- This topic is empty.
Munster vs Edinburgh
-
First time at Musgrave Park last Saturday, awful night really with rain and heavy mist, and to be quite honest; I nearly had second thoughts about going. Went ahead and got my bib, found my spot by one of the blank hoardings at the back of the Dolphin goal and waited for the game to begin. I was very nervous to be honest, this was the first time that I had official accred. from Munster Rugby and some of the pics were on a promise to a Sports Editor friend who works for a Cork paper so didn’t want anything to go haywire. Things didn’t go too bad as it happened; just had to use ISO 1600 all night and forgot to allow a bit of overexposure to allow for the poor light. I’m happy enough with what I got and here are a few low res samples from the night; don’t be too cruel on me as every new outing for me is a learning curve and I’m only too happy to take on board all thoughts/ideas/praise/criticism!
Camera was Canon 1D Mk 2 N and lens was Canon 70-200 L f4. Most are 1/320 sec I think, which in hindsight was probably too slow.
Be warned; they are grainy and like I said, probably should have used a faster shutter speed.
f/4 is never really going to cut it under lights. You really need an f/2.8 lens, or else something that you can bump your ISO to very high numbers. I was at a football game last night and shot ISO 4000, 1/500, f/2.8 because the light was so poor.
The last image there is your best.
Getting the backs of players is seldom useful. You need to see the emotion on their faces. Also, not seeing the ball detracts from the shot, so images #1 and #3 I personally wouldn’t have used.
After a game like that, have a look at the agency sites like Inpho and Sportsfile, and see what they got. It may depress you, but it can also give you an idea of what the papers look for.
All you can do is keep trying. Everyone improves over time. I look back on some images I took when I started out and I wonder why I didn’t delete them.
Ya, knew from about ten minutes in that f4 was not gonna cut it but at the moment that is all my finances can stretch to, maybe later this year might be able to jump to an f2.8 one. As for high ISO, I think the 1D Mk 2 that I have is probably only a mediocre enough performer at the high numbers and I wouldn’t fancy going to 3200 with it. Like the lens, in time over this year I may change the camera as well and get one, either Canon or Nikon, that will be a good performer at high ISO.
Appreciate the feedback Paul and it is genuinely taken in the spirit in which you send it. The f4 L will do me fine at daylight events for the moment and every bit of feedback will hopefully help me take better shots the next time.
Cheers for now! Must go off and clear out my garden shed as the wife says it’s a mess!
I’ve been at this a good few years, and am still learning. I consider myself a beginner, with a hell of a lot to learn. I ask questions, see what others do, and try to improve after each game I shoot. I look at what others produce and see how near my images are. Sometimes I am very happy with my work, and sometimes I feel like I have a long way to go.
Asking for C&C on a public forum can be daunting. I always try to be constructive, rather than critical. I am always open to new opinions, even if I totally disagree with them. :)
With some things, investment is important. To keep your costs down, check for 2nd hand gear. A 70-200mm f/2.8 is good. But, a big prime is much better, but also a lot harder to find at a good price. Glass is a much better investment than bodies.
At Thomond, ISO 1600 f/2.8 and 1/600 should be fine. a 1D MkIV would be brilliant, but you could also consider a 7D, 60D, etc.
Just make sure that you enjoy what you are doing.
Funny that you mention the 60D, I was considering it before getting the current body…it has the added advantage of having video if the need ever occurred. The 2.8 is the correct move, hard to argue with the extra stops it gives. I set myself a goal this year of taking a lot of “Baby Steps” rather than jumping headlong into this lark so the 70-200 f4 was the first step and the 2.8 will be the next. My eldest daughter works in the US and she has a little list that she is working from everytime she spots a good camera store so I’m hoping to maybe grab a secondhand bargain there, she is due home for a break in May and could just have the gear in her carry-on bag! She has already picked up the Nifty Fifty 1.8 for me for the equivalent of sixty euros brand new at a sale in Florida (she works for Disney).
I’m similar to you in that I am always looking at sports shots by others and taking note of settings, gear, light etc. My father used to say that ” The man who thinks he knows everything has much to learn” and that is my outlook as well.
Shed half sorted, must get back to it after lunch! Cheers again Paul and I’ll have a few more up at weekend. Regards…Gerry
paul wrote:
f/4 is never really going to cut it under lights. You really need an f/2.8 lens, or else something that you can bump your ISO to very high numbers. I was at a football game last night and shot ISO 4000, 1/500, f/2.8 because the light was so poor.
The last image there is your best.
Getting the backs of players is seldom useful. You need to see the emotion on their faces. Also, not seeing the ball detracts from the shot, so images #1 and #3 I personally wouldn’t have used.
After a game like that, have a look at the agency sites like Inpho and Sportsfile, and see what they got. It may depress you, but it can also give you an idea of what the papers look for.
All you can do is keep trying. Everyone improves over time. I look back on some images I took when I started out and I wonder why I didn’t delete them.
+ 1
I was curious – how did you manage to get a bib and be on the sideline?
How does say an amateur become a sports photographer. Do you blag your way into it or is there a formal route of applying for something?
By the way your shots are very good (especially considering the lens being F4) .I think your shots aren’t too bad considering the poor weather. Number three would be a fine shot if you had captured the ball.
Dave.
Fergal1 wrote:
I was curious – how did you manage to get a bib and be on the sideline?
How does say an amateur become a sports photographer. Do you blag your way into it or is there a formal route of applying for something?
By the way your shots are very good (especially considering the lens being F4) .Accreditation was sorted by a Cork based newspaper who wanted photo coverage of the Munster game for a new rugby column they have recently started running. Just so happens that the Sports Editor is a good and old friend of mine…It also helps that I supply weekly photo content to them from underage/Youths soccer that takes place in the East Cork/West Waterford area as I’m heavily involved the the same area myself with my local club. They use the photos from these soccer games to flesh out the weekly PRO notes from that particular league and it looks well in the paper.
Rugby games tend to be sorted on a per game basis and accred. has to be asked for per each game, then if you are successful you get your bib and wristband on the day of the game. I’ve been granted an FA Airtricity Media Pass as well for this year and that will involve mainly covering Cork City and Waterford Utd games for the paper in east Cork and occasionally for a paper in west Waterford.
Thanks for the comments, all in all, considering the weather on the night; the shots ain’t too bad. Cheers…Gerry
Seaview wrote:
I think your shots aren’t too bad considering the poor weather. Number three would be a fine shot if you had captured the ball.
Dave.
Thanks Dave, it certainlky was a s**tty night!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
