College football season starting

[floatingby]

Trying to hone my skills, since the team I follow play at night it is quite the challenge. A few of what I brought home, critique welcome.

 

[Jeff1546 46]

Very good action shots....

 

[ac12]

Don't crop so tight.
You want to leave room on the print in front of the player, so he has "room" to run into. It looks odd when he is running into the edge of the print/image.

Good shots.
You have better lighting than I have at my local high school. I don't count on seeing the faces inside the helmets.
The more you shoot, the better you get.

 

[floatingby]

Very good action shots....

Thanks.

 

[floatingby]

Don't crop so tight.
You want to leave room on the print in front of the player, so he has "room" to run into. It looks odd when he is running into the edge of the print/image.

Good shots.
You have better lighting than I have at my local high school. I don't count on seeing the faces inside the helmets.
The more you shoot, the better you get.

Thanks. It's unfortunate but with a 400mm I can crop tighter if need be, but I can't crop looser, what is there is all there is. I haven't found a way to win at that game, sometime a 400 is too short, sometime it's too long. Same with a 300, same with a 600.

 

[ac12]

Rent a 70-200 and try it for a game.
Yes it will be short for shooting across the field, but that is what you have a 2nd body with your 400 for. The 400 is way too long when the play gets near you.

If only one body, the 70-200 is good enough for most shots, then crop as needed. That is as long as you are able to move along the sideline.

I don't know about you, but I have trouble tracking the players if I zoom in tight.
I need space around the players to track well and keep situational awareness.

 

[floatingby]

Rent a 70-200 and try it for a game.

I had one, sold it after a few games, found it too short for most field sport on a FF camera, I like the 120-300mm way better. Maybe if I had two cameras I'd mount one along with the 400, but I'm not even sure, I'd try it first for sure.

I don't know about you, but I have trouble tracking the players if I zoom in tight.
I need space around the players to track well and keep situational awareness.

That 400 sure is challenging, I'm getting better with it but it takes time, a lot of time, practicing now to shoot with both eyes open to see both the viewfinder and what's coming in/out. Not easy.

 

[ac12]

Rent a 70-200 and try it for a game.

I had one, sold it after a few games, found it too short for most field sport on a FF camera, I like the 120-300mm way better. Maybe if I had two cameras I'd mount one along with the 400, but I'm not even sure, I'd try it first for sure.

Then I would use the 120-300, instead of the 400.

 

[floatingby]

I don't know about you, but I have trouble tracking the players if I zoom in tight.
I need space around the players to track well and keep situational awareness.

Rent a 70-200 and try it for a game.

I had one, sold it after a few games, found it too short for most field sport on a FF camera, I like the 120-300mm way better. Maybe if I had two cameras I'd mount one along with the 400, but I'm not even sure, I'd try it first for sure.

Then I would use the 120-300, instead of the 400.

I use both, with the 400 I can go to a different viewpoint that I can't reach with the 300. For example, for a shot like this I could move far upfield and capture the player face, his facial expression, while with a shorter lens you're stuck straight on from the sideline and see the player entirely from the side. (this was shot using my 120-300 but on a crop factor camera, my D850 is broken so I had to rent,so effective focal length was 450mm).

See my edit above though, need training to become proficient with that 400.

 

[ronlane]

Don't crop so tight.
You want to leave room on the print in front of the player, so he has "room" to run into. It looks odd when he is running into the edge of the print/image.

Good shots.
You have better lighting than I have at my local high school. I don't count on seeing the faces inside the helmets.
The more you shoot, the better you get.

Thanks. It's unfortunate but with a 400mm I can crop tighter if need be, but I can't crop looser, what is there is all there is. I haven't found a way to win at that game, sometime a 400 is too short, sometime it's too long. Same with a 300, same with a 600.

How far back are you with the 400? You could shoot at least 1/2 the field with that from the end zone. When I've had a 300mm on a crop sensor, I've shot that far. Having a second body with a 70-200mm f/2.8, helps a lot when you have a 300 mm or longer lens.

I used a crop sensor and a 400 to shoot this shot. Yes, it was heavily cropped and during the day, but I was 75 yards down the field and acrossed the field from the play.

 

[floatingby]

How far back are you with the 400?

I picture it as a zone in the shape of an arc centered on me, in the middle is where it's best and getting gradually worst as you move on either side until it's no more usable. So I try to position myself according to where I think the play is going to go to have it fall dead center in that arc; but of course, as much as I know football, if I could predict each and every play without fault I'd be an NFL coach and raking in the best pay in the league.
Day game can extend that zone outward since you can crop, especially with a body like the D850, to extend your reach without too much loss of quality. Night game, not so much.
The 400 is new to me, still on the learning curve so it's not intuitive to me; most time, being used to the 300 and having shot with it for so long, I'm too close.
But I'm having a blast.

 

[ac12]

I shot a football game last night, and I wished I had a 24-120 instead of my 70-200 on my DX camera.
There was a pass catch and 2 TDs along the sideline near me, all too close for the 70mm end of my lens.
One pass catch just fit into the coverage of the 70mm end.

I guess you slot yourself into shooting long or short, and I end up on the medium to short end.

 

[floatingby]

I shot a football game last night, and I wished I had a 24-120 instead of my 70-200 on my DX camera.
There was a pass catch and 2 TDs along the sideline near me, all too close for the 70mm end of my lens.
One pass catch just fit into the coverage of the 70mm end.

I guess you slot yourself into shooting long or short, and I end up on the medium to short end.

Even carrying 2 cameras isn't a perfect solution; I tried once last year, by the time I switch camera, frame and focus properly, the play is loooong over and I didn't let even one shot fly, not worth the trouble to me. That's why big sports journal send more than 1 photographer to cover big events I suppose.

 

[ac12]

I shot a football game last night, and I wished I had a 24-120 instead of my 70-200 on my DX camera.
There was a pass catch and 2 TDs along the sideline near me, all too close for the 70mm end of my lens.
One pass catch just fit into the coverage of the 70mm end.

I guess you slot yourself into shooting long or short, and I end up on the medium to short end.

Even carrying 2 cameras isn't a perfect solution; I tried once last year, by the time I switch camera, frame and focus properly, the play is loooong over and I didn't let even one shot fly, not worth the trouble to me. That's why big sports journal send more than 1 photographer to cover big events I suppose.

Yup, on a pass or fast run, things can move too fast to switch cameras.
Unless you have a super zoom (like the DX 18-140 or FX 28-200 or 28-300), you need to work as a team; one with the shorter zoom, one with the longer zoom. The problem with the super zoom, besides lower IQ, is that they are SLOW (f/5.6), so not a good choice for night games.

IMHO, the zoom ring on the 18-140 is too stiff. The cam angle for a short throw zoom ring is too steep, resulting in more turning force being needed. I would rather have a longer throw zoom ring to get less turning force needed.

 

[ronlane]

That's why big sports journal send more than 1 photographer to cover big events I suppose.

But even sending 2, 3 or even 5 photogs, those photogs generally have a minimum of 2 cameras and in most cases 3. Typically with a 300/400, 70-200 and a 24-70.

Switching cameras is something that takes a lot of thought and practice. Honestly most of us start out with just the one camera and body and get so ingrained that for a while, even when carrying a second body and camera we forget to reach for it. I agree that having a 70-200 on a second DX body is still tight in the end-zone but can be dealt with by knowing the tendencies of the team you are shooting and placing yourself accordingly.