Football: Flashed vs High ISO

Shot my last Football game with two bodies/setup.

First body ID Mk III with the Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS and with the typical flash setup (mounted below on mono-pod). Settings were F/5, SS of 1/300 and ISO 1250.

Second Body, 1D Mk IV shot using only ambient lighting, Canon 400mm 2.8. Settings around f/2.8, SS of 1/500 and ISO 6400

The Mark IV is great at high ISO, but the tones of flash is...well...unbeatable​.

First some flashed:

I have yet to work a high stadium where I can by without flash. Wish I could. Most college stadiums I have worked are no problem.

That's a pretty good comparison of approx $11,000 worth of gear loosing out to about $3,000 plus a $400 flash.

I don't like "using" the flash setup but the results are much better. Thanks for sharing the comparison. Nice series.

ChunkyDA wrote in post #13344980
That's a pretty good comparison of approx $11,000 worth of gear loosing out to about $3,000 plus a $400 flash.

Equipment can not match the proper lighting...period.

I shot a game Saturday night with flash, but one team showed up wearing all black uniforms and the other in white! Very challenging! You seem to have this down. Any ideas?

p3av8or wrote in post #13347220
I shot a game Saturday night with flash, but one team showed up wearing all black uniforms and the other in white! Very challenging! You seem to have this down. Any ideas?

Any ideas? Yeah, don't be afraid to clip the black channel.

Post what you are talking about and we'll see what kind of ideas we can come up with.

Even with flash, I still like to shoot to the right, then bring down the exposure in post. Shooting raw I can typically have enough data to bring out detail in the white and by shooting to the right I'll be able to bring detail out of the black with out injecting noise...which is what would happen if I shot in the middle or to the left. Hope that makes sense.

I like the ambient more. Did you correct your white balance?

Flash just introduces too many distracting elements for me.