The Official Photography Thread - Vol. 3

[adobecs4]

F/4 is doable depending on your lighting and environment. F4 and 5.6 at night or in badly lit arenas/stadiums will hinder you.

 

[adobecs4]

I have the f/2.8 and honestly for sports, you never want to shoot at that aperture.

Respectfully, this is completely untrue.

 

[Fozz]

Let's go! (Damn, this is definitely heavier than the X100T lol)

 

[Fong$tarr]

Respectfully, this is completely untrue.

I guess it is from my experience. I don't shoot sports often but I find at f/2.8 that some of the body can be out of focus whether it be the hands or legs or what not. With skating stuff that I shoot and if I am shooting toward the skater coming at me, I prefer to shoot at f/4 or higher. I've shot with a 85mm f/1.8 and nothing looked good but I know that focal length for sports is not a favorable one. But that is my personal preference and the only low light action I have ever shot is concert stuff and you really need the open aperture but at most, you really just want the face in focus.

 

[ronaldo nazario]

Thanks everyone, I currently use a 75-300mm that came with my camera from Costco. Is that better than 70-200mm? I would assume so but know practically nothing.

 

[keko jones]

Enhanced from this ....

Which one?

 

[ronaldo nazario]

F/4 is doable depending on your lighting and environment. F4 and 5.6 at night or in badly lit arenas/stadiums will hinder you.

Luckily it's just all Sunday league, during the day so shouldn't have to deal with any of that.

 

[adobecs4]

Thanks everyone, I currently use a 75-300mm that came with my camera from Costco. Is that better than 70-200mm? I would assume so but know practically nothing.

Is it the kit lens? If so, you can get away with it in daytime, decent lit arenas sometimes. If it's this lens below, it will have hard time firing off shots when you're at 1/800 or above, continuous shooting mode at times. It tracks very slow.

 

[James_O]

Enhanced from this ....

Which one?

First one. Looks almost fake, Dayem good photo

 

[ronaldo nazario]

Is it the kit lens? If so, you can get away with it in daytime, decent lit arenas sometimes. If it's this lens below, it will have hard time firing off shots when you're at 1/800 or above, continuous shooting mode at times. It tracks very slow.

Honestly don't even know what "kit lens" means haha. But it is the lens you pictured. And that is what I noticed in terms of shooting. Hard to fire off several shots and doesn't get as close as I would like it too. Would a different 75-300 be better? Or just get one with more zoom?

 

[adobecs4]

Honestly don't even know what "kit lens" means haha. But it is the lens you pictured. And that is what I noticed in terms of shooting. Hard to fire off several shots and doesn't get as close as I would like it too. Would a different 75-300 be better? Or just get one with more zoom?

That focal length is fine, it's all about the aperture of the lens. 1.8 or 2.8 will shoot faster. An f/4 is just slower when shooting action/sports.

 

[jkballer5]

I'd love to have a long lens that's at least as fast as f/4. Right now, my main for shooting Jags games is the Sony 200-600 f/5.6-6.3. It works for the most part since most games here are bright and hot as hell 1pm games

Shots from Sunday:

 

[Fong$tarr]

If I was on a "budget" as a Canon user, I would use a 100-400mmm f/4.5-5.6 version ii with IS. I've heard it is pretty damn sharp and I would want the versatility of a zoom rather than a prime. Part of also sports photography is not just the lens but the focus system and frames per second and each sport is different too. I shot some college baseball once with a 400mm lens for fun and the action is just not the same as say football. You sort of always need the ball in frame whether it is the pitcher throwing the ball or the hitter hitting it and that is pretty hard to do from my experience.

 

[ronaldo nazario]

After looking at most of these lenses. I don't think I can afford any of them at the moment I'll see what I can do with this lens that came with my camera and keep you guys updated.

 

[Fozz]

After looking at most of these lenses. I don't think I can afford any of them at the moment I'll see what I can do with this lens that came with my camera and keep you guys updated.

Just practice and see which focal length you like to shoot at. That could help you narrow down on buying a better lens for your needs.

 

[ronaldo nazario]

Just practice and see which focal length you like to shoot at. That could help you narrow down on buying a better lens for your needs.

Thanks, there's a spot here that lets you rent lenses too so might go that route as well to test out some of these options.

 

[Fong$tarr]

Thanks, there's a spot here that lets you rent lenses too so might go that route as well to test out some of these options.

That's actually a good idea. I know that can be costly in the long run after you get the lens but it's a great way to test things out. I've used https://www.borrowlenses.com/ and they are fine and their return system is pretty damn easy. And DSLR lenses are not as expensive as they once were with mirrorless being the craze. Craigslist and even estate sales are a great way to save some money. Just make sure test the product before you buy it.

 

[andretti]

So like most of my photography, I keep bouncing from one thing to another. I shot like 3 rolls on a trip to Yosemite and got my scans back and all were messed up which I have like no idea why. I did use a tripod with my RB67 with a release cable but other than that, I thought I shot it pretty straight forward and failed somehow.

Anyways...got back to digital and bought a new strobe to add to my other one. Got a chance to do some skateboard photography for some old school pros last week. Pretty hyped on the outcome.

There is an RB specific cable release that has
two ends. One goes in the shutter release on
the body, the other into the lens with the lens
set to "mirror up." Using this it makes it a two
step process: the body release lifts the mirror
and the second (you have to push harder so
there should be a delay to allow the mirror
vibrations to dissipate) releases the lens
shutter to actually make the exposure.
Or you can keep the lens set to normal and just
one release in the body to do everything.
The "T" setting is not same as B. With T, you
have to close the shutter by slightly tipping the
mirror cock forward. You don't have to hold the
shutter open on T; it stays open until you close
it. This is different than the B setting closes
when you release the shutter. RB lenses have
the T setting.

 

[andretti]

 

[Fong$tarr]

There is an RB specific cable release that has
two ends. One goes in the shutter release on
the body, the other into the lens with the lens
set to "mirror up." Using this it makes it a two
step process: the body release lifts the mirror
and the second (you have to push harder so
there should be a delay to allow the mirror
vibrations to dissipate) releases the lens
shutter to actually make the exposure.
Or you can keep the lens set to normal and just
one release in the body to do everything.
The "T" setting is not same as B. With T, you
have to close the shutter by slightly tipping the
mirror cock forward. You don't have to hold the
shutter open on T; it stays open until you close
it. This is different than the B setting closes
when you release the shutter. RB lenses have
the T setting.

This explains a ton. Thanks for that. Cause now that I remember from my roll, all things not from the cable release turned out okay. So I guess I have to buy the one specific for this camera.

Perhaps you can help me on another thing I am confused about. I have the pro S back for the RB67. When you load film, you advance the film 3-4 times before it starts at "1". When I do it, it will just keep on rewinding without stopping sometimes. I saw the video below and don't see anything out of the ordinary that I am not doing. Does that back tab have something to do with anything? I do have to toggle that every time I advance the film when I am shooting for some odd reason.

 

[Fong$tarr]

Also anyone trying to rent from Borrowlenses.com, they have having a 2 day flash sale:

2 Days to Save!

Save 20% on all rentals when you place a rental today or tomorrow! This deal is good on gear arriving by Halloween.

Use Code: OCTFLASH

 

[adobecs4]

I definitely need to rent a 400mm and see what it's like

 

[Fong$tarr]

I definitely need to rent a 400mm and see what it's like

I just checked the rental for the Canon 400m f/2.8 and it's like a little under $400 after taxes and the discount for 7 day rental. I swear you even have to buy insurance on that thing but I took it off at the cart and it was fine. That is still a hefty price for a rental but almost all photographers would never want to drop $12K on a lens unless they are getting paid to use it. I think even most sports photographers have that lens as a staff lens for many to use.

 

[adobecs4]

I just checked the rental for the Canon 400m f/2.8 and it's like a little under $400 after taxes and the discount for 7 day rental. I swear you even have to buy insurance on that thing but I took it off at the cart and it was fine. That is still a hefty price for a rental but almost all photographers would never want to drop $12K on a lens unless they are getting paid to use it. I think even most sports photographers have that lens as a staff lens for many to use.

Sheesh at $400 for one week it'd have to be a playoff game or something for me to rent that and justify it

 

[picasso swerve]

I like all this photography talk.

I never really shot with anything higher than an 85mm and even then I felt uncomfy with it. I did mainly street/landscape type shots so 16-35 or a 50 was perfect for me. Wide angle shots are just so fun. Imagine having to do that in a sports game with a 16, would literally have to be running next to Bron or have a helmet and pads on in a football game next to the QB.