lukas_jenkins

I would have to say that the 30D is OK for sports. However, you may find it to be just a

tiny bit shy of being fast enough for shooting the batter swinging then the shortstop

fielding the ball... I would suggest looking at the used market for a Mark II or Mark II N.

Even a Mark II (non N) is going to be better than the 30D for sports. Right now a Mark II is

on bhphotovideo.com in the used department for around $2,800. I shot with the D200 for

sports when if first came out and it is about on par with the 30D as far as speed. The

switch to a D2X really got me to where I thought I could be with the D200. 8fps or 8.5 in

the Mark II (N) is desirable for some sports although 5fps isn't horrible. As far as football

is concerned any kind of low light event such as Friday Night Football is really going to

make a 30D run into a wall with auto focus. In low light conditions a Mark II (N) will really

deliver! I have learned to never chance it. If you know a certain camera will do what you

need and the other maybe, then definitely go with the one that will handle it for sure if not

be even better than necessary. You won't regret it even if it takes longer to save for or find

one for a good price on the used market.

Lukas

If you watched the games, which I assume you have you will notice a slew of remotes behind

both nets. On these remote cameras you will find wide angles such as a Nikon 14mm f/2.8,

16mm f/2.8, 20mm f/2.8 and other wide-angle zoom lenses like 17-55mm or 17-40mm.

Pretty much anything wide to get a majority if not the whole net in the field of view. You

might even see a fisheye on a few setups but it is not as likely.

Lukas

Honestly I never have shot fireworks in the past so this could explain why my idea was

shot out of the sky. I guess for lightning photography the interval timer would probably

work since there is no "signal" like with fireworks so timing is just a matter of luck really.

Well thanks for your help obviously if I didn't ask I probably would had tried it and not

been happy with the results! Well in all seriousness I don't think we'll be going to the

fireworks now because there is a chance of thunderstorms until 11PM so maybe I will get

to use the interval timer... It has been beautiful all day and now the clouds are moving in.

Lukas

So tonight I am going to be shooting some fireworks with my D2X. I will be bringing two batteries,

12-24mm, 50mm, 70-200mm, tripod, flashlight, 4GB CF card, 2GB CF card, and 4 1GB CF cards. If I shot

in raw this would give me about 490 exposures in Raw given about 49 per GB for 10GB. So I do not see

myself needing to shoot in JPG. I will be shooting at ISO 100 at f/8-11 with a shutter speed around 5-10

seconds. I will set the WB to 5600K. So I pretty much know all the settings and everything I need to do.

The one thing I do not have is a shutter release cable. So I basically would do the 2-second timer deal with

exposure delay. I will also turn the long exposure NR (noise reduction) on.

Here is my new theory. Why not set up the interval timer to just fire off an exposure of 5 seconds in 10-

second intervals. That is 6 per minute, 120 per hour. It is essentially the same idea of using the 2-second

self-timer just automated. So I would get there set up my composition get the exposure right where I want

it then just let the camera shoot with the interval timer and I can just enjoy the show. I know this is not as

precise as doing it by yourself but since this is not an assignment if others think it is a great idea I will

give this a whirl!

Let me know what you think,

Lukas

Your 50mm being sharper than your 18-70mm sounds completely logical to me. The

18-70mm is not even close to Nikon's best mid range zoom lens. Now a 17-55mm or

28-70mm will yield excellent results as far as sharpness. Those two lenses I mentioned

might even be sharper than your 50mm. I have no idea what the optical quailty of your 50mm

lens is as I have never shot with an old Nikon lens.

Lukas

Ok so I got my "used" D2X from B&H today. I paid $3,426.10 (including shipping) for a LN-

rating D2X. LN- stands for Like New and 97-99% original condition. So I get it and all the

accessories are in their bags never opened. I pull out the D2X and I have not found the

missing 3%. Initial shutter count was 24 before I took any images. So I guess the 24 images

taken make up the 3% and resulted in me acquiring it for about $400 less than the current

price after the rebate ($3,800). In the end I am happy. I will look into getting a D2Hs in time.

Lukas

Thanks for all your opinions. I know myself that 24x36 @ ISO 1600 is a stretch and a half

but if it is what the parents want then my company must honor their request. Sometimes

we do recommend smaller sizes but if possible we like to just fulfill the requests. I use

Noise Ninja, which has done a good job with D200 files so far. The largest print I have

made above ISO 200 has been 16x20 at ISO 800 and that was with the D200. Next years

football team wants to make posters, they play at night, and last year before I was

shooting for the HS they ordered 20x30's for every senior. So I would imagine I would

either have to shoot with flash, which I am reluctant to do or shoot at ISO 1600 at f/2.8.

My college has the Mark II N but I really do not want to dump my 300mm f/2.8,

70-200mm f/2.8, 12-24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8, and 60mm f/2.8. I do not like the feel of

the Canon cameras anyway. I think I am going to get a D2X because there is one at a good

price on the market now and the D2Hs I was looking at sold (it was a demo from Adorama

for $2,549). I will continue to save and purchase a D2Hs off the used market in time. I

know this is not possible but it would be nice if the CCD and CMOS sensors were

swappable so I could purchase like a $700 8MP sensor for a D2Hs or something like that,

it would be nice. Well I just bought a used but in 97-99% new condition D2X from B&H for

$3,399. I won one on eBay for a lot less than this but the person stopped responding,

never took my money, and thus I never got the D2X.

Lukas

Here is the situation... I shoot HS sports, all sports. Football, soccer, lacrosse, baseball, softball, indoor

volleyball, indoor basketball, field hockey, ice hockey. Football, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball, basketball, and

ice hockey are shot outdoors at night or indoors with limited lighting (certainly not lit for TV). Flash could

be used for some of the indoor events but I will not have access to any kind of ceiling mounted strobe

lighting. So for a majority of the stuff I shoot I'm at ISO 1600. I need to be able to print 24x36 posters

from ISO 1600 files. Not exactly a bread and butter job but hey welcome to HS sports photography. So I

have a choice D2Hs or D2X. I already have a D200 but I am looking for Cam 2000 and 8fps, which are

what the D200 lacks. For some sports I would use the D2X in it's native 12MP mode but many 8fps HSC

mode @6.8MP (football for example). I am aware of the following comparisons:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X/D2H_vs_D2X_brickwall.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/stevehuff/d2hs_vs_d200

My three concerns:

1. D2X will be pretty noisy, worse than the D200.

2. D2X HSC mode might be problematic with chopping off limbs in frames. (not as big of a deal as 1. and

3.)

3. D2Hs 4.1MP won't be enough for 24x36 prints at ISO 1600.

I truly thank you for your help. Please be sure to state, which camera(s) you have, have shot, or have seen

large prints from.

Lukas

I've had good luck with the Sensor brush.

Lukas

Shun,

Since you are the moderator I am hoping you will see my post as you have responded with

great knowledge in the past. My decision a few months back was to go with the 300mm f/

2.8, which I did. I made some great images with it so far attached to my D200 but have

run into a wall. I miss "the shot" frequently with lacrosse goals and baseball hits (like home

run hits that are very valuable photographs). I get images but it is generally the before and

after because the 5fps is not fast enough. A friend of mine who shoots sports has the

Canon Mark II N. To make things simple he gets "the shot" pretty much every time with his

8fps 8MP camera. Just like everyone said after you get the glass you'll find your camera to

be the weakest link. It is. So I have been looking at my very limited options, D2Hs and D2X

(s). Just to clarify things I DO indeed need to be able to print up to 24x36. The largest I

have printed so far is 16x20 but my friend has had an order of 24x36 in the past. Now I

do print many more 8x10's and 11x14's than larger sizes but I'd hate to email someone

and say that I just cannot print a picture as large as they desire. You mentioned before

that the D2Hs is totally not going to be good enough on the resolution side. I'm not sure if

you have a D2H(s) or if you know someone who does. I would like to obtain a sharp

original file for test purposes to simulate what a 20x30 might look like cropped to an

8x10 sheet. I also would like an honest opinion of the D2Hs for large prints. Some people

say it will be fine and then others just laugh and say that 4.1MP is ridiculous for anything

over 11x14 or so. So my next question is the D2X a better choice in the HSC mode? It

yields I believe 6.8MP @ 8fps. Now this comparison sounds stupid because of course the

D2X has 2.7 more MP right, but my concern is ISO 800 and 1600 for night lacrosse,

soccer, and football.

Lukas

So from what I can gather my 20" Apple display, which is currently calibrated to native white

point and a gamma of 2.2 is correctly calibrated. This also means that from working within

Photoshop and printing from Photoshop using .icc profiles I am working within a color-

managed workflow. From what I described colorsync is not applicable if I am correct since

Photoshop handles color management itself. If everything I just described sounds correct

then I thank you for your input and clarification.

Lukas

I have read that the Mac is gamma 1.8 but should be set to 2.2 to match the Windows world for web sRGB.

However for inkjet print I wonder if 1.8 is better?

Lukas

I uploaded 4 shots to my website from the race.

<br>

<br>

<a href="http://web.mac.com/dclj12/iWeb/Lukas%20Jenkins%20Photography/Delaware%

20Park.html">Delaware Park Horse Races</a>

<br>

<br>

I was very happy with my panning results! I shot handheld so not to bad... If I brought a

monopod I would have tried 1/30s (the two panning shots were shot at 1/60 at ISO 100). I

could have used a longer lens for the turf races. I think a faster camera (D2Hs or D2X)

would have resulted in better finish line sequences. Feedback and future advice is

welcome.

<br><br>

Lukas

I am going to a horse race tomorrow at Dover Downs in Delaware. I am curious if I would be able to bring

in my camera and be able to get some good shots (meaning get close enough to the action to get good

shots)? I would bring/shoot with a D200 and 70-200 f/2.8 VR.

Thanks,

Lukas

First off I�d like to start out by saying that I consciously know this image is not the classic

�back focus� all of us Nikonians are used to reading about. I named the 100% crop back

focus simply because I am struggling with keeping the D200 from focusing on what is

behind my subject when it moves. When I initially establish focus everything is fine but

once the subject begins to move the D200 seems to decide that I am not trying to focus

on the player anymore and pick the next object behind it. This problem does not occur

with basketball and lacrosse because the subject I am trying to photograph fills the entire

frame vertical or the entire frame in the landscape position. However with baseball and

softball when I run into this focusing issue the subject is about half 1/3-1/2 of the frame

when shooting vertical (or portrait although I�m not shooting a �portrait� so I say vertical I

guess I could say hotdog style if we want to go back to grade school art class). Also, when

I�m shooting lacrosse I shoot in continuous focus in group dynamic mode. I am hesitant to

take the advice of closest subject priority for the times when other players are in the frame

as well but my main subject is behind them. If I attempted a shot like I just described in

closest subject priority it is a given that the player closest to me that is not my �subject�

would automatically become it based on the D200�s auto focus setting.

Dave when I shoot bases I normally do use zone focusing it is just for the outfielders and

pitcher that I use auto focus because the tend to move around and would essentially move

out of the location that I focused on.

Nino, I have never attempted what you describe regarding last moment reframing. I

normally either attempt to use the crappy non-cross type auto focus points for

composition or just deal with the subject being centered. I will definitely switch the �lock-

on� to the longest setting and see how that works out. Now when you mention switching

to the �wide� auto focus mode, would you suggest staying in dynamic mode or switch over

to single auto focus mode? I have taken advantage of the D200�s custom menus it is just a

matter of mastering the D200�s auto focus system.

AF lock works in theory until the outfielder runs to catch the ball�

I thank you for your help as I try to sort through the D200�s auto focus. I frequently

become annoyed with how inferior the non-cross type AF points are compared to the

cross type. I frequently shoot with people who are shooting D2Hs�s and Canon Mark II N�s.

Pretty much every time I think of the 8fps vs. 5fps and the improved auto focus systems of

both. Those are the two things I wish I had but don�t� I would get the D2Hs but I simply

need more than 4MP to crop and then be able to print 16x20�s and 20x30�s. The 8fps

make a huge difference as well. I�ve shot 30+ frames trying to get the ball right before the

batter hits it or as they are hitting it (just as long as it is in the frame and it is a hit ball)

with the 5fps I get the before and after 8 out of 10 times. And my friend who is shooting

8fps gets the ball in almost every sequence (multiple frames).

Lukas

Here is a cool idea I think you should try. I did not read all the posts to check but I do not

think anyone mentioned this... I think you will be happy with the effect after some trial and

error with shutter speeds and swing speed. Ok so put a wide-angle lens on your D50

(18mm portion of 18-70 would work). Set the aperture to whatever value that gives you

like a 1/30s shutter speed. Next, place your D50 in your daughters lap and set the self

timer (probably the 5 or 10 second setting, 2 seconds will be to fast). Now push your

daughter a bit on the swing and make her smile. When the shutter clicks you should get an

image depicting the motion of the swing (the background will be blurred in an arch

matching the swings path). This is just something I've tried sitting my camera on a

swinging bench (no people). So when I saw this post I though I'd share this great idea with

you.

Lukas

Frequently I find myself wishing I had a D2H or D2X because of the D200's inferior auto focus system. Try

locking on to second base with one of the offset sensors which is not a cross type, it doesn't work...

Besides the lack of multiple cross type auto focus sensors I will explain a common issue I run into. So

today I'm shooting a softball game with my D200 and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. I'm on the side of the field

about 10 ft past 2nd base on the 3rd base side. So I decided to focus on second base action and outfield

action today. I'm tired of pitchers and batters at the moment. So I already mentioned focusing on the 2nd

base problems. I've learned to deal with it, manual focus. So on to the outfielders. Frequently I get the

fence in focus and the outfielder is out of focus. If i was taking a picture of the fence i would be happy but

I am not. And to make it even better the next shot in the burst is in focus after the ball is caught and its

not suspended in the air above the outfielder (the shot I was going for). Now I have my camera set to

continuous auto focus because the outfielders are normally moving across the field to catch the ball. I also

have the camera set to dynamic auto focus. I figure I put what I want in focus and when it moves the auto

focus should track it... But it seems to pick the fence instead. Any advice?

Lukas

Ok well I think I decided to stay with inkjet because the prints will last longer than dye

sub. This is only true using Epson inks and paper. The Kodak paper has not been tested to

the best of my knowledge so it is really unknown. So would you suggest I get the Epson

paper profiled? Another question regarding Epson print media. Do Epson's Glossy and

Luster surfaces print with the same colors? For example the professional Kodak Glossy and

Luster paper I am currently using prints exactly the same color wise from my custom

profile I had made.

Lukas

I will definitely try the "photo" setting. I don't use the "standard" Kodak ink jet paper that

you buy from target or something. It is the Professional version. All I know is that I get

accurate screen to print matching with the profile I had made. Please let me know more

about testing by Wilhelm, I'm not familiar. There is actually one event on June 2, 2006

where I will need to bring my whole mobile edit/print studio along. It is the local high

school post prom party at The United Sports Training Center. It is a large indoor sports

complex near my house with indoor soccer, hockey, basketball etc. So myself and another

photographer will be shooting against a backdrop and selling prints on the spot possibly...

So I was thinking I would end up bringing the R1800 since my Epson Stylus Photo 900

does not make the best prints in the world. I do have a Epson Picture Mate that is primarily

used for "family" pictures but that might work decently for 4x6's printed from Photoshop.

It is very difficult for me to determine how much a print costs on average with my R1800,

the inks go at different times. I could change one color twice before another etc. Dye sub

has a fixed price of about .86 for 5x7's, .43 for 4x6 and $1.72 for 8x10 based on B&H

pricing of $86 (with shipping) for the media kit.

As far as quality goes I have read people claim that their dye sub dominates any inkjet

they ever had. Is this still true with the newer ink jets like the Epson R1800?

Lukas

I have gotten into sports photography in the last year. Frequently I run into these situations... 1. I get a

order that is to small to justify driving to Ritz to pick up 2-3 4x6's or something. 2. It is a rush order and I

do not have the time to drive to Ritz. I actually rarely get my prints printed at Ritz, I've been using

winkflash.com and have been very happy. Since it is an online gig one has to wait for the prints to be

shipped which is not always convenient. I currently have a Epson R1800. Tonight was one of those nights

where I had a client in need of 9 5x7's by tomorrow. So I obviously did not have time to get the

photographs ready for print and send them to Ritz and definitely not wink flash. I also had another order

to print, 2 4x6's and an 8x10. I find the R1800 to be great for printing at its highest resolution and quality

on Kodak Professional Glossy Photo Paper that I had profiled for like art shows and stuff. I just entered an

art show and used the Epson R1800 and won 2 1st place awards. Anyway, I seem to think that the R1800's

place is not high volume fast output prints for say sports photography. So I thought about this Kodak dye

sub printer I had looked at in the past that prints up to 8x12. What do you think about the quality of dye

subs vs. inkjet now adays? I like how dye sub's have a fixed print cost, it seems like I go through ink like

water in my R1800! So I was thinking using the dye sub for all my sports work up to 8x10 and print

11x14's on the R1800 and anything larger send out. I appreciate your help.

Lukas

I think I'm just going to go with both monitors being profiles which is MUCH better than

nothing so I'm happy. I have Spider2, I bought it over a year ago and now many versions

exist. I have a choice between 1.8 and 2.2 gamma and 5000k, 6500k, and native for color

temperature. I guess a more advanced colorimeter would be beneficial in this case but I do

not see it worth the money. native is where I should be anyway because quality is

important. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't doing something wrong.

Thanks for your help,

Lukas

Ok the monitors are now calibrated as follows:

1. Apple 20" Cinema display

- Gamma = 2.2

- Color temperature = native (6,300k I believe)

2. PowerBook display

- Gamma = 2.2

- Color temperature = native

I put the displays on mirroring which I have found to be the easiest way to compare the

two screens. The PowerBook screen is significantly warmer and this is very apparent side

by side. This really surprises me I must say. I wonder if the PowerBook's LCD backlight is

going bad or its native setting is just really warm. It is also possible that the Cinema

display is just that much better (which would explain why it costs $800). So far it does not

look as if the screens will be matched as far as color balance.

Lukas

The luminance is the closest when the PowerBook is at maximum brightness and the Cinema

display is at its minimum brightness. I am blown away by how bright the Cinema displays can

get if one were to crank them up to maximum brightness. So I'm going to try both displays

set to a gamma of 2.2 and the color temperature native. I'll report back.

Lukas

I just received my 20" Apple Cinema Display this evening. I set it up and the first thing to

do was calibrate it with my Spider2 colorimeter made by Color Vision. I bought the screen

for future G5 use but for now I'll be using it with my PowerBook as a second display. I plan

to fill the 20" screen with the image I'm working on and have all my dialogs and toolbars

on the 17" laptop screen. The first thing I noticed was that I had to lower the Cinema

display to its lowest brightness to be similar to my PowerBook. Since it takes a relatively

long time to calibrate both displays I decided to post my question. How should one handle

matching the color temperature between the two monitors. I currently have them both set

at 6500k at gamma 2.2. Technically this is all fine and dandy but visually both screens do

not look the same as they should. The PowerBook screen is cooler. Would you suggest

setting both monitors to the native color temperature of the backlight or try to alter them

through icc profiling with my Spider2? I know the Cinema display is 6300k native but I am

unsure of the PowerBook.

Thanks,

Lukas

Dave Black uses a little fixed lens Nikon with an electonic shutter to shoot during golfers

backswing which is prohibited because of the "click" of the camera (there is not click with an

electronic shutter and if you shoot wide open there is no sound from the aperture either!).

http://www.daveblackphotography.com/on-the-road/0705.htm

http://www.daveblackphotography.com/on-the-road/0405.htm

Lukas