long, slow lenses and nightime sporting events

[thedude]

Hello everyone!

I bought a digital rebel approx 1 month ago. Of course it came with the 18-55mm lens. Several days later, I bought the canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM and the 50mm f1.8.

I went to a football game in Houston TX and took some pictures of the TX high school all star game using the 75-300. Of course I ran into problems getting the shutter speeds that I wanted. :-( I ended up running the shutter speed at ~160, while compensating with max apeture and high ISOs (800 and 1600)
This game has bitten me with wanting to take football action pictures. I have received an invitation to take pictures of a local high school team with basically all-access sidelines availability. This has me worried. The game I shot was in a well lighted, college stadium. (Rice stadium) The high school I'm looking at shooting is a small school, and if it's anything like the school I attended, the lighting will be decidedly sub-par.

Which leads me to my question; If I bought a 550ex, would I see any improvement in lighting at the long focal lengths? Or to put it another way, What range does the 550ex have?

BHphotovideo has this listed in the flash specs:

138' (42 m) at 50mm
180' (55 m) at 105mm

Does that mean that at 105mm focal length, the flash will reach 180'? That sounds awful far to me...but, I know that this is the big daddy flash.

If that is true, at 300mm, will the flash reach even farther?

Can someone shed some 'light' on the subject for me?! lol

And, as an added bonus, here are several pics from the night game!


This is one of the guys we went to the game to watch...going to TAMU this year! Morrissey is his name...
*picture removed*

One of the suprise pictures I got...grainy, but pretty cool seeing his helmet come off!
*picture removed*
I love these type of pictures. Two lines about to go to war!!!

*picture removed*

This is a prime example of what I would like to do. Notice that his face is severly in shadow. With a big flash, could I reasonably expect to lighten it up? While at the same time decreasing the ISO to get rid of some of the grain?

*picture removed*

Thanks in advance for all the help!

[Jon]

Hello everyone!

I bought a digital rebel approx 1 month ago. Of course it came with the 18-55mm lens. Several days later, I bought the canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM and the 50mm f1.8.

I went to a football game in Houston TX and took some pictures of the TX high school all star game using the 75-300. Of course I ran into problems getting the shutter speeds that I wanted. :-( I ended up running the shutter speed at ~160, while compensating with max apeture and high ISOs (800 and 1600)
This game has bitten me with wanting to take football action pictures. I have received an invitation to take pictures of a local high school team with basically all-access sidelines availability. This has me worried. The game I shot was in a well lighted, college stadium. (Rice stadium) The high school I'm looking at shooting is a small school, and if it's anything like the school I attended, the lighting will be decidedly sub-par.

Which leads me to my question; If I bought a 550ex, would I see any improvement in lighting at the long focal lengths? Or to put it another way, What range does the 550ex have?

BHphotovideo has this listed in the flash specs:

138' (42 m) at 50mm
180' (55 m) at 105mm

Does that mean that at 105mm focal length, the flash will reach 180'? That sounds awful far to me...but, I know that this is the big daddy flash.

If that is true, at 300mm, will the flash reach even farther?

Can someone shed some 'light' on the subject for me?! lol



No, 180 is the "Guide Number", in feet for the flash at the 105 mm. lens coverage setting (an auxiliary lens on the flash focusses the light to provide coverage for a 105 mm. lens). The Guide Number (GN) is the product of the distance in feet and the aperture in use. It won't get any better with a 300 mm camera lens, since it's a characteristic of the strobe lamp and the zoom lens on the strobe. So at f/5.6, you'd get coverage out to about 30-35 feet, regardless of the lens you're using, if the flash is set to 105 mm.

[Jon]

Forgot to say - GN is reported at ISO 100; using a higher ISO will increase the distance you've got coverage. Figure for every doubling of ISO you'll gain a stop coverage, or a distance multiplier of 1.4x. So ISO 400, f/ 5.6 will be good to about 70 ft., 1600 to about 140 ft. But your E-TTL is going to be looking at the overall picture, not the shadows under the guy's helmet.

[thedude]

So is there any hope?

Frankly, I can't afford a $2000 lens to do this. I was poking around the net and found an article on luminous landscapes that talked about a product called a 'better beamer'. It appeared to be a giant lens which snaps over the front of your flash, therefore focusing the flash beam and enabling it to have farther 'reach'. The article claimed 100ft of fill flash mode...How would night shooting affect it?

I just read your second post. Thank you for responding! There is so much to learn.

I guess what I'm really after is the ability to take pictures at a higher shutter speed. I went to the game with the assumption that I would need 1/250 or higher to really 'freeze' the action, but I was rarely able to get that speed without the camera reporting that the image would be underexposed. (Tv mode)

[Jon]

That's essentially what the zoom head on the 550 does, and why the GN differs with lens coverage. From the numbers, the "Better Beamer" will give you about double the distance you'd otherwise get with your regular flash, but you're still going to have to deal with sync speed on the camera, which is 1/200 sec. The flash will be able to stop whatever it's focussed on (which, with the "Better Beamer" will have to be pretty well centered), but the background is going to be smeared if there's any action. Night shooting won't make much difference, but being in a large open area may, as GN is usually figured taking bounce from ceilings, walls, etc. into account, and you won't have any of these around.

The other things to remember are that with a 300 mm lens, hand-holding at less than 1/500 or so will commonly show camera shake, and that E-TTL will still be trying to provide fill-flash. You may want (if they're allowed, and you aren't moving around) to use a monopod for added stability.

[Mark Kemp]

Your best bet is the maximum ISO setting.

That way you will get the best combination of aperture and shutter speed that you can. Then set at least a 1/250 (for a 300mm lens) shutter speed and live with the depth of field (probably pretty small) If you can't even get 1/250 you may just have to use the fastest shuuter speed you can and hope.

I wouldn't recommend flash during any sporting event because you will undoubtedly distract the competitors. Especially in your case as those guys look big and mean, I wouldn't want them mad at me!

Plus, of course you would need a flash the size of a lighthouse to make any difference at more than a few feet.

For small areas like faces a bit of post process in the computer is probably a more practical solution.

Your pictures are pretty good given the difficult conditions. If you really want to lighten the faces there is probably some data still in the shadow areas and its often surprising what a little playing with something like a burn brush or lighten tool will do.

[DocFrankenstein]

That's why I got a Sigma f/2.8 instead of 70-200 /4.0 L :P

You can get the hack for the rebel. It has 3200 ISO. The shutter time is gonna be twice as short. No matter what you do, the conditions are very difficult and you need pro equipment to do this. That's why fast lenses cost so much. :(

Also get some sort of support. Be it a monopod or a tripod, it's gonna help A LOT.

[GenEOS]

I think I have a little experience with this...
I have shot one season with my D60 & 100-400 f3.5-4.5
and one season with the D60 & a 70-200 f2.8 IS.
With the slower lens I shot a flash a lot. Although, I don't like to do it.
With the faster lens, I shot a flash on only the darkest of fields.
I used a 420EX.

I found that direct lighting the players caused harsh pics. I had lots of luck angling the head up about 30 degrees and shooting the flash over head. Sound strange? Well, it worked.

I shot mostly at 800 and 1000. I did not have the option of 1600.
The grain is going to be there. You are not going to get shots with the gear you have without grain. But you can get sharp, nicely exposed ones.

Look around at these galleries and look at my exif data.
http://www.tunstall.cc/HighSchool.htm
This gallery in particular was on a very very dark field and I relied on the flash tremendously: http://www.tunstall.cc/galleries/110703_lhnlhs_fb1/index.htm

You want your exposures at least at 1/250th. Any less and you will not stop the action.

You are going to be running through hurdles to get good shots, but it can be done. Just watch out when usning your flash during the games, so as not to interupt play or distract a player. i.e. shooting into their eyes before the play begins.

[mdm]

The big lebowski. Great, funny movie Dude. Good luck on getting this night time sports thing going. By the way everyone is talking about grain from a high iso, if you get the hack for the rebeld, wouldn't the 3200 iso be terrible ?