Just shot my first footy match = bit blurred!

[paulhillion]

I shot a football match this afternoon for a friend, I took approx 650 shots & out of all of them very few were what I'd call sharp. I was using my 20D together with a 100-400L. I was trying to keep the shutter speed around the 1/200s mark but I guess this just isn't fast enough to catch the action! The example here was taken at 1/200s F5 & ISO800. I had the camera in M mode.

Any hints or tips for this type of shot would be most welcome, thanks!

Looking through them I almost wished I'd bought the 70-200 2-8L instead. Oh well, try again next Saturday!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/IMG_1125.jpg

[sGu]

With 20D, you should comfortably increase ISO above 1000 in order to get at least 1/400 sec shutter speed, the bottomline is 1/320 sec, don't ever go below that speed. 1/500 and faster is recommended for football, well, from my experience.

Also try use a monopod to stablise camera and lens to minimise shake. Other than that, just go out there and shoot. :D

[paulhillion]

Thanks sGu, I had a feeling you would reply to my question! I might ask Santa for a monopod, if I do get to use one should I turn off the 'IS' on my 100-400? I know you're meant to turn it off when using a tripod.

This shot caught my eye, could have been a classic if the little girl had kicked the ball at the same time!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v116/hillion/IMG_0896.jpg

[gmen]

I echo what sGu says. Crank up the ISO and try and shoot at 1/500s or faster. Once you start dabbling at 1/320s or even 1/400s, things can start to get a bit dicey. The IS isn't going to help you at all to be honest - it's all down to shutter speed.

I'd also advise taking up a lower position - this will add to the dynamic effect of your images. Get a stool or kneel... it looks like you are shooting from a standing position - get lower and you will be able to isolate the subject better.

Think seriously about that faster glass - I was shooting football today in pretty grim light. It was heavily overcast and the floodlights weren't on in the first half... so, at 3.30pm, I'd already reached 1/500s, f/2.8 at 1600ASA and it was downhill from there. If I'd been using a lens with a maximum aperture of f/5.6, I might as well have packed up and gone home!

Good luck with your next shoot!

If you're bored, I've got some recent football galleries online at:

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/a241004/index.html
http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/ga091004/index.html
http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/a161004/index.html

[sGu]

Absolutely, try get as low as possible while keep you shooting comfortably, grab one of those fishing tripod stools, only cost you no more than a fiver, then you can rest your legs while focusing on the action.

That could be an excellent shot if you can crop it tighter, leave just goalkeeper, little girl and part of goal post, also better sharpness would improve a lot.

Honestly speaking, I second gmen's advice on lens, go for a prime one, even if you have to rent one, you'll be amazed by it's fast focusing, colour, contrast and sharpness. Bear in mind, primes are ADDICTIVE!

300mm 2.8 will do a good job, but for football, it's a bit short, so 400mm 2.8 IS is THE one to go for ;)

[paulhillion]

Thanks for helping me spend money guys! Not sure I could afford the prime :shock: , however I have been looking at the 70-200mm f2.8L, what do you think of that as a lens?

Cheers,

Paul.

[sGu]

70-200mm 2.8 IS is a MUST have for every sports shooter and every serious amatuer, it has perfect range for goal action and flexibility of zoom, while keep tack sharp images in your bag, not to mention its fast focusing.

[paulhillion]

I can't really afford the 'IS' version, is it still worth considering getting the 70-200 2.8L without the IS? I would of thought using the 2.8 to get that bit extra on the shutter times the IS wouldn't matter so much?

Thanks.

[sGu]

well, IS mainly helps to stable your shot when you handheld, if you use monopod with it, then i don't see without IS would be a problem and of course if you can handheld very steady with a slow shutter speed, you won't find much shake in shots, since you'll most likely be using fast shutter speed.

[Jonny]

not to mention its fast focusing.


This may seem like a stupid question but......

Does the body make any difference to AF speed? Will a lens focus faster on a 20d than a 300d (rebel)??

[sGu]

not to mention its fast focusing.


This may seem like a stupid question but......

Does the body make any difference to AF speed? Will a lens focus faster on a 20d than a 300d (rebel)??

emm, I don't think it makes much difference on body, but I haven't seen or done any test myself to justify this, so don't quote me on it. But with centre focus point selected, I guess they are the same in terms of focusing speed, however, focus accuracy will vary.

You'll get much more keepers on a 1 series bodies than any other series.

[maderito]

Paul,

I think you'll find this thread from an an experienced sportshooter interesting. He uses the 20D for a day to shoot soccer and has some interesting observations when he compares it to his experience with the 1D/1D II.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/148200

So far, I haven't since convincing evidence (including my only early experience) that the 20D approaches the 1D in AF speed and accuracy. With the 20D, the constant challenge is to figure out whether missed shots are related to poor technique (shutter speed, camera shake, etc.) or inherent focus tracking limitations.

[nosquare2003]

not to mention its fast focusing.


This may seem like a stupid question but......

Does the body make any difference to AF speed? Will a lens focus faster on a 20d than a 300d (rebel)??


Both bodies and lens will affect the autofocus speed. It would be more obvious under low contrast / low light condition. I don't know if a 20D focus faster than a 300D however.