lukas_jenkins

I have shot a lot of sports with the D200. Indoor basketball at the moment. In my opinion

the D2h autofocus system is a lot better than the D200. The lack of more than one cross-

type focus sensor is a disapointment. I do not like how the left and right focus points

(when shooting vertical) are located on the centerweighted metering circle. They are to

close to the middle of the frame. That being so it is difficult to frame subjects when using

group dynamic auto focus. As far as focus speed the D200 seems to be able to keep up

(I've been using a 50mm f/1.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8), for highschool sports anyway. I will

say that the 10mp alows for a whole heck of a lot of cropping. See if you can find someone

who has one and go photographing at an event with them and take it for a little test drive

and see if it will fit your needs. Keep in mind the size of the files from the D200 are a lot

bigger than those of the D2h so if you don't have at least 1GB of ram it might be a slow

boat editing. I think you would be able to shoot sports with the D200, I do multiple times

a week but If I were to be able to afford the D2X I would get that. Since it is nessesary for

me to be able to print up to 24x36 I choose the D200 over the D2h because I want to be

able to crop and still have more resolution to work with than start cropping a 4.1mp image

from the D2h. I've attached some sports images from the D200.

Lukas<div></div>

Thanks for the info. I have definitely found gelling the flash to yield excellent results. As

far as using the cheaper flashes I think I'm not going to be able to do that since I'm not

always the only photographer. So far the other photographers that I photograph with and

the ones that shoot for the paper donﾒt use wireless flashes or they have the Canon set up.

So using the sb-800s and sb-600s is necessary so my flashes are only fired by me. But

now that I think of it even this may not work because the flashes work off of light pulses

so other flashes still might trip them... I'll have to experiment with some of my other

inferior digital cameras. I have the D70 as well as the D200. The D70 is not the greatest

thing when it comes to noise at iso 1600 but I think in the near future I might put the

70-200mm f/2.8 on that and keep the 50mm f/1.8 around my neck on the D200. I still

am curious about the effect of using a flash diffuser such as the provided dome that

comes with the SB-800 to lessen the harsh reflected light if a remote flash system will not

work out. The championship games that will occur in the coming weeks are not at my

home court so I am definitely unsure of being able to use wireless flash in those facilities. I

will look into the vivitar flashes because they are inexpensive and I'm sure I could use

them for many other things. As you can see from the picture the walls of the gym are

cement block and that is pretty much the same all the way around. So I might need to

come up with some kind of suction cup idea or something to temporarily stick to the wall

in order to get flashes up at decent heights. I was definitely having some issues shooting

at iso 1600 with ambient lighting. I was able to obtain pretty close to proper exposure but

just the variance in color balance from the lights power cycle and the position really

brought out a lot of noise that resulted in a fair amount of lost detail after a run through

noise ninja. I wish the school(s) would have better lights, it would make it much nicer. In

the future I'll end up taking pictures of college basketball games which will probably be

more pleasant since the arenas are brighter.

I can move around but not 100% freely. The referees do not like photographers sitting

under the basket. So I pretty much shoot from the corner of the baseline and sideline and

sometimes push the envelope and drift in about 3 feet from the sideline so I'm behind the

basket a little more.

I can't wait till outdoor sports start, a new set of challenges but the lighting is not as much

as a concern.

I have attached a image shot in a different gym which is a little brighter than the other

gym which the first picture posted was taken in. This shot was taken with the 70-200mm

f/2.8 at f/2.8 1/250s iso 1600 without flash. Exposure was increased about 1.5 stops in

Photoshop from a JPEG file. This image was taken before D200 support of Raw files in

Adobe ACR. As you can see it is acceptable but flash would have made it better since I

probably would have shot at iso 800 instead of 1600.

Lukas<div></div>

I have recently become affiliated with a sports photography website. At the moment I have

been shooting indoor high school basketball, which includes the poor lighting in all its

glory. My 70-200mm f/2.8 was not fit for the job even at iso 1600. The poor detail in the

shadows (under players arms) was not pleasing due to the overhead lights and high iso.

Since these pictures have the potential of being printed 24x36 iso 1600 is not optimal. I

feel I have come along quite well so far but I am still not receiving the professional results

that are capable. In more recent games I have began to use my 50mm f/1.8 and Nikon

SB-800 Speedlight. With this set up I had the flash on a Stroboframe Pro T flash bracket as

well as using a green gel made by Nikon to match the flash color balance. The use of the

50mm f/1.8 lens resulted in a iso of 800 to be about -2/3 under the ambient reading at

1/250s f/2.2. Overall I was happy with the sharpness and color reproduction, of course I

would love to shoot at iso 400 but I do not know if I want the flash handling that much of

the lighting. My real disappointment was that overall the white jerseys of the basketball

players reflect a lot of light (some times close to becoming washed out in areas) due to the

direct flash. So should I use the dome diffuser that came with the SB-800 to try and soften

the light? Or is off camera flash a better alternative? I only have 1 SB-800 but I might get a

SB-600 if off camera flash is the only way. Note: I am currently using the D200 which has a

built in commander mode which would allow both flashes to be used off camera. My one

concern about off camera flash is where to put the flashes so they will not get stepped on

or hit by a out of bounds basketball.

The picture below is a sample of the best results I am currently able to achieve. It

demonstrates the reflected light off the jerseys, which is why I have attached it.

However, if you have any other suggestions they would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Lukas<div></div>

Just to throw in a little knowledge about color managment througout a workflow with the

D70. I am asuming your monitor is profiled to display accurate color and you are using a

icc profile aware program such as Photoshop. That being said you will get the most

"acurrate" color by using the AdobeRGB profile over the sRGB choices, also the Adobe

profile is larger than the sRGB's, thus your images will express the widest range of colors

using the AdobeRGB profile. The sRGB profiles are intended for web use or direct printing

where no post processing occurs. So I would suggest using the Adobe color space

although it adds a extra step of converting to sRGB to print at some labs and for the web.

A side step, but never the less one that is worth taking, in my opinion

The reason for using an iso of 400 is because I was using consistent lighting, not flash. I

will try using a larger aperature (f/4) and a faster shutter speed. Since the image was shot

at 48mm I think i might try and use a 50mm f/1.8 lens instead of the kit lens, it will

probaly yeild a sharper image. I appriciate your fast and helpful suggestions.

Sounds like a plan, I'll experiment tomorrow.

Lukas

I am doing a doing this shoot over on wed (these pictures aren't supposed to be seen), but

I have a question about image quality, really the sharpness and I would like some input

before then. The image below was shot at iso 400, 48mm, f/8, 1/60th of a second with

the D70 + 18-70mm kit lens, image sharpening set to none in camera (Unsharp mask in

Photoshop, 199%, 1.0 radius, and 3 for threshold), shot in raw. Also, I used a Manfrotto

3001BPRO tripod and used the wireless remote shutter release, focus was on the eyes/

forehead. I feel that the images are not razor sharp and that they should be. I see images

shot at f/2.8 sharper than mine at f/8. The first image below is just a view of the entire

image and the second a 100% crop of the subjects face. My question is this all that I can

expect out of my D70 or should my images be sharper/more in focus then they are? When

I look online I see portraits from the D70 that look much sharper than the images I have

taken. Is it just that they are not 100% full size that they look so sharp or am I missing

something. Also, my D70 was a display model in the camera shop for a while before I

bought it (doubt that has anything to do with my problem). Any suggestions or feedback, I

have been feeling frustrated with my D70 for a while now.

<br><br>

Lukas

<br><br>

<center>

<img src="http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a265/dclj12/_DSC7342-2.jpg"

alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com"><br><br>

<img src="http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a265/dclj12/_DSC7342.jpg" alt="Image

hosted by Photobucket.com"><br><br>

</center>

Hello I have read through tons of fourms but need a simple yes or no awnser, I've collected

bits and pieces but still am not totaly clear. I have a Nikon D70 and want to use the SB800

flash to connect to a Excalibur strobe via pc sync cord connected to the SB800. I have read

the D70 to have a sync voltage max of 250v (pretty high) and the Excalibur 3200 to have a

sync voltage of 9v. I am asuming that since this is the case it is safe to use the Excalibur

3200 with the D70. Also I am using to Excalibur 3200's so the one would be set to

wirelessly trip the others. I have heard that there is a way to get the D70 to trip the strobes

by the SB800 flash with out a sync cord but have been unable to get it to work. Please

help.

Lukas

I am very happy with the N75 light meter. I always bracket by .5 or a whole stop and have

never had all 3 be the wrong exposure.

I think i have come to conclusions that the Tokina 12-24mm f4 is probaly one of the best

wide angle lenses for the d70 and similar nikon digital cameras? What do you think,

agreed? Also, I think I'm going to start to save and plan on getting the Tokina 12-24 and

Nikon 70-200 with nikon 1.4x tele converter. I think these are the two best lenses for my

all photography purpouses in general from super wide landscapes to 0 distraction portrait

backgrounds and sporting events. Both lenses look like a long term investment that won't

become outgrown like nikon 100-300 f4-5.6 (the pictures i've taken with that lens have

HORRIBLE purple outlines basicly of people and objects, very disapointed with that lens).

Any final thoughts before on this topic?

Luke

You are mentioning of the 20mm f2.8 and 24mm f2.8 being out performed by zoom

lenses on digital SLR's. I am curious what about the 50mm f1.8 on the d70 compared to

say the 18-70 dx lens at 50mm? Is the prime still lacking or only in the widers lense?

nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR with a 1.4x teleconvertor (plus the 1.5x crop factor of the d70)

would be equivilent to 420mm at f/4.

Still working on my research on things to do at various ports. I am however 100% positive

that there are many ports where you can get off the boat and go on land and basically do

what ever you want. You can also sign up to do excursions such as kayaking as you

mentioned, many tour type things, bike trips, hikes, etc. The ports are as follows Tracys

Arm Fjord, Juneau, Skagway, Icy Strait Point, Inside passage (Cruising), and Victoria which

is in British Columbia. Also, am planning on staying a day in Seattle Washington which is

where the cruise starts and ends at. So to answer you question bill I believe the Inside

Passage is where all the ice is and that would be viewed from the ship, probably seals and

polar bears. But the other stops I am able to get off the boat and have an opportunity to

see all kinds of wild life, bears, whales, eagles, elk, and salmon going upstream. No idea

what I will see but the possibilities are endless. Most likely my backup camera would be a

Canon PowerShot S1 IS (it is only 3.2 mega pixels but it has a good 10x optical zoom lens

and Image stabilization) or 35mm, traveling on a cruise with film worries me because you

have to go through a metal detector to board the ship again so every roll of film shot

would have a minimal of 3 passes through x-ray machines (airport twice and ship once), I

have not traveled using film so I am unaware. Some say nothing happens and others say

like send it home to get processed and all kinds of stuff like get it processed there etc.

Robert you mentioned you have been using the 12-24mm sigma. Can you provide any

information on the use of filters with the lens, the gelatin type? I am definitely considering

the sigma since I can use it with my 35mm camera as well, its not cost effective to have a

wide angle lens that just works with digital sensors when you shoot film and digital.

I think I have a solution for you check out this product called digisnap by harbortronics

http://www.harbortronics.com/products2000.asp

One other thing, does anyone have an opinion on the Novoflex MagicBall Universal ball

head? I've heard good of Markins and ReallyRightStuff but this Novoflex is about 100

dollars cheaper and the design is pretty inovative.

Next August I am traveling on a 7 day cruise to Alaska so I am starting early to build up

my equipment. I currently have a 50mm f/1.8 AF, 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX

(the kit lens), and the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.G AF. I am not sure the 70-300 was the best

buy, it seemed like it at the time (being cheap) but I am not happy with the purple outline

of people at 300mm (probably sell it). I am looking to get a wide-angle lens (for

architecture and landscapes) and a better zoom telephoto that would be good for wild life

and sports. For wide angle I am looking at the Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX,

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5/5.6 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM, and the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX

DC HSM. The one thing I like about the Sigma 12-24 is that it can be used with film and

digital, unlike the other two lenses although I dislike that only Gelatin Filters can be used

(inserted in rear) I do not know to much about Gelatin filters for lenses, any comments?

The 10-20mm really opened my eye when I saw it was so wide! But Nikon still might have

the better lens. I actually was always thinking Nikon to be the best until I finally decided to

look into sigma after seeing about their millionth add in Shutterbug and Popular

Photography. I am not sure what lens would be best for wildlife and sports. It seems that

the lens ?I like? is more suited for wild life as it is pretty slow 4.5-5.6, it?s the 80-400mm

f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF, I like the focal length range but not the f/4.5-5.6 for shutter

speeds, also it doesn?t have AF-S. The next lens I was looking at well 2, are the 70

-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR and the normal 80-200mm F/2.8D ED AF. I feel that the

80-200 is a little short though, what do you think about using the TC-14E II with it, that

would make it a 280mm and the 1.5x crop factor of the D70 would make the field of view

equivalent to 420mm with a loss of 1 stop to make it a f/4? I just realized that now the

70-200 VR with the 1.4x teleconvertor plus the 1.5x factor of the sensor. I have a ton of

saving to do to get these, good thing I?m starting early so I can save Christmas money and

save money from work this summer. Thanks for your help in advanced.

Luke

Based on my limited selection of bags i went with the LowePro, Computrekker Plus AW

since i has a tripod holder and the All Weather cover. In the future I plan to sell my 17"

powerbook for a smaller 15" or 12" powerbook and then buy a smaller bag for easier

travel.

- - Actual Powerbook Computer Dimensions

- Height: 1.0 inch

- Width: 15.4 inches

- Depth: 10.2 inches

I have come down to basically 2 with one pending. The LowePro CompuTrekker AW and

Farmers Double. I have listed below the CompuTrekker AW and CompuTrekker Plus AW

because I am not sure if I can squese an extra .4 in. on the one dimension for my laptop to

fit (what do you think)? One question LowePro has the All Weather (AW) cover and the

Crumpler has waterproof ripstop lining I wonder which is better. One disadvantage of the

Crumpler is no tripod holder, however I love the Crumpler design. Which bag do you

think

would be suited better for airplane travel, or any other suggestions? Another factor I am

5 foot 4 inches tall.

- LowePro, CompuTrekker AW, main compartment 11 x 15 x 5 in., notebook

sleeve 12 x 15 x 1.5 in. (my laptop is 15.4 inches wide .4 bigger than the notebook sleeve,

do you think I could squeeze my PowerBook into this?)

- LowePro, CompuTrekker Plus AW, main compartment 13 x 18.9 x 5.3 in., notebook

sleeve 11.6 x 18.7 x 1.9 in.

- Crumpler, Farmers Double, 13.8 x 21.7 x 9.4 in., holds 17 inch PowerBook

I posted this but for some reason it appears as if it did not get posted so I am posting this

again. I currently use a Nikon d70 and have a small shoulder bag for carrying it. But this

summer I am traveling and am bringing my 17" laptop so I think I would benefit from a

book bag. Can anyone please recommend a book bag that meets the following

requirements or one you think is good? I searched the Internet for a few hours but could

not decide on one since I am not able to physically see it.

Requirements: Hold d70 with attached lens, hold 2-3 other lenses, Nikon speedlight,

17"powerbook (I know this puts some limits on the bag but there is no other choice), and

basic other accessories. It would be nice for the bag to be able to hold a second (film)

body. I would also like it to be as portable and compact as possible since I will be using it

as my carry-on for flying, any suggestions?