# DSLR for Brazilian Jiu Jitsu



## Ballistics (Jun 5, 2011)

I run a blog where I do reviews on gear for BJJ and I want to upgrade from a point and shoot to a DSLR so I can make the pictures look professional and high quality. I also want to be able to take shots of teammates during competitions. 

So after doing a little research I find my self a bit stuck on choosing a camera. Initially, I was set on buying a Nikon D3100 because it was right at the tip of my budget ($650) and from what I have read it would be perfect for my gear reviews. However, I have also read that it wasn't the greatest choice for action shots. That's where I am lost on choosing a camera.

From my understanding, the lack of an AF motor is the issue with entry level Nikons, and also the issue with action shots. I don't know if my understanding is correct but that is what I seem to be getting out of my research. So is there a camera in my price range that would be good for that? I am also open to used cameras as well.


----------



## scorpion_tyr (Jun 6, 2011)

Until you know exactly what to look for I would shy away from used cameras. I know nothing of Nikon, but I would personally just get the bottom of the line Canon DSLR (more than good enough for what you're wanting) and take the rest of your money and try to get a good lens and probably an external flash. No matter how you go about it, you're probably looking at at least $1,000 worth of gear to get good quality shots, but on the other hand, a Canon XS with kit lens and built in flash will probably still work a lot better than a point and shoot.


----------



## Village Idiot (Jun 6, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> I run a blog where I do reviews on gear for BJJ and I want to upgrade from a point and shoot to a DSLR so I can make the pictures look professional and high quality. I also want to be able to take shots of teammates during competitions.
> 
> So after doing a little research I find my self a bit stuck on choosing a camera. Initially, I was set on buying a Nikon D3100 because it was right at the tip of my budget ($650) and from what I have read it would be perfect for my gear reviews. However, I have also read that it wasn't the greatest choice for action shots. That's where I am lost on choosing a camera.
> 
> From my understanding, the lack of an AF motor is the issue with entry level Nikons, and also the issue with action shots. I don't know if my understanding is correct but that is what I seem to be getting out of my research. So is there a camera in my price range that would be good for that? I am also open to used cameras as well.



To be able to take professional looking shots, you have to know how to take professional quality photos and what gear you need for it. Product photography is all about lighting. Action shots while a match is in progress is going to be all about timing, the right lenses, the right body, and other factors. Even if you go and spend $2,000 on a setup, I don't think it will help you until you learn how to use the equipment.

A used body can be a great way to go. You get a camera that performs well and handles better than an entry level machine. Most photographers tend to take care of a camera that originally costs them over $1,000 for just a body. For $650 though, you're going to barely be able to afford a used camera, a kit lens, and maybe some sort of manual flash. You'll be underwhelmed with the performance of the kit lens and even spending $100 on something like a 50 f/1.8 will get you nowhere. You'd need at least an 85 f/1.8 for about $400 and depending on how close you are to the action, that still might not get you desired results.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 6, 2011)

Ok thanks for the replies. Now, I have been finding used cameras like the Nikon D200 and the canon 30D locally for around $3-450 with a kit lens. Would that suffice for a starter camera? What exactly would I be looking for?

I understand I have to know how to learn how to use the DSLR, and that is what I plan on doing. I just want to have the equipment for my needs so when I do finally know what I am doing, I don't have to upgrade immediately


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 6, 2011)

Unfortunately, you picked one of the most challenging, and expensive, types of photography...Indoor, action shots where flash will probably be prohibited.  Shots like that are at the limits of cameras that are 4 times your price range.  Heck, the type of lens you need is 4 times your price range.

If you can get close to the action, you might be able to get away with a used Nikon D90 and a 50mm 1.8.  It won't be ideal, but I think it is about the cheapest you are going to be able to go and still get decent results.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 6, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Unfortunately, you picked one of the most challenging, and expensive, types of photography...Indoor, action shots where flash will probably be prohibited.  Shots like that are at the limits of cameras that are 4 times your price range.  Heck, the type of lens you need is 4 times your price range.
> 
> If you can get close to the action, you might be able to get away with a used Nikon D90 and a 50mm 1.8.  It won't be ideal, but I think it is about the cheapest you are going to be able to go and still get decent results.


 
Ouch really? Even though it is brightly lit?


----------



## memento (Jun 6, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Unfortunately, you picked one of the most challenging, and expensive, types of photography...Indoor, action shots where flash will probably be prohibited. Shots like that are at the limits of cameras that are 4 times your price range. Heck, the type of lens you need is 4 times your price range.



what he said.
except flash probably wont be prohibited, more so another expense.


----------



## molested_cow (Jun 6, 2011)

You are looking at two types of categories here. Product photography and indoor sports.

I've been doing quite a bit of product photography for internal use for our office, so this is not for official PR photography. In any case, depending on how you want the photos to look like. You can do a straight forward catalog style shot of the product that shows as many sides with as much detail definition, or you can do stylized shots with dramatic lighting.

Examples:







VS







These are just examples I grabbed off the internet. The first photo uses telephoto lens because you want to have little perspective distortion to show as many sides of the product as possible. You also need so have maximum depth of field to capture as much details as possible. The lighting tends to be evenly lit for the same purpose.

The second shot will need a macro type of lens for obvious reasons. The lighting is more dramatic with purposely placed reflections which blinds out details.

The photo studio I have access to has three round defused lights. No flash is used, so everything depends on those lights, a tripod and remote release.

Indoor photography wise, you definitely need a fast telephoto lens with a camera that has excellent in low light ( high ISO capability). The D7000 comes to mind. You definitely also want to be equipped with strobe skills and gears.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 6, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Ouch really? Even though it is brightly lit?


 
The thing is I doubt it is actually brightly lit. Just about the only indoor sporting events that are actually brightly lit are professional events where there is TV coverage. I assume you have taken some pictures in this gym with your P&S...what were the settings the camera chose? ISO? Shutter Speed? Aperture? Did your camera fire it's flash? That will let us know what the light levels really are and we should be able to give more targeted advice for your specific situation.

Will you be allowed to use flash at the event?


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 6, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > Ouch really? Even though it is brightly lit?
> ...


 
Most, if not all BJJ tournaments take place in college sports arenas. The mundials last week took place in the walter pyramid. 

And no, flashes are not permitted.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 6, 2011)

Looking at the EXIF data of the picture that you posted, it was a Nikon D3 with a 24-70 2.8 at ISO 2500, 1/350th of a second, at f/5. The camera runs about $4000 and the lens is around $1900.

Unfortunately, you are not going to find anything in your price range that will be able to produce clean shots under those conditions. If $650 is really your top end and you can't get any closer than where that picture was taken from, I am afraid you are not going to be able to get the results you are looking for.

Cameras in your price range are going to have a max usable ISO around 800, your lenses will be variable aperture and at the long end be at 5.6.  With the limitations that you will have, you will probably be getting close to 1/15th of a second and that just isn't going to work with a fast moving subject.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 6, 2011)

Ill be on the sidelines. Like where the referee is, thats where Ill be. No more than 10 ft away from the competitors.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 6, 2011)

Ok, if you can get that close, than you should be okay with a 50mm 1.8. The 85mm 1.8 would be a better choice, but it's out of your price range. As far as the camera, you will need a body that has a focus motor and acceptable noise at ISO 1600. D90 with a 50mm 1.8 is pretty close to your price range and should get you decent results.  The D200 struggles at ISO 800 and may limit your shutter speed to something too slow to stop the action.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 6, 2011)

Ok awesome info. Thanks.


----------



## djacobox372 (Jun 6, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Ok thanks for the replies. Now, I have been finding used cameras like the Nikon D200 and the canon 30D locally for around $3-450 with a kit lens. Would that suffice for a starter camera? What exactly would I be looking for?
> 
> I understand I have to know how to learn how to use the DSLR, and that is what I plan on doing. I just want to have the equipment for my needs so when I do finally know what I am doing, I don't have to upgrade immediately


 
The D200 has an older CCD sensor, which isn't as good in low light (indoor) situations, the D3100 would be a better choice IMO.  If you can't afford a new DSLR, then you may want to consider a used d80, which is similar to the D200 but about $150 cheaper.  But what really matters is the lens, so you'll need at least $350 left over for that.  Do you need a telephoto lens? or are you up close taking photos?

The sigma 24-70mm f2.8 or the tamron 28-75mm f2.8 are good lenses for close range stuff.  A fast telephoto is likely out of your budget. 

If you can live without zoom, an 85mm f1.8 would be an awesome choice. 

The AF motor wont give you more focusing speed, it just allows you to use "AF" lenses.  This is more of a cost saving/compatibility feature, because "AF" lenses actually focus slower then their more expensive AF-S counterparts.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 6, 2011)

djacobox372 said:


> The AF motor wont give you more focusing speed, it just allows you to use "AF" lenses. This is more of a cost saving/compatibility feature, because "AF" lenses actually focus slower then their more expensive AF-S counterparts.


 
While this is true, the 50mm 1.8 costs around $100, the 85 1.8 is about $490 and neither will autofocus with a camera without an AF motor. To get an AFS, 1.8 prime, you are either looking at the 35mm 1.8 which isn't going to provide the reach needed, or the 50mm 1.4 at $550...or, you could always go for the 85 1.4 AFS which is around $1700.

With the OP's budget, it would be very limiting for him to get a camera body that does not have a focus motor. Basically, the OP can't afford not to have a focus motor in his body. Not having one would limit him to a 35mm 1.8, manually focusing, or going with a kit lens.


----------



## owlxxx (Jun 6, 2011)

Just go with the d90 and a 50mm.  Do a search on flickr and you will see that it is a nice setup.  I just did a quick search "nikon d90 mma" and got some results that werent too bad.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 9, 2011)

Ok so, I just increased my budget a little bit and I am able to buy the D5100. Is it worth the $800?


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 9, 2011)

Ok with bjj where action isn't always that fast you might be able to get a d5000 with a 55-200mm lens. Try to take shots with minimal movements like when a person is in the guard. Or when the 2 guys are trying to setup a take down. Even in that lighting though a 1/600 shutter can make it pretty dark.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 9, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> Ok with bjj where action isn't always that fast you might be able to get a d5000 with a 55-200mm lens. Try to take shots with minimal movements like when a person is in the guard. Or when the 2 guys are trying to setup a take down. Even in that lighting though a 1/600 shutter can make it pretty dark.



What is the difference between a d5000 and a d5100?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 9, 2011)

There is almost no difference between a d5000 and a d5100.  Neither have a focus motor and both will severely limit your options.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 9, 2011)

This is difficult lol.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 9, 2011)

No difference really the d5100 is the next model. It auto focuses on its own while in video while the d5000 is all manual focus. With your tight budget lens limitation is your last concern. There are still many great afs lenses. It just means that the lens contain the motor. In the future if you are so worried about less lenses you might as well fork out the 1000 for the d90. If you are a beginner the difference in lens availability won't really bother you so get that out of your head. specially with that small budget you won't be buying the whole afs collection soon. Worry about that when you get really good. By then you might even upgrade to the d700.
Another thing you're a beginner worrying about having a kit lens is like a teenager mad about not getting a ferrari for his first car. They are lower quality but they will get you what you need as a beginner.


----------



## spacefuzz (Jun 9, 2011)

I have been practicing martial arts for 10 years so am well aquainted with the types of venues you will be in.  I would say D90 or D7000 for their good high ISO performance and the 50mm or 85 mm price lens that was previously mentioned.  You can get a used D90 body for ~$500 (heck mine is even for sale) and it puts out decent shots to about ISO 1000.  D7k will shoot up to 4k ISO respectably.  Id say got 50mm if you want both people on the mat, or 85mm if you want to be able to get their faces.  The ISO performance you can get will allow you to compensate for cheaper glass.  My 50m f/1.8 I got for $75 used and it works great.  Another benefit would be if you can get down low it will throw the background crowd / gym wall out of focus which will make your shots look nicer. 
Are your shots mostly for the web or what size prints did you want?


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 9, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> No difference really the d5100 is the next model. It auto focuses on its own while in video while the d5000 is all manual focus. With your tight budget lens limitation is your last concern. There are still many great afs lenses. It just means that the lens contain the motor. In the future if you are so worried about less lenses you might as well fork out the 1000 for the d90. If you are a beginner the difference in lens availability won't really bother you so get that out of your head. specially with that small budget you won't be buying the whole afs collection soon. Worry about that when you get really good. By then you might even upgrade to the d700.
> Another thing you're a beginner worrying about having a kit lens is like a teenager mad about not getting a ferrari for his first car. They are lower quality but they will get you what you need as a beginner.


 
LOL ok good response. So this leads to my next question - Will the D5100 get me by for a year or 2?


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 9, 2011)

spacefuzz said:


> I have been practicing martial arts for 10 years so am well aquainted with the types of venues you will be in.  I would say D90 or D7000 for their good high ISO performance and the 50mm or 85 mm price lens that was previously mentioned.  You can get a used D90 body for ~$500 (heck mine is even for sale) and it puts out decent shots to about ISO 1000.  D7k will shoot up to 4k ISO respectably.  Id say got 50mm if you want both people on the mat, or 85mm if you want to be able to get their faces.  The ISO performance you can get will allow you to compensate for cheaper glass.  My 50m f/1.8 I got for $75 used and it works great.  Another benefit would be if you can get down low it will throw the background crowd / gym wall out of focus which will make your shots look nicer.
> Are your shots mostly for the web or what size prints did you want?


 
Shots are mainly for the web. I will be taking a digital photography class in college for the fall so my wife is letting me spend a little more on a camera. But the D7000 is just to much for me right now. D5100 seems to be what I am going with.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 9, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> No difference really the d5100 is the next model. It auto focuses on its own while in video while the d5000 is all manual focus. With your tight budget lens limitation is your last concern. There are still many great afs lenses. It just means that the lens contain the motor. In the future if you are so worried about less lenses you might as well fork out the 1000 for the d90. If you are a beginner the difference in lens availability won't really bother you so get that out of your head. specially with that small budget you won't be buying the whole afs collection soon. Worry about that when you get really good. By then you might even upgrade to the d700.
> Another thing you're a beginner worrying about having a kit lens is like a teenager mad about not getting a ferrari for his first car. They are lower quality but they will get you what you need as a beginner.



I realize that everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but what you are saying just doesn't make any sense.  The OP cannot take the kind of shots he wants to take with a kit lens and a consumer body without flash.  It just can't be done.  Period.  The only hope he has of getting a lens anywhere near his budget that will sort of fit his needs is the $100 50mm 1.8 and you suggest he get a body that can't utilize it.  

It's not even close to a teenager getting a ferrari for his first car.  Getting a D5000 or 5100 would be like the teenager getting a hydrogen car and then figuring out he can't find any place to fill up.


----------



## spacefuzz (Jun 9, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Kbarredo said:
> 
> 
> > No difference really the d5100 is the next model. It auto focuses on its own while in video while the d5000 is all manual focus. With your tight budget lens limitation is your last concern. There are still many great afs lenses. It just means that the lens contain the motor. In the future if you are so worried about less lenses you might as well fork out the 1000 for the d90. If you are a beginner the difference in lens availability won't really bother you so get that out of your head. specially with that small budget you won't be buying the whole afs collection soon. Worry about that when you get really good. By then you might even upgrade to the d700.
> ...



I agree, with a D5100 he will not be able to get the pictures he wants and it will be money wasted.  I tried to shoot sports with an inferior camera for years, and all I ended up with was a bunch of crappy pictures.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 9, 2011)

Ok, now that I got that off my chest, I will elaborate upon the differences between a kit lens and a 1.8 prime.  There obviously seems to be some misunderstanding.

Let's start with the basics.  When you look through the view finder, the lens is wide open.  That means, with a 1.8 prime, the aperture opens wider, so the view finder will be much brighter than with a kit lens.  Now, the kicker is, the focus module also uses the image that is projected to the view finder.  So, the image is brighter, the focus module works better, more shots are in focus.  Now, the second kicker, a D5000/5100 has a pentamirror view finder, which is already darker than the pentaprism view finder of the D90.  The D5100 is a newer model and I will say that it has comparable high ISO performance as it's big brother, the 'obsolete' D90, which can be found very affordable used.  Now, for the third kicker, the D90 can utilize that $100 50mm 1.8 fully while with the D5000/5100 it is manual focus only.  For the fourth kicker, manual focus absolutely sucks with actions sports.  For the fifth kicker, a kit lens has a minimum aperture of around 3.5 to 5.6 depending on how far you are zoomed in.  Let's assume you get the 18-55 kit lens.  That means around 50mm, the kit lens will be at aperture 5.6 while the prime would still be at 1.8.  Anybody want to guess how much of a difference that makes?

Schools out.  To the OP, do whatever you want, but in the conditions you are going to be shooting in, while it may look bright, those conditions tax some of the best systems money can buy.  You need every edge you can get, and that means you need a prime lens that has a max aperture of 1.8.  You have two choices that won't blow your budget out of the water...a 35mm 1.8($220) which will autofocus on any nikon camera including the d5000/5100 or the 50mm 1.8($100) which will only focus on a camera that has a focus motor.  In 35mm effective focal lengths, that gives you a choice between a 75mm 1.8 prime and a 52mm 1.8 prime.  Because you are getting a crop body sensor, you gain a 1.5x reach.  IMO, the 75mm efl is going to be a bit too short, but you can probably crop and get an image you can proudly display...the 52mm efl is just going to be too short.

Now for the sixth kicker, the D90 offers the ability to control remote flashes without any special gear...with the D5000/5100 you have to buy flash triggers.  There are so many compromises with the d5000/5100 series and it costs so much money to overcome them, I honestly don't understand why anybody who is thinking they may want to grow as a photographer would even consider it.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 9, 2011)

Ok now I picked up the D5100 but before you look at me like the A-hole who asks for advice and does what he wants anyway hear me out:

I am brand new to photography and DSLRs. I am going to be taking a digital photography course in September so while I may not be able to get what I want out of the D5100, I will use it to learn about DSLRs and how to use it, and in turn will learn what I need and buy it. I am confident that what you guys are telling me is correct, so after 6 months or so I will upgrade to a D7000 body. I don't consider the purchase a waste, but I figure that there are more options and capabilities on the D5100 vs the D3100 so I can experience more while learning. I could probably sell it for 450 in 6 months.

I appreciate all of the insights and information you guys gave me.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 9, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Kbarredo said:
> 
> 
> > No difference really the d5100 is the next model. It auto focuses on its own while in video while the d5000 is all manual focus. With your tight budget lens limitation is your last concern. There are still many great afs lenses. It just means that the lens contain the motor. In the future if you are so worried about less lenses you might as well fork out the 1000 for the d90. If you are a beginner the difference in lens availability won't really bother you so get that out of your head. specially with that small budget you won't be buying the whole afs collection soon. Worry about that when you get really good. By then you might even upgrade to the d700.
> ...


 
Idid not read the whole post. With a 50mm lens that comes with it you don't really need a flash. Bjj isn't like basketball it isn't as fast pace so you don't need as high shutter. like I said all u need to do is make sure you take shots during slower paced times like guard transitions.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo, you're still not making any sense, and now you went and started a thread about how you want to upgrade your D5000 to a D90.  You should really stop 'helping' people until you know what the heck you are talking about.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

ok let me explain this. He wants to take pics of a bjj tournament without a flash but you guys say he needs a large aperture lens so that he can let as much light in. Im saying there is no need because bjj is not as fast paced as other sports therefore you can keep the shutterspeed a little lower and you can have a smaller aperture. What doesnt make sense, i cant simplify it anymore.


----------



## SabrinaO (Jun 12, 2011)

Why are you bringing shutter speed in this? He doesn't want to use the flash, so he needs to open up his aperture. Aperture has nothing to do with motion. You are the one thats not making sense.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> Why are you bringing shutter speed in this? He doesn't want to use the flash, so he needs to open up his aperture. Aperture has nothing to do with motion. You are the one thats not making sense.


 Ok he needs a bigger aperture so that he can speed up his shutter to freeze the action. Im saying he doesnt need a 1.8 aperture because bjj is not that fast paced. He can keep his shutter speed lower and still freeze the action thus letting more light in, allowing him to keep his aperture at 4-5.6. Do i need to explain the shutter, iso and aperture triangle as well.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 12, 2011)

The first one was at 1/160th of a second.  Notice the motion blur in the hand. http://www.judojournal.com/pictures/heavy.JPG

This could have been a nice shot with a decent shutter speed.  http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VotiGP6jOY4/SwbZkypqpOI/AAAAAAAAAhM/YwGa-6h185Q/s1600/throw2.jpg

Action sports are action sports.  Shutter speed matters to capture Action.


----------



## SabrinaO (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> SabrinaO said:
> 
> 
> > Why are you bringing shutter speed in this? He doesn't want to use the flash, so he needs to open up his aperture. Aperture has nothing to do with motion. You are the one thats not making sense.
> ...




HOW IS HE LETTING GOOD LIGHT IN AT AN APERTURE OF 4-5.6????????? And a low shutter will blur the action. You don't need to explain the exposure triangle to me... you need to read it for yourself. How long have you been at this? WOW.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

gryphonslair99 said:


> The first one was at 1/160th of a second.  Notice the motion blur in the hand. http://www.judojournal.com/pictures/heavy.JPG
> 
> This could have been a nice shot with a decent shutter speed.  http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VotiGP6jOY4/SwbZkypqpOI/AAAAAAAAAhM/YwGa-6h185Q/s1600/throw2.jpg
> 
> Action sports are action sports.  Shutter speed matters to capture Action.


Thats during a throw though and its judo not bjj. 2 very different martial arts. Thats why i was telling op to shoot during slow moments like in the gaurd.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

K well then tell me in a bjj tournament with multiple spot lights on each mat how much shutterspeed is needed. You mind telling me because I would really love to hear about something you have never experienced in your life.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > The first one was at 1/160th of a second.  Notice the motion blur in the hand. http://www.judojournal.com/pictures/heavy.JPG
> ...



Good sports photographers know their sport.  

Ronin Jiu-Jitsu: Motivation


----------



## SabrinaO (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > The first one was at 1/160th of a second. Notice the motion blur in the hand. http://www.judojournal.com/pictures/heavy.JPG
> ...



So you are saying he should limit himself to get certain "slow shots" instead of doing the obvious to capture ALL the shots when opening up his aperture and increasing the shutter speed?? Just wow.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 12, 2011)

So your advice is to basically not take any photos while anything is happening.  That is an interesting strategy for sports photography. :Rolleyes:


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Kbarredo said:
> 
> 
> > gryphonslair99 said:
> ...


 It says on the site you posted itself JUDO. So excuse me for using the website you posted as a reference.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 12, 2011)

> Thats during a throw though and its judo not bjj. 2 very different martial arts. Thats why i was telling op to shoot during slow moments like in the gaurd.



Just to interject for a moment; Judo and Jiu Jitsu are actually very similar. All of the throwing take downs in BJJ is in fact Judo. BJJ was developed by a Judo black belt. But I am actually learning a lot from your exchange though, so you guys should definitely keep going lol.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> > Thats during a throw though and its judo not bjj. 2 very different martial arts. Thats why i was telling op to shoot during slow moments like in the gaurd.
> 
> 
> 
> Just to interject for a moment; Judo and Jiu Jitsu are actually very similar. All of the throwing take downs in BJJ is in fact Judo. BJJ was developed by a Judo black belt. But I am actually learning a lot from your exchange though, so you guys should definitely keep going lol.


 No they are not similar at all. 70% of judo is standing ending with one main takedown and they are stood back up after a few seconds on the ground. Bjj a large majority of the style is on the ground fighting. Judo is mostly on throwing bjj is mostly on the ground fighting. Bjj shows hows to fight off their back. Judo not so much, you are taught more to stay on top.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Kbarredo said:
> ...



Yeah you are right. There is no fast action here.  
YouTube - &#x202a;The only Marcelo Garcia video that matters&#x202c;&rlm;
YouTube - &#x202a;Shinya Aoki vs Marcelo Garcia&#x202c;&rlm;

Let's see, who do I believe shows this the best. Marcelo Garcia, 4 time Brazilian jiu-jitsu Champion or you?
Brazilian jiu-jitsu is a fast paced sport.  No different than any other action sport.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > > Thats during a throw though and its judo not bjj. 2 very different martial arts. Thats why i was telling op to shoot during slow moments like in the gaurd.
> ...



They are similar, there is more than 1 type of competitive Judo. And there is also combat judo, how are you going to argue about it with me? Guard, Submissions, Throws, are all apart of BJJ all came from Judo. I train judo just as I train BJJ. Gi chokes, joint locks, transitional techniques are all apart of judo. Just because they only throw in the olympics doesnt make Judo just throws.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 12, 2011)

> The art began with Mitsuyo Maeda (aka Conde Koma, or Count Coma in English), a member of the then-recently-founded Kodokan. Maeda was one of five of Judo's top *groundwork experts* that Judo's founder Kano Jigoro sent overseas to demonstrate and spread his art to the world. Maeda left Japan in 1904 and visited a number of countries[SUP][2][/SUP] giving "jiu-do" demonstrations and accepting challenges from wrestlers,boxers, savate fighters and various other martial artists before eventually arriving in Brazil on November 14, 1914.



They are not the same, however they are very very very similar. The basics of Judo's ground work is the basis of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.
The most common position that I use on the ground to transition from side control is called Judo position.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Kbarredo said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...


 Well I apologize because the only judo I took was throw based and you only have a few seconds to keep action going on the ground. But a person that is pulling off an ankle breaker in basketball is much faster than any bjj move on the ground.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > Kbarredo said:
> ...



I'm not disagreeing with this, I wouldn't call BJJ fast paced as a whole. Once you hit the ground time slows down. But standing, BJJ is very very fast. Basketball is a faster paced sport, but the action is fast all the same. The 10-15 seconds of action is just as fast as BBall.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Kbarredo said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...


But wasnt i saying the d5000 with a kit lens is ok if you stay with shooting down times. I never said take shots during fast paced times. Everyone is making it out like I said you can take anything with the d5000. Just stay within your limits with your budget.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 12, 2011)

I shot a wedding last night.  There were spot lights on the bride and groom.  It was actually a pretty decently lit church as things go.  I was at ISO 2000, aperture 2.8, with a shutter speed of around 1/15th of a second.  Luckily, I had my tripod with me and took shots at peak action, like the kiss, lighting of the unity candles, etc.  But any photo taken when people were walking is a blur.

My point is, indoor, no-flash photography is not kit lens territory, regardless of how relatively slow the action is.  Yes, there are some venues that are brighter than others.  Yes, there are some moments where there are temporary pauses and a slow shutter speed can work.  All of that is besides the point.  Just because occasionally you can get a good shot with certain equipment does not mean it is the right equipment for the job.


----------



## Kbarredo (Jun 12, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> I shot a wedding last night.  There were spot lights on the bride and groom.  It was actually a pretty decently lit church as things go.  I was at ISO 2000, aperture 2.8, with a shutter speed of around 1/15th of a second.  Luckily, I had my tripod with me and took shots at peak action, like the kiss, lighting of the unity candles, etc.  But any photo taken when people were walking is a blur.
> 
> My point is, indoor, no-flash photography is not kit lens territory, regardless of how relatively slow the action is.  Yes, there are some venues that are brighter than others.  Yes, there are some moments where there are temporary pauses and a slow shutter speed can work.  All of that is besides the point.  Just because occasionally you can get a good shot with certain equipment does not mean it is the right equipment for the job.


 Im just trying to stay within his budget


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 12, 2011)

What lens would be good for what I am looking for? I am going to pick up a 50mm 1.8D for portraits and DOF pictures, but what about action shots? I am going to buy used.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > I shot a wedding last night.  There were spot lights on the bride and groom.  It was actually a pretty decently lit church as things go.  I was at ISO 2000, aperture 2.8, with a shutter speed of around 1/15th of a second.  Luckily, I had my tripod with me and took shots at peak action, like the kiss, lighting of the unity candles, etc.  But any photo taken when people were walking is a blur.
> ...



I would like to take photos of Saturn.  It is important that I get great clarity in the rings.  My budget is $250.  Got any advice?

Sometimes the best answer is to tell somebody that, either: 

a)their expectations are unrealistic or 
b)their budget is unrealistic

Telling me to go out and buy a Vivitar 800mm f/8 mirror lens just because that is in my budget doesn't make it good advice.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 12, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> What lens would be good for what I am looking for? I am going to pick up a 50mm 1.8D for portraits and DOF pictures, but what about action shots? I am going to buy used.



The 50mm 1.8 is still your best option anywhere near your budget range, but unfortunately, you will not have autofocus, which makes sports photography much more difficult, especially with the small viewfinder in the D5000/5100 series.

Better would be an 85mm 1.8 or you might look at the 35mm 1.8 since you can get relatively close to the action.  The 35mm 1.8 will autofocus on your camera, but it costs about twice as much as the 50mm 1.8.


----------



## SabrinaO (Jun 12, 2011)

How would the 35mm be? It has AF since his body doesn't have it.


----------



## SabrinaO (Jun 12, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > What lens would be good for what I am looking for? I am going to pick up a 50mm 1.8D for portraits and DOF pictures, but what about action shots? I am going to buy used.
> ...


*

*hahah.. i didn't see this


----------



## table1349 (Jun 12, 2011)

Kbarredo said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > Kbarredo said:
> ...



Wow, I will have to remember that next time I am at Oklahoma Memorial Stadium, Boone Pickens Stadium, Texas Memorial Stadium on the sidelines shooting football, or Allen Field House shooting basketball or a Boxing or MMA event ringside to shoot.  Don't go for the fast pace stuff, just get the standing, sitting, laying shots.  Those will really sell big.:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## dallasimagery (Jun 12, 2011)

You don't need a super AF system for BJJ - most of the time it's in one area. I shot BJJ and MMA for a couple of years several years ago before I realized I didn't like shooting sports,a nd took some awesome shots with the 50/1.4 and a 20d.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 12, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > What lens would be good for what I am looking for? I am going to pick up a 50mm 1.8D for portraits and DOF pictures, but what about action shots? I am going to buy used.
> ...



What would be better?  The 50mm or the 35mm? The 50mm is 220 and the 35mm is 230 refurbished. They are both AFS.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 12, 2011)

The 50mm 1.8 af-s is not released yet.  I'm not sure what the delivery date is going to be and nobody will really know the quality until after it has been around for a while.  To tell you the truth, I didn't know it was about to be shipped, so I am the wrong guy to ask about it.  I figured after the earthquake in Japan, it would be months away.

I assume you got a kit lens with your D5100...I would stand at about the place you will be shooting during the matches with a friend and figure out if 35mm or 50mm works better for you.


----------



## dallasimagery (Jun 12, 2011)

35 is too wide for a sport like that.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 13, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> The 50mm 1.8 af-s is not released yet.  I'm not sure what the delivery date is going to be and nobody will really know the quality until after it has been around for a while.  To tell you the truth, I didn't know it was about to be shipped, so I am the wrong guy to ask about it.  I figured after the earthquake in Japan, it would be months away.



I am seeing reviews for it on the nikon website from customers including someone from NY(where I live) a few weeks ago.  I dont know if that matters. 



> I assume you got a kit lens with your D5100...I would stand at about the place you will be shooting during the matches with a friend and figure out if 35mm or 50mm works better for you.



Yes I got a kit lens, 50mm  would probably be best. Thanks for your help.


----------



## ausemmao (Jun 13, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > The 50mm 1.8 af-s is not released yet.  I'm not sure what the delivery date is going to be and nobody will really know the quality until after it has been around for a while.  To tell you the truth, I didn't know it was about to be shipped, so I am the wrong guy to ask about it.  I figured after the earthquake in Japan, it would be months away.
> ...



The AF-S 50mm 1.8 is out now, has been for a while. As far as lengths go, I sometimes do pictures for my capoeira school, and I think distances from roda to players is about the same from you to the fighters if you're ringside. So 15-60mm is about the range you want to use, depending exactly how far away they are and the framing you want. The kit lens will make taking frozen motion shots painful. One of the 17-50 2.8s or the primes you've looked at will make it fairly easy - at 2.8 or below and ISO2600-3200, you'll be able to drop to 1/250-1/500, which will be enough to freeze everything but the feet of the fastest kicks, and then it often adds the impression of the power behind things.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 13, 2011)

ausemmao said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > Kerbouchard said:
> ...



I'm assuming that is where the difference comes in between the 1.8 and the 1.4?


----------



## ausemmao (Jun 13, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> ausemmao said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



The 1.4 will give you 2/3 of a stop of extra light, so where you may have had 1/400 with the 1.8, you could get 1/600 with the 1.4, or drop your ISO some. Your DoF becomes even smaller - I think you'd have a foot or two of DoF shooting at 15 feet (certainly not much either way) - good if you want to isolate individual body parts, less so if you want a whole person in focus. That obviously depends on their orientation compared to you, but it is something to think about.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 17, 2011)

Ok so with recent events and research I have decided to return the D5100 and pick up the D7000 and a 50mm 1.8D. I think I will be much happier with this combo.


----------

