Well, I'm not an official softball photographer. My niece started JV softball this year, and we (my family) have been to every game taking pictures. First, the girls were camera shy but now they want us taking lots of pictures so they can make a scrapbook for their coach.

I have to say, shooting softball (probably true for many ball sports) isn't easy. It really isn't easy. I think lighning and fireworks are easier to shoot. You (or maybe it's just me) can never tell when or where the action is going to happen, or even if there's goingto be any action at all in any given inning. On top of that, you have umpires and first/third base coaches standing in the way all of the time, plus all the chain link fences. I'd have to say, out of ever ten plays, I get one shot timed ok, but it's oof. Maybe one out of 20 comes out ok. The pitcher is the simplest to shoot, second is the catcher and batter (probably a tie), but the outfield, that's another story... On top of that, for some reason, my dumb camera focuses about 1/10t the speed (or should I say it takes 10 times as long to focus) at full telephoto than it does at full wide. So even if there's a pop fly to the outfield, by the time I get a focus lock, the play is long over...

And then, the irony of it all, I'm out there to catch the action, but since I'm staring through this little viewfinder, that blacks out when I hit the shutter, I miss the action. I always have to ask the wife, "What happened?" after I take a picture, so she can narrate what's going on in the shot I just took....

All this for a few photos for our memories and the girls' scrapbook...it's still well worth it, but it comes at a cost.

BM

A faster camera with a longer lens would surely take some of the pain away.

What camera & lens are you using? Not everyone can afford to go out and by a Canon 1D MKII N and lenses just for sports, but it's the fastest AF and shutter around. Sometimes the best thing is to use slower gear and learn to time things better. If you only knew how many shots I delete at a game :) , although I don't find baseball or softball hard to shoot at all. It's much easier to shoot if you know the sport really well, what to expect, and be ready for the unexpected. That is where the faster gear makes the difference.

JS

I guess that's part of my problem. I don't kow the sport all that well yet. I don't much care for professional ball sports, personally... Anyway, my camera is a Sony DSC-F828. I bought it two years ago when it was first released. At the time I knew nothing of digital cameras or photography, and it has been an excellent learning device, but it is time to move on. I've been moonlighting and saving my extra money for a 20D (especially now that the prices have been dropping in the wake of the 30D). Torn on lenses though. For a first lens, I don't know. I'm tempted by the sigma 18-200 lens, but I wonder if the canon 28-200 usm lens is higher quality an/or faster at the cost of some wide end range, or if there's something else in the price range I don't know about. I'm thinking since the 28-200 is for full frame and/or 35mm cameras, that it'd have less vignetting or distortion on a APS-C sized sensor than the compact sigma digita only lens. Of course, I drool over L-Glass. Maybe with next year's tax refund...

BM

Are you thinking 28-300 and not 28-200? I have the 28-300 and use it on my two 1D bodies and the DRebel 300D without any issues whether wide angle (28mm) or at 300. Some of my basebal shots here on the forums are with the 28-300.

JS

Hi Bmadau. I just started shooting softball this week, and I have a few more games to get in the next couple weeks so next year's media guide has action shots. I have many of the same problems you have. If I shoot at ground level, I have to shoot through a fence, which isn't bad if I want to get shots of the pitcher and some batters, but otherwise it isn't a good location. If I try to get above the field, either by shooting from the adjacent soccer grandstand or from the observation lounge of the single building complex, I am too far away and have to shoot through a net.

I came up with a novel solution, though. I am bringing a step ladder. A three-foot step ladder will get me up high enough so I can see over the fence, giving me an unobstructed view of the field.

The Sony f-818 is a very nice camera. The Carl Zeiss glass is oustanding. But, you are stretching its capabilities just a little bit. I used it early on to shoot sports, and the shutter lag was a problem. You can overcome that to some degree by learning to anticipate the action, but since you aren't a sports addict like me, that would probably be more difficult. Don't get frustrated and have fun with it. Baseball and softball are tough for most people because it's difficult to get close to the action and it seems the sun is always in the wrong place (shooting at night is a whole different set of problems, but actually your 818 will do surprisingly well in low light since it has the equivalent of a 2.8 lens). When it's hard to get to all the action, I just shoot lots of candid stuff and hope to catch a couple of good shots of the players in action along the way. I'm betting the coach would love a scrapbook with some select action shots and lots of pictures of the girls acting silly and just generally goofing around.

All of our dugouts are now screen in so foul balls can't hit players. The coaches in our county don't allow any "goofing" around by the kids. From the first pitch to the last it's all business, even for the high school and middle school kids so you'd be out of luck with anything other than action, or maybe a coach chewing some kid out or congratulating them for a big play. But even then you have the screen covering the dugout :(

JS

Is this your 28-300? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=319784&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=319784&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation) If so, it's a little out of my price range at the moment, but that is an awesome lens. I was thinking of this, obviously not in the same league, but for my purposes hopefully adequate. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=206435&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation As a package (this lense+ 20d) has to be a better system than what I'm using now.

That might work, although I think you'd be better off with say the 75-300 or Sigma 70-200 f2.8 for low light, It's what I used until IO got the Canon 70-200 IS USM f2.8 and the Canon 28-300 USM IS f3.5-5.6 that you linked to. I honestly haven't used the Canon 28-200 to know how it would work. It can't hurt to check it out though.

And yeah, that is a bit pricy for most users, but I love the thing, and will be using it today to shoot girls track. It's great to get up close or up close from far away.

JS