Somehow I pulled it off (baseball)

[deckcadet]

I've been shooting UF baseball for about a month and a half now, but I got this pretty nice shot during the first game of UF's series against LSU on Mar. 28. Ordinarily we only get to shoot from the photo boxes, but between innings we can travel behind the catcher and get shots of practice pitching.

I decided to be daring and go into auto subject detection mode on the D3 and see what happened. I rattled off exactly two frames.

This was one.

[JSPhoto]

Nice catch there, great framing to

JS

[retroactiv]

Good catch, for auto subject detection, I would figure it would have picked a larger subject than the baseball (maybe that is showing my lack of knowledge of the D3). With that said this shot would be a great shot to have in a newspaper for a story about your baseball team with the text in white covering up the image.

[brmill26]

What a cool image. The fact that it was tracked by the camera absolutely blows me away - that the software and focus are that fast and that accurate. The technology in these cameras is truly unbelievable.

[livin4lax09]

not bad harrison, how are you enjoying the d3? Thinking of making the nikon switch when i get back...

[deckcadet]

I'm loving every minute of it, I'll tell you.
Thanks for the comments everyone!

JS: it is cropped a bit and straightened a bit more... if I gave you the full details of how I went about the shot you wouldn't believe me.

[JETA]

I can't tell you how much I love this shot. It's probably my fave ever from this board.

I'd love to hear the details.

[deckcadet]

We have a somewhat limited amount of time to take the shot. I was using a Nikon 200-400mm f/4 VR, but since I had so little time, I didn't have time to adjust my monopod or the bags I was carrying. In the end I was handholding the camera and the 200-400 (longer and heavier than the 300/2.8, but lighter than a 400/2.8) though not entirely level, and I couldn't easily get my eye all the way up to the viewfinder. This shot was definitely part luck.

[Dubbs5050]

really unbelievable that you caught this shot....great work....I really can't find anything wrong. GREAT job here....

[ciddog91]

Wow.. I love the shot. Great job.... Can't say anything that hasn't already been said....

Phil

[AgingEyes]

You mean the camera did that??

Oh man, I want a D3 !!!

[racedraper]

Originally Posted by AgingEyes

You mean the camera did that??

Oh man, I want a D3 !!!

I with you. I see the doctor next week so I can put my name on a kidney donor list

Was the VR lens a DX lens? I was told that these lenses are not very good with the D3.
Cause I am planning to buy one in july when I get a severance check from my work.
You have to send this shot to baseball manufacture for a paid price for advertisement.

[deckcadet]

DX lenses are designed for DX format sensors. The D3's FX format sensor is able to crop down do a DX size portion, which gives you a 5.1 megapixel image.

I would suggest that you get a D300 with MB-D10 grip and some better lenses than an 18-200 and 50mm f/1.8 rather than a D3, which is really wasted on DX glass and consumer lenses. The 50 would be fine, but you'll need other lenses.

The lens used here, though, was the Nikon 200-400mm VR, which is a professional super-telephoto. Nikon only has 3 pro level DX lenses, none with vr: the 17-55mm f/2.8G DX, 12-24mm f/4G DX, and 10.5mm fisheye f/2.8G DX.

[AgingEyes]

If I may ask, deckcadet, since you use both D300 and D3, will D300 be able to give you the same result? Presumably they have the same AF system, right?

Originally Posted by deckcadet

DX lenses are designed for DX format sensors. The D3's FX format sensor is able to crop down do a DX size portion, which gives you a 5.1 megapixel image.

I would suggest that you get a D300 with MB-D10 grip and some better lenses than an 18-200 and 50mm f/1.8 rather than a D3, which is really wasted on DX glass and consumer lenses. The 50 would be fine, but you'll need other lenses.

The lens used here, though, was the Nikon 200-400mm VR, which is a professional super-telephoto. Nikon only has 3 pro level DX lenses, none with vr: the 17-55mm f/2.8G DX, 12-24mm f/4G DX, and 10.5mm fisheye f/2.8G DX.

[jorgemonkey]

Nice! I've been thinking about trying this, but we'll see when I get a chance to.

I smell a future POTW.....

[deckcadet]

Originally Posted by AgingEyes

If I may ask, deckcadet, since you use both D300 and D3, will D300 be able to give you the same result? Presumably they have the same AF system, right?

In theory, yes. The difference is in focus point size relative to the frame. If I'd shot this identically with the D300, to get the same framing I'd have had to stand further back than I was here, which would have left more of the focus points covering other areas of the frame, so the results could not be counted on to be exactly the same in this case. Also, I get the feeling there may be a slight difference in processing speed between the two, but due to the D300's lower frame rate I rarely if ever notice anything. Most of the differences in tracking etc. have more to do with coverage area of the AF system and focus point size relative to the frame.
I won't lie to you- for my needs the D3 is the best camera there is and I'm pretty convinced that it's probably the best camera yet made. But it's not right for everybody- the D300 is in many cases a far better choice.

For those of you who haven't already, I suggest you read the D300 Pro Review that we've published here... It will tell you everything you wanted to know about the D300 and you'll know exactly what I think of it, seeing as I wrote it

[Loupey]

That's very impressive!

My request is if you can post a similar result with flying bugs. I've had my eye on Nikon's VR macro (I mean "micro" ) lens for a while now and if the D3 can do for bugs what you demonstrated with that baseball, well, I can see a possible change down the road.

A bit of a warning though - bugs don't fly in a straight line. I'm really curious if that Nikon AF can track an erratic, small subject.

[AgingEyes]

Originally Posted by deckcadet

[snip] Also, I get the feeling there may be a slight difference in processing speed between the two....

That's what I read, too, on the internet, i.e., the D3 focuses faster than D300.

Between D3 and D300, I prefer D3 because of its high ISO performance. All my lenses except the Tamron 17-50 are FX lenses. Problem is, I've got myself into this bird photography thing and I have no money for a 600mm lens

[deckcadet]

Loupey, I do not own the 105mm VR Micro-Nikkor, so I can't help you there. The limiting factor would be the lens AF speed, which with most lenses of that type still isn't very fast.
For bird photography, I'd actually say that in most cases the D300 has a big advantage- that being the focus point layout. Since the D300's AF array covers a much larger portion of the frame, you have a better chance at tracking when you're in really close and greater flexibility with framing.

[Loupey]

Whoops, no, sorry about the confusion.

What I meant was that the 105mm VR is already tantalizing enough for me to consider a possible switch to Nikon.

What I was hoping for was a similar type of image (to the baseball shot) using the D3 and your 200-400mm to get a bug/bird in flight coming somewhat towards you. If the AF can do that, well, then the Nikon system might just be what I'm looking for.

[deckcadet]

Again, that will be more dependent on the focus gearing of the lens itself. Most macro lenses have very long focus throws so I don't know if it'll be fast enough. Being AF-S though there's a decent chance, and I have no doubts the AF system can do the tracking.

[michaelward82]

Erm, wow.

That is an excellent shot. I'm insanely jealous!

[AgingEyes]

Originally Posted by Loupey

Whoops, no, sorry about the confusion.

What I meant was that the 105mm VR is already tantalizing enough for me to consider a possible switch to Nikon.

What I was hoping for was a similar type of image (to the baseball shot) using the D3 and your 200-400mm to get a bug/bird in flight coming somewhat towards you. If the AF can do that, well, then the Nikon system might just be what I'm looking for.

Originally Posted by deckcadet

Again, that will be more dependent on the focus gearing of the lens itself. Most macro lenses have very long focus throws so I don't know if it'll be fast enough. Being AF-S though there's a decent chance, and I have no doubts the AF system can do the tracking.

Based on this baseball shot, I am confidence that the D3 can track a bird in flight very well, especially with a clean background

Loupey, not sure if this helps but I shot this with with 105 VR macro on a Fuji S5:

http://forums.photographyreview.com/...ad.php?t=40481

If S5 can do it, D3 should be able to do it much better. With your skills, I'm sure you can use that lens even better than I can.

[JETA]

Congrats on potw. You deserve photo of the year on this one though.

My son is a college pitcher. I'm going to send him the link to your pic. He's going to ask me why I can't take a pic like that. lol

[deckcadet]

wow! I've never had picture of the week *anywhere* before. Might have something to do with not posting enough pictures, but hey... this is pretty awesome! Thanks guys!