# NBA Shooting Question



## CNCO (Jun 8, 2010)

Im watching the NBA finals(GO LAKERS). I noticed that there are a ton of photographers underneath the hoop with the super telephoto lenses. How is it possible to use a 200 - 600mm lenses underneath a hoop? I would have assumed that they would want a wide angle and then crop the image. The only reason I see them using the focal lengths is because they get a very fast shutter speed. Am I correct here?


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jun 9, 2010)

Focal length has nothing to do with shutter speed.  Well, Actually it does, in regards to camera shake, and having longer focal lengths would require them to have higher shutter speeds, not enable them too.  My guess would be that you were looking at a lot of 200mm f/2, 300 f/2.8, and maybe 400mm f/2.8's.  I would think that they are either shooting action on the other  side of the court with the 400's, or shooting tight cropped shot of people at the three/foul shot distances.  200mm on an FF body isn't really that long.


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 9, 2010)

Most (probably all) of them will have two or three cameras on the go.  They use the telephoto when the action is farther away and switch to a camera with a wider lens when it comes down to their end of the floor.


----------



## j-digg (Jun 10, 2010)

GeneralBenson said:


> My guess would be that you were looking at a lot of 200mm f/2, 300 f/2.8, and maybe 400mm f/2.8's. I would think that they are either shooting action on the other side of the court with the 400's, or shooting tight cropped shot of people at the three/foul shot distances. 200mm on an FF body isn't really that long.


 

Heres what some were shooting during the Suns - Spurs series I went to.......... ( Thats Cindy McCain and daughter in the middle of the frame btw hah. ) Im not too familiar with any of the lenses off the top of my head.


----------



## bigtwinky (Jun 10, 2010)

While you can crop and image to get closer in on the face or emotion of the player, its always preferable to get the shot you want IN camera rather than relying on cropping or post processing.

If the photographer wants a close up shot of a player's face as he is doing a layup or a dunk, then he will bring out the lens that he needs to get in nice and close.  

Today's high megapixel cameras do allow a good degree of cropping, but again, as with all types of post processing work, always preferable to get it right when you click the shutter.

These sports photojournalists are also on a very tight timeline and have to submit their images pretty much during the game or right away at the end of the game.  So they don't have time to work on them.

I was speaking with a local photojournalist who does all the work for the Montreal Canadians, and one thing he told me is that he shoots in JPG, not in RAW.  It allows for faster shooting, no post processing work to be done.  He has been shooting for 30+ years as a sports pro, so he has no issues nailing an exposure.


----------



## Big Mike (Jun 10, 2010)

I read an article about a tog who was shooting at the Superbowl.  He said they had 'runners' who would take the cards every few minutes and upload them onto a network where they could be snagged by the news service/publisher.  In some cases, a photo could be on a website only minutes after it was taken.  
The article also mentioned wireless technology.  He said that wireless USB speed technology was just around the corner, but I haven't seen or heard much about it since.


----------



## bigtwinky (Jun 10, 2010)

In the film days, there were runners to get the film down and developped and then to the editor.  Makes sense there are runners now.

I've seen a few with laptops on the field.  During a game stoppage, put one card in the laptop, new card in the camera, start the transfer, keep shooting.


----------



## KmH (Jun 10, 2010)

A close look at the image j-digg posted and you can see all those shooters are using 2 bodies/lenses


----------



## CNCO (Jun 10, 2010)

it makes sense, i guess i pay more attention to the 400mm lenses than the wide angle. i was just amazed that these pros were using the long focal length lenses for up close shots. i was thinking that i missed something.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 10, 2010)

It looks to me like the two fellows in the front row with the white lenses are using 200mm f/2 EF lenses, and it looks like the guy with the Nikon body also has the 200mm f/2 VR-Nikkor. The Canon shooter on the left has his lens shade on, the guy ion the right hand side is shooting without the lens hood. Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM Telephoto Lens - 2297B002 - Buy.com


----------



## Reese's PB Luver (Jun 11, 2010)

Are they putting their lenses directly on the wood floor?  Or do they put something on the floor first to protect the glass from the floor and whatever tiny loose particles (especially coarse ones like sand) might be on the floor?


----------



## Flash Harry (Jun 11, 2010)

They're on the floor on the rim of the lens a bit of dust or sand aint gonna damage the glass unless you start buffing away with a lens cloth.  H


----------



## Reese's PB Luver (Jun 13, 2010)

Yeah, and I guess they know not to do that, but still, I wouldn't do that with my glass. If I have to put one of my lenses down face-first, I put the lens cap on it first.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jun 13, 2010)

There's nothing wrong with doing that.  For one thing, the lens on the far left has it's lens hood on, so the front element is about 6 inches away from the ground.  But the other two guy look like it's just the rim of the lens on the ground.  That can be done perfectly safely, as long as you're paying attention.  I do it all the time.  Front elemtns are surprisingly tough.  These photographers don't have time to be messing around with lens caps, and they need to be switching back and forth very quickly from one camera to the other.  Part of being a professional is acknowledging that protecting your equipment is secondary to getting the shot and doing you job.  Being anal about caring for you gear is a luxury that professionals all too often don't have time for.


----------



## burstintoflame81 (Jun 14, 2010)

I took some shots at the Suns - Lakers game from the stands with my 70-300mm, not fast action though. They almost always have 2 bodies/lenses. Also, if you have a DVR, pause the game next time they lay it up for dunk and look at how many cameras are strapped behind the glass and to the post that holds the whole basket up in the air. 

I think it was in the Suns/Lakers game ( could have been the  Suns/Spurs series ) Leandro Barbosa fell into a photographer and split his head open on his lens.


----------



## Reese's PB Luver (Jun 18, 2010)

GeneralBenson said:


> There's nothing wrong with doing that. For one thing, the lens on the far left has it's lens hood on, so the front element is about 6 inches away from the ground. But the other two guy look like it's just the rim of the lens on the ground.


 
Yeah, with the hood on it'd be fine.  I wasn't talking about that, I was talking about the lenses that are directly on the ground.



GeneralBenson said:


> That can be done perfectly safely, as long as you're paying attention. I do it all the time. Front elemtns are surprisingly tough. These photographers don't have time to be messing around with lens caps, and they need to be switching back and forth very quickly from one camera to the other. Part of being a professional is acknowledging that protecting your equipment is secondary to getting the shot and doing you job. Being anal about caring for you gear is a luxury that professionals all too often don't have time for.


 
I know they have to switch back and forth with no time and I didn't say they should use lens caps, so no need to treat me like an idiot or a non-professional, thanks.  I'm not even going to respond to the rest of your comments.  :roll:


----------



## j-digg (Jun 18, 2010)

I dont think he was really attacking you, but rather trying to illustrate the urgency and priority of the guys sittin on the floor.. Im sure that theres enough clearance for them to place them on the ground with confidence. Plus the higher end lens' front elements typically dont move at all so no worry of it creepin or anything. Even still, Id be much more at ease with a nice hood on them


----------



## GeneralBenson (Jun 18, 2010)

Sorry if you thought I was trying to be insulting.  I was just responding to what you said.



Reese's PB Luver said:


> Yeah, and I guess they know not to do that, but still, I wouldn't do that with my glass. If I have to put one of my lenses down face-first, I put the lens cap on it first.



If that's what you do, and what ever kind of shooting you do and at whatever level you shoot it at, allows for that... then that's great.  When I have the time, I do the same thing, and I'm sure most of the people in that photo would as well.  I was merely stating in contrast to what you said, that in some situations, like quick action, pro photography, there isn't time for that, and that most pro will willingly put there gear in lower priority than 'the shot'.


----------



## bigtwinky (Jun 18, 2010)

Reese's PB Luver said:


> GeneralBenson said:
> 
> 
> > That can be done perfectly safely, as long as you're paying attention. I do it all the time. Front elemtns are surprisingly tough. These photographers don't have time to be messing around with lens caps, and they need to be switching back and forth very quickly from one camera to the other. Part of being a professional is acknowledging that protecting your equipment is secondary to getting the shot and doing you job. Being anal about caring for you gear is a luxury that professionals all too often don't have time for.
> ...


 
Holy in need of valium batman!


----------



## wgp1987 (Jun 20, 2010)

Shooting at an nba game is very,very tough. I had what is practically floor seats at a nets game and only brought my 24-105 f4 (after arguing with the retard at the gate that my lens has less zoom then a 5x zoom camera lol) and i had a horrible time getting decent shots. The main thing is that the lighting is so poor so you mainly have to shoot wide open which really sucks. I dont remember my exif data but i think i was shooting f4,1/200/iso1600 and was doing ok. You can check out my flickr at Flickr: WGP Photo's Photostream ..... i have what i thought is my best shots from that night on there. Being as close as i was (10ft further back than the togs on the wood) I still had to crop almost 50% on all my shots to get the composition i desired. Heres a photo i liked that was decently close up, enjoy!








BTW... i wanted only the ref in focus, thought it was a cool shot


----------



## Derrel (Jun 20, 2010)

Most of the newer pro lenses like Nikon's 300/2.8 and 200 f/2 VR have rubber impact "lips" around the front ring...because placing a camera/lens combo lens-down is one of the most practical ways to put the doggone thing down indoors. It looks like the Canon 200/2 L-IS has the same type of rubberized impact ring as the similar Nikon lenses.

The front elements are 1/2 inch or so behind the edge of the front rings' rubber.


----------



## table1349 (Jun 20, 2010)

Derrel said:


> Most of the newer pro lenses like Nikon's 300/2.8 and 200 f/2 VR have rubber impact "lips" around the front ring...because placing a camera/lens combo lens-down is one of the most practical ways to put the doggone thing down indoors. *It looks like the Canon 200/2 L-IS has the same type of rubberized impact ring as the similar Nikon lenses.*
> 
> The front elements are 1/2 inch or so behind the edge of the front rings' rubber.



It does and I do the same thing.  The front elements are like Darrel stated, back behind the front element ring.  I have yet to mess up a lens shooting from the floor on the baseline by putting it down on the lens.


----------

