The Basketball Thread!!! From Pee-Wee Leagues to the NBA... Post'em up and share!!!

props to you for helping folks out , shows confidence in yourself, but then again , your work is absolutely killer

killer work

Tried out some of my new gear today.

From our men's retreat this weekend

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18239991
Motion blur is from too slow a shutter stopping the motion. If focus was off, you would see focus elsewhere potentially in the image, not where you intended, but that area would be sharp. Like I said, school children could use a shutter range of 1/1000 through 1/1600th to really crisp up the shots, and for pros, I run 1/2000th, and sometimes that isn't enough.

If you are at 1/500th at ISO 3200, going to 1/1000th at ISO 6400 will freeze the action more, but your exposure will be identical to what you are getting now, since you bumped both settings up the same amount. To lighten up the exposure, you would want to go to ISO 8000, 10000 or 12800. However at these levels, you most likely aren't going to get any better a result than just raising brightness in post, depending on where the native ISO stops on the T3i and the multiplicative version of ISO kicks in (which is all you do in post when you brighten).

I just leveled up the image, ran Noiseware, ran a USM step to increase contrast, ran a USM step to improve sharpness, and then added a bit of saturation. With Photoshop, you can just record all these steps together and then run that action singularly, or in bulk against a folder of JPG files.

That being said, the Canon 70-200 II is quite a bit sharper than the Sigma. Which Sigma 70-200 do you have, I think there were like 3 or 4 different models through the years.

I think the OS version is the most recent and the sharpest though.

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM APO
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro HSM APO
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG Macro HSM APO
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO

one quick question for you, if i may,

you mention running a "USM" step for a couple of different items. im familiar with shooting basketball (currently only shooting football hockey) and know all the exposure and noise and ISO stuff and have pretty good equipment (5D4, 70-200 f2.8L IS USM II, 24-70 f2.8 L II) but i cant reference "USM" as it relates to post processing...

care to enlighten me please?

USM is unsharp mask, used to both sharpen and add micro contrast.

Some from the new season...

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18748637
USM is unsharp mask, used to both sharpen and add micro contrast.

looks like something ELSE to study and try to master! thanks for the explanation

Happy it's BB season, tired of shooting football in the rain. Only 3 home games left (unless playoffs).

I have a lens question about shooting basketball. Been shooting a 17-35mm F/2.8 on my 7Ds for under the basket (70-200mm on other body). I just switched to FF & got 2 6Ds so my 17-35mm only works on crop bodies. I know the lens I would get if I didn't have a budget, the 24-70mm F/2.8. Right now I can get a new 24-70mm F/4 for $850 or a used 16-35mm F/2.8 for $950 (version I). I want to get the F/2.8, but is a 16-35mm too wide on a FF?

Shooting my first game this Saturday, looking forward to it!!!

Pigpen101 wrote in post #18749743
Happy it's BB season... ...


... ... is a 16-35mm too wide on a FF?

Yes. A 24-70 is more than wide enough. A 70-200 is also a great choice on a FF.


Phil

Thank you. I do shoot the 70-200mm on 1 body, and a wider lens on the 2nd.

I can't wait to get back to shooting some youth basketball! Got roped into helping coach last season and couldn't take any pictures.

+1 on the 24-70.

70mm reach is much more useful than 35mm and you'll find 24mm to plenty wide enough.

Yes, I've found some Version 1s of the 24-70mm F/2.8 for sale around the same price as the 16-35mm F/2.8, so I think that is the way I'm leaning. I also figure it will be more helpful to me come next football season as well. I would much rather get a used F/2.8 than a new F/4, that is if the used version is in good shape. I have never bought used because I have witnessed first hand how "most" professionals treat their equipment.

Thanks for the input.

I'd recommend saving up and buying the vII version instead of the original. It's lighter, slightly smaller and sharper. I've seen used ones sell for ~$1,100. That's probably twice what you'd pay over the original though. Good luck.