- This topic is empty.
Surf Shots
-
Anyone else here into Surfing photography?
Here’s a few of my shots: http://www.flickr.com/photos/corksurf/sets/891551/
Nothing great, I’m usually either too tired from surfing or too excited about going surfing to take any shots!
I think the waterhousing will have to be the next purchase.Enygma wrote:
I think the waterhousing will have to be the next purchase.
Some good shots of what is no doubt, a difficult subject. I think you might find that a powerful telephoto lens with teleconverter might be a cheaper option than a housing, although I suppose you don’t really need a fully fledged underwater housing in which case just ignore what I just said. :)
Enygma
I use one of these for my Nikon D2H with 2X Tc and 70 – 200 lens and it works wonderfully in the October rainy season
http://www.camerasunderwater.co.uk/slr/aquatech/sportshield.html
I [heart] surfing photography :D
So… a 100-400L or a 50-500? Can’t decide :D
Some deadly shots there Enygma. Well done.
I spent an hour down at St. Finan’s bay in Ballinskelligs a few weeks ago waiting for this surfer to get out far enough. The feckin eejit couldn’t get up on the board and he gave up. :(
The only surf shot I’ve ever taken…
http://www.mondaymorningphoto.com/index.php?showimage=24
Lame, I know. Was on my way to a surf lesson, wasn’t gonna hang around taking snaps of other people enjoying themselves! :lol:
More, one day, perhaps…!
Thanks for the comments guys.
ecp I reckon the housing with a wide angle lens would cost me around ?1500~ whereas a good long lens would cost me around ?1000-1300. I’ve convinced myself that the shots from out in the water would be far superior to shots from the shore which can all start to look the same after a while. Obviously a long lens is in the pipeline, but I think the housing could make for far more interesting shots. That’s my reasoning anyway, and I’m sticking to it! :D
Valentia, there’s a guy that lives down there that drives a Black VW Transporter Camper van and rides a longboard, look out for him the next time your down there. He’s a quality longboarder.
I’m tossing up between a waterproof casing and a 500mm zoom. I take mainly kitesurfing photographs though and to some extent, I can probably get away with working from the beach for quite a lot longer depending on the 500mm. I wade into the water to a depth of two to three feet depending on how cold it is.
If I were going to do more surf photography, I’d be angling for a full waterproof casing. A lot of the angles I’d like to work with in the water make that mandatory, really – once I go past waist height water then, that’s it, and what I want to do would take me very close to the face of the wave.
By the way – in case you’re interested, in this months Kitesurf magazine there’s an article by one of their sports photographers on what he considers to be the tools o the trade. Interestingly, he (Alex Jowett) mentioned that if he was going into the water, he wouldn’t take a digital camera with him, only film. He’s drowned a couple of cameras. I don’t know if the magazine is still available (it was the Jul/Aug edition). PM me if you’re interested in a look but can’t find it.
kenmurphy wrote:
Enygma
I use one of these for my Nikon D2H with 2X Tc and 70 – 200 lens and it works wonderfully in the October rainy season
http://www.camerasunderwater.co.uk/slr/aquatech/sportshield.html
Ken did you get the rain cover from cameras underwater ? how did you find them to deal with ?
I need to get a cover for my Minolta the weather in this country is just too unstable.A Long lens for surf photography is essential.. at least in part because the days with the very best surf it’s not going to be too safe to be in the water with a camera in your hands. But if you are going to go into the water you’ll need to use a bodyboard & fins as well… using a surfboard is not recommended.
Ducking through waves means a full on waterproof housing is essential rather than something like the sportshield.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
