Tennis Tournament: Backed into a bit of a corner

[Adama]

Hi Guys,

There's a chance that I am going to be shooting a professional tennis tournament in August, the Rogers Cup in Toronto. My gear list is below, and I'm obviously going to have to rent some stuff out. I know my 70-200 is going to be fine for action since I'm going to be court side (I'd have press access to the event) but I have a 300 2.8 rented out just in case. Now, I was going to rent out another Mark III or a Mark II N, but no rental place in the city has a 1D for rent. Imagine that. So I've temporarily decided to rent out the 5D MK II since I am not using it for action shots (I mainly want to use the 300 for extreme close ups), and I'm also getting a 1.4x extender just in case I need the extra range. I really am unsure about this decision since I am so used to shooting action with the 1D now and I wonder if the extra 50mm I get with the 300 is worth even using a second body + lens (the 70-200 is 250mm on APS-H I believe)

I am just curious if you guys have any advice, especially those who have shot tennis before. I considered getting the 50D as my secondary body but the truth is the IQ and resolution on the 5D II is so ridiculously good my HOPE is that I can always crop in post to get that 1.6x reach. And again, I don't need the low shutter lag/high frame rate since this is for close ups and not action.

EDIT: My second thought is just using the extender with the 300 and 5D II. I hear the 1.4x extender works very well with the 300 and I primarily am shooting day games which means plenty of light.

[dmwierz]

When I've shot pro tennis, I use my 400 and 70-200. Personally, have gotten WAY more WOW shots with the 400 than with the 70-200.

Here are some with the 400:

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76521368.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76122258.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76382398/jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76452435.jpg

And here are a few with the 70-200:

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76265949.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76264509.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76251418.jpg

It depends whether you want full body shots or tight captures. Like I said, I far prefer the close-ups.

In the events I've worked, 3/4 of the shooters use a 400 as their primary lens and something shorter (70-200 or a 300) for the rest of their shots. With the 400, you can not only get shots in the near court, but can shoot across the net. A shorter lens will only allow you to get near court shots.

[Adama]

Sounds like you know what you're doing so I'll definitely keep your advice in mind, thanks for your thoughts.

This is very important for me as it's my first professional assignment and my first opportunity to add professional sports to my portfolio for a potential job shooting pro sports in the fall. I really want to make an impression on my potential employers, and any potential employer really.

[SPORTshot]

Congrats on your first assignment Adama and I wish you the best of luck ! I'm an aspiring sports photographer as well. I hope to get an opportunity like you, one of these days.

[rovers_Andy]

superb photos Dennis!

[dmwierz]

Alex,

It sounds like you're really committed to doing the best you can on this assignment and that's great. Be careful not to put yourself under too much pressure, though.

Do you have any chances to shoot High School or College tennis between now and then? If so, I'd do this as many times as possible. Or even go down to the local tennis courts and learn how to read the game from the proximity of courtside.

You need to get familiar with how to shoot forehands and backhands. A forehand shot typically doesn't look the best when shot across net unless you time it for before or after ball impact, like these images:

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76073314.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76107878.jpg

Trying for a forehand shot from across the net and ball impact, for example, often ends up with flailing arms like this:

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76517959.jpg

Which I think looks kinda weird.

There are several posts on this board that describe shooting tennis, so give the search feature a try and see what you come up with, then post your images here and see what the members have to say.

You mentioned to me in your email that those familiar with the venue say the 70-200 is all you'll need, and this begs my next question: whom are you shooting for and what are they looking for? I haven't worked a lot of pro tennis, but the events I have covered, there were mostly 400's, both for covering the matches courtside, and especially for working from behind the end lines, like this. No way you're gonna get anything from behind the baseline with a 70-200:

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76562173.jpg

Is the agency you're shooting for looking for tight close-ups or full body shots? FWIW, I have rarely been told to shoot looser on any assignment and in any sport. In fact, most of the images I have had published were cropped even further before being published, so the Photo Editor ended up wanted the image even tighter than I shot it.

Shooting tennis from the side of the court with a big lens like a 400 may see like overkill, but trust me, it can and is done all the time. First of all, like I said above, if you shoot with a 70-200, you'll be relegating yourself to pretty much only covering the action in the near court - you'll be way to loose to get anything on the other side of the net. Secondly, while a loose shot can always be cropped tighter, you also say the only pro body you'll be able to get is a 1D? That's not a very big file, so relying on cropping to get you tight shots might be more problematic.

Edit: I just realized all the shots I've posted are from the first pro tennis event I covered a couple years back, and this was only a month or so after getting my 400. I went into the event worried that the 400 would be way too long, but after a day or so of practicing (during qualifying) ended up shooting 90% of the matches (and about the same percentage of events subsequent to this one) with the 400. I'll only change to a wider lens if I've already gotten enough close-ups of a given player, to add variety.

Again, don't put too much pressure on yourself. At the end of this or any other day, the quality of the work in your portfolio is way more important than the level you are shooting at.

Here's a link to the ESPN photo wire. It gives you a good idea of how tight to shoot and what types of images are their best (they only submit the best shots from any given match, and of these, typically only the best get published or posted):

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/apphoto/wire?id=850

The first time I worked a pro tennis event, I spent hours here, and actually saved dozens of images to my hard drive and put them in a slide show. I watched this slide show over and over again, analyzing where I thought the photographer was positioned, where the ball was, whether they were low or high (some venues have sunken pits on the sides of the courts where you can shoot from), etc. Basically, I tried to reverse-Engineer how each of the shooters worked the match. Then I incorporated what I learned into my first matches I covered, and afterward, compared my shots to the best of what I had seen, and posted here and on another sports board for honest critique.

[Adama]

Thanks for the reply Dennis. I think I'm going to rent out the 400 2.8 and a Mark II. Still going to have to decide which lens to mount my Mark III on.

As for your question about what my editor is looking for, I believe just a few great shots with the 70-200 would be good enough. We have three other shooters there so we're not under too much pressure. The truth is they want a few solid images and that's it, maybe 3-4 others if they decide to do a spread for the event. I'm sure they have no issue with me taking out the 400 and will love the shots I take with it, but I am sure they would be content with me just using my 70-200.

What I also want from this event as well are "Wow" images for my portfolio that will stand out so I can get maybe get a job at this image agency that I am looking at (I have a friend there who I've worked with for a year willing to help me out if he thinks my portfolio is worthy of submission). This is going to be my once chance to shoot professional sports before then, everything else I've done so far is community sports work. So I think I'm going to take your advice and go long for this event and use the 70-200 for secondary wide shots.

[dmwierz]

Alex,

Got it. IMHO, nothing says "Wow!" more than a 400 shot at close quarters.

Since you're at York University, any chance you can work some of their tennis practices? I notice York's tennis season is in the Fall, but they probably are practicing now, right? To "simulate" a long prime, you could rent/buy a 1.4X TC, slap it on your 70-200 and set it to 200.

Alternately, find a local HS to shoot.

In any event, I'd strongly suggest you not go into the event in August not having worked any tennis. Pro tennis is pretty fast - not impossible to work by any means - but starting any sport at the highest level is kinda tough.

[T2000]

Consider renting the same body not primarily to have a second lens handy but to have in the event your camera fails. It happens.

--------
www.proTennisPhotos.com

[Adama]

Hi guys,

I think Dennis is out of town or busy so he hasn't been able to get back to me about an interesting question I had. I notice a lot of pro photographers sometimes hand pick their fast shutter speeds to ensure they freeze the player but retain some motion blur in the tennis ball and sometimes the racket. Is this actually intentional? If so, do you guys think this is a good technique? I find it to always look a bit awkward...but then that's because I know the cause of it and it's usually something I was taught to avoid.

Also, I had my credentials confirmed earlier this week and I've been shooting amateur tennis like crazy. Very excited :)

[DDCSD]

Hi guys,

I think Dennis is out of town or busy so he hasn't been able to get back to me about an interesting question I had. I notice a lot of pro photographers sometimes hand pick their fast shutter speeds to ensure they freeze the player but retain some motion blur in the tennis ball and sometimes the racket. Is this actually intentional? If so, do you guys think this is a good technique? I find it to always look a bit awkward...but then that's because I know the cause of it and it's usually something I was taught to avoid.

Also, I had my credentials confirmed earlier this week and I've been shooting amateur tennis like crazy. Very excited :)

That ball is moving at over 100mph at times and the racket is moving nearly that fast. That is 1742 inches per second. With a shutter speed of 1/3200s, that ball/racket head is still moving around 1/2 inch while the shutter is open. Even at 1/6400s they're moving about 1/4 of an inch.


When you're that close to something that is moving that fast, sometimes you just don't have enough light to get a shutter speed high enough to completely freeze it, especially when the sun gets below the rim of the stadium.

There's nothing wrong with a little bit of motion in a sports photo.

[bps]

Good grief Dennis. Your work is incredible!

Bryan

[Adama]

Ah, thanks DDCSD. Makes sense, I feel silly for asking now actually.

[dmwierz]

Hi guys,

I think Dennis is out of town or busy so he hasn't been able to get back to me about an interesting question I had. I notice a lot of pro photographers sometimes hand pick their fast shutter speeds to ensure they freeze the player but retain some motion blur in the tennis ball and sometimes the racket. Is this actually intentional? If so, do you guys think this is a good technique? I find it to always look a bit awkward...but then that's because I know the cause of it and it's usually something I was taught to avoid.

Also, I had my credentials confirmed earlier this week and I've been shooting amateur tennis like crazy. Very excited :)

Sorry, I must have missed your question, Alex, and yes, I've also been busy. Derek's got it right that, even with the highest speed shutter you're still likely to show some motion blur, but some of the "blurriness" on the shots I posted was the result of shooting wide open with a 400 f/2.8 lens - the depth of field is pretty shallow, and often the ball is outside of this margin.

Plus, I agree that some motion is OK. Somewhere I have some tennis shots taken around 1/2500s (I've found this is a good ss to relatively "stop" the motion of the player and the bat/racquet/stick and allow the ball/puck/thing to show some degree of motion blur that imparts a good sense of speed) but I can't seem to find them at the moment.

In another sport, here's an image many of you have seen before that, in all honesty, I think is more of a freak shot than a great sports action shot, however it's been wildly popular and even was voted an award as "Best Sports Shot of the Year - Amateur, College and Pro 2007" category a couple years ago on another sports forum (thank you very much). The only real reason my shutter speed was at 1/8000s is it was a partly cloudy day at Miller Park and I was shooting Av mode. Right before Ramirez took this swing, the Sun burst through the clouds and drove my shutter speed from a more reasonable 1/2500s to a ridiculous 1/8000s which resulted in this shot that would be more appropriate in a book on the Physics of Baseball than on the sports page.

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/80218360.jpg
1/8000s f/2.8 at 400.0mm iso400

Same sport, same situation (batter). In my opinion, this shot is a better sports shot, as it gives a good inference of the motion of Wily Mo Pena's bat (and all the pieces) and the ball.

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/75297386.jpg
1/2500s f/4.0 at 560.0mm iso800

Hope this helps a bit.

Dennis

[Adama]

It does Dennis, thanks again for replying!

On an unrelated note (sort 0f) I have to say that first image is awesome in terms of color, sharpness, and contrast considering that the lens is wide open. I really can't wait to get my hands on The Beast (400 2.8 :)

[Adama]

Just wanted to pop in and post some shots I got from the qualifiers today. I kept Dennis' advice in mind while feeling the professional version of the sport out for myself after watching so much amateur tennis. These were all done with my 70-200 since I have no 400 2.8 until Friday. Incidentally, I discovered today that my organization is being denied access to the photo pit opposite of the umpire's side of the court, which may make things problematic with the 400. I had enough trouble today trying to shoot around linesmen and security guards, since they all sat on the umpire's side.

1.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3454/3825375724_d180bdd7f8_o.jpg
Canada's Heidi El Tabakh reaches for a shot during a qualifying match against Russia's Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova at the Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario. Tabakh would go on to win in three sets.

2.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3541/3825375524_4b223f0dae_o.jpg
Russia's Anastasia Pavlyuchenkov prepares to hit a high ball from Canada's Heidi El Tabakh during a qualifying match at the Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario. Pavlyuchenkov would go on to lose the match in three sets.

3.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3521/3824591903_daf3985418_o.jpg
Canada's Heidi El Tabakh reacts after scoring match point against Anastasia Pavlyuchenkov in a qualifier match at the Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario.

4.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3454/3825411000_20a6dda74a_o.jpg
Canada's Rebecca Marino runs for the ball during a qualifying match against Germany's Kristina Barrois. Barrois would go on to defeat Marino in three sets.

5.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3452/3825421060_6fc07763b9_o.jpg
Canada's Rebecca Marino runs for the ball during a qualifying match against Germany's Kristina Barrois. Barrois would go on to defeat Marino in three sets.

6.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2534/3824631975_53c6940fc3_o.jpg
Russia's Anastasia Pavlyuchenkov serves during a qualifying match against Canada's Heidi El Tabakh at the Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario. Pavlyuchenkov would go on to lose the match in three sets.
I shot an entire other match besides those two, which was incidentally probably the one I felt best about leaving the tournament today, but it's taken me all day to sort through files and I don't have time to get to it tonight unfortunately.

Critique is welcome. This is all practice right now during the qualifiers so any comments would be appreciated.

[dmwierz]

Alex,

I thought about you shooting this tournament when I notice it being broadcast today. Shots look pretty good, actually. Watch your horizons (like number 4 - notice that the vertical edge of the white box just to the left of the word "Event" on the padding in the back isn't vertical), and you might want to add some captions to each of them so we can tell who is doing what.

How did you pull off #2? Normally, shooting during a serve is a bit touchy.

Also, try some backhand shots in the near court. These will be open to you even if you're "stuck" on the umpire's side. Once you get your hands on a 400, the side you are on will be a little less of a problem since you can go farther down the line towards the baseline to cover the opposite side of the net. Might make you a little close to the near court, but still workable.

You might want to play with your positioning some more, to get the linesmen out of the background - or select the shots without linesmen in the BG. Having somebody behind the player is kinda distracting.

Looking forward to seeing some more.

Thanks for posting.
Dennis

[jacuff]

How did you pull off #2? Normally, shooting during a serve is a bit touchy.


Yeah, it's a quick way to get denied credentials in the future and maybe to even find an immediate escort out of the event. The same is true for getting a golfer in the back swing... big no-no. The 1DIII does have the silent one shot, but it's still not quiet enough when everything is dead silence. With other cameras, Live View using silent shooting mode 2 is often quiet enough to get that shot, assuming you don't raise the shutter button too quick.

[Adama]

Yeah, it's a quick way to get denied credentials in the future and maybe to even find an immediate escort out of the event. The same is true for getting a golfer in the back swing... big no-no. The 1DIII does have the silent one shot, but it's still not quiet enough when everything is dead silence. With other cameras, Live View using silent shooting mode 2 is often quiet enough to get that shot, assuming you don't raise the shutter button too quick.

I'll keep that in mind in the future, perhaps clarify it with my contact in Tennis Canada. I counted at least five photographers next to me going full blast with their 1D bodies during serves.

That wasn't a serve interestingly enough, however (No excuse since #6 is :mad:). The player was actually just gearing up for a powerful shot on a ball that went up high in the air during play.

There are actually captions I put on the flickr version, just didn't think to put thme here. I've put them into my post.

Thanks again for the advice, Dennis.

EDIT: Dennis, it occurs to me that what you saw on a broadcast was the Montreal Rogers Cup. I'm shooting the Women's tournament in Toronto. It has yet to be broadcasted since it's qualifying matches. Here is a shot to give you an idea: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/Rexall_Centre_York_University_Toronto.JPG

I will be shooting from the left side, but I obviously have the freedom to go into the stands as well. Picture a linesman in each one of those chairs sitting down. The issue isn't so much them in the background, as them just being a plain obstacle in front of me.

[Adama]

Finally got to the last match from yesterday. I'm beginning the official tournament tomorrow (qualifiers are over), so I'll check in periodically but I'll likely be too busy to put anything else up for awhile. I would still very much appreciate critique!

1.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2455/3828305539_e6c2c971fd_o.jpg
Canada's Sharon Fichman fires off a return shot to Ayumi Morita during an opening qualifier match at the 2009 Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario

2.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2463/3828305799_5ed3641ef1_o.jpg
Canada's Sharon Fichman prepares to return a shot from Ayumi Morita during an opening qualifier match at the 2009 Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario

3.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3548/3828411776_4ec7462e19_o.jpg
Japan's Ayumi Morita winds up for a shot against Canadian Sharon Fichman during an opening qualifier match at the 2009 Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario

4.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2662/3828732556_77aedc5b9d_o.jpg
Canada's Sharon Fichman looks on after returning a shot from Japan's Ayumi Morita during an opening qualifier match at the 2009 Rogers Cup in Toronto, Ontario

[DDCSD]

Looks like you've got the timing down!

[Adama]

Just got my 400. Too exhausted to sort everything but there were two shots that I knew I had to process as soon as I got home:

1.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2615/3844885628_aaec2044a3_o.jpg
August 21st, 2009: Russia's Maria Sharapova reacts after scoring a point in a tiebreaker against Agnieszka Radwa?ska during their quarter finals match at the Roger's Cup in Toronto, Ontario

2.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2514/3844095285_c8e89c4351_o.jpg
August 21st, 2009: Russia's Maria Sharapova reacts after winning her quarter finals match at the Roger's Cup against Poland's Agnieszka Radwa?ska in Toronto, Ontario

The 400 seems too tight in my situation, however, for action shots. Something always ends up getting out of frame, so I've resigned myself to using the 70-200 for action and the 400 for close ups until I've become accustomed to it.

[dmwierz]

The 400 seems too tight in my situation, however, for action shots.

Alex - The first time I worked a pro tennis event I thought the same thing, but I stuck with it and ended up using the 400 for more than 90% of the matches. I also noticed the majority of other shooters using their 400's most of the time.

Shooting with both eyes open really helps with timing when using a long prime lens.

Sharapova makes for good photos, no?

[Adama]

Yes, indeed she does! It's a good thing too because I got many emotional shots of players yesterday but they all lost their respective matches, so it didn't really fit with the overall "story" of their matches.

Also Dennis if you're interested, I was seated a bit to the left of the umpire's tower (in that photo I showed you of the stadium) and was shooting the bottom of the court through a small opening between the benches and the umpire tower. I shot the top side with the 70-200.

I really think it's just going to take a lot of practice. It certainly is possible to get those shots framed but it takes perfect composition. Hopefully better luck today, as it's my last day in the pits, then I'm taking the lens up with an extender into the concourse while my co-worker shoots the finals.

[flickserve]

These shots are very good. Really enjoyed them.

[polarbare]

Well done on the images. This will be my first year shooting tennis at the college level so this thread has been most helpful.

[Adama]

Thanks for the comments guys. I just compiled all the photos from the tournament for my editor so I'm going to make a final image post here with some highlights of the tournament:

1.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2453/3853291731_5eb8b60a9d_b.jpg
Vera Dushevina mid swing in her doubles match with Anastasia Rodionova against Cara Black and Liezel Huber

2.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2431/3853294569_a6bf97cf47_b.jpg
Serena Williams returns the ball against Lucie Safarova during their singles Quarter Finals match at the 2009 Rogers Cup.

3.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3470/3854087800_d2c10c9fd7_b.jpg
Serena Williams reacts after missing a shot during her quarter finals match against Lucie Safarova

4.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3492/3853300433_2b8dcefa33_b.jpg
Jelena Jankovic returns the ball during her quarter finals match up against Alisa Kleybanova

5.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2424/3854094414_47bca29e31_b.jpg
Jelena Jankovic reacts after scoring set point during the first set by tie break against Alisa Kleybanova during their quarter finals match up.

6.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3472/3854101048_bd4fefef78_b.jpg
Maria Sharapova returns a shot against Agnieszka Radwanska during their quarter finals match up at the Rogers Cup

My final verdict on the 400 in Tennis is that Dennis is right, it is most useful. However, I unfortunately was relegated to mediocre vantage points in the tournament and was only able to take advantage of the 400 when the players were in the right spots where I could take a peak through the obstacles in front of me with the long lens. If I was on the side opposite of the umpire, I would have had a much easier time with the lens. All of the shots in this post were taken with the long lens, so it did work out for me in the end.

[Stealthy Ninja]

When I've shot pro tennis, I use my 400 and 70-200. Personally, have gotten WAY more WOW shots with the 400 than with the 70-200.

Here are some with the 400:

http://www.pbase.com/dmwierz45/image/76521368.jpg



LOL.... like literally laugh out loud.

[AdamLewis]

Back from the deadly

[Stealthy Ninja]

Heheh

[vreeke]

only bring your rented 300mm 2,8 for tennis you will love this lens