Options
Need some advice...
Hi all,
Being a beginner with my d40 (5.6 75-300 lens) I am looking for settings for my first game under the lights with my daughters softball team. Season starts this friday night with a game at dusk and then a pure game under the lights. Been messing around with the manual setting, and although I think I got the sunlight thing down, (included below) am clueless about the setting for 9-10pm under the lights at the diamond.
Any help would be appreciated...
Thanks
Herb
Being a beginner with my d40 (5.6 75-300 lens) I am looking for settings for my first game under the lights with my daughters softball team. Season starts this friday night with a game at dusk and then a pure game under the lights. Been messing around with the manual setting, and although I think I got the sunlight thing down, (included below) am clueless about the setting for 9-10pm under the lights at the diamond.
Any help would be appreciated...
Thanks
Herb
0
Comments
David
www.davidcolephotography.com
I don't want to be the bearer of bad news but, without a minimum of a 2.8 lens you will have a hard time getting any action photos. You just won't have enough light to get the shutter speeds or enough ISO you need to stop action. Note I said action. If you want to get shots during the game concentrate on getting portrait type shots, ready position in the field, on deck batter, baserunners, etc. Look for unique lighting situations you can frame players with, this is a good time to think outside the box.
I shoot manual at night, the easiest way to get settings is to meter your hand. Check your histogram and heres the important part...make sure you OVEREXPOSE slightly. If you underexpose and try and correct in PP the noise will become very apparent. Take a few test shots and keep checking your histogram and make any adjustments as necessary.
Good luck with the games and let us know how it works for you.
Canon Gear
You're going to be shooting at high ISO (1600 or 3200). The key to getting usable shots at those ISOs is to have a properly exposed image in-camera. That means FACES ARE PROPERLY EXPOSED. That could be a 2/3 - 1 stop exposure difference depending on whether you have a helmet or not. Not only that, but chances are the lighting is NOT going to be uniform. So, you need to do a couple things BEFORE or during the game:
1. Figure out from a standard exposure, how much you ned to change depending on field position - e.g. how much do you need to bump things up if shooting at 2nd base vs 3rd or 1st or home plate vs. pitcher vs. outfield. Those places are likely to have a different light levels. I would suggest you find the positions that have the brightest light levels and see if you'll be able to capture any action - chances are pretty slim. I think 1/125 at f5.6 is a best case scenario - which isn't fast enough for most action.
2. Figure out how you need to adjust exposure when your team is batting and they have a helmet on.
Given those two pieces of data you plan your shoot. But I agree with Dan in that you should look for portrait type shots - and get the best shot you can of static subjects in the best light. You don't have the right equipment for motion shots. You can take them but you're going to have a very low keeper rate. But if you expose properly you might get some decent keepers of non-action.
Hope for bright lights and use a good noise reduction program.
Kent
"Not everybody trusts paintings, but people believe photographs."- Ansel Adams
Web site
Thanks for all the input! Lets see if I can retain any of this,(be patient with me please).
Decrease my shutter speed and go to a higher ISO (1600-3200), this will sacrafice "freezing" the action.
Go to the lowest appature to get as much light as possible in.
Try to get more "portrait" shots so as not to get more noisy pics.
Try not to shoot long range shots to keep to allow reasonable cropping...
I don't get the "2/3 - 1 stop exposure" thing. Is that the + / - setting in the menu?
Sorry to sound like a complete dweeb, but anything new takes time.
Again, thanks for all the input. You all are being very patient with me
Herb
I quick reading of light:
Put the camera in P mode. Pan all the areas of the field from your position. You will notice shutter speed goes up and down in certain parts of the field. The highest shutter speed area is the best lit for your location. Then go to S mode and set the shutter speed to 100-160. Take test shots so you will be ready for an action shot. It really helps if you have software that can bring out detail in dark areas.
Still, your take home shots are going to be few. Take a whole bunch and maybe some will look good.
I respectfully disagree with this advice, assuming I am interpreting it correctly. I can almost guarantee that in the night situation you describe, you will need your widest aperture possible, no matter what lens you are using. In sports, you will be trying to maximize shutter speed, so you should shoot in aperture priority, wide open, and let the light meter tell you the fastest shutter speed you can get with a proper exposure. Or take meter readings at your widest aperture, then shoot in manual. It is possible that using the method described in the previous post, you could end up with severely underexposed images.
I do agree with the last sentence, take a lot of pictures and you should get some keepers.
good luck
shutter priority is the one mode to stay away from. At high iso it's essential you get exposure correct. if you lock in shutter speed at 160 and iso at 1600 it's possible for a given shot the aperture necessary for proper exposure is 2.8. If you're zoomed out you'll get a shot that's 2 stops underexposed and at iso 1600 that equates to useless.
Aperture priority or manual are the way to go.
A mode is useless in regards to shooting in low light. If you are in S mode and set it at 100-160 in bad light, aperture is going to be wide open regardless. The only time it will get in trouble is if you are in M mode or A and don't have it set properly for night shots. In P and S mode, it will be in the proper setting because it is being forced to because it has to compensate for the higher shutterspeed if set S mode or it will adjust according to the conditions in P mode.
If you want action, you have to set shutter speed. If you let the camera decide, you could miss the action and get a blur. If you have decent post processing software, you can bring out an underexposed shot. We are not talking SI quality here. You will get terrible pictures for sure. That's why it's important to know the best spots on the field.
My advice is on getting action on bad conditions. You are going to have terrible pictures by the way I ascribe, but you are going to get some decent action shots if you know the best lighted areas on the field. I have tried all kinds of techniques, and this is the best one in regards to getting action with a slow lens. It depends on what you want. You can get portrait and candid shots between the action your way, but you can't get good action as the shutterspeed goes up and down. For night games I go between A,M,P and S, depending on what I want. They all need to be employed for different shots.
This is a shot set on S at 1/125 s. It's not great by any standard, but it's action.
Here's one I went out of S mode just flipped it to P mode and it selected 1/80 s. The exposure is better and it's cleaner, but it's also not an action shot either. In both cases, the aperture was at the widest as the camera automatically selected it.
Sorry but that's just plane wrong. If you lock in a shutter speed - as I said before - and you hit max aperture, proper exposure could demand a lower aperture and you end up with poorly exposed shots.
While the first shot shows action - it isn't of high enough quality IMO to keep. You're not framed tight enough and poorly exposed so the noise destroyed too much image detail.
When exposed properly and framed tight enough you get very usable shots. Please judge for yourselves which approach worked better:
Again, please judge for yourselves whether the photos from shutter priority produced better results than these. To the OP - try both if you like and prove it to yourself.
I still disagree. Aperture and ISO will max out before shutter speed. If you lock shutter speed in shutter priority, there is nothing left for the camera to adjust in the worst lighting conditions. Shutter speed is of utmost importance in sports, but if you're at 1600 ISO (on most cameras) and f2.8, shutter speed is the only thing left to work with. If shooting in apeture priority is not giving you a minimum shutter speed you need, you can go to manual, intentionally underexposing with a faster shutter speed, hoping to bring up the exposure later in post. I did this quite a bit shooting poorly lit ice hockey.
But hey, to each his own. If shutter priority works for you, then go for it.
If i set my lens, 18-200mm VR to widest aperture, my shutterspeed is anywhere from 20-60 at 3.5 to 5.6 which is my range depending of focus. If I put my camera in S mode, my aperture is going to be 3.5 - 5.6 regardless. I wish I had a 2.8 or better, but I don't. The OP does not either. With a slow lens, you get crap in low light, but if it's all you have, you make do. My aperture does not stay steady regardless if I set it in A or M mode because it changes zooming in and out, just like the lens OP has. At 18mm my aperture is 3.5. At 70mm, my aperture goes to around 5.0. Since my aperature always goes to it's widest opening in low light, the only thing I have control over is shutterspeed if I want decent pics. Everyone of them is underexposed, and maybe a couple will be good.
The football pictures are much better than mine. I didn't uphold my pics as a gold standard of night photography either. I cannot get shots like that unless I flash and that is not allowed in SB. I have to make do with what I got. I shoot sports for the local paper and I get my usable pictures by doing as you describe. However, I cannot get any decent action shot because the shutterspeed is too low. Unless I get a pan shot of someone running to first base, it's not usble as an action shot. I get my usable pictures, then I try to get action shots. I really would like to get better shots. However, the highest shutterspeed I get when I am in A mode and have it set to wide open is 20-60 at 1600 ISO. If I set shutter speed to 120-160, I MIGHT get something although it takes some postwork. I hope to get a sports lens for football this coming fall so I can take great pictures like yours.
My advice is based on a slow lens like the OP has, not a fast lens like a 2.8 you and slapshot have or are basing your advice on. I agree with all of your points if he or myself had one.
The advice is the same regardless of lens. underexposed shots at high ISO just aren't usable. It's also why some of us are suggesting the OP concentrate on non action shots - it's better to have non-action shots that are at least usable than 200 attempted action shots that aren't.
Yes, we all have to deal with the equipment we have - but the best approach is to work within the limitations. Your shot selections in sports are in many instances determined by your gear. When shooting HS basketball, for instance - I usually use an 85mm 1.8. You can't shoot the length of the court with that lens. I could waste my time and shutter trying to do that and maybe 1 out of 200 shots would be usable. Or I can take the shots that are within range. Same here. 5.6 isn't good enough to shoot action at night. My advice to the OP is to accept that and get the shots still available. As with anything else you get good shots because you look for them not because you react to them. So if the OP concentrates on finding the good non-action shots they can really have some success. But if they try to take action shots that won't really work well because of light levels they may miss a lot of opportunities for shots they COULD get.
But you are correct - in the long run, if you want to shoot night time, you're going to need ISO 3200 and 2.8 (which all my shots above were done at I believe). There's no getting away from that. Both 3200 and 2.8 are going to be necessary if you don't or cant use flash.
johng is 100% correct, it doesn't matter if you have a fast lens or a slow lens. The proper way to expose doesn't change. The first thing you have to learn when shooting high ISO's is DO NOT UNDEREXPOSE!!!!! Which means if all you can get for a shutter speed is 1/20s or 1/60s then that is what you will get, you can't change your shutter speed to something faster and hope to fix it in PP.
By underexposing and then trying to fix in PP you loose detail in the shadow areas and increase the amount of noise visible. That is what happened in the shots you posted.
Which is why it was suggested in the first page to concentrate on the shots that the camera is capable of getting, non-action portrait type shots. Don't fall into the trap of "I'll fix it in PP", it is even more important to get everything right straight out of the camera when shooting high ISO.
Canon Gear
Ok, I never said you would get great shots. My advice is on getting SOME action shots with a slow lens. Your advice will NEVER get action because the shutterspeed is too slow with a slow lens. If you are trying to get SI quality shots, you are not going to get it with my suggestions. I never said don't use your suggestions as you have to get properly exposed shots for the moments between action.
We are saying the same thing. However, how hard is it to flip from A mode to S mode when action is taking place? For me it's turn of the dial. It's not hard at all. When you are in A mode and action is taking place, you get crap but it's properly exposed. At least if you are in S mode, you might have something. I am giving options. That's all. Sports is about action and it can be captured with a slow lens. The keeper rate is very low and that's why I suggested finding the best lit places on the field and getting moment shots so YOU WILL HAVE USABLE SHOTS to fall back on.
Usability is in the eye of the beholder. Moms like the portait shots and the moment shots, dad's like seeing the play at second or slide into home. They don't see the grain or the underexposed pic, they see their kid making a play.
Forgive me for trying to give the OP some options. I NEVER claimed it was the proper way to expose. IT's the ONLY way to get action shots. For hypercritical eyes like ours, it's is bad advice. For parents who want to see action shots, they don't care because their P a S cameras can't even come close to a bad exposed action shot. My advice is get the proper shots and then try for action.
You can get a ton of good shots at the game of non-action events to fall back on. However, when a parent sees their daughter sliding into home and they see the dirt and chalk flying up, that's the one they remember and show off to friends. They DON'T care if doesn't make the cover SI because it breaks the rules of exposure. You CANNOT get that shot with a slow lens in A mode because the shutterspeed is too slow.
I was covering one game and I got a picture of a girl hitting a homerun. The bat and ball coming off the bat are a little blurry, but the batter is sharp. The grain is bad but I got a picture of the homerun swing. Nobody else did because they were too busy following the "rules" of proper exposure or were not even trying because the rules say you can't get an action shot in low light with a slow lens. I sent it to to the paper. I sent in other pics that were properly exposed so layout would have a choice. They went with the HR shot and I got paid for it. What do I know.
The potential problem here is right at the end - you are charging money for a very inferior product. That's great now - but when someone who has the right equipment and technique comes along your business dries up. You can't go back and re-make first impressions. It's your choice to charge money for such a product, but in the long run this will hurt your business. It's why I would advise against a similar approach to anyone charging money. If you're giving away pics that's different - although I don't advise that either if you ever plan on charging. Again, you've made your choice and I respect that but I consider it a poor route to go down and would advise others not to follow. You want quality right from the start in any business.
I should have been more specific on my suggestion to go with manual and bring up exposure in post processing in order to use a faster shutter speed. From my experience, you can only underexpose 1/3 of a stop, maybe 2/3 and still have some ability to brighten the image and possibly recover shadow detail, again all depending on conditions. If you are down to 1/60 then it does not make sense to do this at all. The times I would do this would be if in aperture priority I got 1/200, maybe I would go to manual and set shutter at 1/250. That might make a difference in capturing the action. And then only in a setting with consistent lighting. If you are as low as 1/60, then there is no point in trying to get an extra 1/3 in shutter speed.
On another point, using a lens with aperture that changes with the focal length, it is even more important not to use shutter priority. You would need to manually change shutter speed every time you zoom in or out. Aperture priority is really the way to go.
Let me know what y'all think
Herb
Again thanks for all the input
(and be nice to each other!)
Herb
First shot is a nice capture but about a stop underexposed. If you can fix it in PP you'll have a keeper.
Last one is nice too, but closer to 2 stops underexposed - not sure you can correct this one enough to save it.
I like #2 (and think you probably can brighten it in PP). I like #3, but unfortuanately someone's head is in the way, otherwise it could have been cropped to the collision at home plate for a nice shot.
By the way, did you end up shooting in A, S, or Manual? What settings?