You are accessing this forum with [trillian] as part of the url. This may be happening automatically following a move to a new server, or it may be something you are doing as part of a phpbb3 upgrade. If this is not part of an upgrade then be patient and do not bookmark the link, the old links will be working again shortly. If this is part of an upgrade then make sure the owner finalises it in the control panel and selects to redirect to this version of the forum, then once again the link will return to being the old one within 48 hours or so. NEVER BOOKMARK OR PUBLISH THIS LINK IT WILL NOT ALWAYS WORK.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: sports photography
Not sure if this is the right place to post... please move it if it's wrong :D
I was taking photos of the rugby yesterday - in the pouring rain. My questions are twofold...
1. How do you keep your camera dry!!!?
2. What is the best lens for this type of photography? I've got a Nikon D100 and a couple of zoom lenses - one is a 28-100mm and the other a 70-300 but it's not the best quality one. I've also got a wide angled lens but can't remember the numbers.
I've also got a fuji finepix fd6500 which did ok but am disappointed with results if I don't take in RAW format, but unfortunately RAW format just doesn't move fast enough to keep up with the action. _________________ My Flickr Pics
As for the lens's Im not the one to ask,hill or creators would no the answer to that but to keep your cam dry all you need to do is to use a plastic bag and cut a whole for the lens to see.Try it in doors a few times till you get it right.
I know a few people who use plastic bags (I have used a well known supermarket brand) always have a couple in my bag - come in handy for kneeling on as well if the ground is damp. You have to disregard the funny looks.
But there is always this little number, which is also cheap
Lens - all depends how close to the action you want to get - the longer the better- but you will need tripod or monopod to help keep it still. Higher isos will help with shutter speeds.
Jonh will hopefully see this and expand a bit - as he is famous for his sports images. _________________ -----------------------------------------------------
Always in search of that magic moment
Last edited by hil26 on Fri May 30, 2008 10:23 am; edited 1 time in total
Just for the record, I am as ignorant as the day is long about lenses, if I ever get the money for some serious glass I'll be on here needing advice. _________________
I use cameramacs to keep my kit dry - http://www.cameramac.net Unfortunately they've had a lot of use this year - the weather's been so crap.. but they've performed flawlessly and have been worth every penny. They work very well and seem to have the best features when compared to the competition
Re lenses, I'm fortunate in that I rarely need to go longer than 200mm and my lenses of choice are a Tokina 12-24 f/4, Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 and a Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR, with the addition of a Nikon 1.4 Teleconvertor which will turn my 70-200 into roughly a 100-280 f/4. The 200 is fine for handholding so I don't use a monopod and I find the idea of using one far too restrictive.
For rugby I think you're right to have coverage up to at least 300mm but if your lens isn't that good then it may be time to start saving. If you want the shots, you have to have the glass - it's far more important than the camera behind it.
What you need to try and bear in mind is a lens with an internal focus motor (nikkor = AF-S, sigma = HSM, canon = USM) as screw-driven focus motors just don't cut it for sports photography
Sigma do a 120-300mm f/2.8 HSM but the rrp is £2200! They also do a 100-300 f/4 HSM which has an rrp of £1000 but obviously won't allow the same shutter speeds the f/2.8 will do when the light goes. The 120-300 could be turned into a real monster (168-420mm f/4) with a 1.4 teleconvertor on it too .
(Nikkor do a 200-400 f/4 AF-S which is also extremely nice, and so is the price tag - £3500 )
Tbh I think a 70-200 f/2.8 and a 1.4tc would be better than a 300mm f/4 - as it means you could still shoot up to 200mm at f/2.8 in poor light - the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is a lot cheaper than the nikkor one but is nowhere near as good - my wife uses the sigma one and it has a harder time of focusing in low light, plus i don't think it's as fast to focus irrespective of the weather. _________________ There is nothing in life that cannot be improved with either monkeys, pirates or ninjas NPU Member
So... I now WANT more kit :D David is gonna love me! Mind you, it does make birthday presents easy. Somehow I don't think he'll stretch to the thousands, (thinks to self - if I can turn it round to taking rugby pics he might!)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum