High School Night Football - DX/FX/Glass

MileHighAko

Looks like I'm going to get access to ONE of the two options for the next few months:

Option 1: 300mm f/2.8 on D7000
Option 2: 70-200mm f/2.8 on D4

(I wish I could mix it up and take the D4 with the 300, but life isn't fair)

I'm on the sideline for high school night football. Lighting is terrible. I shot last year with the D7000 70-200 combo and the results are acceptable, but obviously later in the game and later in the year things start to stink.

I'm leaning towards going with option 1 since I'm worried about not having enough reach in option 2.

Anyone experience or suggestions?

M38A1

So it boils down to reach or image quality?

I'd go with image quality and crop vs mediocre. I hear the D4 is tremendous in low light and a eleventy-billion frames/second. OK, ten should be good, but that ISO for me would rule in getting the quality shot and then having a crop component in my workflow instead of a noisy image that might not require crop.

Have you considered the D4/70-200 and the new 2xTC from Nikon? I've used it and the light you give up can be made up for on the D4 ISO capabilities putting the reach back in your pocket at 140-400 w/o sacrificing much to get there.

YMMV


.

perroneford

D4 every time. You'll have half the noise of the D7000. You'll just have to be patient and wait for things to get nearer to you. Heck, you could even get a 1.4x tele, and STILL be better off than if you'd shot the D7000.

Ferguson

I agree with Perrone. I shot soccer on a high school field a couple weeks ago and at F2.8 I ended up at and consistently above ISO 6400. YMMV, of course, and it was a semi-pro team playing there so they were a bit faster than high school players (i.e. you might get away with slower shutter), but you are going to be in very high ISO range. Also, if you aren't familiar with the equipment (and while I don't really advocate it as a shooting style) being about to shoot long sequences at 10fps will give you higher odds of getting a well timed shot.

The 70-200 is good for about a third of the field. Try some from behind the goal, and some maybe from 20 yards in front of the goal. A lot depends on how good the teams are (i.e. how much time they spend at which end). At 200mm shooting anything over about mid-field is pointless, especially at night (large noise "grain" on very small faces means bad). But a 70-200 is ideal for shots on goal, corner kick, etc.

If you asked about DAY soccer you might have gotten a different answer. 300mm on a crop body with high density sensor is a nice length. Hard to deal with no zoom - you really would need a second body with a 70-200 with you to be thorough. But personally I'd still go with the D4 for frame speed.

johng

I would say d7000, 300mm 2.8 and external flash. Heavily cropping at 6400 is going to ruin any benefit the d4 provides in IQ (although focus performance would be better). Using an external flash you completely throw out the need for high ISO.
Here are a couple photos from your typical dismally lit stadium:

Ferguson

johng wrote: »

I would say d7000, 300mm 2.8 and external flash. Heavily cropping at 6400 is going to ruin any benefit the d4 provides in IQ (although focus performance would be better). Using an external flash you completely throw out the need for high ISO.

Yes, but is flash an option. No where I shoot will permit flash.

And personally if flash is permitted I would still worry I would annoy the players. I know a lot of people do, I'm not trying to be the flash police.

But you need to check your venue.

johng

Ferguson wrote: »

Yes, but is flash an option. No where I shoot will permit flash.

And personally if flash is permitted I would still worry I would annoy the players. I know a lot of people do, I'm not trying to be the flash police.

But you need to check your venue.

The OP would have to find out if it's allowed. I have found it is often an urban legend that flash is not allowed for football - people assume it isn't but it really is.

As for annoying players - players I have spoken to say they don't even notice. Similar accounts from people that use flash for football. Again, I think it's a bit of a myth that it distracts because it seems like it would. In reality, that does not seem to be the case. I would also say, the flash needs to get off the camera - mine is mounted on my monopod. But you have to get it away from the camera to eliminate the worst red-eye you've ever seen

Ferguson

johng wrote: »

The OP would have to find out if it's allowed. I have found it is often an urban legend that flash is not allowed for football - people assume it isn't but it really is.

Absolutely. I shoot the Florida Miracle baseball, and FGCU sports (whose division has no football). Flash is banned at all of those, but other venues may be different. And some venues may give special permission, especially for remote flashes (not really applicable for football I think )

I could even see an argument that in football during vision-critical plays, the player is rarely looking toward the photographer (e.g. pass reception, kicking, throwing). Unlike, say, tennis or basketball, or even soccer if the photographer is beside the goal, which is a favorite spot.

perroneford

johng wrote: »

The OP would have to find out if it's allowed. I have found it is often an urban legend that flash is not allowed for football - people assume it isn't but it really is.

The Florida High School Activities Association (FHSAA) essentially bars flash photography in this state. Been there, done that. Even ran it up to the state office two years ago for softball and got quickly shut down. I don't know about other states, but for HS here, it's a no go. Don't even THINK about it at college or the NFL. You'll never get another credential.

johng

First, we're not talking college or pro. Unlike Florida, OHSAA (Ohio High School Athletic Agency) allows flash for football, basketball, wrestling and I believe it now allows it for volleyball. Not allowed for gymnastics. But, we're talking HS football. So, the OP needs to look into the governing body where he shoots to see if it's a possibility. In the end it doesn't matter that Florida bans it and Ohio allows it - all that matters is what Colorado does.