And these are just one game.

#1: Catcher drops the ball allowing a baserunner to move o third base, and ultimately tie the game 2-2

#2: The real pain...foultip off the hands!

#3: Out at 2nd

#4: Blowup of ball and glove in #1

But even with all the pain the home team won 4-2

JS

Which lens was this one.

Peter,
These were all shot with the 28-300. I shot the whole game with it.

JS

Amazing high quality and timing. If you are trying to impress me you did it with these. The ball and the catcher's mit is fantastic. Hard to find one sharper than that. Nice going John.

was this with the 1d? or the Mk2N?

MK II N, I haven't used the old 1D in a long time.

JS

Amazing high quality and timing. If you are trying to impress me you did it with these. The ball and the catcher's mit is fantastic. Hard to find one sharper than that. Nice going John.

Thanks OT, The catchers mit and ball are a 100% crop of the top shot. Shows what the MKII N can do even at JPG Large. I really like that 28-300 lens though, and I have yet to find any of the issues many seem to claim with it.

JS

JS,

Great photos but I have a question. In the batter photo he is perfectly in focus, but you are obviously shooting at a shutter speed that doesn't stop the bat/ball motion, is this so that the batter is better in focus? Or to allow the motion feeling in the photo? Or something completely different?

I have a tendency to shoot at high shutter speeds, I was taught to stop the action, but could I be giving up clarity overall in the rest of the photo?

Thanks Don :)

normally, you want to stop the action but you can always play around with slower shutter speeds for interesting effects. But clear, frozen action is always preferable over a blurred subject. The faces should ALWAYS be in focus.

JS,

Great photos but I have a question. In the batter photo he is perfectly in focus, but you are obviously shooting at a shutter speed that doesn't stop the bat/ball motion, is this so that the batter is better in focus? Or to allow the motion feeling in the photo? Or something completely different?

I have a tendency to shoot at high shutter speeds, I was taught to stop the action, but could I be giving up clarity overall in the rest of the photo?

Thanks Don :)

Don,

I shoot for a lot of news papers and even though the sports editors want everything dead stopped, they always wind up picking the shots with motion blur. I personally want motion blur as it does convey action. When shooting for magazines and so on for racing you ALWAYS want motion blur on the wheels or it's just a boring static shot, unless it's a crash, and even then certain motion blurr can add a lot to the photo. I had one of LaBonte at the Brickyard 400 last year when he bounced off the turn 3 wall and the slow shutter speed made it look like the paint coming off the wall was in a wind tunnel.
The AP has certain requirements for their photos Shutter minmum 1000, ISO 800, and you set your exposure via your aperature. This will assure wheel blur for either Indy cars or NASCAR.

JS

JS,

Thanks again for the tips, I WILL use them and learning is what I am here for. It is nice to know that you shoot are are willing to share. It is appreciated.

Thanks,
Don

Not only is the composition great, but the colors absolutely pop. I can't ever seem to get colors and skins tones like that.

Not only is the composition great, but the colors absolutely pop. I can't ever seem to get colors and skins tones like that.


Thanks, but I have to credit the camera on these, the WB was set to Auto with an adjustment to the blue (in camera). These are straight out of the camera, just cropped and resized for the site.
You get the WB right and it makes life a lot easier, especially in post processing.

JS