FPS for dog photo shooting

[hoboahoy]

Big Mike, I hear you loud & clear about the 70-200mm F2.8, but that's beyond my budget though that must be a nice lens. I just can't justify the cost. Part of reason why I think of the 50mm prime F1.8 is relatively cheep and small, so it's more practical where I see myself with the 18-200mm VR simply for convenience at expense of charpness….I just checked the 70-800mm Tamron, Sigma, they are arround $700-800, which is reasonable in price, but they seem too huge, another inconvenience. These lens may be bigger than my Corgi dogs... but I'll definitely remember your suggestion of these particular Sigma & Tamron (Nikon 70-200 F2.8 is impossible due to the price).

 

[SpeedTrap]

Not sure where you are located but here is an example of a good setup for you.
This is in Canadian Dollars.

D90 - $1119.00
Sigma AF70-200mm F2.8 APO EXDG (Nikon) $1099.00
Sigma AF24-70mm F2.8 EX DG (Nikon $529.00
Nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-D $149.00
Total $2896.00

Or

D300 $1769.00
Sigma AF70-200mm F2.8 APO EXDG (Nikon) $1099.00
Sigma AF24-70mm F2.8 EX DG (Nikon) $529.00
Nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-D $149.00
Total $3546.00

This would be everything you need for a long time.
If you are in the US the price will be lower and if you are in Europe it will be higher.

 

[hoboahoy]

SpeedTrap, thank you for taking time to prepare the figures. Yeah I'm in Tucson Arizona USA. My afore mentioned figures came from B& H photos web site...this hobby is EXPEN$IVE. Yeah those hardware set would last me long. Lots to learn for a beginner. Nice gear. I just need to make up my mind between D90 & D300. Being a casual nonprofessional, I feel I stress more of practicality (like portability & lighter smaller lenses etc). Maybe I'd appreciate a smaller camera D90 (istead of D300), if everybody says D90 provides sufficient FPS. I'll play with the idea and will decide for the next few weeks till the D90 body only comes out. Thank you, Speedtrap.

 

[uplander]

As someone who shoots dogs in action all the time, I'll put my 2 cents worth in. It's not about FPS but if definately helps. If I were going to try to stay at the economical end of the spectrum,I would look to get a Rebel XTI or a 10D and a A Canon EF 70-300 mm f/4-5.6IS USM This setup will get the shots in decent light.
Examples / 10D + EF 70-300

On the other end of the spectrum I would go with a Canon 40D or the 50D and either the EF 70-200 f/2.8 L I USM or the EF 100- 400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM.
Examples
EF 100-400

EF 70-200

The thing is it's not really about FPS but about IS and AF points with AF being more important. Getting the shutter speed up there in the above 1/500th sec or better, the faster the better.

Your on the right track tho, A P&S just will not cut it. A DSLR is the way to go.

 

[dEARlEADER]

Not sure where you are located but here is an example of a good setup for you.
This is in Canadian Dollars.

D90 - $1119.00
Sigma AF70-200mm F2.8 APO EXDG (Nikon) $1099.00
Sigma AF24-70mm F2.8 EX DG (Nikon $529.00
Nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-D $149.00
Total $2896.00

Or

D300 $1769.00
Sigma AF70-200mm F2.8 APO EXDG (Nikon) $1099.00
Sigma AF24-70mm F2.8 EX DG (Nikon) $529.00
Nikon 50mm F1.8 AF-D $149.00
Total $3546.00

This would be everything you need for a long time.
If you are in the US the price will be lower and if you are in Europe it will be higher.

errr... i'd stay away from recommending that 24-70 2.8 Sigma.... believe me i searched the entire internet for a reason to convince me to buy it and came up dry.. it's soft at 2.8 .... why buy 2.8 glass if you have to stop it down to f4 to get a decent shot...

however... i believe sigma just announced a revamp of that lens with HSM at photokina... maybe they cleaned up the image quality too... i'd wait till that lens comes out in the next couple of months instead of the current one...


EDIT : don't forget about used gear.... you can find the Nikon 28-70 2.8 and the Nikon 80-200 in the range of $800-$1000 a piece.... these are still top notch lenses and you would have enough change left over for your body... these lenses are available all the time on the nikon forums...

 

[Aggressor]

errr... i'd stay away from recommending that 24-70 2.8 Sigma.... believe me i searched the entire internet for a reason to convince me to buy it and came up dry.. it's soft at 2.8 .... why buy 2.8 glass if you have to stop it down to f4 to get a decent shot...

I agree. I have the Sigma 24-70 2.8 and I almost never shoot at 2.8. I have to consciously remind myself... f4 and no more.

 

[uplander]

Shooting dogs in action ...unless your in an enclosed pen or yard. 50 MM will not cut it . A 70-200 has barely enough reach. A zoom in the 70-300 or 100 -400 will get it done. A decent body with good high ISO performance will do justice with a lens with a smaller aperture. You can armchair quarterback this all you want but getting out there and doing it will show you what works and doesn't. I don't wanna be a prick about it but show some examples to back up wht your spewing

 

[SpeedTrap]

errr... i'd stay away from recommending that 24-70 2.8 Sigma.... believe me i searched the entire internet for a reason to convince me to buy it and came up dry.. it's soft at 2.8 .... why buy 2.8 glass if you have to stop it down to f4 to get a decent shot...

I own this lens and I have to say, it is not soft wide open. This lens has been around a long time and I know many pros that use it. it is a bit long in the tooth but for the money it is a good lens.

 

[Chewbecca]

I suggested the 50mm f1.8 lens to you because it was a good lens for INSIDE, that would do better in low light situations than the 18-200mm lens.

When I use the 50mm to shoot my dog, I am in my fenced in yard.
This was shot on a cloudy day, in mainly the shade (we have two trees in our backyard that really shade it).
I don't remember what my aperture was set at (I believe it was f2.2 or f2.5), and I *think* my shutter was 1/800 or a tad higher).

Some more from the sunshine shooting I did (the other pics from the other thread):

All shots taken with the D300 and 50mm f1.8
She was in non-stop motion, so all are completely frozen.
Again, I don't like shooting ANYTHING in direct sunlight like that, but I didn't have a choice, really. And they didn't come out too bad considering.
One of the problems with using the 50mm f1.8 for shots like this (regarding the FPS and just in general using it for action shots with dogs) is: Obviously, you have to be closer to get a good, sharp shot. But, due to that fact, you'll often cut off parts of the dog in your photos. Taking that into consideration, unless you're a coordinated saint and are perfect, the FPS isn't going to be THAT much of a use because as the dog moves, you're going to cut off parts of it. My shots from that sunshine shooting came out GREAT...if you don't worry about the fact that I cut off paws and even most her legs in a lot of the shots.

 

[dEARlEADER]

I own this lens and I have to say, it is not soft wide open. This lens has been around a long time and I know many pros that use it. it is a bit long in the tooth but for the money it is a good lens.

wow... i surprised to hear you say that.... wish you were around last week when I dropped two grand on the Nikkor...

what about lowlight focus? do you this lens to shoot your weddings?

 

[SpeedTrap]

wow... i surprised to hear you say that.... wish you were around last week when I dropped two grand on the Nikkor...
what about lowlight focus? do you this lens to shoot your weddings?

Low light focus has everything to with the Cameras AF system and very little to do with the lens, but I have had no problems in any light. I shoot in some dark reception halls with my D700. This is the only lens in my lineup that is not Nikon, I will replace it in time, but it is tough when on a print that is 16X20 I can't tell the difference (I borrowed the Nikon 24-70 to test it).

It is possible I got lucky and have a good copy, but that means that everyone else I know who shoots with this lens got lucky as well, Or maybe there are a few people out there that got un-lucky and are just a bit more vocal about the problem.

I firmly believe in going and testing everything myself. If I believe half of everything I read on my equipment, I would have saved up for a hassy and only work in the studio. The Real world and test labs are very different places.

And as for my D700, when I order my D3X you can buy it off me J

 

[Mystwalker]

P&S are not too good at capturing moving targets - not even crawling babies. I imagine dogs are much faster and agility type dogs even faster.

The "FPS" you are talking about is called "shutter speed" on a DSLR. The faster the shutter speed the better chance you have of capturing moving target without the "blur" - I'm assuming you want to jump to DSLR to get rid of blur. This is original reason I jumped to DSLR - to get rid of blur of my daughter running around.

Before you dive into DSLR - you will want to know that shooting moving targets in an indoor environment (dog show/competition?) may require top end lens which will cost more then the camera itself.

 

[hoboahoy]

Uplander, very nice photos you have taken. I am again very impressed with what experienced photographers could do with the skills and the equipment.

Uplander & SpeedTrap, according to what you said, I see the AF capability as one of the utmost priority features. If my decisions so far isn't wrong, both Nikon D90 & D300 are said to have a decent Auto Focus system. The difference between them is 11pts vs 51pts where they have both 3D tracking capability. Is D300 noticeably better in AF function when I operate under poor lighting or under quick unexpected movtions of the dogs? If the D300 51pt AF can make a noticeable difference to freeze the moment, like Uplander or Chewbecca have demonstrated in the photos, I would choose the D300. Please advise.

Chewbecca, I'll respond back to your email later (sorry I haven't had a chance last night), but I'm firmly set to obtain a prime 50mm F1.8 in accord with your suggestion. Thank you. Now I’m trying to decide on the camera body (wither D90 or D300) and longer range lens(es).

Thank you. You are very knowledgeable.

 

[SpeedTrap]

The "FPS" you are talking about is called "shutter speed" on a DSLR.

Actually they are not the same, FPS are how many Frames per second you can shoot. For example the D60 shoots at 3.5 framers per second no matter what the shutter speed is (this is asuming you are shooting at shutter speeds of 1/60 or faster) and the D3 shoots at 8 framer per second with the MB-10 Grip and proper batteries. Shutter speed only refers to how long the shutter is open (30 sec to 1/8000 sec on the D300)

 

[Mystwalker]

Actually they are not the same, FPS are how many Frames per second you can shoot. For example the D60 shoots at 3.5 framers per second no matter what the shutter speed is (this is asuming you are shooting at shutter speeds of 1/60 or faster) and the D3 shoots at 8 framer per second with the MB-10 Grip and proper batteries. Shutter speed only refers to how long the shutter is open (30 sec to 1/8000 sec on the D300)

Oops ... you are correct. I had my mind on graphic cards and getting max "fps" for Crysis.

Shutter speed on DSLR - how fast a DSLR can take continuous photos