witolda_maruszewska

If you shoot a lot in manual mode, a good lightmeter / spotmeter is always handy to have.

 

Or maybe a nice book on photography. There's all sorts of publications to suit all tastes, from collections of photographs to stuff on specific kinds of techniques. I've got several shelves of photography books and I love flicking through them for ideas and tips.

Rob, I have used the Sigma 50-500, more commonly known as the Bigma - a friend bought one and I wanted to see what it was like when compared to my 100-400L IS. Here are my thoughts about what it was like. I am a motorsports freelancer, BTW.

 

It is a big, clunky lens with pretty poor ergonomics and handling. The zoom ring is incredibly stiff, useless for sports as you can't change focal lengths quickly, at full extension it is unwieldy to hold and without a monopod it is near enough unuseable as camera shake is near enough inevitable. With a monopod it is fine for head-on action but somewhat clumsy for panning.

 

Image quality is pretty reasonable at the short end, but degrades noticeably as you zoom out - the results are acceptable, but the 100-400L really shows it up. In good light you won't notice that so much, but it will suffer when the light is less than optimal. The lens is very slow (5.6 - 6.3) all the way through the range, which is two thirds of a stop slower than the 100-400 at the short end and a third of a stop slower at the long end - it doesn?t sound like much, but as the lens has no image stabiliser you have to work at higher shutter speeds than you otherwise might have in order to avoid shake, and so in poor light you may well quickly run out of useable ISO range and aperture. IMHO the IS of the 100-400 gives it around a stop and a half advantage over the Bigma in those situations.

 

Focusing is also very slow - again, not so good for sports. Mounted on a 1D Mk2, the 50-500 seemed to take forever to lock onto a moving target, and this on a body where the centre point retains full autofocus at f8. Most consumer camera bodies i.e. 10D only retain AF at f5.6 or faster, so at the long end, the Bigma will hunt and sometimes refuse to lock on entirely.

 

If you plan on attaching a converter to this lens, it will only compound the problems that are there already. You will lose a minimum of one stop (assuming a 1.4x TC) so the lens becomes an f8 - f9 which means that it won?t focus very well even on bodies that are designed to retain AF at f8 let alone those that you have in mind (10D equivalent), you will have to work at high ISO to maintain acceptable shutter speed, which degrades image quality and likely you will have to look for a converter that does not clash with the rear element of the lens, again compromising image quality. I have been down this road in the past with a 75-300 lens to avoid shelling out for the 100-400 and it was a waste of money.

 

Now I'm not saying the Bigma is a lemon - I am saying that it isn't a lens designed for sports usage. In any case, I was glad to hand back the example I tried to its owner and mount my own lens back on my camera - it made me realise how good the 100-400L really is.

 

If you are looking at ultimate focal length, a prime would probably be your best bet as opposed to a zoom. The Sigma 300 2.8 is a pretty nifty performer and can easily be used with a 2x TC to give you 600mm for a reasonable outlay. Don?t be afraid to spend a little bit more on glass than you might have budgeted for, no matter how much it makes you wince ? good glass, and more importantly, appropriate glass for your subject matter will always be a wise investment. Anything else is just a costly mistake.

Generally here in the UK the basic unwritten policy for racing photographers is that you can publish the moment of impact and the crash progression, but any sort of aftermath (i.e. medical assistance) is no-go if the driver is injured - unless specifically requested to do so.

 

I've never shot an accident with injury or a fatality, but would follow my conscience if I did, but that would be the same as the guidelines anyway. Fred and Jay raise some valuable points though. Whatever you do, don't bin the shots - they may prove useful at some point and parties connected might be interested.

 

Sorry my reply is a bit woolly, am suffering from the after-effects of covering a 24 hour 2CV race...

I last used film to shoot racing back in early 2003. Most of what I used was ISO 400, though in really good, consistent light (rare here in the UK) I did use slower films. ISO 400 is good for motorsports because it helps you keep the shutter speed up while retaining a realistic aperture and gives you that extra little bit of latitude if the light keeps on changing, assuming you are shooting in daylight. I tended to use print films before switching to digital, Fuji Superia Reala was my choice, and with a good lab to process it, the results were excellent. A4 enlargements were fine with this emulsion.

 

Digital is slightly different as the medium is a touch more sensitive for a given ISO rating than the equivalent film. In contrast, I try and use the lowest possible ISO I need to maintain my shutter speed for the task in hand while also keeping a realistic aperture. But then again, digital is like having a bag with an infinite selection of films in it?

 

Either way, shooting racing is all about shutter speed.

 

If you are taking images of cars coming directly towards you i.e. head on or front three-quarter shots, then you will want to be working with shutter speeds of around 1/400 or 1/500 or so. That way you will be able to eliminate any blur / shake caused by up-and-down movement of the car as it clips a kerb or lifts a wheel, say, but still retain enough to show movement on the wheels of the car so that it does not appear static. The same applies for rear-on shots.

 

On the other hand if you are taking images of cars coming across you, then you do want to show the effect of the speed. This is done by a technique called panning, which entails tracking the car with your camera as it crosses you and operating the shutter when the car is just about sideways on to you; you ideally will want to use a shutter speed of between 1/160 to 1/250 depending on how fast the car is at the point at which you are shooting. As you are using film, you do not want to waste money by binning frames so you are better off sticking to a higher shutter speed. You will get a far better hit rate and not lose so many shots through camera shake. When panning, pick up the car early, rotate your body smoothly, work the shutter and follow through. Smoothness in the body rotation is the key to this technique as is a good firm stance.

 

The shutter speeds Ive given here are a good rule of thumb with which to start. You will find that the AI Servo auto-focus mode on your EOS 3 will work quite well to track the cars both when shooting head on and panning. If the light is consistent, I will quite happily leave the camera in Tv mode, but if things keep changing I switch to manual and then tweak the exposure as needed.

 

Other than track action shots, dont forget the pit-and-paddock goings on as there are plenty of interesting things to photograph. Your portrait and wildlife skills will be useful here as sometimes you have to lurk to get the shot you want.

 

If you have a monopod, take it along with you as you will find it handy and you will most definitely be shooting with the extender attached to your lens, particularly if you want to fill the frame with the action when it is coming towards you. Shoot with a slightly shorter focal length than you think you will need as it is easier to crop when printing than discovering that you have cut off the front and rear of the cars by trying to fill the frame too much. This is important to keep in mind with film as you still have to pay for wasted frames.

 

Last of all, stay safe. Things happen very quickly at a race circuit when things go wrong, so ALWAYS, ALWAYS make sure you have an escape route.

 

Feel free to look at my portfolio here on photo.net and on my website (www.post14.f9.co.uk) to give you some ideas and a feel for what can be achieved. If you have any questions, dont hesitate to ask. Hope this helps. ;-)

Thanks for the useful replies.

 

I have just bought a 190PRO tripod with 488RC2 head - just what I needed!

I know that the cheaper solutions won't always be particularly effective, but I honestly can't justify spending major money on something that will only see use a couple of times a year. As a result, I can put up with something that's less than optimal.

 

The 100-400 is the heaviest of my lenses so is the worst-case scenario. I reckon that I shouldn't have many problems with my other glass i.e. 28-70 2.8 and 20 & 50 primes...

 

Thanks for the suggestion re the flashlight - I'll look into that.

Well, the thought behind selecting a ballhead is that there's less fumbling around when it is dark as there's only a single lever that operates all the adjustments.

 

I did the same event last year with a borrowed tripod that had a 3-way head and it was a pain to work it in the cold and wet with a torch clamped between my teeth at 1:30 in the morning...

 

For the same reason I've selected legs with lever lock mechanisms.

I need a tripod and head...

 

Now as a motorsports photographer, a tripod isn't something I use

more than once or twice a year but I am doing a 24 hour race at the

end of this month and I need something to use to shoot light trails

and extended exposures. I don't want to borrow from a colleague and

as it is a piece of equipment that would normally sit and gather

dust in my possession I do not want to spend a great deal of money.

 

I know there are many expensive and probably better solutions out

there, but I have narrowed my choice down to two tripods and two

ballheads with quick release plates which I can justify buying.

These are as follows:

 

TRIPOD: Manfrotto 055PRO or 190PRO (Bogen 3001 or 3021 for you US

folks)

BALLHEAD: Manfrotto 486RC2 or 488RC2

 

The objective is to be able to support a 1D Mk2 with 100-400L

attached - that will be the maximum I would expect to use the tripod

and ballhead for. Does anyone use any of these with the camera-lens

combination I have mentioned? If so, what is your verdict?

Nope - forget the rest! I'm still passionately in love with my month-old 1D mk2 ;-)

 

And yeah, I've just started my racing season work - in the rain and fog at Snetterton. In the next few days I'll be at Rockingham for SCSA and Truck rookie training. And so it continues... :-D

I know you've asked for other suggestions beside clothing, but I find that my 1D Mk2 with 50 1.8 fits snugly into a thick, fluffy fleece beanie hat - useful when I want to carry my camera in something other than a purpose-made camera bag. The hat is nicely padded and the fluffy lining stops the camera from being scratched.

Ian,

 

Firstly, in order to maximize your budget, you wouldn't go far wrong talking to Park Cameras (www.parkcameras.com) as they have some nice deals going on both new and used DSLRs. They have two shops, one in Haywards Heath and one in Burgess Hill but do also trade over the 'net.

 

I was at their Burgess Hill shop on Tuesday to pick up some stuff I'd ordered and they had a reconditioned 10D in the window for around ?600 and sell new ones for ?700 though they don't have too many left. For this sort of money you can't go wrong - the 10D is a more flexible camera than a 300D and the difference in price alone makes it worth getting over the 20D as it will leave you more money to buy the glass that you want.

 

Hope this helps :-)

Gary,

 

How much do you need the wide focal lengths? That will be the determining factor in which lens(es) you will choose. I know you've already a few possibilities in mind, but here's a couple of alternatives you might want to consider.

 

If you really don't need the wide end and are thinking of a "normal" zoom then how about looking for a used 28-70L if funds are tight - this lens is a quality performer and well worth getting. Team this up with a 20 mm prime for those "wider" moments and you have a nice combination that will complement what you already have.

 

The alternative, if you want quality but at the wide end of the range, you could either go for a new 17-40 f4 or if lens speed is important to you, a used 17-35 or 16-35 f1.8 depending on your budget. At the longer end of the range you are nicely served by your current 50 and 85 primes IMHO.

I've got both Lowe Pro's S&F belt system (2 pouches & 2 lens tubes on a deluxe belt) and the Stealth Reporter 400 AW shoulder bag. These can swallow up a 10D with BG-ED3, 28-70 2.8L, 100-400L, 20 2.8, 50 1.8 and 550 EX flash.

 

You might find that the larger Stealth Reporter AW bags (500, 650) are worth a try. The belt system can be customised, but I must confess I don't half look daft in it...

 

Also, the Stealth Reporter bags will take any of the slip lock attachments, so you might be able to get away with a 400 AW bag and a lens tube or two attached to the outside.

I have the Canon 20mm 2.8 and have used it on both a D60 and 10D and actually picked it over the 16-35 2.8 that I had on loan with an option to buy, which is saying quite a bit.

 

Mine performs really well on both the camera bodies I have used it on; it is more than useable at f2.8 (though a little soft) and hits the sweet spot at f5.6 through to f8. Wide angle lenses are hard to use well and I have found that improper technique i.e. photographer error accounted for the problems I encountered with the lens.

 

The 20mm is my walkaround lens on my 10D and I am very pleased with the results I have achieved with it. My view is that it is an underrated lens and somewhat maligned - used properly it is a real little gem and a definite keeper.<div></div>

For one-offs in A4 and A5 size, I print on Ilford Classic Pearl paper with a Canon S900 inkjet.

 

Otherwise, for other sizes up to 30x20, for large volume prints and for customers (I am a motorsport freelance) I use Photobox (www.photobox.co.uk) as I've found it to be the best in terms of output and value here in the UK. All these prints are printed by a Frontier on Fuji Crystal Archive paper.

Verge got out OK, albeit a little shaken... I think AF proved its worth there, though the weather didn't help at the time. The exposures are not flat - it really was that misty at the back of the circuit. A few laps later, the fog had burnt off.

 

Off on another tangent, I will agree that AF on point and shoot cameras drive me to frustration as there is no real means of controlling what the camera is locking on to. At least with an SLR and the direct viewfinder, you can quite literally see what you are doing, and along with being able to select the focus points or focus lock and recompose, you have a sufficient degree of control with the AF to get things right.

frame 11<div></div>

frame 10<div></div>

frame 9<div></div>

frame 8<div></div>

frame 7<div></div>

frame 6<div></div>

frame 5<div></div>

frame 4<div></div>

frame 3<div></div>