indoor sports pictures without a flash

<p>I have a Nikon D200. ive been trying to get some good basketball pictures without a flash and am having a difficult time. I have a AF-S nikkor 18-200mm lens. there are plenty of other people with much larger lenses none of whom are using a flash.<br>

last year I took a bunch with my built in flash, Smode with my shutter set to 250 and didn't have a problem most of the time other than my inability to continuously fire because of the flash.<br>

for some reason evertything is coming out dark, even with flash. we are alomost halfway through our season and I am anxiousl to get photos of our girls first high school year...<br>

game tonight<br>

any suggestions?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Different light conditions, maybe?<br /> Different shooting distance?<br /> Different ISO setting?<br /> Different built-in flash settings?<br /> If you post a pic we could read your settings, or maybe you can write them all.</p>

<p>Hi Kim, welcome to photo.net. You have an older DSLR (the D200 was introduced back in 2005) and a slow lens. That combo is going to have a hard time doing indoor sports without a flash, as that is one of the most demanding type of photography in terms of equipment. The more recent DSLRs will give you much better high-ISO results.</p>

<p>Are you shooting from the stands or court side? If you can show us a couple of sample images that are typical for your basketball photography, it'll help us understand your needs.</p>

<p>I would look into getting a faster lens, such as the 35mm/f1.8 DX AF-S (not the new one for FX), 50mm/f1.8 AF-S or 85mm/f1.8 AF-S, depending on how far you are from the court. The first two lenses are around $200 to $220, so they are quite affordable.</p>

<p>Of course you can always upgrade your camera as well or get an external flash, if flash photography is permitted at those games. If getting more equipment is an option, please let us know what your budget is. Again, indoor sports photography is demanding. The pros use cameras and lenses that cost thousands of dollars for basketball, volleyball, gymnastics, etc.</p>

<p>rent a faster lens. the 18-200 is upwards of f/5.6 on the long end vs. you could rent a 200/2 or a 70-200/2.8<br>

But then again, you should try to figure out why the flash images are now coming out dark.</p>

<p>Kim,<br /> <br />The 18-200 lens, while fine for general purposes, is not the right tool for this job. The gym you are in has light levels that are far too low to use this lens. You need a lens with what's called a "large aperture" to allow more light to be gathered by the camera. More light (depending on how much) means you can have brighter images, with faster shutter speeds, while not having to use the flash.</p>

<p>What lens to use will depend on how close you are to the players and your budget. Can you upload example shots or give a good description of where you are able to stand during the games for these photos?</p>

<p>thanks for your responses. I know the best fix is to purchase a new lens, with a wider aperture setting. I was wondering if I was overlooking something obvious.<br>

I will try also to pump up my ISO setting as well, maybe it was lower than it had been.<br>

any other suggestions on lenses. I like the idea of the zoom since I am sometimes courtside, sometimes from the stands.<br>

I also just purchased some portrait lighting so im sure I will have many more questions as I start my learning. I'm planning on doing some portrait work.</p>

<p>A suggestion: see if you can locate a AF-S 35mm f1.8G DX Nikkor lens. You have a zoom that is good for out-door images...indoor basketball action is not going to be improved with that lens.</p>

<p>As noted above: you need to increase the ISO setting on your camera. [if the exposures are overly dark, it may be time to seek out a new camera body. The D200 is getting on in age, and it won't work forever.]</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Since the OP states that the built-in flash worked previously, there is perhaps some other issue (possibly related to his settings). While his setup is not ideal, it should not produce dark images, especially since it worked previously.</p>

<p>With the right settings, your camera can do the job. Without knowing your exact settings, it is difficult to assist you, but chances are your ISO is not high enough. AUTO ISO may work for you. What kind of flash are you using? What are the settings from your 'dark' picture and how are they different from your good ones? If you take a 'dark' shot with the external flash, and then take the identical shot with the built-in flash, are the exposures different?</p>

<p> [[i like the idea of the zoom since I am sometimes courtside, sometimes from the stands]]</p>

<p>Indeed, zooms are flexible for these situations, but at large apertures, very expensive and can be quite large and heavy. The least expensive route is to put your own body as close to the action as possible and find a single focal length lens that best meets your needs. The goal is to not get every shot, but to setup the situation to give yourself an advantage at getting particular shots. So, if you want to get at-the-basket shots, that means leaving the stands and getting closer.</p>

<p>Using your existing lens I would raise the ISO to the maximum value. Try getting closer so you don't have to zoom as much and see how the results change. Based on that, you can start to zero in on what equipment you may need to get the results you're looking for.</p>

<p>[[since the OP states that the built-in flash worked previously, there is perhaps some other issue (possibly related to his settings). While his setup is not ideal, it should not produce dark images, especially since it worked previously.]]</p>

<p>The OP also indicated that this is the first year of high school which could mean venue changes, lighting changes, changes in distance to the players, etc. There are a ton of factors at play here (no pun intended). Examples of good and bad images would go a long way towards providing more specific help. </p>

<p>Hi and welcome, Kim.<br />

<br />

If you're sometimes court side, that's good news: short(ish) wide aperture lenses are much cheaper than longer ones. Something like an 85mm f/1.8 is relatively inexpensive, and will both help you freezing action and be a good way of isolating the background in your portrait work. (The newer AF-S version is better at this, but costs more, by the way). Even cheaper, a 50mm or 35mm f/1.8 lens will do the same, but you'll have to be even closer to your subject. In fact, even your existing zoom will let in more light at its wide end - as Rob suggests, getting close is the budget solution to not having light. If you're allowed to use it, getting close also gives your on-camera flash a better chance of working. The only zoom that lets in this much light is the Sigma 18-35mm, which is probably too wide-angle for your needs.<br />

<br />

Even very expensive zooms, such as a 70-200 f/2.8, let in less than half as much light as one of these f/1.8 lenses will - although they would also let in four times more light than your 18-200, at the long end of the zoom. This is why people can get away with shooting in those conditions with bigger lenses, and it's also why they cost more. The advantage, obviously, is <br />

<br />

If the image is looking dark and exposures were previously correct, it does sound as though something has changed in your settings - perhaps auto-ISO has been set differently? Although as Rob says, it may just be that it's winter (assuming you're in the northern hemisphere) and there's less light. However, even fixing this is likely to give you a noisy image (increasing ISO increases the noise, or grain, of the shot) in dim lighting conditions.<br />

<br />

If you can solve the exposure problem by increasing ISO, the cheap solution for low light is to take images with a longer shutter speed. This is obviously going to be limiting, in that you can't just snap away and hope for a blur-free image, but you might get away with some carefully-planned shots - for example, panning with the subject and catching them at the top of a leap. You might find a monopod to be a cheap option that would help your ability to hold the camera steady for these shots, if you're allowed to use one by the venue, but resting your hand on a solid surface can help.<br />

<br />

This forum's participants wouldn't normally respond to a request for advice by saying "buy something expensive", but unfortunately you're trying to do one of the things for which expensive equipment really does help, at least for flexibility. But, fear not, there's always the "take lots of shots" solution - the more you take, the greater the chance that something will be a keeper. Good luck!</p>

<p>I use a D200 to shoot figure skating, which is fast sports action under low light, so you should be able to shoot basketball with it with no problem. But you do need either a faster lens, external flash or both.<br /><br />Most schools don't want you to shoot flash, so you need at least a 2.8 lens and ISO at 1600. You've never going to get 1/500 or 1/1000 in a high school gym. But there points in basketball where you don't need a high shutter speed. A player getting ready to make a free-throw, for example, often stops for a second or so to take careful aim just as he's about to throw. Or in dunking the ball, there's a "peak of action" when the player jumps up and hits the highest point of his jump but hasn't started to come down again. it's a mtter of timing.<br /><br /> If you can shoot flash, you want the biggest external flash you can get. An SB-800/900 would be ideal. You still need fast lens since a 5.6 lens is going to have trouble autofocusing under low light, but you might be able to shoot at 5.6. You can also try manual focus.<br /><br />In high school and college, I regularly shot basketball for the local paper. I was using a Mamiya TLR with an 80mm lens (equivalent to 50mm on a full frame 35mm camera) and a Honeywell Strobonar flash with 400-speed Tri-X. I shot from courtside, prefocusing on the basket and waiting for the action to come to the basket. I could shoot at probably f/8 or f/11, so I had enough depth of field to cover things even if the action was a couple of feet either side of the basket. Backgrounds were inky black, but images were generally tack sharp. You do do the same with a D200 provided that you can be courtside.</p>

<p>You can use an i-Phone to shoot high school basketball if you want, as long as you are not demanding on results. It all depends on the quality your desire.</p>

<p>I think I shot my son's first season of bball with a D200 (and D2Hs) and managed to get some keepers. Have been shooting sports off an on for decades, almost always without a flash. Been trying to get the best HS bball shots that I can for 5 years now (my son only has 10 more games, darn)</p>

<p>1. You will need one of the f/1.8 lenses as others have mentioned. The newer G lenses are better and worth a few more $'s (to me), but the 50/1.8D is inexpensive and will work with your D200. Move to and shoot from the baseline, there won't be enough light to shoot from the stands with a long lens. Even though I have a 2.8 zoom, they are not fast enough in about half of the gyms I shoot in.</p>

<p>2. Don't underexpose if at all possible. The results may look ok on the camera, but not so good back on the PC.</p>

<p>2. Try doing manual white balance with the camera, or shoot raw files. Good white balance helps a lot, especially with the older cameras.</p>

<p>3. Or better, shoot raw files and use DXO software to help get all possible quality out of the camera. Shoot a picture of a white sheet of paper to determine white balance later with software and raw files.</p>

<p>4. Shoot the away games. Some gyms have much more/better quality light, this will help a lot.</p>

<p>5. Make sure your camera AF is set up optimally. Lots of internet threads on this so I won't repeat.</p>

<p>6. If you child will be playing for a number of years and you enjoy shooting the games, make a long range plan for equipment upgrades. The most expensive thing is to do unplanned partial upgrades that don't get the big improvement, then feel the need to do another upgrade later. Lenses are a better "investment" than cameras, but the ability to shoot in the dark has not changed all that much since the D3 came out in late 2007. $'s needed to shoot in low light have gone down a lot, though. A refirb D600 sells for a lot less than what the D200 did new and would result in a huge improvement in low light image quality capability. I was not so lucky from a $ standpoint, the ability to shoot in the gyms got better each year, it seemed, so I upgraded several times ($$$$$).</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you attend the games occasionally (say once/month)...it might be more efficient just to rent D7100 + 70-200II/2.8 zoom....till you can get something better. This way you'll have good ISO's and the reach (considering the 1.5 factor) of 105-300.</p>

<p>Les</p>

Since it hasn't been pointed out yet: your camera can also operate the old

screw-drive f/2.8 Nikkor zooms, like the 80-200/2.8. Those gather just as

much light and are considerably cheaper used than a new 70-200/2.8.

<p>The little pop up flash on your camera doesn't have enough power to go very far. I would suggest the following:</p>

<p>1. Buy a used Nikon D7000, shoot it at ISO 2000<br>

2. Buy a used Sigma/Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lens, shoot at ISO 1000<br>

3. Buy a used Nikon SB-800 or SB-900 flash. These have a lot more power.</p>

<p>Above suggestions are from most expensive to least.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>If you look for a good used Tokina 80-200MM F2.8 lens I think you would have a good combo to do what your trying to do. With the ISO set at 400-800 and the lens at F2.8 It should rock.</p>

<p>Have read a lot of threads similar to this along with this one. Been shooting HS BBall for 5 or 6 years now, shot college BBall back in the day, including the ACC torunament. </p>

<p>The light in many/most of the High School gyms I shoot in often is not enough to get great results with a DX camera and a 2.8 zoom, at least at schools around here. Just checked my last game shots, 1/500 at f/2.5 at ISO 5000 was the norm, with an appropriate or slightly to the left histogram. My three FX DSLRs all calculate about this exposure at the home gym, which is about the worst I shoot in.</p>

<p>To be sure, college and pro gyms with broadcast quality lighting have much more light. Most HS gyms I visit have about another stop or more of light vs. the home gym, which would get the ISO down to 2500 with the same shutter speed and aperture above, and would be within reach of a good DX DSLR. I probably would experiment with 1/250-320 to get a little lower ISO depending on the camera. Still, VERY marginal for trying to use a 2.8 zoom which does not actually transmit a full 2.8 worth of light, typically.</p>

<p>I shot a season with a D90 and 50/1.8AFD, worked hard to find the best combo of ISO, f-stop, and shutter speed. I got OK results with the 50mm, but never had enough light to make good use of my 80-200/2.8 on the D90. Results from a D700 I used the next season had a good bit less noise, but the 2.8 zoom still did not work well with it in the home gym.</p>

<p>So, BBall shooters, check to be sure that the home gym has enough good quality light before investing in a 2.8 zoom. A 50 or 85 f/1.8 prime lens is usually less expensive while providing about another stop of light when needed. Night outdoor sports venues often have even worse lighting.</p>

<p>Time to go to tonight's game!</p>