I want to Freelance...

I'm an ex-college basketball player in my 5th year of school (5 out of 6 years, full time--yay!). I want to become a freelance sports shooter and/or photojournalist. There are several successful photogs on this forum and I'm looking for some advice and guidance to achieve my goals.

Photography is a hobby and sports are a love. I want to shoot what I love and learn doing it. I want to capture the excitement, action, pain, agony, victory, and defeat that sports offer. Making money on the side is a bonus if I reach that point. Mainly, I need a hobby on campus to take my mind off 15 hours of lab work a week (biological forensic science)

My first goal is getting my photos in the school news paper. I'll have to check into it, but I don't think you have to be a journalism major to get published. Providing the school paper with quality images should help me get closer to the field or court with a school press pass

Initial thoughts, advice, comments?


I'll address gear in a bit...

Don't know your school or how large it is, but the school paper and/or athletic dept would be the best place to start. Of course you need something to show them your work.

It kinda depends on how big your school is. Mine is a fairly small div.2 school in rural oklahoma with about 3,000 full time students. Our paper takes whatever they can get. I have been on payroll for the last year and it is great. However, with a larger school you run the risk of having more competition and tighter rules. Talk to your schools newspaper advisor and/or editor and see what they can do for you.

zelseman wrote in post #10539177
It kinda depends on how big your school is. Mine is a fairly small div.2 school in rural oklahoma with about 3,000 full time students. Our paper takes whatever they can get. I have been on payroll for the last year and it is great. However, with a larger school you run the risk of having more competition and tighter rules. Talk to your schools newspaper advisor and/or editor and see what they can do for you.

San Jose State, Div. 1, 32,000 enrolled I always thought the school news paper was for credit, not paid. I'll have to find out.

Start with the paper but you'll need a longer lens.

yeah for sport you will need a longer reach. had a quick look at your flickr was going to point out that there is way to much dead space on the sport shots that would be fixed with a longer lens....
dont forget there is a huge difference in shooting for yourself spending 2hrs at a baseball game or football game and getting ok shots and then being asked to cover a couple of different things in an afternoon and only being able to spend 2o mins at each one and needing 4/5 shots from each event for the paper ... huge difference

Sledhed wrote in post #10540503
Start with the paper but you'll need a longer lens.

I'm aware of that. That's why I said:

Staszek wrote in post #10537833
I'll address gear in a bit...

So now lets talk about gear. I don't see myself buying super telephotos when I'm not getting paid. I was thinking a used 70-200 2.8 IS would be my best bet. If I need longer reach I can add on a 1.4x converter and get close to 300 for baseball, football, etc. The 2.8 should be fast enough for college lit gyms and it would offer me the most versatility.

Or would I be better off going with a handful of primes?

Staszek wrote in post #10539592
San Jose State, Div. 1, 32,000 enrolled I always thought the school news paper was for credit, not paid. I'll have to find out.

At UTK the school newspaper positions are paid positions. (Like $8 an assignment was the latest figure I heard last semester.) While some schools might do it as part of a course curriculum, I suspect many try to stay editorially independent of the faculty and thus are not associated as part of any class.

The school newspaper is definitely the way to go. If you can't get on with them, look for local weekly or community papers. If you are serious about freelancing, don't allow others to take advantage of you. Getting paid is not a bonus, getting paid is something you should expect. (It may be fun and a passion of yours, but it is still work.)

If you don't already have it, buy yourself a copy of Photo Mechanic.

honestwords wrote in post #10540593
yeah for sport you will need a longer reach. had a quick look at your flickr was going to point out that there is way to much dead space on the sport shots that would be fixed with a longer lens....
dont forget there is a huge difference in shooting for yourself spending 2hrs at a baseball game or football game and getting ok shots and then being asked to cover a couple of different things in an afternoon and only being able to spend 2o mins at each one and needing 4/5 shots from each event for the paper ... huge difference

I agree. Truth be told, I've only shot one sport seriously and that can be seen here. I'm interested in doing this to practice and learn. I'll get better as I go.

jacuff wrote in post #10542413
At UTK the school newspaper positions are paid positions. (Like $8 an assignment was the latest figure I heard last semester.) While some schools might do it as part of a course curriculum, I suspect many try to stay editorially independent of the faculty and thus are not associated as part of any class.

The school newspaper is definitely the way to go. If you can't get on with them, look for local weekly or community papers. If you are serious about freelancing, don't allow others to take advantage of you. Getting paid is not a bonus, getting paid is something you should expect. (It may be fun and a passion of yours, but it is still work.)

If you don't already have it, buy yourself a copy of Photo Mechanic.

Good advice. Why Photo Mechanic? I usually change the image names-sequence and add keywords in LR3 while they import. Is this different than PM?

IMHO, especially if money is tight, you can go with the non-IS version of the 70-200/2.8L - for sports, your SS will be ~1/500"-1/1000" anyways. I've found that IS is most useful at SS slower than ~1/FL... 1/60 - 1/200 is too slow to stop motion for sports.

If you're going to be doing a lot of field sports, you'll find that you'll probably be at the 200mm extreme 90% of the time, so consider the 200/2.8L prime... you can find the Mk I version (with the built-in hood) for ~$500-600... half the cost of the 70-200/2.8L zoom, 1/3rd the cost of the IS version.

With the money you save, consider the 85/1.8 - great for indoor sports... basketball, volleyball.

Staszek wrote in post #10542433
Good advice. Why Photo Mechanic? I usually change the image names-sequence and add keywords in LR3 while they import. Is this different than PM?

Download a trial version of Photo Mechanic.

Give yourself a deadline. For example, say a football game starts at 7:30 PM and you have to have your images into an editor by 10:00 PM. The editor has requested that you provide 8-10 images with captions and cutlines.

How fast can you do this in LR3?
How fast can you do this in PM?

clarence wrote in post #10542439
IMHO, especially if money is tight, you can go with the non-IS version of the 70-200/2.8L - for sports, your SS will be ~1/500"-1/1000" anyways. I've found that IS is most useful at SS slower than ~1/FL... 1/60 - 1/200 is too slow to stop motion for sports.

If you're going to be doing a lot of field sports, you'll find that you'll probably be at the 200mm extreme 90% of the time, so consider the 200/2.8L prime... you can find the Mk I version (with the built-in hood) for ~$500-600... half the cost of the 70-200/2.8L zoom, 1/3rd the cost of the IS version.

With the money you save, consider the 85/1.8 - great for indoor sports... basketball, volleyball.

You think a two prime setup ( I can also use my 50/1.4 for wider shots) would be better than the 70-200/2.8? Is the IQ of the 200/2.8 better than that of a 70-200? What's the reasoning to get that instead of the zoom besides price? I was thinking the IS would be nice for all-around use. I can use it for much more than just sports. I also like the way IS steadies the viewfinder, at least on my 24-105

jacuff wrote in post #10542461
Download a trial version of Photo Mechanic.

Give yourself a deadline. For example, say a football game starts at 7:30 PM and you have to have your images into an editor by 10:00 PM. The editor has requested that you provide 8-10 images with captions and cutlines.

How fast can you do this in LR3?
How fast can you do this in PM?

I'll check it out. Thanks!

The photographers I know and have seen at sporting events, usually carry a 24-70 f/2.8, an 85 f/1.8, 70-200 f/2.8 and 300 f/2.8. One guy showed up when the UH Cougars were playing LA Lafayettee in the Softball Super regionals and he had all of that gear and a 400 f/2.8. I was pretty impressed until I saw a label on one of the lenses that said "Houston Chronicle". That is a lucky guy.

I sat beside another photog that was hooting for the Chronicle at a big high school basketball game. It was in a big arena. The guy was using the 85 f/1.8 and the 300. We wer sitting at the corner of the baseline. I was using the 70-200 f/2.8 and two strobes set up high up in the second level.

Hope this helps.
Mike

Staszek wrote in post #10543432
You think a two prime setup ( I can also use my 50/1.4 for wider shots) would be better than the 70-200/2.8? Is the IQ of the 200/2.8 better than that of a 70-200? What's the reasoning to get that instead of the zoom besides price? I was thinking the IS would be nice for all-around use. I can use it for much more than just sports. I also like the way IS steadies the viewfinder, at least on my 24-105

Every lens has a tradeoff... sharpness, cost, size/weight, AF speed, durability, resale value. If I had to pick one lens for a sports photographer, I'd have to pick the 70-200/2.8L - it's not a perfect solution... it's great 90% of the time, but too short for field sports, f/2.8 can be too slow for indoor sports.

If we all had unlimited budgets (or a employer with a nice equipment closet), we'd have the complete arsenal of lenses.

The 70-200/2.8L is a great starting point. If you want to save a few bucks, look into the Sigma or the prime. If you can spend a little more, then yes, the IS might come in handy too.

Want more reach and willing to limit yourself to daylight shooting? Try the 100-400L or 50-500 Bigma.

I had the 70-200/4L non-IS as my first L. Was disappointed, based on the great reviews. So I upgraded to the 4L/IS and absolutely loved it. But then I got into Sports and f/4 wasn't cutting it and I was at 200mm 90% of the time. So I found the 200/2.8L prime and loved it... small, light, easy to handhold, built-in hood, fast, and very sharp. But for those 10% of the times that the action came close and I couldn't zoom out, I'd get frustrated at being forced into shooting too tight (is there such a thing?), so I sold it. Now that I'm used to other primes, I think I should've been more patient. Eventually I traded my 4L IS for a 70-200/2.8L non-IS and it's been a great workhorse. I'm willing to trade off a little size/sharpness for the flexibility of the zoom range.

And then I came across the 200/1.8L and absolutely love it. But it's a beast. I use the 1.4x TC on it half the time, to get 280mm at f/2.5 - but I still wanted something longer, so I started hunting for a 400/2.8, but found a 600/4L first - again, love it, but it's even a bigger beast.

Bottom line, I don't think there is a perfect solution. I don't even think there's a perfect 2 lens combo. I don't think there's a recommendation that applies for all shooters. Everyone has different styles and budgets, plus there are variances between lenses.

But instead of renting dozens of lenses, I've found that they hold their value well, so buy a couple and sell them when you're ready to mix things up to target a different need.