make significant adjustments in Lightroom on some of the shots. Next time I will keep it at ISO3200 and 1/640. I had a bit too much blur at 1/500. I wish I had a D3S so I could shoot ISO6400 and 1/1000th... but don't we all wish that? I know the D300S goes to 6400, but there is too much noise at that point.

This past Friday I photographed a tennis tournament for the school and got some good shots with my 70-200. I'll post a few here once I'm done. This weekend, I am covering women's tennis and basketball, and men's basketball. Possibly even a softball game! I can't get enough.

jmphotocraft · February 9, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

Thank you - I'm currently working on getting the word out that I'm taking these. The "communications/media director" of the athletic department is not very receptive to my ideas for sharing these with the athletes and parents.

So go around him. In this day and age, there is no stopping information. All you need is one parent to spread to the whole team.

I don't really care much about selling them, I just want people to see them!

That is fun for like one season, or while you are learning to be a decent sports shooter, and only if your own child is on the team. After you're competent, the parents' compliments are nice but worthless and fleeting. You'll know the pics are good, you won't need parents to pat you on the back. It looks like you are most of the way there. The real compliment of your skills is when the photos sell. If you keep doing it for free, that is what people will expect. I run my photography as a hobby side business through smugmug, and it pays for the gear and then some. It's nice when you can plunk down for a new Canikon 70-200/2.8 and not even blink because your customers are paying for it!

dsloan · February 9, 2011

jmphotocraft wrote: »

So go around him. In this day and age, there is no stopping information. All you need is one parent to spread to the whole team.

That is fun for like one season, or while you are learning to be a decent sports shooter, and only if your own child is on the team. After you're competent, the parents' compliments are nice but worthless and fleeting. You'll know the pics are good, you won't need parents to pat you on the back. It looks like you are most of the way there. The real compliment of your skills is when the photos sell. If you keep doing it for free, that is what people will expect. I run my photography as a hobby side business through smugmug, and it pays for the gear and then some. It's nice when you can plunk down for a new Canikon 70-200/2.8 and not even blink because your customers are paying for it!

thanks for your insight. i really do appreciate it.

i can see myself getting tired of doing it for free the more i do it, but at this point i am just learning. i have a ton of fun shooting sports, and the beauty is that i don't have a committal contract with the school so i am by no means required to cover any event - i can come and go as i please. they mentioned having a contract with another photographer, but i have yet to see him at anything i've attended, and their website has a major dearth of quality photos (lcpioneers.com). a photographer (i believe she was a student) from a competing school in the same conference had the ultimate sports setup: TWO Nikon D3 or D3S bodies, one with the 24-70 2.8 and the other with the 70-200 2.8. apparently that school can invest several thousand into high-end photog equipment, but my alma mater appears to have photography at the bottom of their priority list. oh well.

anyway, when i am through with the tennis photos, i will post a few up here to share.

thanks again to everyone for their comments.

jmphotocraft · February 9, 2011

I think your images are worth selling for something. Even if it's just 95 cents for a 1mp download or $2 for a 4x6. Even if you're just having fun and learning. Only publish the good, non-redundant ones for sale. Publishing 5-10 pics of the same kid doing basically the same thing and giving them away for free will just make you look like an amateur who doesn't know how to separate his own wheat from the chaff, and not to be taken seriously. As you get better your quality will improve allowing you to raise prices. And your keeper rate will improve so you'll have more to show and sell. But there is value in a good photo no matter where you are on the learning curve. If you don't value them, your customers won't either.

73Rocks · February 9, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

Hello sports shooters,

I volunteered to photograph my alma mater's athletic events this weekend so I could gain more experience photographing sports, and I want to make sure I'm ready to shoot from the start of the events.

First I'm photographing a swim meet, then a basketball game (or two, men's for sure, possibly women's).

I've never been to a swim meet before, so I'm unsure of the kinds of positioning I will be able to attain around the water. As for basketball, I will probably stick close to the baselines/corners.

My main concerns are regarding minimum shutter speed, and the use of auto ISO. What do you, as an experienced sports photographer, usually do? Use auto ISO to stay above 1/xxx of a second, or just stay on manual mode at a locked shutter speed and ISO?

I'm shooting with:

Nikon D300s + grip
18-200 3.5-5.6 VR
85 1.8D
35 1.8G
Monopod
processing in LR3

I'm leaning toward keeping the 85 on the camera most of the time due to the aperture, but am concerned with the focusing speed. I know that by using the 18-200, I will probably be at ISO 1600 or 3200 to get the shutter speeds I want.

I also want to use the optimum focus mode. I have mixed opinions about the 3D tracking, but I supposed it would work well if I wanted to follow one person. Otherwise, 51 point AF should do the trick, right?

Thoughts? Suggestions? Tips when photographing these specific sports?

Any input would be much appreciated. Thanks!

Daniel

I have been shooting sports for an area newspaper for about 11 years now (and enjoying every game) and here is what I found through trial and error.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
1<SUP>st</SUP> though – my equipment: I use “middle price” Canon equipment. A 50D, a Canon 85mm f1.8 prime, a Canon 50mm f1.4 prime, a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 zoom, and when using a flash a Canon EX430 Speedlight. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Because I shoot for a paper, I have a press pass. No, it’s not because I am a tightwad . . . the press pass allows me access to the courts and inside the “wire” for football and track . . . very important.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
For years I shot in Shutter Priority at around 500/sec with the lowest ISO I could go. I found that once you get the knack of shooting in Manual, your shots will be more consistent. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I use the 70-200 zoom with a 2X teleconverter for football until the sun goes down . . . then I take the 2X teleconverter off and use the 70-200mm with my 430EX at ½ power. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I use the low light prime lenses for basketball because of the small, low lit gyms I shoot in. The 50mm works best for the smaller gyms because I only have at the most 4 feet between the baseline and the wall. When I am shooting in the bigger gyms I use the 85mm. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Although flashes are allowed in South Dakota, I always prided myself for being able to go into the poorly lit gyms and shoot without a flash. After reading the threads on this forum I got the inkling to use the flash as just a “fill” light. I experimented around until I figured out that if I got my settings in Manual for the correct exposure, and then if I turned on the flash and put it in Manual at around 1/8 to 1/16 power it added just that extra little bit of “dazzle” to shots that were “dull” before. That is also why I shoot my night football shots with the flash at only ½ power . . . trust me, it is better than shooting with the flash in Auto.

Editing. At first I would submit my pictures cropped, but not to the point to where any body parts were missing. My editor started cropping for a tighter look (she pays the bills so she has last say) and I discovered that it does add to the shots. The old newspaper adage that “Faces sell” should be kept in mind when editing.

High Speed Sync . . . one of the most mysterious terms in flash photography. Please use this link (I know it is an ad for Pocketwizard) to get the best explanation of High Speed Sync that I know of http://www.pocketwizard.com/inspirations/tutorials/pocketwizard_controltl_optimiz/ . If you want to use a flash for sports photography, your flash must have a High Speed Sync feature on it.

EXAMPLES:

<o:p>

</o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p>Cropped loosely without flash.

</o:p><o:p></o:p><o:p>

</o:p>
<o:p>
Cropped tight with flash at 1/8 power.
</o:p>

Cropped loosely without flash.

Cropped tight with flash at 1/8 power.
<o:p></o:p>
These are just some suggestions that I found over the years. Hope they help you out.<o:p></o:p>

JimKarczewski · February 10, 2011

I disagree about the need for HSS. 1/250 is more than enough, hell, even 1/200 which I'm stuck with, to freeze subjects at a basketball game. It all relates to the amount of ambient vs amount of flash. If you flash and ambient are too close to each other, you will see blurring in 1/200 pics. However, get at least 2 stops difference and I haven't had a problem yet and I by no means shoot with a "sports" specific camera (Canon 5DII.) I'll be grabbing a 7D eventually unless the latest and greatest next big release from Canon actually is a high performance FF/Cropped when needed body.

FYI - HSS sucks IMHO. You aren't shooting a single burst flash, you are shooting multiple lower power bursts in a short period so you can light the entire frame. Doesn't make sense unless you really need to do so... a SINGLE NON-HSS 1/700-1/1200 flash burst is just fine to freeze action in a basketball game. You don't see any pro's shooting college or professional with HSS setups. They are all using 800-1000w/s power packs that are single shot way up in the rafters.

JustinThyme · February 10, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

Could you be more specific, please? I know some of them show a bit of movement (like the swimmer's arm moving), but which photos are actually out of focus or soft (ok i found one... #15 going up for a layup)

I did crop several of these because of how limited I was shooting with just the 35 1.8 and 85 1.8 and used a tiny bit of noise reduction, which may add to the soft effect.

I made the mistake of using auto-ISO throughout the evening which gave me some over and some under exposed shots. I had to make significant adjustments in Lightroom on some of the shots. Next time I will keep it at ISO3200 and 1/640. I had a bit too much blur at 1/500. I wish I had a D3S so I could shoot ISO6400 and 1/1000th... but don't we all wish that? I know the D300S goes to 6400, but there is too much noise at that point.

Without doing a crituque on every image it looks like you have explained most of it in the following statements. A light crop to change from landscape to potrait or to crop out unwanted things in the frame is common practice. Heavy crops almost always show up soft at best. Under exposed images and attempt at recovery is a guaranteed flat and washed out image. Once dark detail is lost it cant be recovered and attempts at recovery flatten the image, give it an overall haze and make it soft. Some images are better than others but I didnt see any that really "POPPED" with sharp edges and good contrast. Of course the venue, indoors with HID lighting, is one of the most challanging venues for the use of natural light. I cant emphasize enough to stay away from auto anything and go full manual where you have control of the exposure and not the camera. The auto modes do not calculate for what color the jerseys are or changing luminance in the back ground etc. They calculate for the luminance in the metered area and expose acccording to the average of that area with preference to preventing blown highlights. Well if most of the area is brighter like white jerseys its going to underexpose, inverse is true for darker jerseys it will overexpose. If you shoot in manual and pick a neutral spot to meter like the floor with nothing else in the image and set exposure based on that you will get even exposures thoughout the set. My routine is always to pick my metering spot, set exposure and snap a few and review the histogram. If they are good then shoot away. If they are underexposed then bump up 1/3 stop on the meter or down if they are overexposed, repeat as necessary until you have a good exposure then the rest will fall right in there.

dsloan · February 10, 2011

73Rocks wrote: »

I have been shooting sports for an area newspaper for about 11 years now (and enjoying every game) and here is what I found through trial and error.

Thank you

JimKarczewski wrote: »

I disagree about the need for HSS. 1/250 is more than enough, hell, even 1/200 which I'm stuck with, to freeze subjects at a basketball game. It all relates to the amount of ambient vs amount of flash. If you flash and ambient are too close to each other, you will see blurring in 1/200 pics. However, get at least 2 stops difference and I haven't had a problem yet and I by no means shoot with a "sports" specific camera (Canon 5DII.) I'll be grabbing a 7D eventually unless the latest and greatest next big release from Canon actually is a high performance FF/Cropped when needed body.

FYI - HSS sucks IMHO. You aren't shooting a single burst flash, you are shooting multiple lower power bursts in a short period so you can light the entire frame. Doesn't make sense unless you really need to do so... a SINGLE NON-HSS 1/700-1/1200 flash burst is just fine to freeze action in a basketball game. You don't see any pro's shooting college or professional with HSS setups. They are all using 800-1000w/s power packs that are single shot way up in the rafters.

At this point I think I'd rather not worry about flash. I know that it can produce better light in many cases but I'd rather be shooting at 8FPS to increase my chances of getting a great shot.

JustinThyme wrote: »

Without doing a crituque on every image it looks like you have explained most of it in the following statements. A light crop to change from landscape to potrait or to crop out unwanted things in the frame is common practice. Heavy crops almost always show up soft at best. Under exposed images and attempt at recovery is a guaranteed flat and washed out image. Once dark detail is lost it cant be recovered and attempts at recovery flatten the image, give it an overall haze and make it soft. Some images are better than others but I didnt see any that really "POPPED" with sharp edges and good contrast. Of course the venue, indoors with HID lighting, is one of the most challanging venues for the use of natural light. I cant emphasize enough to stay away from auto anything and go full manual where you have control of the exposure and not the camera. The auto modes do not calculate for what color the jerseys are or changing luminance in the back ground etc. They calculate for the luminance in the metered area and expose acccording to the average of that area with preference to preventing blown highlights. Well if most of the area is brighter like white jerseys its going to underexpose, inverse is true for darker jerseys it will overexpose. If you shoot in manual and pick a neutral spot to meter like the floor with nothing else in the image and set exposure based on that you will get even exposures thoughout the set. My routine is always to pick my metering spot, set exposure and snap a few and review the histogram. If they are good then shoot away. If they are underexposed then bump up 1/3 stop on the meter or down if they are overexposed, repeat as necessary until you have a good exposure then the rest will fall right in there.

Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for when I asked you to elaborate. Auto ISO was definitely a big mistake.

I am shooting more basketball this weekend with my 70-200, not my 85, so hopefully i can get more non-cropped shots to keep more detail.

I wonder which would be better for getting better photos - ISO3200 at 1/640th, or ISO6400 at 1/1000th? Maybe I'll try some of both and compare.

JimKarczewski · February 10, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

Thank you

At this point I think I'd rather not worry about flash. I know that it can produce better light in many cases but I'd rather be shooting at 8FPS to increase my chances of getting a great shot.

It's about perfecting your timing. As I mentioned.. if you ever get to a point where you want to shoot for a publication/paper that has an agreement with a school that has lights.. you need to be able to hit a shot on a single flash. Then again, if the papers are like the ones in my area, they could care less if they are 3 stops underexposed with no flash.. ugh. Quality between the 2 papers here local is night and day, but that's another story.

JustinThyme · February 15, 2011

The two ISO and shutter settings depend mostly on the movement. I think you can pull off most BB with 1/640 but the occasional snap right at the time of some really fast movment will get you a tad bit of motion blur. 1/1000 will definitely rule out motion blur but how is your camera at ISO 6400? If its not all that great I would rather have a few blurred ones to cull out than a whole shoot thats really noisey.

dsloan · February 15, 2011

JustinThyme wrote: »

The two ISO and shutter settings depend mostly on the movement. I think you can pull off most BB with 1/640 but the occasional snap right at the time of some really fast movment will get you a tad bit of motion blur. 1/1000 will definitely rule out motion blur but how is your camera at ISO 6400? If its not all that great I would rather have a few blurred ones to cull out than a whole shoot thats really noisey.

As I found out this past weekend, my camera (Nikon D300s) is worthless at ISO 6400. It seems to do well enough even at 1/500th and ISO 3200. 1/640th leaves the photos a bit too dark in the setting where I'm shooting. I will post some tennis photos when I get back to my home computer.

patrnel · February 15, 2011

dsloan wrote: »

I made the mistake of using auto-ISO throughout the evening which gave me some over and some under exposed shots. I had to make significant adjustments in Lightroom on some of the shots. Next time I will keep it at ISO3200 and 1/640. I had a bit too much blur at 1/500. I wish I had a D3S so I could shoot ISO6400 and 1/1000th... but don't we all wish that? I know the D300S goes to 6400, but there is too much noise at that point.

This past Friday I photographed a tennis tournament for the school and got some good shots with my 70-200. I'll post a few here once I'm done. This weekend, I am covering women's tennis and basketball, and men's basketball. Possibly even a softball game! I can't get enough.

I have found with my D7000 that ISO3200 is about all that I need for shooting volleyball and basketball indoors. If it is a particularly poorly lit gym I might bump up but that is unusual. I did just get my 70-200 2.8. Have not even had a chance to shoot it yet. Got a great deal on Adorama but still pricey. Nice work!

Newbie sports shooter soliciting advice (swimming, basketball)

Comments