Fastest Shutter Speed for Boxing

Hi, all,

For the past year I have been attempting to learn the very difficult trade of

boxing photography. One thing that continually ruins my pictures the slow

shutter during my action shots. When I'm lucky enough to time a landing blow,

I end up with a blurred face.

I'm using a Canon 20D with the 24-70 F2.8 L-series lens. At ISO 1600, my

pictures are a bit grainy. At f-stop 2.8, the depth of field is so shallow

that unless the boxers are aligned on the plane of focus I lose focus on one

of them. So, I'm forced to choose a slightly smaller aperture (usually

3.5/4.0) and take the fastest shutter I can get for a good exposure (usually

1/250). But that's not good enough.

Could anyone offer some suggestions as to how I could get another stop? I'd

love to shoot at 1/500 but without losing my DOF or increasing grain, I'm in

trouble. I see most of the "professionals" using longer lenses (70-200 F2.8)

so I'm to believe that they are actually using SLOWER shutter speeds. But

they do have those nice full-frame cameras.

Any suggestions? Is there something about the full-frame cameras that are

improving their maximum shutter speed? Should I cheat and underexpose and

correct in post-processing?

Thanks!

Scott

This is dependent on the lighting pack in use. I've worked in the same hall with marginal shutter speeds with one lighting pack and at other times with speeds around 1/640 at f8. The latter happens when ESPN films, they pay for the extra lighting. I've had to use high ISO and Noise Ninja to get decent results when the lighting was low.

The pros aren't using full-frame cameras. I shoot boxing with a 1D Mk11, and everyone else shooting at the curtain also uses the 1D, except a few guys who shoot with Nikons. The 1D isn't a full-frame camera and neither are the Nikons, but that wouldn't impact your shutter speed anyway.

No kidding...I'd love to use a flash! Unfortunately, it is not permitted during action.

It seems that that I'm just out of luck. I hate the grain at ISO 1600 and hate the shutter speed at ISO 800 at f4.0. I guess I'm going to have to open up to F2.8 and just pray for better focus...

Scott

"I see most of the "professionals" using longer lenses (70-200 F2.8) so I'm to believe that

they are actually using SLOWER shutter speeds. But they do have those nice full-frame

cameras."

Why are they using slower SS's? They have the same aperture you do, and unless they're

on strobes, they are using the same light you are. FF sensors are not better at low light

than modern 1.3x sensors. Both are better than modern 1.6x sensors, though.

"Any suggestions? Is there something about the full-frame cameras that are improving

their maximum shutter speed?"

-As I said, no.

"Should I cheat and underexpose and correct in post-processing?"

-You could try it, but the images will get noisier. Still, see if you're happier with that

compromise that the one you are currently making. If it were me, I'd definitely shoot at f/

2.8 with the highest ss.

A few more thoughts: Focus manually, your subject won't be moving very fast or very far,

but willl be moving erradically (inconstant speed and direction). If you're addicted to AF,

this will be an issue at first, but you'll learn quicky if you commit to it. I know boxing is

routinely lit with arena strobes, which are expensive but modern shoe-mount strobes

triggered remotely are incredibly useful. (I've used them successfully for bull riding.)

Rings are usuallt lit directly frrom above and not entirely evenly. What this means is that

you can get and extra 1/3 or 1/2 stop if you're picky about where in the ring youre choose

to shoot. Also, since thr mats are usually light colored, they reflect light fairly well.

Shooting from above the action, rather than below can get you up to a stop more light.

You might wonder if if 1600 ISO film has better characteristics than 1600 ISO digital...

But full-frame sensors would have less dept-of-field while a point-and-shoot digital camera would have more dept-of-field...

Probably, the full frame digital shooters use ISO 1600 with fast shutter speed and have the shot raw post-processed in layers to take out the noise ?

Also, a wide angle lens would have more dept-of-field but that requires ring-side...

You are at the mercy of the lighting provided by the promoters and depending on the venue, I try to aim for 1/500 or 1/350 @ f2.8 with ISO 1600 or 3200.

Do not hesitate to use ISO 3200 as producing sharp images is why they hired you for.

At one avenue, the correct exposure was 1/90 @ ISO 3200 so, I deliberately set it to 1/180 with one stop underexposure. With 1/180, one can just freeze the facial expressions while the tips of the gloves are naturally blurred but if the image is taken at the peak of the action, one can get quite satisfactory images.

Yes, it is a catch 22 situation as depth of field is very limited @ f2.8, as opening up the aperture will result in slower shutter speed thus blurry amateur photos.

Whilst I can get faster shutter speed with prime lens, I prefer the 24-70 for tighter composition thus less cropping as it reduces your ability to print larger for clients thus affecting sales. Upsizing may be fine with lower ISO but when one uses ISO 1600/3200 & deliberately underexposing it for higher shutter speed, there is a limit to what noise reduction can do.

It can be very challenging as one has to encounter issues like slow shutter speed, limited depth of field for both fighters, potential AF issues with the fighters oily skin, timing, metering issues, strange coloured lightings, hot lights, odd placements of lights, uneven lighting such as brighter in the middle than the corners etc.

You can see some of my Thai boxing images at http://www.pbase.com/perthwa

Good luck.