# NCAA Basketball



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 24, 2013)

Had an opportunity to shoot UCONN vs Stanford last Wednesday. Had a good time, not really into team sports but it was a nice change. Not bad for my second time shooting basketball. The refs constantly get in your way.


----------



## Zyr55 (Dec 24, 2013)

Nice shots man! the first one looks like he's about to get ACL/MCL tear.


----------



## Brand000n (Dec 24, 2013)

Some nice shots there. I'm trying to get into sports photography. Could you go over what equipment and settings you were using?

Were you shooting for a newspaper?


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 24, 2013)

Thanks for the comments. I really enjoy sports and photographing events. 

Most of my settings were f2.8 / 1/500th / 2000 ISO. I could have gone to f3.5 / f4 but the lighting was a little uneven in some areas. I realized that f2.8 was the best all around. Each arena is different. I have shot AHL and I often get pink frames.

To get serious in sports you really need good equipment. You can't gamble with quality, remember you and other photographers are taking the same photo. Your quality needs to be on par with everyone else. I'm ok with D3's, 24-70, 70-200 and a 300. I want a 500 next. I also have a 10.5 fisheye, 50 f1.8 and a sb-900 along with other odds n ends.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 24, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Thanks for the comments. I really enjoy sports and photographing events.
> 
> 
> Most of my settings were f2.8 / 1/500th / 2000 ISO. I could have gone to f3.5 / f4 but the lighting was a little uneven in some areas. I realized that f2.8 was the best all around. Each arena is different. I have shot AHL and I often get pink frames.
> ...




So where you there as a fan or working sports photographer? Do you know what the rules are for fans when it comes to glass in regards to college and pro basket ball?


Anyhow, nice shots....I really like the action in #2. 







Brand000n said:


> Some nice shots there. I'm trying to get into sports photography. Could you go over what equipment and settings you were using?
> 
> Were you shooting for a newspaper?



It really depends on the sports but you need a zoom with a 2.8 Aperture for sure. As for which zoom, it depends on how far you're shooting. A 70-200mm 2.8 VR/VR II will work great on something like Basketball but you're probably going to want a 300mm 2.8 or 400mm 2.8 if you plan to shoot Soccer for example. A good camera that works great with High ISO is an almost must...that and one that is fast, lots of fps. These are generally cameras with Full Frame (FX) sensors like the D700, D800, D3, D3s, D4 etc.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 24, 2013)

I was there on assignment. Not sure what rules are for fans. At a football game my buddy was told to put his 5D mII with a 24-105 back in the car.   For field sports on a fx, get a 70-200 and at least a 400. A 500 is nice because it weighs a lot less than the heavy 400.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 25, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> I was there on assignment. Not sure what rules are for fans. At a football game my buddy was told to put his 5D mII with a 24-105 back in the car.   For field sports on a fx, get a 70-200 and at least a 400. A 500 is nice because it weighs a lot less than the heavy 400.



Well I just checked for the Mavericks which is our local team...no pro cameras with a 3" OR 6" lens. 

 Anything goes with the Texas Rangers and the Stars minus tripods. I've actually seen Ranger fans with D3/4 bodies and 300mm 2.8 glass.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 26, 2013)

You can shoot sports with a lot of entry level digital cameras as long as you are using good glass. FPS is overrated and typically used as a crutch by those that don't understand the sports they are shooting.  Being able to time the action is the key to shooting sports well.  Always watching what's happening around the field, court or rink and anticipating the movements of other players helps you be ready for anything that may happen.  Too many people only ever watch the person with the ball, puck, etc.


----------



## Brand000n (Dec 26, 2013)

Tailgunner said:


> It really depends on the sports but you need a zoom with a 2.8 Aperture for sure. As for which zoom, it depends on how far you're shooting. A 70-200mm 2.8 VR/VR II will work great on something like Basketball but you're probably going to want a 300mm 2.8 or 400mm 2.8 if you plan to shoot Soccer for example. A good camera that works great with High ISO is an almost must...that and one that is fast, lots of fps. These are generally cameras with Full Frame (FX) sensors like the D700, D800, D3, D3s, D4 etc.



I've got a D600 right now with a 24-70 f/ 2.8. Part of the problem with the D600 for sports is the slow focusing speed and the 6 fps burst is not great either. I think this'll be ok for some wide angle shots but it's not gonna have enough reach so I'll need to get the 70-200 soon. Definitely want to work my way up to the 400mm but it's a huge chunk of money. I have no idea how people save up that much as sports photographers haha. 

Brian, how did you start out getting sports assignments? Did you start a portfolio by just shooting high school events? I'm curious as to the best way to get your foot in the door for this kind of work.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 26, 2013)

That's true about fps and I agree but it's nice to be able to select the exact frame you want. For instance in basketball you can anticipate a late pass to the 3 point line for that perfect vertical shot, but having multiple frames to choose from to post is ideal. I look at attention to detail on the faces, what's in the background, was a ref in the way, can I still crop with the proper aspect ratio etc.

Yes you can do a brake change with a ratchet but air tools make things much easier. Any sports shooter who doesn't use high fps is a moron. Sure the D4 and D1X are 12+ fps but I'd never shoot sports with less than 7fps. Once you look at other factors you'll realize that high fps is an advantage.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 26, 2013)

I realize that you are calling me a moron for my comments and that's just fine, coming from a talker means very little. I've spent 40 years shooting sports around the world and have rarely used huge bursts to end up with images. I have sat next to some of what you would probably regard as the "best" sports photographers in the world, unfortunately you probably don't know who they are, the ones I've worked with, care more about single frame content than trying to find one average frame in a burst of 20-30.


----------



## pixmedic (Dec 26, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> That's true about fps and I agree but it's nice to be able to select the exact frame you want. For instance in basketball you can anticipate a late pass to the 3 point line for that perfect vertical shot, but having multiple frames to choose from to post is ideal. I look at attention to detail on the faces, what's in the background, was a ref in the way, can I still crop with the proper aspect ratio etc.
> 
> Yes you can do a brake change with a ratchet but air tools make things much easier. Any sports shooter who doesn't use high fps is a moron. Sure the D4 and D1X are 12+ fps but I'd never shoot sports with less than 7fps. Once you look at other factors you'll realize that high fps is an advantage.



High FPS and AF are just accessory tools. 
if you NEED high FPS and fast AF to get your usable shots, then you don't have much choice in what equipment you have to use. 
Imagemaker  has been shooting sports professionally since before either of those  features were even available, let alone fine tuned to what they are  today.
Just because you are unable to shoot sports without modern DSLR's and the high FPS and AF they give you doesn't make someone else a "moron" for saying they arent necessary.  because frankly, sports were being photographed LONG before there was high FPS "spray and pray" and Auto Focus.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 26, 2013)

Scott I have asked you several times to not comment on my threads and to stay away. Thanks again for ruining this thread.

All Im saying is that high fps is needed not to get the best shot but to choose the best shot; there is a huge difference. Ansel Adams said a good photograph is knowing where to stand. What Im saying is that no one today, or anyone I have worked with shoots on single frame, except a house photographer who is using a strobe, even then the keep rate is minimal because things happen. There are problems that get in the way and you need to take several fames of the same composition so you can pick the best shot. Athletes dont stop n pose for sports shooters. Things happen like refs in the way, players feet, hands in the way, shadows, white balance can be off, missed focus, a player blinks among other things. Shoot hockey in a high school area with a Nikon D80. Good luck at getting a clean image above 800 ISO. Now a D4 will be very clean to 3200 ISO in the same arena. If you are a professional you want the best to provide the best. It doesnt make you a better photographer it gives you more opportunities.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 26, 2013)

Brand000n said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> > It really depends on the sports but you need a zoom with a 2.8 Aperture for sure. As for which zoom, it depends on how far you're shooting. A 70-200mm 2.8 VR/VR II will work great on something like Basketball but you're probably going to want a 300mm 2.8 or 400mm 2.8 if you plan to shoot Soccer for example. A good camera that works great with High ISO is an almost must...that and one that is fast, lots of fps. These are generally cameras with Full Frame (FX) sensors like the D700, D800, D3, D3s, D4 etc.
> ...



If you want to do sports, a 24-70 / 70-200 is essential. Then work your way up to getting long glass. The D600 is a good camera but the AF is slow. You might want to invest in 2 D300S's for sports only. They are great cameras to start with without spending a lot of money. I have seen amazing motorsports work taken with Leica's M9 rangefinder. Learn your craft your way not what others say. Know your equipment and what you can do and what you cant do. 

I started out with networking beyond networking and contacting teams. I just landed a really nice contract for the upcoming season with a manufacturer. I am very excited about this opportunity. It takes time and hard work pays off. The only opinion that matters is your clients. People will try to beat you down. The good pro's will give credit and respect to new photographers.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 26, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> That's true about fps and I agree but it's nice to be able to select the exact frame you want. For instance in basketball you can anticipate a late pass to the 3 point line for that perfect vertical shot, but having multiple frames to choose from to post is ideal. I look at attention to detail on the faces, what's in the background, was a ref in the way, can I still crop with the proper aspect ratio etc.
> 
> Yes you can do a brake change with a ratchet but air tools make things much easier. Any sports shooter who doesn't use high fps is a moron. Sure the D4 and D1X are 12+ fps but I'd never shoot sports with less than 7fps. Once you look at other factors you'll realize that high fps is an advantage.



If a credentialed photographer was bursting 20-30 frames constantly, Id yank his credentials my self!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 27, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> brian_f2.8 said:
> 
> 
> > That's true about fps and I agree but it's nice to be able to select the exact frame you want. For instance in basketball you can anticipate a late pass to the 3 point line for that perfect vertical shot, but having multiple frames to choose from to post is ideal. I look at attention to detail on the faces, what's in the background, was a ref in the way, can I still crop with the proper aspect ratio etc.
> ...



I wish it was that easy, I've had to endure hours of sitting next to accredited photographers that would be filling 10GB cards like it was rolls of film. I asked one guy why he did it, and his honest answer, and I have to respect it, was, "I just not very good"  He worked for a figure skating magazine and was so concerned about missing a picture he just shot everything without even looking at what he was shooting.  He's been around skating for 20 years, in real life he works as a nuclear chemist.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 27, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> Scott I have asked you several times to not comment on my threads and to stay away. Thanks again for ruining this thread.
> 
> All Im saying is that high fps is needed not to get the best shot but to choose the best shot; there is a huge difference. Ansel Adams said a good photograph is knowing where to stand. What Im saying is that no one today, or anyone I have worked with shoots on single frame, except a house photographer who is using a strobe, even then the keep rate is minimal because things happen. There are problems that get in the way and you need to take several fames of the same composition so you can pick the best shot. Athletes dont stop n pose for sports shooters. Things happen like refs in the way, players feet, hands in the way, shadows, white balance can be off, missed focus, a player blinks among other things. Shoot hockey in a high school area with a Nikon D80. Good luck at getting a clean image above 800 ISO. Now a D4 will be very clean to 3200 ISO in the same arena. If you are a professional you want the best to provide the best. It doesnt make you a better photographer it gives you more opportunities.



Brian, what I did say was using bursts of 8-12 fps isn't necessary, if the photographer knows what he's doing. It is worse now than ever.  I've shot hockey, basketball and swimming with a Canon t2i, and a 300 2.8 and you're correct in saying anything over 800iso looks like crap, so I work around the capabilities of the camera and not allow the camera to decide what I can and can't shoot. It's simply a tool.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 27, 2013)

I agree the camera is a tool learn to use it's advantages. Your are going to tell me that when you shot hockey or basketball, you never had a random white balance issue(pink frames)? Unless you were the house guy using a strobe, Ill agree to that. For the non-strobing shooters, yes there are random frames that are thrown off. I rarely shoot over 5 fps because I dont feel like sorting through more images than I have to. The only time I max the buffer out is a start, finish, and trophy presentation.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 27, 2013)

I've shot with strobes and have to say I'm not a big fan of it, simply because I hate the way the images look, and the shadows on the ice. I have shot indoors in every kind of light and of course the lights has tossed out all kinds of bad pulses. It doesn't really matter, you just have to work with the light you have. If I am shooting a player coming at me I will follow and shoot, it is not a burst and more selective. I colour correct any images that need it.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 27, 2013)

Brand000n said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> > It really depends on the sports but you need a zoom with a 2.8 Aperture for sure. As for which zoom, it depends on how far you're shooting. A 70-200mm 2.8 VR/VR II will work great on something like Basketball but you're probably going to want a 300mm 2.8 or 400mm 2.8 if you plan to shoot Soccer for example. A good camera that works great with High ISO is an almost must...that and one that is fast, lots of fps. These are generally cameras with Full Frame (FX) sensors like the D700, D800, D3, D3s, D4 etc.
> ...



Yes sir, I would look into a D700 or D300Smaybe even a D300.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Dec 30, 2013)

A D700 is over a thousand $. You should be able to find a D300(s) for a lot less. The fx is nice, real nice and will do very well at higher ISO. You can't go wrong with either camera. Ask your wife if you can spend 1200$ or 3000$, it's the easiest way to decide how to buy 2 cameras.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Dec 31, 2013)

I know my opinion means nothing to you, but apart from suggesting a tighter crop on your basketball, they all look great.


----------



## Tailgunner (Dec 31, 2013)

brian_f2.8 said:


> A D700 is over a thousand $. You should be able to find a D300(s) for a lot less. The fx is nice, real nice and will do very well at higher ISO. You can't go wrong with either camera. Ask your wife if you can spend 1200$ or 3000$, it's the easiest way to decide how to buy 2 cameras.




Ya, a refurbished D700 can run $1,999 while a refurbished D300 can run $900 and a Refurbished D300s around $1,200-1,500. I've got a D300 and it's really quick but if you got the extra cash, the D300s maybe be a better bet since it's got the twin memory card slots. Another option maybe a D7100, the sensor is really quick and works great on action shots.


----------

