lukas_jenkins

Tomorrow I will be photographing the final play off game of a high school basketball

league. I am going to be focused on a specific team and they asked me if they win to take

a group picture of the team with their trophy I presume. I will be using a 50mm f/1.8 to

shoot the game (I have a 70-200mm f/2.8 but from my experiences most gyms are to

dark to use it, even at ISO 1600 with out flash. Anyway I have a 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 and a

12-24mm f/4 for wider lenses. Which one of these lenses would be optimal to use? I'll be

using flash with a Gary Fong LightSphere PJ II and lens at around f/5.6 at ISO 400.

Thanks,

Lukas

I would not stress it I have pinpointed it down to be the Flu lighting. At ISO 100 or 3200 it

does not matter on my D70 and D200 this CD case which is purple records as a blue, much

like the blue in your picture. If I take this same CD case outside and change my white balance

for sunlight the purple records as purple. Use fill flash next time if it becomes a problem.

Lukas

I have a Nikon D200 and I must say I was totally expecting Canon to triumph Nikon in

spades. But it did not happen... Where is the weather sealing, huge image buffer, improved

image sensor that I was expecting...? So Canon did not have spot metering in the 20D until

now, you have to be joking. I thought Canon was like a year or so "ahead" of Nikon. Well

anyway I have a D200 and all I have to say is "30D, you can't touch this." Well l definitely

do not think the 30D will be as profitable for Canon as the D200 was/is for Nikon. Every

owner of a D70 or D100 is trilled with the upgrade but I donﾒt know why a 20D owner

would want jump for a 30D, they mine as well purchase the 5D or Mark II N, or the D200

haha. No I really like Canon and am envious of the Mark II N however I am really

disappointed with the 30D release even though I was not planning on buying one.

Lukas

Put the Gary Fong LightSphere Photo Journalist II flash diffuser on your SB-800 and you

will get the best darn pictures you ever got before with flash. Set your aperture to f/4 f/

5.6 and shutter speed to 1/60 maybe and about ISO 400 (you don't really even need the

tripod although its nice). If you use this set up I bet you will be more than delighted with

the results.

www.garyfong.com

Happy Shooting,

Lukas

All of your answers make sense and I thank you all. I would like to get another D200 body

or D2X if I could afford it but I cannot at the moment, definitely not if I am to buy the

Pocket Wizards as well. I was looking to do a fairly even up trade for a D100 with

my D70 but I don't think it is the best idea after all. Since I still have to buy the Pocket

Wizards which arenﾒt cheap, especially if I get the MultiMAX's, I'm going to use your

recommendation Brad. I was looking to not get the Pocket Wizards for flash use but it

looks like they might be the best option in the long run even though they are expensive.

So I think I'll buy a pair and see how I like the remote camera and eventually sell my D70

and a couple of my lenses I donﾒt use and buy another D200 body.

Lukas

I was thinking the infrared system would bypass the problems with regular flash but I guess

not. With the Pocket Wizard Plus, the description does not mention anything about rear sync,

the MultiMAX does. Is rear sync only capable with the MultiMAX or if I set the flash setting on

my D200 to Rear Sync would it communicate to the Pocket Wizard Plus a little later to enable

the rear sync?

Lukas

Frank, the "intelligent" digital slave triggers by Wein. I like the system however the ones

you described would be tripped by other photographers and "snap shooters" in the stands

I think. So I am unsure if that wireless system would work well. Wein does have a infared

system which might work better. So far I am thinking I will go with the Wein infared

wireless slave triggers and the Sunpak 544's which have a Guide Number of 140 for $129

each. I would like to find some photographers that have such a set up and how well it

works for them.

Wein infared slave triggers:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?

O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=63136&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

Lukas

I was not quite sure 5fps was possible with flash. I watch a lot of basketball on television

and I only see one flash from the rafter mounted strobes when a player tosses a 3 pointer

or what ever. I'll save the 5fps for outdoor sports.

What does this mean "with a guide number of 140 down to just 1/64th of full power. " I

am taking it that it means the flash will travel 140' at ISO 100 at 1/64th power, that seems

like a lot. Its from the description of the Sunpak 544 GN 140 at B&H photo for $129.

Say I were to get 4 Sunpak 383's for $80 bucks each (ignoring the cost of the Pocket

Wizards for all of them). Would it make sense to put like two of them right next to each

other for like double the power. Or would it be better to put one at the top of the

bleachers on the right middle of the bleachers on the right and the other 2 in the same

layout on the left side of the court?

Lukas

I have not attempted to use the SB-800s in any wireless configuration in a gym since the

CLS was a disappointment for the most part (for this intended purpose anyway). I think

that you are right that if I mount the SB-800s in a distant location that they will not have

the power to keep up and light up the gym enough. So what are some more powerful flash

units that are relatively compact and run off some sort of battery pack? Lighting half the

court would be desirable then I could use my 70-200mm f/2.8 and get a variety of shots.

But I'll settle for 1/3 if thatﾒs all that is possible. And with the 5fps burst, just a single

burst of 1-2 seconds is plenty. I definitely am not planning on filling the D200's buffer of

37 shots.

Lukas

I am becoming more and more excited as an amateur sports photographer to expand

towards more professional shooting techniques. I have a Nikon D70 and D200. The D200

is obviously my workhorse and most of the time has a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR for obvious

reasons. My D70 has been sitting on the shelf collecting dust as I have not found a use for

it in sports photography since I have the D200. The other day I had the excellent idea of

using my D70 as a remote camera with the Pocket Wizard radio system for various sports

such as tennis, baseball, basketball etc. However, this idea was slashed out of the sky

when I found out that the D70 does not have any connections to be able to function with

the Pocket Wizard system as a remote camera. The Nikon D100 however CAN be used with

the Pocket Wizard system if the MB-D100 vertical grip is attached (this adds a 10pin

connector which can be used to connect the Pocket Wizard). So should I sell my D70 for a

D100 in order to make better use of my second body as a remote or is the D70 a better

camera that I'm better off keeping around my shoulder with a wide angle lens and just

forgetting about remote cameras. I'm not set on having a remote camera but it sounds like

a neat idea that I could use as a tool. Maybe have the remote camera at the other end of

the basketball court incase something exciting happens and I'm at the other end, or as a

backboard camera, the possibilities are endless.

Thanks for your opinion,

Lukas

Wilson do you use the piece of Epson Matte paper for just ambient WB or flash & gel

combination with ambient as well?

Lukas

I was not really planning on using iTTL. My idea with using the SB-800's was to just

connect the Pocket wizard to the SB-800 through the PC sync on the flash. I already have a

50mm f/1.8, 70-200mm f/2.8, and I am going to the 85mm f/1.8 as well. It is impossible

to not use flash because of the inconsistent lighting (since sports is shot > 1/250s only a

portion of the fluorescent lights power cycle is captured, this would not be a problem if I

shot at 1/30s. If I were to not use flash I would have a lot messing around to do with color

balance in post processing. I currently shoot at ISO 800 but would like to be down around

ISO 400 or even lower if possible. I want a wireless flash system to get the flashes up high

and not directly over the lens of my camera, which leads to washed out white jerseys and

shadows. My main reason to not use strobes is because I would have to set them up every

game, they are big and heavy, and need to be plugged in most of the time. The Nikon CLS

(creative lighting system) is crap from my experiences. Its great for portraits but 5fps does

not seem possible. I was planning to use my D200 with built in commander mode with

flash along with my SB-800 at one game but I thought I would test it out at home before

using it in the field. It does not function in continuous shooting mode. You get one shot

then you have to wait, there seems to be a delay like its not sure if the flashes are recycled

but it wants to wait a second or two to be sure. The SB-800s are not all that powerful, I

believe the GN of the Canon EX580 is higher than that of the SB-800. So I am unsure if the

SB-800s would be useful being so far away or if I need more powerful flash units. I will

look into the Wein system you described Frank. Myself and another photographer both

cover the same events sometimes so it might be nice to have similar flash systems at each

end of the court and we could just switch channels during half time and switch locations.

I take photographs for a website that sells prints to parents. It is not uncommon to get

20x30 poster orders or even the occasional 24x36 at the end of a season (D200 and 20D

files make great poster sized prints). In an effort to increase the quality of the end product

lowering ISO from 800 to say ISO 400 is desirable. Many people say ﾓjust buy a 50mm f/

1.4 and shoot ISO 1600 or 3200 without flash, yeah and print a 24x36 of thatﾅ It might

not be that bad to the average person but you have to admit the same print shot at ISO

400 is miles cleaner. Since I am not a ﾓprofessionalﾔ I am not willing to spend $2000 or

more on a flash system that is mounted in the rafters of an arena (in my case a gym.) But I

would like a system that is small, portable, powerful, and runs on batteries.

Lukas

Does it make since to use 2 Nikon SB-800's to light half a basketball court with the Pocket

Wizard system? Next year I would like to use wireless flash at high school basketball

games. I do not really want to use strobes as they are big and most often have to be

pluged in (or require a large battery pack). With a couple small powerful flash units I am

planing to clamp them on the bleacher railings. I also would like to use my D70 as a

remote camera with the pocket wizard system as well. I am planing on getting a flash

meter as well. So is it logical to use SB-800's as wireless flashes with Pocket Wizards? The

Nikon SB-800's are pretty expensive and would like a cheaper alternative. I would like to

maintain 5fps.

I have attached a picture of the gym. It looks nice and bright but dont kid yourself.

Thanks,

Lukas

I actually have an expodisc... I might want to try using it. I tried it once with just ambient

light in a similar gym. I just aimed my len toward the lights and did the preset. Honestly It did

not work well. This could be explained by the change in color balance of the lights, I dont

know. I could have used it wrong to. I'll have to do some more experiments with it.

I took a deep breath and shot a whole game with out the flash gel tonight. I think It

worked fairly well, still undecided if flash gel works better or not. I definitly should give

custom white balance a try. Should I use just a plain old white poster board or is a special

one made? The WhiBal does work but then you have to click on it in post processing. Also,

find someone to go out on the court and hold it for you while you take their picture at half

time to use it with flash. I'll be shooting another game tomorrow at 1:00PM and probably

again at 7:00PM.

Camera settings:

Nikon D200, 50mm f/1.8 at 2.2, 1/250s, ISO 800 Shot in Raw, camera set to fluorecsent

white balance SB-800 flash used with diffuser dome in TTL BL mode and -1 2/3 EV (flash

on bracket)

Dan, after reading your reply I am assuming that my flash is pretty much neutral on the

green-cyan axis since it is pretty much a ﾓdaylight sourceﾔ. However the fluorescent lights

have their distinct colorcast. So I guess maybe I have a misunderstanding of the use of

gelﾒs. My idea was initially to use flash to provide fill light and stop the action (rear-sync).

Then I figured ok well flash and fluorescent are very different how can I get them to be

blend cleanly since I am not lighting the entire gym with strobes. I settled on the Idea of

using a green gel on the flash to match it more closely with the fluorescent lights and then

use the fluorescent white balance setting instead of the magenta filter that was used on

film cameras back in the day (I believe). So does the green filter to what I think it does or

not really?

Thanks for all your replyﾒs. I should have noted that I do in fact shoot Raw almost

exclusively because I find the workflow easier for batch processing in ACR although ACR is

nasty with noise in reds. I also use a WhiBal to take a reference shot of the color

temperature instead of the large poster board idea and simply do the white balance work

in post based on the samples (below I will list my samples). Now one thing that really gets

me is when I set any white balance on my D200 in Adobe ACR the white balance is not

what it should be. Example, Fluorescent preset of 4200 in camera appears in ACR as 3950

degrees Kelvin +31. So the problem is that in the D200 you cannot adjust the white

balance on both spectrums which is a problem. I have before got the degrees Kelvin right

but then the magenta-green spectrum had to be increased from -5 to like +30 in ACR. It

is not working to use ACR to click on the gray card and get the reading and then use that

reading back in the camera the next time, it doesnﾒt work, but I think it should! So Dan I

guess this is where I am seeing your reasoning for using the poster board.

White balance samples:

Ambient in gym, 3650 +0

Flash w/ gel ﾖ Ambient sample # 1, 4850 +15

Flash w/ gel ﾖ Ambient sample # 2, 4100 +4

Flash w/ gel (sampled in dark room later), 5550 + 22

Just by looking at the above numbers specifically the ambient and the flash w/ gel only the

real world combine samples are pretty close to the median which I found to be 4537.5

+10.5 I had some other numbers involved so donﾒt try to do the math. Anyway most of the

pictures that I showed you in my first post ended up being like 4650 +14.

Another person I shoot with uses his camera on the fluorescent white balance setting

without a gel on the flash. Here is what one of his pictures looks like (below). I feel there is

a little to much magenta in the subject. I'm not sure what straight out of the camera looks

like but his workflow pretty much consists of "auto levels" as a first step. And I know that

fluorescent and flash are like approximately 1000 degrees Kelvin apart. I have tested this

myself in my basement (which has fluorescent lights) and flash with the camera set to

fluorescent yields a magenta cast. Again where the poster board might help.

http://www.downingtownsports.com/IMG_5090%20copy.jpg

Thanks,

Lukas<div></div>

I would like some feedback on lighting in a high school gym. The last game I took

photographs at I used a Nikon D200 with a SB-800 flash on a flash bracket. Also, I used

the lighter (less dense/more transparent)flash gel made by Nikon for balancing flash

output to ambient. Nikon also has a "more" green filter for the same purpose. So my

question is would the "more" green of the 2 filters yield better results? I have found it to be

impossible to not use flash, I use the flash basically so I have some consistent white

balance. As you can see from the links below the news photographers pictures have good

color on the players but that is because the wb was set to flash with out a flash gel. I do

not like the dark backgrounds in her photographs. I am looking for a realistic clean look.

Ambient white balance is about 3900-4000 degrees kelvin. My pictures below are in the

vicinity of 4600-4800 range. I feel the use of filters gets me closer to the realistic look I

want. Unfortunately I can not light the whole gym with strobes or use solely available light.

If you have any advice for me to try in the future please let me know.

My camera info:

Flash

Camera - Nikon D200

Lens - 50mm f/1.8 at f/2.2

ISO - 800

My photographs:

http://www.downingtownsports.com/_LNJ2225.jpg

http://www.downingtownsports.com/_LNJ2232.jpg

http://www.downingtownsports.com/_LNJ2227.jpg

http://www.downingtownsports.com/_LNJ2208.jpg

Local news photographer:

http://photos.allaroundphilly.com/photos/242516_macbkgdwestcoat063.jpg

http://photos.allaroundphilly.com/photos/244029_macbkgdwestchest003.jpg

http://photos.allaroundphilly.com/photos/242508_macbkgdwestcoat008.jpg

Thanks,

Lukas

The 70-200mm f/2.8 VR has a tiny rubber ring around the mount on the lens how effective

this would be I do not know.

I feel pretty confident taking my D200 out in the snow with a good weather sealed lens

like the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR. If you really thing about how wet something gets in the rain

or snow its not all that much. Not even close to how wet it would get if it got submerged

in a pool or something. A lot of water just drips/rolls off the D200 and the attached lens.

From what I've read and seen people do with say the F5 (which the D200 has better

weather seals than the F5) I would say its pretty safe. I've read about people who have

dropped their F5 in the snow, taken them out in the pouring rain and they work fine. Also

check out this link of the D2X out in bad weather conditions. The D2X does have a little

better weather sealing than the D200 but I think it is pretty safe to say they both fair

pretty good.

http://simpho.free.fr/alpirush/rushe.html

One thing I am curious of is how well the MB-D200 vertical grip is with weather sealing.

the battery door does not look sealed very well. However, where it attaches to the battery

compartment on the D200 there is a big rubber gasket.

In conclusion I think I would take my D200 out in the snow and drizzle. But not a

hurricane or heavy downpour. Well actually I might take it out in a hurricane because I

could get some good shots of the disaster.

Donﾒt hold me liable if your D200 fails but I feel that the weather seals are pretty good. I

mean why even bother including weather sealing if they donﾒt work effectively. Remember

that all lenses are not weather sealed though, I am still researching this myself but I know

the 70-200mm f/2.8 is and the 17-55mm is (its a DX lens) as well from what I've read.

Lukas

I have the D200 as well as the 70-200mm vr 2.8. I shoot sports every week and have a

pretty good feel for the D200's auto focus system. Forget closest subject priority and

normal dynamic auto focus. Neither of these modes work effectively for tracking a single

object, the auto focus system is to likely to be confused and focus on something else

other than what you want in either of these modes. Closest subject priority works great for

say a picture of someone with the sky as the background because there is nothing in front

of the subject to confuse the auto focus system. But with sports the race track in car races,

the floor in basketball or even other cars in the race or other players in the game will

confuse closest subject priority and lead to "out of focus pictures". Something will be in

focus but not what you want. The two modes I have found successful and you probably

will too are single area auto focus and group dynamic auto focus. Of course both of these

are used in conjunction with AF-C.

Here are my settings for the "Custom Settings Menu (sub menu a, for auto focus)" (some of

which may not suit your needs.)

a1 Focus (this is because I would rather not shoot at 5fps but have the camera slow down

and not shoot when focus is not achieved, this saves me time later of editing out the out

of focus shots, however when focus is established the D200 fires away at 5fps)

a2 Focus

a3 Normal Frame 11 areas (I switch this to wide 7 areas if I am shooting with Single-area

AF

a4 Pattern 1, center area

a5 Normal (you'll have to experiment with this one, really depends on the nature of what

your shooting)

a6 Shutter/AF-ON

a7 auto

a8 Wrap (makes switching focus areas much faster from end to end in the view finder)

a9 off

a10 AE/AF-L + Focus Area (I donﾒt know about you but when I have the vertical grip on my

D200 there is no possible way my thumb will ever reach the multi-selector to switch focus

areas so I have the little AF-ON button on the MB-D200 set so it works as the AE/AF-L

and if you hold it and rotate the sub command dial on the MB-D200 it will allow you to

switch focus areas.)

Note: When I shoot sports I most often use group dynamic 90% of the time and just leave

the center focus group enabled at all times. This for two reasons first it is the only cross-

type focus point in the D200 and secondly because once focus is established with the

center point of the central selected group the surrounding sensors will take over so you

can still do rule of thirds etc. for framing. The link below explains pretty much everything I

just said, the D200's focus system works almost exactly like the D2X but itﾒs slower... So

you'll find that everything in that article is accurate.

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/body/multi-cam2000_af/

index.html

I feel I am capable of taking the D200 apart and cleaning it no problem. I was really

referring to "should I do it because of the warranty" aspects although I didn't mention it. I

am very good with mechanical and electrical things since I used to race remote control

cars before I began photography. I'm not afraid of cleaning it and not being able to put it

back together or damaging it, I'm the type of person that cleans my own CCD with no

worries (with the high quality Sensor Brush of course). I have not done so with my D200

but have had to with my D70. I'm just going to have Nikon clean my D200 completely

when I send it in for the hot pixel specifically mentioning the sticky aperture ring. If the

camera was not new and I had if for a year or more I would have just cleaned it myself

already with out even posting on photo.net although Iﾒd probably mention my accident for

the humor of it.

Lukas

Thanks for the information. Just have to wait it out and it will clear up it sounds like. I have

not experimented with properties of soda until now. It does make since because maple syrup

beomces really sticky and then into the hard sugar stage as it dries as well.

Thanks,

Lukas

I am excited but I do not think I will buy one since I rely on auto focus for sports

photography.

I have tested the D200's weather seals to a certain extent. I no longer am afraid of going

out in the snow or light drizzle and getting the D200 a little wet, but no soaked. However I

have managed to find a weak spot of the D200. One day I was carrying my D200 with the

strap wrapped around my forearm and a soda in my hand. The soda was empty but there

must have been a little left as I was soon to discover. A small amount of soda (less than a

half ounce) found its way to my D200 body. I was not worried one bit because it was such

a small amount and I knew that the D200 has weather seals so I was not afriad of the soda

going inside the camera. Its been a few weeks now and I have discovered that a little bit of

soda found its way into the aperture ring around the lens mount on my D200 body. When I

go to put a lens on the D200 it is hard to turn the lens because of the aperture ring on the

body sticking. So my question is should I try to fix it myself or am I able to. There are 5

screws on the metal plate of the lens mount on the camera. I wonder if I take those screws

out if I would be able to remove the aperture ring to clean it so it doesn't stick anymore.

Or do you think I should not attempt to disassemble the camera even though it seems like

a simple fix although Iﾒm not sure. My problem does not affect the ability to take pictures

just switching lenses is not so fast and smooth as it should be and I would like it to be. It

not bad with big lenses like the 70-200 f/2.8 but it is rather difficult to put on say the

50mm f/1.8. And since the lens is constructed out of plastic its worrisome to turn it so

hard. I also have the Ritz Camera Damage Protection Plan, which would probably cover it

since it was an accident. My D200 body also has 1 hot pixel on the CCD that I will be

sending in to be remapped in June. Should I request the lens mount problem to be fixed

then (cleaned basically so its not sticky anymore) or attempt to fix it on my own.

Thanks,

Luke

Great shot! Same as above, D200, D70, D50, D2X, D2H(s) would love to know.

Lukas