As far as photography is concerned, table tennis is an extreme sport!

Hi there. I'm a newcomer to photo.net and also to the world of SLR

photography, having recently bought a Canon EOS 20D. One of the

reasons I've taken photography up is that I'm very keen on table

tennis, and I want to capture the spirit of the game through the

lens.

 

My first attempts haven't been very good. Using the EFS 17-85mm that

I bought with the camera, I was forced to use an ISO of 3200 and

things were very grainy and the action too blurred (particularly the

ball!)

 

So I bought a Sigma 30mm f1.4 as my first additional lens. My

thought was that by getting a wide angle I could get both players in

the shot to capture the action, while the f1.4 would give me the

necessray light / fast shutter speed. Also I could crop the shot to

get a close-up of the player at the far end of the table. But this

lens hasn't worked out well either, because for some reason the lens

is so soft on anything over 5 feet away that compared to my 17-85 it

looks out of focus (even at smaller apertures) and when I crop the

shot the face of the person on the other end of the table is too

blurred.

 

So my question is basically what would you recommend? Do I need a

longer lens? Is the Sigma lens faulty? I've tried sharpening the

images but it has't helped much. (By the way, the Sigma is great for

night-time street photography and general indoor work, it just

doesn't seem to be up to table tennis. I'm beginning to think that

as far as photography is concerned, table tennis is an extreme

sport!)

Your problem is this:

 

A lens at f/1.4 will have a very shallow depth of field. If you focus at 2m (approx 7

feet), your depth of field (i.e. what is in focus) is less than 1 foot. And things will get blurry

very quickly as you move behind or in front of these 2m. You 17-85 is something like f/

4.5 at 30mm which gives you 2.5 feet of depth of field. Thus why it appears to perform

better.

 

Your should probably try to use this to your advantage. Have one player in focus, the other

out of focus. To stop the ball you will need shutter speeds that will be impossible to get

with indoor lighting without a flashgun. Your best bet is to get an external flash (like a

430EX) and then set high-speed sync on the flash, use Manual mode, set aperture to f/8

or something like that, shutter speed to 1/500 and blast away.

 

If you want to see how little depth of field you have at apertures like f/1.4 or f/2 when

focusing 1 or 2 meters away, see this:

 

http://ca.geocities.com/lokejul/jlcalc.htm

I would agree that stopping a ping-pong ball in action would be hard indeed without good light. Incidentally, it is easy to estimte the kind of shutter speeds you would need to do so without flash. Just estimate the average velocity of the ball and do some calculations.

 

So flash is your other option. But without multiple wireless flashes etc you are looking at flat dark backgrounds and unnatural lighting. So, I would suggest that you work on using the narrow dof to your advantge and also on your timing - for example it should be easy to freeze the ball on the service toss etc.

 

-A

I agree that you need flash. And try rear curtain sync - should look great with a trail indication motion for the ball. But I guess that means you can only shoot during practice sessions and not in a real game.

 

Robert

Thanks very much for your answers, but unfortunately flash would not be permitted. I was wondering whether I would get better focus if I used a longer lens, so that the AF doesn't take into account the table in the way (i.e. more of a close-up style shot). Perhaps a 50mm or 85mm?

No they will not. Practice with your 30/1.4.

 

1.Try and focus on the head(s) of the player(s) instead of the shoulder or arm.

 

2. Try shooting while the ball is released from one hand and before it hits the bat for a serve.

 

It is challenging but is doable.

 

TT is a fun and fast sport that demands a lot of energy and concentration, yes.

Using high speed sync flash is NOT a good idea. The reach of the flash is sharply reduced, and you actually get less motion freezing than from using the flash in normal mode, because the flash essentially puts out almost constant light for the duration of travel of the shutter curtains. The range is effectively constant, because what you gain with faster aperture you lose because the gap between the shutter curtains narrows with faster shutter speeds, exposing the sensor to less light. It's really as if you had a weak floodlight:

 

http://eosdoc.com/manuals/?q=Flash+Curves

 

As others have pointed out, you are only going to get a very limited depth of field if you are forced to use wide apertures and no flash unless the ambient lighting is very good. That means you need to think in terms of photographing one player at a time, or possibly photographing the table from side on to get both players about the same distance from the lens (but any mption of the ball will be noticeable). IIRC a table tennis ball travels at up to 40-50mph in a smash shot, so 60ft/sec or more, or about 1 inch in 1/750th.

 

For shortest flash durations, allow the flash plenty of time to charge between shots and use an ISO/aperture combination that will have it firing at no more than 1/4 power which will give you an effective shutter speed of 1/2000th or better, with the advantage that you don't necessarily need to be shooting at f/1.4 to get there.

 

You may also find it handy to play with Julian Loke's Lens Calculator to see what depth of field you can expect at various apertures and focus distances:

 

http://ca.geocities.com/lokejul/jlcalc.htm

 

For photographing individual players, you might want to consider the 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8.

Move the game outside

"Thanks very much for your answers, but unfortunately flash would not be permitted. I was wondering whether I would get better focus if I used a longer lens, so that the AF doesn't take into account the table in the way (i.e. more of a close-up style shot). Perhaps a 50mm or 85mm?"

 

You can always select the AF point yourself. A longer lens will have less depth of field than a shorter at similar apertures.

"A longer lens will have less depth of field than a shorter at similar apertures"

 

That is essentially not true given the same field of view. The depth of field at the same aperture is very similar when the field of view is the same - although the subject distance will be very different of course.

I would try shooting at around 1/500 at F2.8 with a very fast film (1600asa). Use manual focus, pre-focus on a chosen spot using the net or table edges as a guide. When the ball reaches the spot you focussed-on (some anticipation needed!), shoot. Blurred shots at slower speeds might also be very effective but you will need a tripod so the blur is movement of the subject and not the camera.

A longer lens will not solve the problem. If you can go closer a shorter lens might be the answer but I don't think you can get anything faster than you Sigma.

 

I think you'll have to find your own style.

 

Basically you will have to deal with either out of focus areas or motion blur... You can trade some DOF against motion blur by using slower shutter speeds.

 

If you want to try the slower shutter speed way may I suggest to begin by using a monopod. A more radical and expansive option might be to sell the Canon and use a Minolta Dynax 5D or 7D with the Sigma lens. Or going back to film with a rangefinder camera, a wide-angle and a monopod...

 

If you choose to have only one player in focus You'll will have to choose which one. I don't trust AF a lot in such conditions.

 

In any case, I doubt that you will avoid motion blur on the ball, but IMO that's not a problem.

BTW, after a look at :

 

http://images.google.fr/images?hl=fr&q=table%20tennis&btnG=Recherche+Google&sa=N&tab=wi

 

I think its a New Frontier...