Karim Ghantous Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 <p>Hot damn. I think these are at least the equal of 95% of sports photos I've seen:</p> <p>http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/06/29/the-leica-m9%E2%80%A6-for-sports-by-peter-prosophos/</p> <p>NB: The very last image in that selection is a DSLR shot, which is not mentioned in the article.</p> <p>Heaven forbid that a Leica - a mere mantlepiece trophy bought only by snobs and doctors - be used to photograph sport! Heaven forbid! This cannot be allowed. What next? Animals? Children? Landscapes? Reportage? Portraiture? Sunsets? Trees? Grass? Everyone knows you need a good AF system to keep up with those subjects! Everyone!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerwb Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 <p>One more time. Great photos are made by the photographer, not the camera.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 <p>No, no, no - great photos are made with a Leica. All else is just poor imitations.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 <p>Speaking as someone who used to shoot sports professionally, these are decent photos but not particularly representative of great sports shots. A few stand out but most have that "parent with a camera" look. The actual "point of action" is missing in all except two. And the tones are muddy in many of them. I'm sure one could get some great sports shots with almost any camera (a pinhole would be difficult) but these aren't the ones that will sell a brand.</p> Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 <p>I used a Leica to shoot basketball games when I worked for a newspaper in the mid-60s. I had 35, 50 and 90 mm lenses in my kit, which is similar to what most of my colleages with SLRs used too. I mostly sat on the floor behind the home team basket, pre-focused and guessed at the "peak of action" moment. The Leica (M2) was at no particular disadvantage with respect to the SLRs of the time, which had a wind lever just like mine, and manual focus. We developed Tri-X in (print developer) Dektol, diluted 1:1, and rated it at ANSI (now ISO) 1000.</p> <p>I could do that with an M9, perhaps even better. The frame lines for a 35mm lens are well inside the boundaries of the viewfinder, which makes it easier to follow and anticipate action. I wouldn't even bother with continuous shooting. At a smashing 2.5 fps, why bother? Did I mention I worked close enough to the action to use a 35mm lens most of the time, then cropped for editorial effect?</p> <p>Believe me, autofocus lense, long telephotos and motorized cameras make life a lot easier, but they don't make the shot for you.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 <p>I've shot in that park. <br> As Jeff says you can use any camera to shoot whatever you want. If I <strong>wanted</strong> to get some kidlet sport shots, I could use my M9. If I <strong>had to</strong> get some sports shots, it would be the last camera I would use. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pensacolaphoto Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 <p>I sometimes use the M9 at sports events, but it is difficult to take photos quickly back to back due to the long buffer times in the M9.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 <p>As a parent and grandparent, I can attest that kids can move pretty fast at play, and you don't have 30% downtime for commercials. Steve Huff demonstrates his skill in capturing kids' action. Personally, I like his examples better than all those shots of adult delinquents playing a child's game, using machine gun cameras and 800 mm lenses. Raising the flag on Mt. Suribachi was a memorable moment, taken with a Speed Graphic. Monday night football is quite the opposite, no matter how many exquisitely detailed photos are taken of the melee.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 <p>Peter Prosophos took these, not Steve Huff. I agree with Jeff: they are quite nice shots, but nothing that strikes me as particularly stunning. They are, indeed, the "parent with a camera type" shot, which is probably what was wanted, but not quite the same as the "amidst the melee" shots" which is what many of us think of as sports photography. As to which type is better, clearly that is a matter of preference, but I agree with Ian, you can make some nice shots with a Leica M, but its not really the tool for the job.</p> Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 I think they're great shots, but they're not what most people think of as sports- because that's normally professional or adult sports and usually a situation where you can't get too close to the field...... Hence, the need for a camera that can handle a very long lens and ideally fire off shots rapidly. Thanks for posting, I enjoyed the pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted January 3, 2015 Share Posted January 3, 2015 <p>You can photograph sports with a cheap 35mm disposable camera... you don't even have to focus. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now