LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


attempt at basketball

FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk
Thread started 14 Feb 2012 (Tuesday) 10:03   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
five0.4tluv
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2010
112 posts
Austin
[MORE/SHARE]

I finally read enough and got the stop action I needed in this gym. I have a 40d and I used my 17-55 for this shot. Unfortunately that resulted in ISO 3200,f2.8,1/620 at 42mm. I've used Aperture to reduce noise and this is the best I can do with my limited PP skills. I've been thinking about getting either a 50d or 7d (better/faster focusing) to replace my 40d or getting new glass (EF 85 1.8 or 70-200 f2.8-I). I will be needing longer reach anyway for spring baseball and football. What should I purchase or do differently in this situation? Thanks.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #1, Feb 14, 2012 10:03:56


---------------
40D
Feedback
http://photography-on-the.net ...=12524713&postcount​=27116
http://photography-on-the.net ...=16216631&postcount​=41043

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
dwarrenr
Goldmember
dwarrenr's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
1,650 posts
Fairland, Indiana
[MORE/SHARE]

five0.4tluv wrote in post #13895737external link
... I've been thinking about getting either a 50d or 7d (better/faster focusing) to replace my 40d or getting new glass (EF 85 1.8 or 70-200 f2.8-I). I will be needing longer reach anyway for spring baseball and football. What should I purchase or do differently in this situation? Thanks.

How much do you want to spend? You can't go wrong with a 70-200 f/2.8. You'll use that lens for every sport you'll shoot. As far as a body goes, for about the same money as a 7D you can look for a used 1DMkIII. Since basketball is close to being over, maybe upgrade to the 70-200 then look to upgrade your body next fall before basketball. Personally, I'd upgrade the lens before the body.

Post #2, Feb 14, 2012 11:48:58


D. Warren Robison
"All guys feel the need to compensate. Most compensate with sports cars. I compensate with a 400mm 2.8"
Flickrexternal link - Home Pageexternal link - MaxPreps Gallery -external linkRazziexternal link
Equipment List

LOG IN TO REPLY
five0.4tluv
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2010
112 posts
Austin
[MORE/SHARE]

I'm looking about $1k. I'm not wanting to go to FF cause I've got the 17-55 that I like and just recently bought. My main question is ISO difference in the 50d/7d vs the 40d. Is ISO equal regardless of camera? IE. Would ISO 1600 be equal 3200 on the 40d and thus be "better".

Post #3, Feb 14, 2012 14:10:40


---------------
40D
Feedback
http://photography-on-the.net ...=12524713&postcount​=27116
http://photography-on-the.net ...=16216631&postcount​=41043

LOG IN TO REPLY
dwarrenr
Goldmember
dwarrenr's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
1,650 posts
Fairland, Indiana
[MORE/SHARE]

The 50D and 7D will both handle high ISO better then the 40D. And the 7D will handle high ISO better then the 50D. The 7D does have more pixels which does generate more noise then smaller pixel bodies and some have experienced problems when trying to clean it up. For more on that you will want to read THIS THREAD. If your choice comes down to a 50D vs the 7D, the 7D would get my vote. But keep in mind it will take some time to get the shots to turn out the way you like. I do have a 7D as a backup, but it gets very little use due to having a MkIII and MkIV as well.

Post #4, Feb 14, 2012 14:27:24


D. Warren Robison
"All guys feel the need to compensate. Most compensate with sports cars. I compensate with a 400mm 2.8"
Flickrexternal link - Home Pageexternal link - MaxPreps Gallery -external linkRazziexternal link
Equipment List

LOG IN TO REPLY
ZXDrew
Goldmember
Joined Mar 2010
1,022 posts
Austin, TX
[MORE/SHARE]

I shoot mainly with my pair of 7D's. I keep a 50D for remotes and a backup. They are both great cameras. I like the focusing better on the 7D. Honestly I don't really use the higher frame rate that often, but I do shoot at ISO4000+ often. I prefer the 7D over the 1D series for the extra reach 1.6x factor over the 1.3x factor of the 1D series.

Post #5, Feb 15, 2012 12:48:44


PhotoWolfe.comexternal link
Facebook.com/PhotoWolfeexternal link
Gear / My flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Sam6644
Senior Member
Joined Jan 2010
685 posts
Columbus, Ohio
[MORE/SHARE]

If I could only have one lens to work with for sports it would be a 70-200 f/2.8. Save your money and don't bother with the IS. With the money you'll save by buying the non-IS 70-200, you could buy another lens or even another body.

I'd upgrade your lenses before your bodies. The 40D isn't as good as it gets, but it's an entirely capable body.

A 70-200 and a 50 can take you a long way in sports shooting without entirely breaking the bank.

Post #6, Feb 15, 2012 13:05:01


my site (very outdated at this point)external link
my tumblr, more regularly updatedexternal link
my blogexternal link
and on twitterexternal link
and instagram, too.external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
burnet44
Cream of the Crop
burnet44's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
6,329 posts
Robinson, Texas
[MORE/SHARE]

great replies
I have a 40D and a 2.8 70-200 IS II
and I am wondering the same things
mine are always dark
soft
not sharp

not as good as pic 1 here

and help aqppreciated ty

Post #7, Feb 15, 2012 17:57:19


Canon 70D Gripped, 1 Canon 1DII, 1 Fixed Canon 40D Canon gripped 70-200 2.8 ISM II, Canon 50 1.8, Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 (traded in), Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, Canon 550 EX flash
C and C welcome, Brutality Encouraged, Help Always Welcome
www.firstdownphotos.ph​otoreflect.comexternal link
Flicker Page http://www.flickr.com/​photos/72506283@N03/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
gordholio
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2010
294 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Canon 85mm 1.8. A wonderful basketball lens for typically dark gyms - much better than the 2.8 of the 70-200. And far less heavy.

Post #8, Feb 15, 2012 20:14:25




LOG IN TO REPLY
burnet44
Cream of the Crop
burnet44's Avatar
Joined Jan 2012
6,329 posts
Robinson, Texas
[MORE/SHARE]

agreed
I gotta get one
start saving

Post #9, Feb 15, 2012 21:08:22


Canon 70D Gripped, 1 Canon 1DII, 1 Fixed Canon 40D Canon gripped 70-200 2.8 ISM II, Canon 50 1.8, Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 (traded in), Canon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, Canon 550 EX flash
C and C welcome, Brutality Encouraged, Help Always Welcome
www.firstdownphotos.ph​otoreflect.comexternal link
Flicker Page http://www.flickr.com/​photos/72506283@N03/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kenjancef
Goldmember
kenjancef's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
2,276 posts
East Providence, RI 02914
[MORE/SHARE]

gordholio wrote in post #13905216external link
Canon 85mm 1.8. A wonderful basketball lens for typically dark gyms - much better than the 2.8 of the 70-200. And far less heavy.

I agree. The 85 1.8 is typically the only lens I take out of my bag for high school basketball.

Post #10, Feb 15, 2012 21:40:54


Gear List
My Flickr Pageexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Adam ­ Sofa
Mostly Lurking
Joined Nov 2011
11 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

was the gym you were shooting in really dark to use a iso that high? it may have been needed for the faster shutter speed but both just seem too high

Post #11, Feb 15, 2012 21:46:06




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
kenjancef
Goldmember
kenjancef's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
2,276 posts
East Providence, RI 02914
[MORE/SHARE]

I rarely go BELOW 3200. That's the minimum for me, and I even go to 6400 at times. High school gyms suck...

Post #12, Feb 15, 2012 21:48:24 as a reply to Adam Sofa's post 2 minutes earlier.


Gear List
My Flickr Pageexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Adam ­ Sofa
Mostly Lurking
Joined Nov 2011
11 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I've never shot in one but i guess its due to the lighting being so high up

Post #13, Feb 15, 2012 21:49:17




LOG IN TO REPLY
dwarrenr
Goldmember
dwarrenr's Avatar
Joined Apr 2009
1,650 posts
Fairland, Indiana
[MORE/SHARE]

High School Gyms do 'suck' when it comes to lighting. Best gym I have is iso 3200 f/2.8 with ss of 1/640. Worse place I've shot at was ISO 10,000 1/500, f/2.8.

Also shot a HS game at Bankers Life Field house which was part of the Super Bowl festivities. If you don't know that is where the Indiana Pacers play. So this NBA venue had me at ISO 1250, f/2.8 at 1/640. So in reality ISO 3200 is pretty awesome for shooting basketball.

Post #14, Feb 16, 2012 06:44:08


D. Warren Robison
"All guys feel the need to compensate. Most compensate with sports cars. I compensate with a 400mm 2.8"
Flickrexternal link - Home Pageexternal link - MaxPreps Gallery -external linkRazziexternal link
Equipment List

LOG IN TO REPLY
five0.4tluv
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2010
112 posts
Austin
[MORE/SHARE]

here is one using my EF50 "nifty fifty" in the same gym during practice. I'm having a hard time with focusing using the back button. Are you suppose to keep it held down when pressing the shutter or let go once focus is achieved.

With this lens I am able to drop down to ISO1600. I've cropped it a bit and sharpened and removed some noise. Maybe I too will go ahead and buy an EF 85 1.8. But I need a 70-200 ;)

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #15, Feb 16, 2012 09:05:06


---------------
40D
Feedback
http://photography-on-the.net ...=12524713&postcount​=27116
http://photography-on-the.net ...=16216631&postcount​=41043

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
1,907 views & 0 likes for this thread
attempt at basketball
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00173 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
783 guests, 577 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is N4Ld3

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.