best autofocus mode for lacrosse?

[john_pang]

I volunteer as the "team photographer" for my son's HS lacrosse

team. I shoot with a Nikon F100 plus 80-200 f/2.8 Nikkor. I shoot

using the Continuous Servo AF mode, C, with Dynamic Tracking, [+] on

the back of the camera. Because lacrosse is a pretty fast moving

sports, often I find one of the following two:

 

1. the lens is still trying to focus while the action passes by.

 

2. the camera trie to figure out what to focus on (many players in

the frame) and when I get the photo back, it looks like camera

focused on the wrong player.

 

Is there a better setting for fast moving sports with many potential

subjects in the frame?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

John Pang

[keith_van_hulle1]

Having played for several years, saying it's a fast sport is an understatement. I would go to the old standards. As fast a shutter speed as possible (if you're trying to isolate a specific player) or the best aperture (to get everyone in focus with DOF) and pre-focus manually where you expect the action and wait for it to fill your finder. Unless you're gonna pan with the action, I doubt most cameras will do a good job with AF in many cases like this. I think the setting you have may work fine for baseball but not Lax.

 

I'll bet you're trying to shoot from the sides (lens pointing perpendicular to the sideline itself) as they go by rather than an oblique or from the ends. That's tough. The relative speed between you and them increases that way. Think of what the pros did befor AF came along. And they got good photos w/o it. Heck, you may get good enough with practice to manual focus better in these situations where the action occurs than AF can cope with.

[SCL]

Shoot manual focus from almost behind the crease! You'll get lots of action there.

[wilsontsoi]

AF-C, central AF-point (let F100 do tracking from one AF-point to another if necessary,) wide open or stop down to f4 as long as you get 1/500 sec., or higher. You should be fine. Alternatively as above said, you can also zone focus certain area and wait for action to fall into the zone. From my experience, the F100 AF system is very capable, so I personally would try the former first. Good luck.

[2yellowdogs]

I have to disagree with the manual focus idea. Not only is shooting from behind the crease likely to get you, at minimum, a concusion, but shooting manual focus will only result in more missed shots. Focusing with the F100 and the 80-200 is much faster than you will ever be manually.</p>

 

You have very good equipment. I shot hockey with a D100 (now use a D2H) and the same 80-200 you use. The F100 is a great camera. Nikon's best all-around film camera, IMHO, with very good auto-focus capability. </p>

 

The settings you're using are right. The only suggestion I'd make is to stop the lens down. You're shooting outside, so using 400 speed film, you'll still be able to use shutter speeds fast enough to stop the action. Stopping down to about f8 will give you more depth of field and fewer out-of-focus shots. Remember, though, that your backgrounds won't be as out of focus as you may want. </p>

 

While the 80-200 isn't as fast to focus as the af-s version, it <i>will</i> perform very well for you, even wide open. You just need to keep shooting and learn to anticipate the action. This will come with time and experience. Eventually, you may trade up to an AF-S for faster focusing, or a better focusing body (f5/6, D2H/X). But as was said above, a lot of great football, baseball and even lacrosse shots were taken with manual focus lenses.</p>

[john_pang]

Thanks for the tip. I might try manual focusing and pre-focusing - this is what I used to do at basketball games, before auto focus, but a basketball court is much smaller & the action is more confined.

 

I shoot both from the sidelines and behind the goal, and yes, I have had balls zip by me several times. Nothing like seeing the ball disappear from the frame and knowing that it's coming toward you!

[discpad]

You'll want a macro lens for the stripper party afterwards to get the real "action!" :`)

[lex_jenkins]

Ditto the single sensor suggestion. Even on my D2H, which has blisteringly fast AF, the single sensor options are much quicker than any of the multi-sensor options. The tricky bit is choosing a sensor that doesn't fight your desired framing. I prefer an off-center sensor at the 12-o'clock position whether horizontal or vertical. That means I'm having to quickly switch sensors as I reorient the camera.

[john_pang]

I like the single sensor idea - I've been thinking about it, also, and I'll definitely try that.

 

Hey Dan - lacrosse is a great sport. Don't paint the whole sport negatively becuase of what a small number of immature drunks did. These things happen much more often in other sports, and I don't see the same reaction simply because those other sports aren't perceived as privileged, preppy sports. If this happened to a Division 1 football team, and someone raised race and social class as contributing factors, I can only imagine what the reaction would be.

 

John

[2yellowdogs]

The snide, ill-informed comments about lacrosse seem especially ill-timed in light of <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/10/D8GTG5MG0.html">this.</a>

[ron_laxton]

I shot a lacrosse game this week. First one in several years. Mostly manual focus, all on Fuji 400 film. Dinosaur terms, huh?

[richard_cooper5]

A thought on position: shooting from behind the crease IS dangerous and, as with hockey, you'll never see the one that gets you. But if you move to one side (still behind the end zone, not on sidelines), you avoid the greatest danger and get the benefit of action coming toward you. By shooting vertical, you can isolate a player or players. And those areas inside the attack zone but just to the side of the goal are where a lot of plays develop. Also not a bad position for shooting in toward the goal.