most common sports camera outfit?

anyone know what the most common camera outfit is for sports

photography? film or digital? i was thinking maybe a canon 10d w/ a

600mm lens? i have no idea, if anyone could enlighten me, i would

appreciate it.

 

thanks,

patrick

1D/D2H + 300/400 f2.8

 

I looked through a 10D and a 600 at a football game once and it was a bit much. You'd get waist-up in vertical of someone 3/4 of the way across the field. Then my friend decided to see what it would be like with a 1.4x slapped on it.

Football: Nikon F100, AF 300mm f2.8 lens, a monopod, and maybe a AF 24-85mm f2.8D~ Nikkor. And a Nikon speedlight.

 

 

 

 

Basketball: Nikon F100, AF 50mm lens, AF 85mm lens, and a speedlight.

Basketball; Nikon F; 85mm F1.4; 105mm F2.5; 50mm F1.4; H1 and H2 screens; 800 Fuji print film; Chuck Taylors; sometimes an F2 too.

Man, these Nikon guys sure are funny. How often do you see black lenses at an NFL/NBL/NBH/whatever game? How much black did you see at the Olympics?

 

Most sports shooters shoot with either the 1d or 1d2, with white glass (300/2.8is).

 

The 10d isn't going to help you all that much at a sports event. The AF is too sparse (7 points over the whole frame) and too slow. I know this because I've tried. The 1D's 45point AF is a complete killer. Fast and exact.

The most common outfit for sports photography? Probably comfortable pants (jeans, maybe), a cotton shirt, and a photographer's vest? Oh, wait, maybe I'm mis-reading the question...

I agree with Edward. I use 1V's and a 10D for motorsport, drifting and drag racing. The 10D sucks as it is way too slow and inaccurate. The 1V's kick ass, fast and exact. If the IDs uses the same logic as the 1V then it must be awsome. The lenses you need depend on the sport.

JJ

While Edward H and John Jovic posting above give you accurate and expensive advice they post no images here so we can learn from their obvious expertise. It really depends on which sports you are photographing as to what lense is the most appropriate at that time.

 

Contrary to what a lot of so called experts post on websites many working photographers are using 10Ds (and the new 20D) to capture good publishable sports pics, sure it is a little harder than using a machine gun like a ID or ID mk2 and requires good motor skills, plus plenty of practice.

 

The 600 you mentioned is a very difficult lens to control due to its large size and high magnification it would also cost around 20,000 New Zealand Dollars, I think this is around $12,000 US.

 

A versatile sports lens to start with would be a 70-200 2.8. Image stabilisation is not that important for most sports photography as the shutter speeds required to stop action are high.

 

The best thing to teach yourself is to anticipate how the action will unfold and try to get that iconic image in a single frame without relying on a high speed motor advance to give you chance choices.

 

Even a chimpanzee that was trained to use a ID MK2 or Nikon D2H on full auto and the highest frame rate and with a nice lens would get a few publishable pics, as long as his keeper kept 2 gig CF cards up for him

 

Oh yes Digital DSLR would be the camera and medium of choice.

As far as my own experience goes, the ?most common sports camera outfit? is a pretty elusive concept in practice, certainly amongst my most frequently-met colleagues?

 

We, as a collective group, cover the Days of Thunder stock car racing series based at Rockingham Motor Speedway near Corby in the UK and when it comes to camera gear, none of us use the same selection of equipment ? if anything, our choice of bodies and lenses is nothing if eclectic but it doesn?t stop us from all being published on a regular basis in the motorsport press, in raceday programmes, on promotional posters, driver hero cards and team merchandise.

 

Out of the half dozen or of us that form the core of the series? regular photographers, most are Canon shooters (myself included) but there are two who shoot Nikon. I can?t really say too much about what the Nikon guys use as I?m not familiar with their equipment per se, but I do know that one uses Nikon glass and the other uses Sigma glass. However, as for us Canon shooters, I can assure you that none of us have exactly the same selection of equipment? One of my close colleagues shoots with a 1D Mk2, a Sigma 12-24, Canon 24-70 L, Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS, Canon 300 2.8 L and both the Canon 1.4 and 2x converters. Another shoots with a 1D and D60 combo coupled with a Canon 17-40 f4 L, Canon 70-200 f4 L and Sigma 300 2.8.

 

I myself shoot currently with a 10D and BG-ED3 grip and prior to that, a D60. In terms of glass (all of it Canon), my two main lenses are a 100-400 L IS and a 20 USM prime, with the former being used for track action, while the latter for pit and paddock situations. These two lenses capture about 85% of the motorsports stuff that I do, with the remainder split between a 28-70 2.8 L and a 50 1.8 if the situation warrants it. For the main I shoot in daylight conditions, so the flexibility of the 100-400 L is perfect for my needs since I have everything I want in terms of focal lengths for track work in one handy package and the IS is just an added bonus.

 

Using a 10D or a D60 hasn?t stopped me from being published at all or getting a good array of shots ? it just requires a little bit more thought and a better sense of timing than when using a 1D or 1D Mk2, that?s all. For a previous poster to say that the 10D sucks for motorsport I think is a little bit uncalled for ? it may not be quite as capable as a 1-series body in terms of focusing and frame rate but with careful use it has certainly proved to be more than adequate, if a little challenging at times. Machine-gunning the frames to get the action is all very well and good, but there is far more skill and a certain amount of satisfaction involved in order to anticipate and then hit the peak of the action with just the single frame. Maybe it marks me as something of a Luddite, but hey?

 

But it just goes to show that three different photographers i.e. myself and two of my colleagues shooting at the same event have totally different equipment choices to achieve the same ends.

 

A lot of it is down to what you are comfortable with in terms of focal lengths (for glass) and what you are actually prepared to carry around with you all day, and while ultimate equipment capability does play a part in getting the shot, more important is an intimate knowledge of that equipment and a good in-depth feel for the sport itself and the venue at which you are shooting. The best outfit for sports in my view is the best flexibility for the least amount of weight as is possible ? hence my selection of the 100-400 zoom instead some of the larger, faster primes. Believe me, even with as little equipment I have in comparison to some of my colleagues, my back isn?t half killing me after a day down on the fenceline?

 

To see what can be done, please feel free to visit my portfolio here on photo.net or my own website at www.post14.f9.co.uk

What kind of sports? What kind of access do you have? A 600mm lens is very long for some sports. <p>

 

I've been working professional boxing for the last six weeks, culminating in a Strikeforce world championship kickboxing title last Friday. A number of other photographers also worked it. Of all of us with press passes, everyone was digital, four photographers (including me) used Canon (1D, 10D, 20D) and one used Nikon (not sure what model.) Pretty much everyone used 1 gig cards and shot in RAW. The lighting was very difficult (mix of incandescent and fluoro), so shooting in RAW was pretty much mandatory The photographers brought all sorts of lenses, but most of it was probably shot between 28mm and 85mm. I wish I had brought a wider lens for some atmosphere shots. <p>

 

<center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/brianschwartz/images/b15.jpg"><br><i>Brian Schwartz Demolishes Tom Bottone, Copyright 2004 Jeff Spirer</i></center>

These days of course digital is standard though if you have time for film I'd shoot some of that just for fun. All of the top end Nikon/Canon models are very good for sports and just about everything else journalistic. For those who have a hard time justifying and paying for one of these (includes me), the 10D/20D and even 300D as well as the D100 and probably D70 should do just fine. They have a few limitations in terms of buffer size and write speed but are not hobbled by AF, ISO range or any of the rest of the 'camera' parts.

 

For an outfit that will cover most sports events: 2 bodies the best you can afford, 4 cards 512mb or better, 300mm f/2.8 or f/4, 70-200 f/2.8, something in the 28-135 neighborhood and 19-35 zoom or 20mm prime. A good dedicated flash is a must. You don't absolutely need to buy Canon or Nikon brand lenses. Buy the very best glass you can afford but Tokina, Sigma and Tamron make very good lenses. Upgrade later, look at the used stuff. I would add a battery grip to at least one body and have a couple of extra batteries. Get a good camera bag that will help you carry all of this around. Good ones are not cheap. A monopod. Man, it's just endless. Well, this should keep you going through a years worth of sporting season. Do as much as you can, practice practice, keep notes and re-evaluate after a year. It is an evolutionary process. Oh, and find a chiropracter. Good Luck.

 

Rick H.

I shoot mainly soccer and rugby action. For me, the standard would be a 1D with my 400

f2.8 and my 70-200 f2.8. This is not to say that any other lens will not do, just that a lot

of my shoots are at night and the lighting demads f2.8 glass. I have used a 10D and even

a 300D on occasions as a second body and they deliver excellent results too. U just need

to preamp the action. The min the focus locks, i shoot it off and don't wait for it to track.

Anticipate is the word here.

Hi Patrick,

 

Like Jeff says, it really depends on what sports you are into, but a 600 on a 10d is way big

for most stuff. I use a 1D, not because I don't mave the motor skills to use a 20d but for

the 1.3 crop, build quality etc. Hopefully there is a surf pic below, sea spray plays havoc

with everything so I really appreciate the weather sealing on the 1 series cameras.

 

You can take very publishable pics with a P&S in some sports, and whilst an ape might

take one or two good pics with pro kit he wouldn't have been able to pay for it himself.

 

In general a lot of sports can be covered with a 300mm on full frame so save yourself a

bundle and get a 200 f2.8 for an effective 260mm and learn and go from there.

 

Take care, Scott.<div></div>

Sorry that should be effective 320mm on a 10d. DOH!

 

Take care, Scott.

If it's skiing, snowboarding or mtb, I'd say an EOS 1(V), 70-200 2.8L, 17-35mm 2.8L and a 50mm. Plus some pocketwizards and a strobe of some kind. It's more or less still film throughout but is slowly going digi.

 

 

 

 

Forums open - http://www.wheelsandwax.com/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl