Back to the Boxing Ring...

[gmen]

Another chance to shoot some boxing last night. Lighting conditions at this venue were certainly not favourable... however, here a a few of the results...

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg145.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg146.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg147.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg148.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg149.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg150.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg151.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/bg152.jpg

[spud159]

very good - what were the settings?

[hauff]

I love boxing. You've got some excellent captures there despite the poor lighting. Very good action in a few of them. Nice Job!!!

[madplower4]

Same request, what were the settings? Incredible shots!! I did not know a nose had that much flexibility!!!!

[Dandaman_24]

Look at the state on that blokes nose in the 3rd photo !

Great shots gmen, i m a big fan of your work !

[Vetteography]

Wow.... Just Wow.

[sixshot]

Amazing... Think I'll stick with photography after seeing that guys nose!

[gmen]

very good - what were the settings?
Thanks spud. These were shot with the 50mm f/1.4 - ISO1250, 1/400s or 1/500s at f/1.8. Hope that's of help.
--- Gavin

[gmen]

Same request, what were the settings? Incredible shots!! I did not know a nose had that much flexibility!!!!

Cheers madplower! Settings are posted above... and, as for the nose pic, well my eyes watered a little when I came across that one! Ouch...

[PhotosGuy]

Great work!

[DwightMcCann]

Ya', this great stuff! I just posted a collage of images at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=71645 from a series of matches I shot on April 22nd, but don't think I got anything so dramatic. What camera/lens? From where do you shoot ... it doesn't look like you had your elbows on the mat.

[gmen]

Cheers Dwight... just seen your thread... like I said, I'd love to see your pics in isolation rather than as a collage... some good work there!

I was shooting from ringside - all of these pics were with the 50mm f/1.4... It was only my second boxing shoot - however, my timing improved bout by bout and I think that's the key. Even so, the 'face-distorting' pic only lasts for a nanosecond, so it's incredibly tough to shoot!

My first set of boxing pics are here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=67043&highlight=boxing - the slightly better lighting at that venue made life that little bit easier.

--- Gavin

[DwightMcCann]

Both sets seem pretty close for 50mm ... are they cropped? Yes, I can see that to get the sort of feedback I'm really after I will have to get my images to my website so I can link them to posts here. I was shooting with 24-70mm and 70-200mm, f2.8, 1/250th, ISO 400.

[gmen]

Both sets seem pretty close for 50mm ... are they cropped? Yes, I can see that to get the sort of feedback I'm really after I will have to get my images to my website so I can link them to posts here. I was shooting with 24-70mm and 70-200mm, f2.8, 1/250th, ISO 400.

Yep, there are some crops... but nothing over the top... the 50mm works quite nicely for action across about 2/3 of the ring. These are shot at ISO1250, 1/400s or 1/500s at f/1.8. The lighting isn't great at some of these venues, which is where the fast primes come into their own I guess.

[DwightMcCann]

Ah, the guy who was shooting on my right was using a 1D with a 50mm. I suspect this may be a great combination for speed but a little shallow on DOF. Both he and Tom Casino shot ISO 400 and both publish so I presumed that it was necessary to shoot at that ISO or less for the required quality. Any thoughts?

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

OMG!!! haha! Number three is........ woah! Great shots! makes boxing look that much more painful!

[Pugdaddy]

You'd have to be out of your friggin' mind to do something like that for a living. If I was going to be a pro sportsman I'd choose golf. Much easier on the gray mass. Never saw a golfers nose bend like that, either.

[gmen]

Ah, the guy who was shooting on my right was using a 1D with a 50mm. I suspect this may be a great combination for speed but a little shallow on DOF. Both he and Tom Casino shot ISO 400 and both publish so I presumed that it was necessary to shoot at that ISO or less for the required quality. Any thoughts?
The noise on the 1D MkII at ISO1250 is very acceptable if you get the exposure spot on - that's not the case with the old 1D.

ISO1250 on the MkII is certainly good enough for most publication purposes - my work is mainly newspaper stuff where noise is not quite so critical... but I have run off a couple of 15" x 10" prints which look pretty good to me.

Obviously I'd rather be shooting at lower ISOs. However, the venues I have had the pleasure of working at are not very well lit. I would imagine that the lighting you're used to is significantly superior to some of the dungeons I've shot in!

I prefer not to let the shutter speed drop much below 1/500s or I find that the motion blur becomes unacceptable. Ideally I'd like to be shooting at 1/640s or higher.

With regards to DOF - yep it's very shallow at f/1.8 - particularly when the action is close up. Therefore focusing is of critical importance. I have a particular custom set-up for the focus points that I use for boxing to try and maximise the hit-rate. It seems to work reasonably well.

I'm looking foward to working in a venue where I can get 1/640s at f/2.8 at ISO400. I may have to wait a very long time :lol:

[gmen]

By way of example, here's a shot from a different venue at ISO1000, 1/500s at f/2.0...

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/ax007.jpg