Thinking of buying dig. rebel xt for one reason only - help

[matt_b6]

First let me say thanks for reading my post. Second, I want to buy a

good camera and am thinking of a EOS-350D (Digital Rebel XT)I have

owned kodak product for the last 5 years. I've come to one

conclusion. They suck. so, that said I want to buy a new camera for

one reason only - to take pictures of my dog playing flyball (a dog

sport) it's usually done in dimly lit arenas or buildings, flash is

not permitted and the dogs move at approx 20 mph I need to freeze

frame the dogs, while getting a decent exposure. My sister just

bought a 20d and she loves it, but won't loan it to me to see if it

will do what i want (i can understand - the price) ultimatly I want

to get pictures like the cover photos at flyball.org ie: caputure the

heat of the moment & emotion but i'm told these are meticulously set

up shots with extra permanent lighting. my 5mp kodak set at f2.8

1/350 iso400 (max of the camera) is badly underexposed and way to

grainy. I'm thinking that it's noise from the low light level. is

there any combination of lenses and camera that will work good for a

photo newbie like me? I'm leaning towards the f1.8 50mm lens with the

dig. reb. xt. but, i don't want to buy a camera that won't work. I've

tried to photoshop the kodak stuff but it's way too dark. thanks, any

help would be appreciated.

[mvgals]

You'll want to get a lens which is fast, and can focus fast.. The f1.8 really isn't that good for focusing speed (which if I'm understanding your situation correctly you'll need..)

 

The 50mm f1.4 may be a better choice.

-mark

[mvgals]

btw - if you want to save, grab a camera such as the new sony dsc-h2 instead.. It has a high iso (up to 1000 and supposedly fairly clear), and image stabalization - all for $400.

-mark

[marknagel]

Depending on the reach you need, a Canon 50/1.4 or for more reach Canon 85/1.8. Both great lenes, sharp, fast and either around $300-$325 at B&H. Set the XT to ISO 400 to 800 and you should be fine.

 

M

[stephen hazelton]

Matt, it seems to me that first you need to figure out what shutter speeds and apertures WILL work- evidently what you're doing now isn't up to snuff, but it won't help if you don't know how much to change. You for sure don't want to pay $1000 and STILL not have enough speed.

 

I don't know about your compositions, but it seems to me that the kind of shot you're talking about would tend to be wide-angles up close. If you're shooting from a ways away- maybe 50 feet- the 50mm might work fine. And if you're too far away (like sitting in the stands at a football field) you'll want something a lot longer.

 

You say your sister won't loan you the camera- can you get her to go by the place and try some shots? Or borrow a film camera and experiment with aperture, speeds, etc? Got any good friends that have good cameras or good light meters?

[mark u]

In planning your kit, it helps to look at the flyball regulations that specify the ring layout and the size of the jumps, because these factors will determine where you are able to crouch to capture your pictures, and hence the sort of focal length that is necessary:

 

http://www.flyball.org/rules/rulebook.pdf

 

You may be able to get away with a 50mm, but I'd think of adding an 85 or 100mm for a little more reach if you are going to try shooting up/down the lanes. Lenses will need to be f/2 or faster, but supposedly rapid focussing lenses may not be of great benefit in the low light, where the camera will be slow to focus. Instead, pre-focus on a jump, the start/finish line, the ball release box - and practice timing your shots to get the dog a) well framed and b) with its head at the sharpest focus point - this requires pressing the shutter slightly ahead of the action. If you get a ring USM lens like the 85mm f/1.8 you can try using AI Servo focus mode to follow the action, but don't be surprised if it proves difficult. You'd need to keep the centre focus point on the dog for a good half second at half press (hoping for good contrast against the background) before shooting in small bursts - the first image may not be quite as sharp as the second and later ones - although if the dog starts getting close, the ability to track focus drops away completely, even in good daylight.

 

You're right that lighting can be atrocious - often worse than a dimly lit high school gym - so you are going to need a fast lens or two and 1600 ISO (Don't use the XT's Sport mode which tops out at 400 ISO) to get action freezing shutter speeds (a minimum of 1/320th, preferably (a lot) higher) unless you get to photograph the finals at Cruft's under TV lighting (so digicams are out of the running - none currently offer the combination you'll need). You may suffer from several lighting problems that only become apparent when you take some pictures. Firstly, white balance can be all over the place - you should set a custom white balance to cope as best you can. Secondly, mains frequency cycling of lights can lead to lighting that varies in intensity and even colour balance, depending on the nature of the lights. Shoot RAW so you have the maximum flexibility to correct these problems - but even so, you may get a low success ratio. If this might put you off from making the investment, do a lighting test with a film body and a roll of Fuji 1600 and an f/2 or faster 50mm lens (don't worry about the wider angle of view - you're testing the lights) - or persuade your sister to do the test for you with her 20D.

 

Set the camera in M exposure mode, and meter the ring area from a mid tone. Start from 1600 ISO and f/2 to see what shutter speed you get for a proper exposure. Once set, you should be able to keep the same exposure for all the action. Switch to Av mode to capture out of ring shots of the teams or spectators if they're less well lit - lower shutter speeds will matter less. You can simply regain your settings by switching back to M mode for the next heat as long as you reset the aperture if you change it in Av mode.

[sheldonnalos]

Getting a DSLR is on the right track, though I don't think it really matters which one. The DRebel, 10D, Rebel XT or 20D would all work, in order of increasing performance and image quality.

 

The key issue is on the lens you use. From the photos on the website you posted, I don't think that you can get close enough to use anything as short as a 50mm lens and fill the frame with the action. I would say that you have three choices that would work (with any of the cameras above). 85mm f/1.8 for $330, 135mm f/2 L for $850 or 70-200mm f/2.8 for $1000 (the IS model isn't really necessary). The latter two would likely work better due to having more telephoto reach, but you pay a high price for that.

 

Trying to get action stopping shutter speeds under poor lighting with any lens slower than f/2.8 at ISO 800 or 1600 will be an excercise in frustration, and the 50mm lens, while affordable, is just not long enough unless you can get within about 10-15 feet.

 

The plus side is that if you buy any of the above lenses used, you can use them for a while and resell them with little or no loss. The same is slightly less true for the DSLR's, but they still hold their value fairly well.

[danny_lee2]

I dont think there is a camera nor lens that can do what you described. but to be sure, get a light meter, and meter the light in the situation. figure you need at least 1/200 shutter to freeze a 20 mph dog, and perhaps a faster ball ?

 

thats really tough. there just isnt going to be enough light as you described it.

[ken munn]

Sheldon neglected to mention the 100mm f2, roughly the same price as the 85mm f1.8.

[grinder]

It seems it was only touched upon, You are not going to get clear nice cover type pictures without flash period. They use flash for covers or high power hot lights bet a coke on it. A 1.4 lens and a 5d isn't going to make a lick of difference if there isn't enough light. I hate to see you spend over 1000 dollars on a ens and camera that is not going to make you happy. have your sister come and shoot a few shots since she will not loan you her camera. I suppose at 1600 ISO and a wide open lens you might be able to pull it off in RAW with some post processing but I don't think it is what your looking for. Speed and dim lighting and expecting frozen action do not go well together. on a tripod and panning with the dog would be your best bet but dogs cut and dodge so quick.

 

Anyway best of luck I just would hate to see you spend all that cash and be stuck not using it or unhappy.

 

,Grinder

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>Getting a DSLR is on the right track, though I don't think it really matters which one. The DRebel, 10D, Rebel XT or 20D would all work, in order of increasing performance and image quality.</i></p>

 

<p>IMO, since low-light photography is a concern, it very much matters which DSLR. The Rebel XT and 20D will have better low light performance than the Digital Rebel and 10D. The 20D will allow you to take photos more quickly. Since the action is fast, I would think this to be a priority as well as the ability to take low-light photography. That is, unless your reflexes are as fast as that of the dogs. ;-)</p>

[sheldonnalos]

True - I did neglect to mention the 100mm f/2. The 135mm f/2.8 (w/ soft focus turned off) might also be a workeable solution as would the 200mm f/2.8 (or 200mm f/1.8 L ;-).

 

My point in stating that is didn't really matter which DSLR he got is because the lens is so much more important than the camera for this application. A 20D with a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 lens won't perform nearly as well as a 300D/Rebel with a 135mm f/2. That being said, I'd still choose the 20D. ;-)

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>A 20D with a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 lens won't perform nearly as well as a 300D/Rebel with a 135mm f/2.</i></p><p>With respect to low light performance, I agree. However, assuming the shutter speed is fast enough, you can shoot 5fps with the 20D, whereas you can only do 3fps with the 300D. With fast action, those 2fps certainly could be the difference between making and losing a shot. Low available light would be an overriding factor. It doesn't matter how fast you can take the shot, if it's underexposed.</p>

[jim_larson1]

Kudos to Mark's excellent response.

 

Read both Mark's and Donald's responses carefully. You *cannot* get magazine quality images because you simply don't have the resources. By resouces, I mean both equipment and event manager cooperation.

 

I was at a hockey game once watching a guy take pictures. First, he opened a hole in the glass above the boards through which he stuck his lens. Second, whenever he took a picture, a whole series of high powered strobes (like, 8 or 16 units) mounted in the ceiling lit up.

 

I think his shots were going to came out better than my P&S pics from row "L".

 

Having said that. . .you can still get great shots. You will need both good high ISO performance (reble XT, 20D are similar and good. 10D and dRebel not as good for this), and a good lens. Yes. . .you may very well spend more on lenses than the body.

 

If you can get away with the 50/1.8 -> count yourself lucky. This is a great portrait lens as well. If you need more reach. . there are a variety of primes in the $300-$600 that are all *fast* and *superb*.

[mark u]

Some extra points:

 

Except at the most major events, ringside access is usually easy to organise - attendees are usually all closely involved and would be delighted to have some great pics. Once you have a reputation, you will probably be able to get ringside at top events too.

 

The basic level of lighting can be judged shooting your Kodak at ISO 100 using f/2.8 - you'll get a shutter speed that is 32 times faster shooting at 1600 ISO and f/2. That won't tell you about problems at shutter speeds faster than 1/125th due to any mains freqency cycling. Although at a major event lighting may be good enough to get away with an f/2.8 lens, don't imagine you won't need something faster at local events. These events are photographed without flash - which is banned because it distracts the dogs. If you actually look at the EXIF data in the images on the flyball site you will find:

 

A Canon 1D used at 1600 ISO, 1/320th f/2.8, 78mm (would have been better with 85mm at f/2 and 1/640th to reduce motion blur)

 

A Nikon D100 used at 1600 ISO, 1/1500th f/1.4, 85mm, and at 1600ISO, 1/2000th, f/1.4 50mm

 

In neither case was flash used - though the lighting is clearly better than some venues would be, casting sharp shadows under the dogs.

 

These tips on AI Servo focus are useful - though bear in mind a) the dog's peak speeds are likely to be 30mph, b) an XT won't focus as fast as a pro body, c) the 300 f/2.8 is Canon's fastest AF performer so you won't quite get that performance, and d) low light slows down AF significantly:

 

http://www.shutterfreaks.com/Tips/CanonAIServo.html

[mark u]

Two other points:

 

I disagree with M Barbu about the 20D: you'll get the best pics by timing your shots (practice is the key - do it in the yard with your own dog(s) over your practice course) - shooting at 5fps or even 8.5 fps with a 1D Mk II really won't help because a) it's likely that AF simply won't keep up as discussed above, made worse by the extremely narrow depth of field at the wide apertures you'll be using; b) you lose control of timing of the shots. With good technique (pre-focus, timing, right exposure, good positioning/framing) you'll get just as good shots as the pros.

 

Secondly, you'll almost certainly benefit from having some noise reduction software - e.g. Noise Ninja, Noiseware, Neat Image - to improve your results still further. That will help make your images shine when printed at larger sizes.

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>you'll get the best pics by timing your shots (practice is the key - do it in the yard with your own dog(s) over your practice course)</i></p>

 

<p>Of course you will, but how fast are your reflexes? What if someone walks in front of you? What if the dog blinks? What if the dog trips and stumbles? Can you react fast enough to get the shot of the dog landing on it's face? There are plenty of reasons in this type of photography for wanting to have a camera that can take more photos per second, and for having a larger buffer. I'm not advocating just shooting blindly and hoping you get the shot. I'm merely pointing out that there are some significant differences between those two models that can be <i>very</i> useful in fast action photography. Even just having a 350D (instead of a 20D), would be a <i>huge</i> improvement over having the 300D in this regard.</p>

[trothwell]

I was asked to photography a flyball competition this summer. I've never been to one before, but looked at some pictures taken by someone else last year. I'm planning on ordering a 135/f2 lens... that seems my best choice for the distance and apeture required.

[mark u]

As with all sports shooting, it helps to know the location (lighting, focal length choices given where you can shoot from - incidentally, too long a focal length can be a handicap for flyball because you may not be able to back up enough without being masked by spectators or bumping into a wall - better to crop a little if necessary, and to have a lens that allows you to shoot the humans involved as well as the dogs), to know the sport (what are the shots that will have impact) and the players (particular performances to look out for).

 

The 20D offers no real advantage over the Rebel so far as lighting is concerned - 1600 ISO performance is similar (and if really pushed you can always underexpose by 1 stop to simulate 3200 ISO), since the sensors are similar. There might be some improvement with say a 1D Mk II in terms of high ISO performance. The main difference in practical terms is the handling characteristic of the bodies. As has been emphasized by several posters, the choice of a fast enough lens is more critical - without it shots will suffer from motion blur that a high end camera does nothing to solve. Of course, if the event is being held outdoors (as many are in the UK), really fast aperture can just become nice to have for blurring backgrounds.

 

Knowing the sport: a top dog will run up the ~50ft course jumping 4 hurdles, catch the ball at the far end and hurdle back down the course with the ball in as little as 4 seconds. Four dogs run in relay, so if everything goes well a heat can be under 20 seconds. A second team is running in a nearby parallel lane. In practical terms, you have to decide what kind of shot you want to capture before each heat - there's no time to reposition yourself, and it's hard to cover both lanes simultaneously, partly because of the design of some hurdle side supports that can block your view. DOF considerations only allow you to focus on one lane at a time shooting sideways on indoors: even outdoors it's not on unless you use a 50mm lens on a crop body because of the lane separation (advantage digicam with high DOF when shooting outdoors). Novice dogs will tend to wander off course, fail to catch the ball or drop it, etc. - but few of these shots work well as stills rather than video (2 dogs in the same lane probably offers some of the better opportunities). Knowing the teams and heat standard will allow you to anticipate whether there is a good chance of antics that might be worth trying to capture - however, it's harder to get a good position looking up the course for the return run because of the runoff area where the other dogs and handlers are also await their turn to go or for the heat to finish.

 

So what are the needs for fps in this sport? Framing/positioning considerations make it desirable to aim to capture one particular event per run. Because of the speed of the dogs (20mph is about 30 ft/sec), at 5fps the dog can have moved 6 ft or more between shots - or over half the distance from one hurdle to the next. Since the hurdles are 10ft apart, capturing successive jumps requires you to pump the shutter at a slower rate (probably 2.5-4.5fps) - which is tough for even the most seasoned pro. The requirements are more like those for shooting a batter at the baseball plate (and your requirements for timing your shot are similar to the batter's - learn to swing before the ball arrives, or press the shutter before the dog reaches the hurdle - where depends on the shutter lag of your camera, but so long as you practise with the same camera shutter lag will be fairly consistent - you'd need to "re-learn" for a camera with a different shutter lag).

 

High shutter speeds and good panning technique is much more important. Shooting sideways on, if the dog is moving at 30ft/sec, that's about 1/2 inch in 1/750th - enough to completely blur the detail in its coat and make the dog as a whole motion blurred, however accurately focus is set. From closer to head on, the relative motion is less, which helps things stay sharper, and allows the use of slightly slower shutter speeds.

[matt_b6]

Oh my gosh, you guys are amazing. the depth of detail in here is crazy - beyond anything i've expected - thank you! Mark U , you sound like you photograph flyball for a living, wow. Basically, what I'm gathering is that the Rebel Xt is the best for my price range, with a realy good lens. (The 1.4 50 I'm thinking) with possible investment in another lens as a backup. My sister, well.. thats another story .. I'm hoping but I'm not holding my breath. So, I'm able to be approx 15' away from the lane, but to press the shutter button, I'm going to have to stay away from lane shots from behind. I'll have to do box & side shots at tournaments and down the lane shots at practices. I was thinking of getting a lc-5 or rc-1 to get me by, but the 700$ for the lc-5 is harsh just so I can leave the camera behing the box loader for a few "chance" good shots. and I think the rc-1 or rc-5 's infrared won't work from as close as I can be to the action. Like I said before though, the horrible under-exposure is my main concern. I'd just do pan shots if they were exposed correctly, but they are just about black with my current camera. Which is the reason for the investment. Noise ninja... hmm, never used it dont know a think about pc based enhancment. but that will be for a later post on another forum board if I buy the camera. Do you guys think detail on an all black dog, in these low light conditions, will be evident ie: I can see the dog's features? or will it be a struggle to get it? Can software help me? I think the biggest print I would ever do would be a 4 x 6 someone else might want an 8x10 but they can worry about that themselves. raw format, manual focus on a jump, do a custom white balance in the light, the ai servo article on shutter freaks is helpfull, hopefully the camera can keep up. we only have one really fast dog on our team, but another team in our district has world class speeders 120' in 3.1 seconds avg. crazy speeds... pan shots only I think. so the lens issue... think a 50/1.4 would work? The mine-ute barrel distortion i've seen from this lens seems okay to me, just the light issue I think will be my prob. If necessary I could post some pics from my kodak z740 just so you can see how badly exposed they were to make a recomendation.... but thanks guys none-the-less, this info is great. I can't say thank-you enough! I'll reccomend photo.net to anyone who crosses my path with a camera! Keep up the good & fun work.<div></div>

[mark u]

That light really does look pretty crummy. DO test to see what shutter speed you might be able to get before plonking down your cash. So far as remotely triggered shots are concerned, you should set the camera up on a tripod - with a camera as small as the Rebel and given the low shooting angle it doesn't need to be a big one - something like a Velbon Maxi or Luxi series might be quite good, splaying the legs fairly wide to give a more stable support with the camera perhaps just 18" or so off the ground (dog high). Frame and focus, and leave the focus set on MF. The cheapest option for a remote release would be one of the radio wireless ones from ebay (made in China), which has the advantage that you could also plug in an infrared trigger (like the ones used to measure times) placed across the lane at the ideal point allowing for shutter lag. Use a hood to avoid risk of flare from the overhead lights.

[mark u]

If you were going to spend $700 on anything else, it should be on upgrading the lighting.

[matt_b6]

lol , yes... upgrade the lighting, I'd love that bill! But seriously, I've convinced my sister to come with me tommorow & I bought a f1.8/50 canon to try. the salesman at the store was extremely knowledgeable and said it would crop the image due to it being a film lens and the camera having a smaller cmos sensor. So, hopefully all will go well and I'll get a properly exposed image. 1.8,iso800,1/350th-1/500th and hopefully it will work, I'll just keep playing with the iso & the shutter to get my best and see where that takes me. thanks alot everyone!

[matt_b6]

So, I went with the 20d, excellent with the 50mm 1.8 II, now, I have another problem, i'll start a new thread. thanks alot everyone!

[m_barbu1]

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GN7B">Really? I thought you got the XT.</a>