What's your pro setup?

[TEMPESTboy]

Hey everybody, here's a curiosity post.

I just got back from shooting the World Masters Games Opening Ceremonies (pics to come) and was wondering what kind of setup people of each type of photography use? For example, what do photojournalists use, wedding photographers, sports photographers.

I'll start with me. I'll say this event was more of a photojournalist type of deal. The photo editor of the university paper gave me a media pass (lucky me!). I'm just a poor boy, so my setup was an EOS 3 body, a 135mm f2.0L lens, a 50mm f1.8 lens, and the 28mm-90mm zoom that came with my Rebel Ti (I know, it's a hurting setup). I think I got some good shots with my gear, but my ideal setup (and what I saw some of the pros had) would be 2 1D Mark II bodies, a 70mm-200mm f2.8L IS lens on one, a 16mm-35mm f2.8L on the other, and a 1.4X just in case I needed the reach. Ahhh, I love to fantasize.

So all you pros (or wannabe pros) out there, what's your setup?

[Asylum Steve]

Here's the correct link to the WMG:

http://www.2005worldmasters.com

As for your question, for most pros I think the complete answer may be a bit too exhaustive for a simple thead in a forum. We've had many discussions here on what equipment we all use, so don't be surprised if participation this time around is a bit sparse.

Personally, suffice to say my commercial work has me dealing mostly with smaller focal length lenses (love wide angle even for fashion and portrait), and of course, electronic flash along with a plethora of light control grip equipment.

Add some sunlight, and I'm usually good to go...

[another view]

Two fast lenses and a fast camera body will give you a lot to work with. Like Steve says, it's a tough question to answer and it comes down to personal preferences. You probably learned what one piece of equipment would have been really nice to have in that situation, and if you're in that situation a lot you might look at getting it. A 70-200 f2.8 is a very commonly used lens and I'd guess that might be high on your list. But there's nothing like wide angle shots for a different perspective on the world (as in 24mm and wider).

I've got a lot of equipment, but lately been shooting with my Coolpix 5000 more than anything else. It's a different type of photography than using a DSLR and long lens, and it's a good way to shake things up a little, so to speak.

[TEMPESTboy]

That's true about the preference thing. As you said, I did have lots to work with with my setup, but a nice wide angle would've been good for the stadium shots.

Steve, nice stuff on your site. Do you do lots of portraits and fashion shots with sunlight? I'm interested because I don't have the cash to buy lights.

[92135011]

I'm no pro, but I'm extremely happy with my setup.

Currently...Leica M4, 35/f2 ASPH, 50/1.4 ASPH, Sekonic 558 and a Minolta colormeter IIIf, which I bought at a good price, but yet have a collection of filters great enough to use it.

[Outdoorsman]

You know, I had a feeling no one would be willing to give away their secrets. Unfortunately, this only hurts those of us (like me) who want to know the answer to this question.
I have looked into land-based pro surf photography and those guys don't really bother with anything other than the Canon 600mm f/4 with or without the 1.4x or 2x converters. They use (so I've read) Velvia or something similar. I do not know if they use filters, but I'd like to know what ones they do use. I've also read that most of the surfing pros still use film, but that with the inception of the 1Ds MKII, some are finally trying digital shots with good results. And as digital improves, so film will be used less. For the most part they're using Canon EOS 1V HS bodies for the high frame rate with film and the good weatherproofing. Some locations are so close to the beach that a 600mm is too much. So pick your poison, I guess.
For surfing I use a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 with a Quantaray 2x converter attached to a Canon EOS Elan 7N with BP-300 battery pack/vertical grip on a Bogen 2001 tripod with 3030 head. With Fuji Provia 400F. And a Hoya 81A.
I'm not exactly well-heeled either...
I list all this to let it be known that it's no secret. We're all here to learn, and so here's my gear, laid out for all to see. And I am not ashamed...
-O-

[another view]

You know, I had a feeling no one would be willing to give away their secrets. Unfortunately, this only hurts those of us (like me) who want to know the answer to this question.

I don't think there are many pro sports photographers on this forum. There are some people who have a specialty, like Photo John with Mountain Biking, but I don't know if there are any people who make their living shooting different types of sports. I certainly don't - I've done some commercial and wedding jobs and shot sports occasionally for fun, but I'm not really in much of a position to give advice on it.

There will always be people out there with more equipment than a well stocked camera store, but that doesn't mean that you can't get good images with what you've got. Cameras don't take pictures, people take pictures. Look at older work, from 30-40 years ago. I've seen some really nice work and those cameras were fully manual, fully mechanical. I happened to see a Sports Illustrated issue several months ago showcasing the work of a photographer from this time period (can't remember his name). I thought the basketball shot from behind the clear backboard was a relatively new idea, but it's older than me!

And look at stuff from 5-10 years ago. Most of that was shot on film, and we all know what the prices of film equipment have done recently. You may be able to afford some of the equipment that was used by all the pro's at that time (i.e. the EOS-1DS MkII of it's day). An image that really blew you away for how great it is remains a great image long after the camera equipment passes it's prime. Newer top of the line gear probably will increase your percentage of "keepers" and may be faster, have new features, etc. Plus all the digital stuff that's improving by leaps and bounds still.

It is very possible to get great images without all the latest and greatest gear. Thinking that you can't is just a cop-out. I wouldn't even think about digital if I wanted to be a sports photographer - Nikon F5's go for $700 or maybe less, how do you beat that? The equivalent Canon is probably similar or even less.

FWIW the few times I've shot sports I've used my 80-200 f2.8 and 20-35 f2.8 when I can get close enough for it to work. I keep meaning to get back up to the SCCA car racing track that's 1/2 hour from here but have only been there once. The cool thing about it is that you can go anywhere you want - walk around the cars, hang out with the owners/drivers, get to a lot of different places on the track, etc. Only about $10 for the day, too.

[paulnj]

ever hear of http://www.sportsshooter.com/index.html

[Lionheart]

Not a pro, but I do incorporate photography everyday in almost all aspects of patient care.
Clinical setup:
EOS 10D, 50mm f2.5 compact macro, 100mm f2.8 USM macro, MR-14EX ringlight
Studio setup:
EOS 1D MkII, 85mm f1.8 USM, 135 f2 L USM, 28-70 f2.8L USM, 70-200 f2.8L IS USM, Wein wireless system, Norman LH500 strobes, Bogen autopoles, Bogen backdrop racks, various backdrops and drapes, reflectors,etc, Polaris lightmeter.
at home/personal hobby use:
Panasonic FZ-5 ;)
Software: Adobe Creative Suite (photoshop cs), C1-Pro, Breezebrowser, ACDSee 32 v.7,

[TEMPESTboy]

ever hear of http://www.sportsshooter.com/index.html

Yeah, but I'm not a member there, and I was just curious, so I just threw up a post here. I didn't intend to make this a "who has the best gear" kind of post, just curious what you use when you go take photos for a certain situation.

[Speed]

So all you pros (or wannabe pros) out there, what's your setup?

I'm not a pro, but I play one occassionally on weekends (portraits and weddings).

Asylum Steve may have took the air out of your sails right off the bat, but he's correct.
There is no magic formula of gear. Learning to use, and maximize, the gear you have is the secret to sucess. Having said that, my modest gear is as follows:

For sports I love my F5 (which I bought used). For ourdoor sports, such as soccer, football, track, etc, I use my Quantaray (Sigma) 70-300mm f4-5.6. For indoor sports, such as basketball, I use my Sigma 28-70 f2.8 with my SB-28.

For portraits I typically use my N80 with my Sigma 28-70mm f2.8, and I mount my SB-28 on my stroboframe.

For weddings I use the N80 setup like with portraits, and I use my F5 with my 70-300mm and an SB-28, or my 50mm f1.4 with an 80C filter.

For landscape work, it depends on what camera I have with me. I used to use my 50mm f1.4 for landscapes, (and still do for night and low light work), but I usually use my 28-70mm for daylight work. I occassionally use my 70-300mm for landscapes to isolate a part of the landscape, or my 105mm f2.8 macro for closeups.

Now if you want to talk fantasy...I'd love to have a pair of new F5's, a D2X, a 70-200mm f2.8 VR, an 85mm f1.4, a pair of SB-800's.......

[paulnj]

Well, not all the people at sportshooter use the best gear , but most list the gear they use in a certain situation(indoor basketball, football and boxing all have different needs)

I truely wasn't trying to be anything beyond helpful . So seriously, search there for the answers to the sports "pro setup" question.

Me personally..

When I shoot people images, I either use a film body with a 50F1.8 and 80-200 F2.8 or a 1D/ 28-70 F2.8. I know a PJ that uses everything from a nikkor 16mm to a 300F2.8 AFI for people imagery mostly.

[Outdoorsman]

I knew my post would get people going. ;)
I must disagree with the common idea espoused here that it's what you do with you gear, not what gear you have.
Frankly, I think that photography is quite a bit about the right gear. I can't even begin to compete in the local press market beacuse I lack the proper gear. I couldn't go out and start shooting weddings commercially because I lack the proper equipment. I do not shoot surfing commercially because I don't have the right gear. My setup takes okay pics but they're usually not very good due to equipment limitations. I have a few hundred crappy slides of surfing to show you if you disagree. I simply don't have the telephoto reach with reliable AF and a fast enough lens to do it. I try to cheat (cheap zoom with cheap converter) but it ends up just being a waste of film.
And for this broke college student, it's all about saving $$$, not wasting it.
Can I really agree and then go out and start covering news events with a film camera? I'd have to spend quite a bit on film, processing, and then go home and scan, edit, send...if I had a DSLR I'd shoot all I want and then go home and edit+send.
I can't take good indoor shots hand-held because I don't have a fast 50mm for the Elan. I could go ahead and make a bunch of images with 800 ISO film, but they'd look like crap compared to a 50mm f/1.8 on 100 ISO film. I own no prime lenses for my Elan, so even my best camera can't make the most of even the finest grained film.
And for the record I also shoot an ancient Vivitar screw-mount with a broken light meter. With a 28mm f2.8, 50mm f/1.8, and a 135mm f/4 with a broken aperture. I don't use it for indoor stuff 'cause it takes too long to calculate the exposure. My Elan does it waaay faster than my feeble mind...
BTW, for graduations and birthdays & such it's the Elan 7N w/ BP-300, 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, 420 EZ and 100 ISO print film. On the long-ago thread where we all posted pics of our systems, there's a shot of this setup (you just can't see the film). If anyone wants to see it again, I'll be happy to post it...
Please blast me over this. It's been so long since anyone called ******** on me...
-O-

[another view]

Please blast me over this.

OK! Nah, it's all about setting priorities and goals. I've shot some weddings but decided to get out of that world - just not for me. But I can tell you a little about it. You'll need backup gear and fast primes. Ideally, a used 35mm camera body (doesn't have to be top of the line, we're not shooting sports) that works with the system you've got, and a 50 f1.8. Shouldn't be too much, but Plan B could even be an AE-1 with a 50 f1.8 - that shouldn't set you back much at all. You'll really need this to get started. The bride doesn't want to hear "uh, my camera broke so I'm gonna leave..."! Shoot both cameras often and really get to know them. You don't need the latest evaluative metering system because color neg film has a lot of latitude. You do need to be careful - use a grey card when possible. Find a good lab to work with (very important), read up on how to shoot weddings, assist a pro a few fimes if possible. Build a portfolio by shooting with the person you're assisting (with their permission), doing portraits, etc. It ain't easy and there are shots you can't miss, but nobody starts as an expert. Steve Sint's book is really good about how to do the job.

When you feel like you're ready, go to ep-o.com and get a basic membership. Mine was free but I'm not sure if they do it that way anymore. Brides register, then you get emails telling you when the wedding is, budget, etc. You'll be in the low budget group to start, but you're building a portfolio. Take the money you make and invest it in equipment and workshops. Look at other wedding photographer's websites. Eventually you'll have the gear you want and can hopefully command higher prices. From there it can turn into whatever you want. But don't risk someone's very special day if you're not ready - you can't re-do special moments like that.

Maybe part of your equipment purchases include faster cameras and lenses, which will help you with weddings but also surfing photography. See how this works? Yes, there's a reason that top pros use top equipment. But they didn't start out life being top pros, and some photographers have amazing portfolios done with very little equipment.

Do you know who Gerry Widen is? He's a member here and his type of photography is very different than sports (b&w street) but not far off from photojournalistic wedding work. He has nice equipment, but most of it is fully manual.

[JSPhoto]

I guess I'm one of the few "pro's" on the site. I pretty much cover sports only, although I do shoot and sell some nature photos.
I shoot with a Canon 1D, 70- 200 2,8, for most things. On occasion I use other lenses such as a 19-35 for under the basket or victory circle shots.
Shooting sports for newspapers is tricky, you need fast gear that can get multiple frames of the action. But most of it is being in the right place at the right time. Basically if you do not know a sport you can't get good shots because you are "out of position". You have to be prepared for any situation. Gear is a lot of it, but knowing the game is just as important.

You also need to be aware of your surroundings and have a way out if the action comes towards you. Even then you can still become part of the action. I've been run over at high school basketball games, football, almost got it at a Colts game last year and darn near got killed at a midget race as well. No matter what you do, if you shoot a motorsports event, ALWAYS shoot with both eyes OPEN! Doing that saved my rear while shooting a car that was spinning. Suddenly out of my left eye I saw a car go airborne. I hit the dirt, the car hit the catch fence right where I was standing, I looked up and the car was above me. I walked away without a scratch (the camera was ok too). That was way too close, if I wouldn't have hit the ground I'd have been killed. BE SAFE! Too many "pro's" get complacent and end up getting hurt.

JS

[Skyman]

Horses for courses, i am not a pro in that i don't make my living out of photopgraphy but i have an extensive "quiver" not all of it is considered pro gear by the marketing department but the definition of pro is stated above and i have seen pro photographers producing great work with what most would describe as consumer. anywho my list is thus
canon eos 300d & 20d eos 5 and 500e, lenses 28- 80ef 18-55ef 75-300usm 70-200F4L 24mmF2.8 50mm F1.8 135mm F2.8SF 200mm F2.8L sunback 4500 bracketflash and 4000 afz canon 550ex and 580ex speedlights and lots of gadget that really do make life easier such as the canon angle finder (fantastic when jambed into a corner or as a waist level finder for candid portratiture) also i find that the 135mm f2.8 is actually sharper than the 200mm f2.8 from about f5.6 onwards and often produces a more natural feel to an image. i also tend to use the non L series lenses when lighting will allow as sometime for portraiture the prime lenses and L series lenses are to sharp. (the reason I bought the 135sf) i take my time over my photos so i do use the prime lenses more than most pro's would so my quiver could be replaced by the 16-35 or 17-85is and 70-200L but really what seperates the men from the boys is not the toys but the understanding of when to use what and why. I am a big believer in learning photgraphy with nothing but a 50mm prime lens as this will help you understand the different properties of the different zooms and focal lenghts and then lens selection becomes a creative choice.