Options

Some HS Baseball state finals

donekdonek Registered Users Posts: 655 Major grins
edited July 14, 2011 in Sports
The last day of state track I had to run over to a baseball game and get a few.

1.
DSC3569-L.jpg

2.
DSC3596-L.jpg

3.
DSC3663-L.jpg

4.
DSC3622-L.jpg

5. This was the first time these guys made it to state. They came in second.
DSC3705-L.jpg
Sean Martin
www.seanmartinphoto.com

__________________________________________________
it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.

aaaaa.... who am I kidding!

whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!

Comments

  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 9, 2011
    Nice! Great captures, exposure, composition, colors, sharpness, bokeh. Except 3, which does nothing for me because the main subject's face is turned away. I haven't shot any baseball players older than 12, but at the younger ages plays like these are extremely rare and hard to catch. Good work.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    donekdonek Registered Users Posts: 655 Major grins
    edited June 9, 2011
    3 was questionable. I had a lot of action at 2nd base and wanted some variety. There was an interesting play at home, but I chose that one instead. Thanks for the comments.
    Sean Martin
    www.seanmartinphoto.com

    __________________________________________________
    it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.

    aaaaa.... who am I kidding!

    whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!
  • Options
    attorneyjayattorneyjay Registered Users Posts: 78 Big grins
    edited June 10, 2011
    I agree about #3. I'd focus on the runner diving back. Sometimes can get him in mid-dive, nice facial expression. Also, shooting from the other side of the base (outfield side) increases chances for best facial expression as he ends dive back since runner usually turns his head away from the arriving pickoff throw.

    Some pics are crooked. This is a no-no. Otherwise, I echo other comments.

    Jay
  • Options
    donekdonek Registered Users Posts: 655 Major grins
    edited June 10, 2011
    attorneyjay wrote: »
    I agree about #3. I'd focus on the runner diving back. Sometimes can get him in mid-dive, nice facial expression. Also, shooting from the other side of the base (outfield side) increases chances for best facial expression as he ends dive back since runner usually turns his head away from the arriving pickoff throw.

    Some pics are crooked. This is a no-no. Otherwise, I echo other comments.

    Jay

    I was shooting the team in green, so my focus was on them. I was also limited in location to the press box provided.

    I'm not seeing what you mean on the crooked images. All the fence posts are vertical.
    Sean Martin
    www.seanmartinphoto.com

    __________________________________________________
    it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.

    aaaaa.... who am I kidding!

    whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!
  • Options
    attorneyjayattorneyjay Registered Users Posts: 78 Big grins
    edited June 10, 2011
    donek wrote: »
    I was shooting the team in green, so my focus was on them. I was also limited in location to the press box provided.

    I'm not seeing what you mean on the crooked images. All the fence posts are vertical.

    Hmmm, well, maybe my monitor is crooked then. rolleyes1.gif

    The field looks level in some pics but not others. headscratch.gif

    Jay
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 11, 2011
    The yellow fence guard shows the crookedness in 2 and 3, but who cares? It's not bad. The action is all that matters in these shots.

    MajorsCubs045-X2.jpg
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    donekdonek Registered Users Posts: 655 Major grins
    edited June 11, 2011
    I think you are a little to the left in that one Jack. Too bad you'd loose more of his head. The problem is a lot of these fences aren't on level ground so all you can do is check the posts and hope the person who put it up used a level.
    Sean Martin
    www.seanmartinphoto.com

    __________________________________________________
    it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.

    aaaaa.... who am I kidding!

    whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 11, 2011
    Yep, I was crooked too, had to make a quick pan. Too bad I didn't anticipate the jump, but I've gotten many compliments on this shot from parents and players. Nobody has mentioned the crookedness, that's my point.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited June 11, 2011
    Great shots. Suggestion: Photoshop a ball into #4 mwink.gif
  • Options
    boksterbokster Registered Users Posts: 13 Big grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    70-200mm F2.8
    Hi,

    I realize that shooting the infielders from the 1st or 3rd base side with a 70-200mm F2.8 isn't optimal (and forget about the outfielders). I have to crop off a lot to get a decent 5" X 7" picture. I am considering getting a 1.4x TC to get a tighter crop. I am wondering if this is enough. Any advice?

    Thanks.
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    bokster wrote: »
    Hi,

    I realize that shooting the infielders from the 1st or 3rd base side with a 70-200mm F2.8 isn't optimal (and forget about the outfielders). I have to crop off a lot to get a decent 5" X 7" picture. I am considering getting a 1.4x TC to get a tighter crop. I am wondering if this is enough. Any advice?

    Thanks.

    For little league, a 70-200 on a crop body is enough. For Juniors/Babe Ruth, high school and older, maybe not. The 1.4x TC is your cheapest option, I think you should try it. Otherwise you are looking at a longer slower zoom and shooting only in good light, or a long fast prime. Or if you are like Sean and have bags of money lying around, you get a 200-400 f/4. :smooch
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    donekdonek Registered Users Posts: 655 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    For little league, a 70-200 on a crop body is enough. For Juniors/Babe Ruth, high school and older, maybe not. The 1.4x TC is your cheapest option, I think you should try it. Otherwise you are looking at a longer slower zoom and shooting only in good light, or a long fast prime. Or if you are like Sean and have bags of money lying around, you get a 200-400 f/4. :smooch

    Luckily the money I make from photography all goes back into equipment. The 400 f2.8, 300 f2.8, are comparably priced. I do not own a 1.4TC, but many do and use them with great results. I do understand that the 1.4 and 1.7 are great, but you do loose a more quality with the 2.0.
    Sean Martin
    www.seanmartinphoto.com

    __________________________________________________
    it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.

    aaaaa.... who am I kidding!

    whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!
  • Options
    nipprdognipprdog Registered Users Posts: 660 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    For little league, a 70-200 on a crop body is enough. :smooch

    I respectfully disagree. The 70-200 is not even long enough for T-Ball.

    I shoot T-Ball with my 300 2.8. 9-10 year olds, the same.

    11-12 year olds, and older, with 1.4.
    Jim

    http://www.knippixels.com
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    nipprdog wrote: »
    I respectfully disagree. The 70-200 is not even long enough for T-Ball.

    4,658 keepers this season says it is.

    http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/FalmouthLittleLeague2011

    padres59-XL.jpg

    twins015-XL.jpg

    AAAAthletics47-XL.jpg

    If you can't shoot from inside the fence, then yeah, you'll need something longer.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    nipprdognipprdog Registered Users Posts: 660 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    If you can't shoot from inside the fence, then yeah, you'll need something longer.

    Psssst, I'm shooting inside the fence. mwink.gif
    Jim

    http://www.knippixels.com
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    nipprdog wrote: »
    Psssst, I'm shooting inside the fence. mwink.gif

    ok, how is a 70-200 not getting it done for you? Are you on full frame?

    70-200/2.8 and my 7D were plenty for me and 35 teams.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    Shooting outside the fence, a 70-200 on a 1.3x body is enough for the batter, pitcher, and close infielders, but for infielders on the other side of the infield it's not that great. I would love a 300mm, but I think I'd use the 70-200 more TBH.

    Jack, #1 is absolutely stellar BTW.
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited June 27, 2011
    ThatCanonGuy wrote: »
    Shooting outside the fence, a 70-200 on a 1.3x body is enough for the batter, pitcher, and close infielders, but for infielders on the other side of the infield it's not that great. I would love a 300mm, but I think I'd use the 70-200 more TBH.

    You could always rent a 300/2.8 for a spell. I did last year with my old 1DIIN, it was very fun. Kids thought it was a HDTV camera for the news.
    Jack, #1 is absolutely stellar BTW.

    Thanks!
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    boksterbokster Registered Users Posts: 13 Big grins
    edited July 13, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    4,658 keepers this season says it is.

    AAAAthletics47-XL.jpg

    If you can't shoot from inside the fence, then yeah, you'll need something longer.

    Jack, for this image, what were your settings? Where did you focus? Did you use AI SERVO and track the pitcher and follow through his pitch? I am having trouble getting sharper images. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks!
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited July 13, 2011
    Hi bokster, that was with my 7D, 70-200/2.8II, ISO 400, f/2.8, 1/3200, 200mm. Top AF point with expansion, on the face, Servo AF. Servo tracking speed on medium-slow. That is sort of a misleading name for that setting - it determines how quickly the camera will switch subjects if another object enters the frame in front of your intended subject. That setting probably had nothing to do with this shot anyway.

    Here's a somewhat bigger version:
    http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/FalmouthLittleLeague2011/AAA-Baseball/Athletics/i-XCKZQHW/0/X3/AAAAthletics47-X3.jpg
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    boksterbokster Registered Users Posts: 13 Big grins
    edited July 13, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Hi bokster, that was with my 7D, 70-200/2.8II, ISO 400, f/2.8, 1/3200, 200mm. Top AF point with expansion, on the face, Servo AF. Servo tracking speed on medium-slow. That is sort of a misleading name for that setting - it determines how quickly the camera will switch subjects if another object enters the frame in front of your intended subject. That setting probably had nothing to do with this shot anyway.

    Here's a somewhat bigger version:
    http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/FalmouthLittleLeague2011/AAA-Baseball/Athletics/i-XCKZQHW/0/X3/AAAAthletics47-X3.jpg

    Hello Jack:

    Thanks for the info. I am using the 30D so I don't have the top AF point with expansion and tracking speed options. 7D is a camera I have in mind for my next camera. :-)
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited July 13, 2011
    I used to have the 30D. With that camera your best bet is to use the center point in servo mode and aim for the chest or the waist. If the player doesn't have a logo or a line of contrast there, like a belt or a tucked-in shirt, you might be out of luck.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    boksterbokster Registered Users Posts: 13 Big grins
    edited July 14, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Hi bokster, that was with my 7D, 70-200/2.8II, ISO 400, f/2.8, 1/3200, 200mm. Top AF point with expansion, on the face, Servo AF. Servo tracking speed on medium-slow. That is sort of a misleading name for that setting - it determines how quickly the camera will switch subjects if another object enters the frame in front of your intended subject. That setting probably had nothing to do with this shot anyway.

    Here's a somewhat bigger version:
    http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/FalmouthLittleLeague2011/AAA-Baseball/Athletics/i-XCKZQHW/0/X3/AAAAthletics47-X3.jpg

    Jack,

    I am looking at your smugmug site and have a question here. Do you use the same settings when shooting the batters in the batter's box? What's your process?

    Thanks.
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited July 14, 2011
    bokster wrote: »
    Jack,

    I am looking at your smugmug site and have a question here. Do you use the same settings when shooting the batters in the batter's box?

    Yes. However in retrospect I think I should have left the tracking speed at the default medium, or even medium-fast. Medium-slow is good for soccer where kids are randomly entering the frame. Baseball doesn't usually have that.
    What's your process?

    I'm not writing that book here. Can you be more specific?
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • Options
    boksterbokster Registered Users Posts: 13 Big grins
    edited July 14, 2011
    jmphotocraft wrote: »

    I'm not writing that book here. Can you be more specific?

    Oh, just curious if you use AI Servo and track the batter from swing through to when they dash of out the batter's box.
  • Options
    jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited July 14, 2011
    bokster wrote: »
    Oh, just curious if you use AI Servo and track the batter from swing through to when they dash of out the batter's box.

    Yes I do.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Sign In or Register to comment.