# Shooting through Chainlink fences???



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Ok PROBLEM, this is gonna be my first season shooting Softball with pro equipment. I used to use my XTI with 75-300mm kit lens to shoot through the chain-link fence of a softball backstop. I sold my kit lens to a softball mom for a few bucks that also had an XTI with only the 18-55. Now that the season is back around I was at practice and realized all my good glass is freakin' HUGE! My cheapy 75-300 would nestle itself between the chain-links and I would get awesome shots without the chain being a factor. Now my glass is just too big at 72mm and 77mm front filter sizes. I realize if I wanna keep getting the shots parents pay $$$ for I need to get me some glass with a filter size in the 50mm's like this one below at 58mm front filter. 







However at $550.00 the price seems steep as it would only serve the purpose of the back stop shots I am used to getting. I thought I was done buying glass for a while. Anyone wanna recommend another option that is in the 70-300 range with a small front filter size and is good glass? Do I just buy my 75-300 kit lens back and dare strap it on a 5d MKII just for those shots?


----------



## Misfitlimp (Feb 10, 2010)

I shoot stuff at my daughters softball games and I use my 70-200 2.8 and shoot from the dugout so as to not deal with the fence, I dont get why you wanna shoot from behind the batter unless u are shooting all the field players from the backstop. Can i see these money shots you speak of?


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Misfitlimp said:


> I shoot stuff at my daughters softball games and I use my 70-200 2.8 and shoot from the dugout so as to not deal with the fence, I dont get why you wanna shoot from behind the batter unless u are shooting all the field players from the backstop. Can i see these money shots you speak of?



Yeah I got the 70-200 2.8L  also, but how can you not shoot a pitcher looking at her right down the line? I am not saying my shots are phenomenal by any means, but the parents love this angle of their daughter pitching and I can't begin to get this shot from the dugout although I do shoot from there a lot as well with my canon 70-200mm and sigma 120-400mm. If the parents like the backstop shots I am gonna keep giving it to them this year... 










If you haven't shot this angle for the pitcher you might consider it. You can get a lot of good shots right down the light over the batters shoulder, just saying...


----------



## Misfitlimp (Feb 10, 2010)

hmmm never done that before. Dont really like the one with the bat in the way but the second ones interesting. In some of my stuff I like to shoot the batters but show some motion. You might wanna try that with the pitcher also. ill post if I can find em


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Misfitlimp said:


> hmmm never done that before. Dont really like the one with the bat in the way but the second ones interesting. In some of my stuff I like to shoot the batters but show some motion. You might wanna try that with the pitcher also. ill post if I can find em



Yeah, the 1st one is part of a sequence I usually shoot bursts of 5 at a time and batter was in the way, but I like the pitchers expression in that one. Motion? you mean like blurred? Can't wait to get out there and do some shooting with the new heat 5D! just wish I could keep the sweet spot behind the backstop and I don't want cheap glass either... seems like all good glass come with huge front filter sizes...


----------



## Misfitlimp (Feb 10, 2010)

Yeah your gonna have trouble doing 5 shot burst with a 5D mark 2 seeing as how it does a meer 3.9 FPS, if you wanna do fast sequence shots your best bet would be a 1d mark 4 or a 7D and to leave that mark 2 in the studio brotha


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Misfitlimp said:


> Yeah your gonna have trouble doing 5 shot burst with a 5D mark 2 seeing as how it does a meer 3.9 FPS, if you wanna do fast sequence shots your best bet would be a 1d mark 4 or a 7D and to leave that mark 2 in the studio brotha



OK sista, sorry I meant almost 4 frames per second bursts (it's a new camera to me) I will buy a 7D just for the field I am sure I can't do any damage with my slow 5D... LOL


----------



## Misfitlimp (Feb 10, 2010)

Im also a brotha. I own a a gripped 50D and I am looking to unload it if you are interested


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

sorry brotha I meant 7D, LOL I corrected that in my post... how much you want for the Fifty? I might no some peeps interested?


----------



## Misfitlimp (Feb 10, 2010)

1g obo let me know


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

anyone with any lens options? Or do I just pick up a cheap 75-300mm canon with 58mm front filter size on my 5D just for that shot, to get through the chain-link?


----------



## mrmacedonian (Feb 10, 2010)

...2-3 good cuts with these you can keep your fancy glass on!


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

mrmacedonian said:


> ...2-3 good cuts with these you can keep your fancy glass on!



HAHA! Lookin' like my only solution right about now...


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

does anyone out there at least have the 70-300mm IS USM and can comment on it? It has a small front size at 58mm, seems price for a range I already have covered in other lenses...


----------



## Stosh (Feb 10, 2010)

There is a slight misunderstanding going on here regarding your request for a small front filter lens.  The front filter is a good indication of the size of the beam of light coming in to your lens *at maximum aperture*.  If you want a smaller aperture, stop your lens down.  To determine the correct f-ratio that will give a 58mm size "hole", take your focal length divided by f-ratio and that's the true aperture.  For instance 200mm/2.8=71mm aperture.  200mm/3.5=57mm.  There's no reason to buy another lens unless your real reason is for a lighter lens.

Also, I assuming you know that to shoot between the chain link fence you need to be right at the fence - like touching it.  You can't be back away from it.  Also, you have to center the lens "between" the links.  You'll see the links in the outside of the view finder, but when the picture is taken, the lens will be stopped down and they will be gone.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 10, 2010)

Just press the front of the 70-200 right against the chain link and shoot. I've done that, and it works pretty well. I'd prefer to shoot from the home or visiting team's dugouts, or the 3rd base area. Depends on the fencing and the type of bleachers/seating at each field.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> Misfitlimp said:
> 
> 
> > I shoot stuff at my daughters softball games and I use my 70-200 2.8 and shoot from the dugout so as to not deal with the fence, I dont get why you wanna shoot from behind the batter unless u are shooting all the field players from the backstop. Can i see these money shots you speak of?
> ...




Those shots would not sell at the events i shoot they are too soft, i would be shooting this with a 300mmF2.8L and a 70-200F2.8L, the 70-300 is not good enough or fast enough


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> Misfitlimp said:
> 
> 
> > hmmm never done that before. Dont really like the one with the bat in the way but the second ones interesting. In some of my stuff I like to shoot the batters but show some motion. You might wanna try that with the pitcher also. ill post if I can find em
> ...




Use your 1D the 5D is not good for shooting this sort of sport


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> Misfitlimp said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah your gonna have trouble doing 5 shot burst with a 5D mark 2 seeing as how it does a meer 3.9 FPS, if you wanna do fast sequence shots your best bet would be a 1d mark 4 or a 7D and to leave that mark 2 in the studio brotha
> ...



I thought you had a 1DMK2, thats what it said on your equipment list


----------



## Tulsa (Feb 10, 2010)

Why is the catcher pitching??


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

Whats with the mask, too much safety in American sports


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Tulsa and GsGary, yes the mask is so she don't ruin her mug if a batter hit's a line drive to her face, they are kids... I will tell them to remove the masks for pictures next time! LOL So no help with my situation huh? No one??? 

By the way below is a youth softball catchers mask, a little more narley! LOL


----------



## NWK04 (Feb 10, 2010)

Tulsa said:


> Why is the catcher pitching??


----------



## Tulsa (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> Tulsa and GsGary, yes the mask is so she don't ruin her mug if a batter hit's a line drive to her face, they are kids... I will tell them to remove the masks for pictures next time! LOL So no help with my situation huh? No one???


Wimps these days I tell ya, would have never seen that when I was a kid, and that was only 20 years ago!

I would suggest just standing somewhere else, or just get a cheap lens in the 50mm range, not much else you can do.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> Tulsa and GsGary, yes the mask is so she don't ruin her mug if a batter hit's a line drive to her face, they are kids... I will tell them to remove the masks for pictures next time! LOL So no help with my situation huh? No one???
> 
> By the way below is a youth softball catchers mask, a little more narley! LOL




Yes use your 1Dmk2 and get a better lens


----------



## Stosh (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> So no help with my situation huh? No one???


Help with what?  A smaller lens?  Did you read my reply?  You can have a smaller lens by stopping down a larger lens.  It's the exact same thing optically speaking.


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Stosh said:


> There is a slight misunderstanding going on here regarding your request for a small front filter lens.  The front filter is a good indication of the size of the beam of light coming in to your lens *at maximum aperture*.  If you want a smaller aperture, stop your lens down.  To determine the correct f-ratio that will give a 58mm size "hole", take your focal length divided by f-ratio and that's the true aperture.  For instance 200mm/2.8=71mm aperture.  200mm/3.5=57mm.  There's no reason to buy another lens unless your real reason is for a lighter lens.
> 
> Also, I assuming you know that to shoot between the chain link fence you need to be right at the fence - like touching it.  You can't be back away from it.  Also, you have to center the lens "between" the links.  You'll see the links in the outside of the view finder, but when the picture is taken, the lens will be stopped down and they will be gone.



Yes, gotcha, this is my last resort. If you read my first post I used to just rest the lens in the chain link and click away, this way I will have to work a little harder to stay in the right position but I will try it out next practice, thanks for the info! :thumbup:


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

"Yes use your 1Dmk2 and get a better lens" 

Yes I do have a 1Dmk2, and better lens what do you mean? I have the 70-200mm 2.8L and and 135mm F2.0L and hmmm many more... I was just looking to shoot a decent 58mm front filter through the chain-link but I guess we got away from that question a while ago, LOL I think I will try Stosh's Idea... I guess no one has the 70-300mm IS USM to vouch for its performance.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 10, 2010)

Stosh said:


> AliasPros said:
> 
> 
> > So no help with my situation huh? No one???
> ...



The old rules actually work. Whenever one needs to shoot through bars, dirty windows, chain link, or any type of obstruction the WIDER the lens's aperture, the better. The longer the focal length, the better. The closer the lens is to the obstructing cage,wire,or glass, the more out of focus the chain link or other foreground obstruction will be rendered.

If you merely place the front of the lens right on the chain link fencing, at 135mm to 300mm at the widest aperture your lens has, there will be almost no chain link visible. The last softball/baseball game I went to, I had my 5D and 24-105 f/4 L with me,and that was easily able to shoot through the chain link for a couple of snaps of my friend's son. What you will get sometimes is a bit of odd distortion at the edges of the frame, where the chain link wire is obstructing the light, but if the lens is close to the wire, most of the light will pas around the wire,and form an image on the film.

Here are a couple examples, the first at 105mm and f/5 shooting throughnbthe chain lnk down at 3rd base, the second as her son ducks down to avoid being smashed in the head by a high pitch.

_MG_0718_Justin_eMail.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com
_MG_0736_Justin_eMail.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com

and here's a softball shot from five years ago, done at 160mm at f/4 with the Nikon 70-200 jammed right into the chain link fence


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> "Yes use your 1Dmk2 and get a better lens"
> 
> Yes I do have a 1Dmk2, and better lens what do you mean? I have the 70-200mm 2.8L and and 135mm F2.0L and hmmm many more... I was just looking to shoot a decent 58mm front filter through the chain-link but I guess we got away from that question a while ago, LOL I think I will try Stosh's Idea... I guess no one has the 70-300mm IS USM to vouch for its performance.




Forget your 5D use your 1D with the 70-200F2.8L use a wide aperture and you won't see the fence 
This was shot through a fence, can you see it, looks like you have lots to learn:lmao:


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

Derrel said:


> Stosh said:
> 
> 
> > AliasPros said:
> ...



Why is the catcher pitching


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

Problem solved! I got the 5DmkII with 24-105 f4L also, I will give this technique a try, this is why I am a rookie, thanks fellas! I will post some pics in 2 weeks with this technique unless I make a practice before that... Screw cheapo glass with 58mm filters! LOL I knew I couldn't give up this angle and I figured out how to keep it here at TPF that's why I am a supporting member... You all just saved me some money and helped me make more money this year! Thanks :thumbup:


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> Problem solved! I got the 5DmkII with 24-105 f4L also, I will give this technique a try, this is why I am a rookie, thanks fellas! I will post some pics in 2 weeks with this technique unless I make a practice before that... Screw cheapo glass with 58mm filters! LOL I knew I couldn't give up this angle and I figured out how to keep it here at TPF that's why I am a supporting member... You all just saved me some money and helped me make more money this year! Thanks :thumbup:




Why do you keep going on about using the 5D when the tool for the job is the 1Dmk2


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

gsgary said:


> AliasPros said:
> 
> 
> > Problem solved! I got the 5DmkII with 24-105 f4L also, I will give this technique a try, this is why I am a rookie, thanks fellas! I will post some pics in 2 weeks with this technique unless I make a practice before that... Screw cheapo glass with 58mm filters! LOL I knew I couldn't give up this angle and I figured out how to keep it here at TPF that's why I am a supporting member... You all just saved me some money and helped me make more money this year! Thanks :thumbup:
> ...



Ok 1D it is. Just habit I guess the 5D MKII is all new and shiny... LOL :blushing:


----------



## srinaldo86 (Feb 10, 2010)

Well I suggest you way out the cost/profit from it really... How much $ do the parents pay you and is it enough to validate buying the other lens.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

What you really need is a dye sub printer so you can print on site and get them buying before they go home, we charge £10 for an 8"x6" in a mount only takes about 20 seconds to print


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

@Srinaldo86, 
4 fields at the sports complex so 4 games in the morning that's about 15-19 girls a team lets just say 15 per team so that's 60 girls x 2 for visitors that's 120 girls then another 120 in the afternoon (usually same girls) for their second game, that's 120 girls to shoot a day and usually there are 3 game days a week that's a lot of parents and opportunities to sell photos my friend and I am the only photog out there. I made enough money last year between regular season play and All-Stars to buy a few L's this year.


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

gsgary said:


> What you really need is a dye sub printer so you can print on site and get them buying before they go home, we charge £10 for an 8"x6" in a mount only takes about 20 seconds to print




LOL Already there my friend and a flat screen 32" TV for laptop preview straight HDMI to the laptop... :thumbup: I have parent just walking up to me with $20s in hand to shoot their daughter before they even seen the pics just because the word of mouth around the fields is so strong... Can't wait to see what I can do with 1D and new glass this year, instead of XTI and kit lenses... HAHA!!!


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

We have a van set up with a main computer which has 5 minute photo that resizes and sends to 3 touch screens 2 Sony dr200's one printing 6x4 and the other 8x6, all photo's are shots as JPG and processed with picasa


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

gsgary said:


> We have a van set up with a main computer which has 5 minute photo that resizes and sends to 3 touch screens 2 Sony dr200's one printing 6x4 and the other 8x6, all photo's are shots as JPG and processed with picasa



WOW I can learn from you! Picasa huh? Nice set up, what cam you shooting with again?


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > We have a van set up with a main computer which has 5 minute photo that resizes and sends to 3 touch screens 2 Sony dr200's one printing 6x4 and the other 8x6, all photo's are shots as JPG and processed with picasa
> ...



1Dmk1, 1Dmk2 x 2,5D, and remote 10D you don't need big files for this sort of work
This is a 1Dmk1 shot from an event we shot last year


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

wow Awesome work! :thumbup:


----------



## gsgary (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> wow Awesome work! :thumbup:



Cheers :thumbup:


----------



## srinaldo86 (Feb 10, 2010)

AliasPros said:


> @Srinaldo86,
> 4 fields at the sports complex so 4 games in the morning that's about 15-19 girls a team lets just say 15 per team so that's 60 girls x 2 for visitors that's 120 girls then another 120 in the afternoon (usually same girls) for their second game, that's 120 girls to shoot a day and usually there are 3 game days a week that's a lot of parents and opportunities to sell photos my friend and I am the only photog out there. I made enough money last year between regular season play and All-Stars to buy a few L's this year.




Well then by all means dude, buy that lens! Obviously this is a pretty decent cash cow for you.


----------



## Stosh (Feb 10, 2010)

Derrel said:


> The old rules actually work. Whenever one needs to shoot through bars, dirty windows, chain link, or any type of obstruction the WIDER the lens's aperture, the better. The longer the focal length, the better. The closer the lens is to the obstructing cage,wire,or glass, the more out of focus the chain link or other foreground obstruction will be rendered.
> 
> If you merely place the front of the lens right on the chain link fencing, at 135mm to 300mm at the widest aperture your lens has, there will be almost no chain link visible. The last softball/baseball game I went to, I had my 5D and 24-105 f/4 L with me,and that was easily able to shoot through the chain link for a couple of snaps of my friend's son. What you will get sometimes is a bit of odd distortion at the edges of the frame, where the chain link wire is obstructing the light, but if the lens is close to the wire, most of the light will pas around the wire,and form an image on the film.



This is another one of those complicated subjects where there are more than one acceptable answer.  The OP wanted a smaller front opening lens and simply put, that can be achieved by stopping down a larger lens.

As for the "best" way to shoot through a chain link fence, I'd like to propose 3 different scenarios.

#1:  fence is right in front of subject and you are distant.  This one is almost impossible to do successfully, so let's ignore it.

#2: fence is half-way between you and subject:  Here your rules are exactly correct.  The larger the aperture, the better because it will "average" the distortions caused by the fence, dirty window, etc.  The distortions happens to be diffraction.  The light that's blocked by the fence isn't the problem, it's the light that gets bent when it passes by the fence.  Any light that passes by an edge gets bent and doesn't correctly focus at the focal plane like the rest of the light does.  The is the exact reason why larger apertures can resolve better details - because the ratio of clear glass to edge is larger.  In a pinhole the ratio of clear to edge is tiny, that's why a pinhole camera has horrible resolution.

#3: fence is directly in front of you and object is distant.  Here's where the rules can become a little muddy.  If the holes in the fence are relatively large, one could argue that shooting to avoid the fence completely would be the best option assuming you still have a decent f-ratio.  You wouldn't want to shoot at f/22 to get your aperture small enough to fit through a tighter fence.

In my first response I suggested that he shoot his 200mm at f/3.5 instead of f/2.8 to get down to 57mm aperture.  I don't have the math to prove it, but I would think that the lesser of 2 evils in this case would be to just stop down one stop, but I could be wrong.

In the end it may not make much difference as others and you have shown it can be done well without stopping down to miss the fence.


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

@srinald, 
Gonna try some new techniques with my primo glass first, sounds like I got the solution... Just gonna wait for a sunny practice it's been raining out here in the "Maria" Central Cal.


----------



## fokker (Feb 10, 2010)

Well since you asked, I have the 70-300 IS USM and while it's not overly fast or 'L' build quality I find the images I get from it to be very sharp and the AF is good too (though not amazing). I got mine cheap as chips 2nd hand so have no complaints whatsoever, however at retail price it's probably not an amazing buy. It's definitely a major step up from the 75-300 kit lens. I used to have one of those and hated the thing, couldn't sell it fast enough.


----------



## AliasPros (Feb 10, 2010)

fokker said:


> Well since you asked, I have the 70-300 IS USM and while it's not overly fast or 'L' build quality I find the images I get from it to be very sharp and the AF is good too (though not amazing). I got mine cheap as chips 2nd hand so have no complaints whatsoever, however at retail price it's probably not an amazing buy. It's definitely a major step up from the 75-300 kit lens. I used to have one of those and hated the thing, couldn't sell it fast enough.




Nice, good to know in case I wanna be lazy again and just let my filter rest inside the dug out chainlink slots... Seems like the lens has good reviews on BHphoto, I'd consider a used copy but wanna see if I can execute the advice I got on here first. Thank you


----------

