Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk 
Thread started 14 Oct 2015 (Wednesday) 13:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tips for shooting football with a 5D2?

 
mikepj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Oct 15, 2015 16:24 |  #16

gonzogolf wrote in post #17746881 (external link)
What do you mean by dragging the shutter? That term usually means a slow shutter speed to balance flash with ambient.

Hah, yeah that too. I meant to say that I would keep my finger on the shutter to fire a few extra frames after trying to nail the peak moment.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,106 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1124
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 15, 2015 16:26 as a reply to  @ mikepj's post |  #17

You should be using back button focusing.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Oct 15, 2015 18:01 |  #18

Speaking of focusing and using just the center focus point…

I'm thinking that at f4.5-5.6 I'll have enough DoF to just focus on the player's jersey instead of worrying about focusing on his head/eyes. Is this usually the case? If not, I'll have to make sure I zoom out enough to focus on the player's head and still keep his feet in the frame (otherwise I'll have a lot of shots ending at ankles). Then I lose some pixels in the crop.

Thoughts?


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rdalrt
Goldmember
Avatar
1,648 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 497
Joined Aug 2008
Location: The Great White North
     
Oct 15, 2015 18:56 as a reply to  @ mikepj's post |  #19

Yes, focus on the chest. Usually the numbers one the uniform are pretty good contrast areas for focus to grab. Plenty of DOF at 400 5.6 for this. Heck, I focus on the chest with the 400 2.8 and faces are most always in focus.


Just Sports Photographyexternal link
My Junk ;)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnTrav
Member
Avatar
131 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Philadelphia
     
Oct 15, 2015 21:03 |  #20

even at f/2.8 a lot of times I focus on the chest.

I will post a sample shot in a few min. I used my 5Dii a little bit tonight. I just cant shy away from the 8FPS my 7D gives me and AF system. For sports I go to that camera no matter what ISO I am at.


Canon 5D Mark III - Canon 5D Mark II - Canon 7D - Canon 70-200 f/2.8L - Canon 24-70 f/2.8L - Canon 17-40L - Canon 85 f/1.8 - Canon 50 f/1.4 - Canon 580 exii (x2) - rokinon 8mm fishey

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Oct 19, 2015 16:05 |  #21

Thanks again to everyone who gave me feedback. The game went really well. I had some problems with the camera focusing behind the main subject, and I think it was caused by having focus point auto-expansion enabled. Definitely grabbed enough shots in focus overall though. I'm still working on timing the peak moment. I feel like I nailed some of them, but other times I would have liked to have a faster frame rate. There might have be a 7D2 in my future if this becomes a regular gig. :-)

You can find the full image set here:
https://www.flickr.com …pj/sets/7215765​7742581083 (external link)

Here were some of my favorites…


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Oct 19, 2015 16:06 |  #22

More favs…


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnTrav
Member
Avatar
131 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Philadelphia
     
Oct 20, 2015 02:02 as a reply to  @ mikepj's post |  #23

Looks good. Good job. I used my 5Dii with a 400 f/5.6L and it was ok. I was shooting under lights though so the f/5.6 was not fast enough.

How do you like that 100-400L. I was thinking about looking in to getting one


Canon 5D Mark III - Canon 5D Mark II - Canon 7D - Canon 70-200 f/2.8L - Canon 24-70 f/2.8L - Canon 17-40L - Canon 85 f/1.8 - Canon 50 f/1.4 - Canon 580 exii (x2) - rokinon 8mm fishey

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikepj
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
204 posts
Likes: 63
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Central Michigan
     
Oct 20, 2015 08:37 as a reply to  @ JohnTrav's post |  #24

Thank you. Yeah, shooting a night game would be a whole different deal. At one point during the day game I was shooting, it got cloudy and we had some snow flurries and I had to bump the ISO up to 1250 to get my frame rate fast enough. Could certainly see 6400 being a minimum ISO at night.

I really like the 100-400L. I bought it earlier this year right after the mkII came out and they were selling off the last of the mkIs at a good discount. I originally bought it as a wildlife lens, but it worked really well for football as well. The one drawback I found when shooting the football game was that I kept pulling back on the zoom too much so I could comfortably fit the action in the frame. Once I got home, I realized that I should have been out closer to 400mm for a lot more of the photos I took so I wouldn't have had to crop as much. That would have been a benefit of having a prime of that range, forcing you to stay tight. On the other hand, the 100-400 made it a lot easier to find the action and zoom in (if you remember before the play is over).

The push/pull design is good and bad. It's good because changing the zoom is really quick by just extending your arm. The drawback is that the zoom lock ring can be a little bit of a hassle to loosen and tighten when you are moving around a lot (especially if you're wearing gloves in a colder environment).

From a technical sense, it does vignette a good amount wide open on FF, but that's easy to correct in post. The IS system is older, so it makes more noise than some other lenses, but it's not objectionable even in quieter environments like churches. I can pretty consistently get 2-2.5 stops of stabilization out of it. Sharpness isn't quite as good as my 70-200 f4, but it's still pretty crisp (as a reference, there were only 3-4 photos out of the ~100 picks I had from this football game that I bothered to boost the sharpness in Lightroom). Color reproduction is very nice.

Overall, I think I'll hold onto the 100-400 for quite some time. It's just a really useful zoom range to cover.


Radiant Photography (external link) Instagram (external link) Instagram (Sports) (external link) Flickr (external link)
5D Mark IV, 7D Mark II, Rebel SL1
16-35 ƒ4L, 24-105 ƒ4L, 70-200 ƒ2.8L IS II, 100-400 ƒ4.5-5.6L, 85 ƒ1.8, 50 ƒ1.8 STM, 24mm ƒ2.8 STM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnTrav
Member
Avatar
131 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Philadelphia
     
Oct 20, 2015 12:54 |  #25

mikepj wrote in post #17753160 (external link)
Thank you. Yeah, shooting a night game would be a whole different deal. At one point during the day game I was shooting, it got cloudy and we had some snow flurries and I had to bump the ISO up to 1250 to get my frame rate fast enough. Could certainly see 6400 being a minimum ISO at night.

I really like the 100-400L. I bought it earlier this year right after the mkII came out and they were selling off the last of the mkIs at a good discount. I originally bought it as a wildlife lens, but it worked really well for football as well. The one drawback I found when shooting the football game was that I kept pulling back on the zoom too much so I could comfortably fit the action in the frame. Once I got home, I realized that I should have been out closer to 400mm for a lot more of the photos I took so I wouldn't have had to crop as much. That would have been a benefit of having a prime of that range, forcing you to stay tight. On the other hand, the 100-400 made it a lot easier to find the action and zoom in (if you remember before the play is over).

The push/pull design is good and bad. It's good because changing the zoom is really quick by just extending your arm. The drawback is that the zoom lock ring can be a little bit of a hassle to loosen and tighten when you are moving around a lot (especially if you're wearing gloves in a colder environment).

From a technical sense, it does vignette a good amount wide open on FF, but that's easy to correct in post. The IS system is older, so it makes more noise than some other lenses, but it's not objectionable even in quieter environments like churches. I can pretty consistently get 2-2.5 stops of stabilization out of it. Sharpness isn't quite as good as my 70-200 f4, but it's still pretty crisp (as a reference, there were only 3-4 photos out of the ~100 picks I had from this football game that I bothered to boost the sharpness in Lightroom). Color reproduction is very nice.

Overall, I think I'll hold onto the 100-400 for quite some time. It's just a really useful zoom range to cover.

Thanks for the review on it. I am a paintball photographer and was looking at getting a MKi version of it. For that I shoot in daylight so I would most likely not even use IS for it. But I have a 300L 2.8 IS on the top of my wants list right now for a sports lens. That and a 1D body.

Yeah shooting under the lights was def a challenge. I think I learned a lot though about shooting in low light for sports from the two times I did it this week. f/5.6 is def way too slow though of a lens for it. I had my 70-200 at f/2.8 the entire time.


Canon 5D Mark III - Canon 5D Mark II - Canon 7D - Canon 70-200 f/2.8L - Canon 24-70 f/2.8L - Canon 17-40L - Canon 85 f/1.8 - Canon 50 f/1.4 - Canon 580 exii (x2) - rokinon 8mm fishey

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,161 views & 0 likes for this thread
Tips for shooting football with a 5D2?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Sports Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is JohnBonney
892 guests, 346 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.