Beginning Sports Photography

[sarahd]

hi. I have recently just done sports photography for my work experience and want to buy a camera. I have been told to get a Nikon camera, I was just wondering does anyone have any suggestions of a camera i should get?

[straightarm]

Not a Nikon!

but seriously, you will generally need a SLR camera. The type is more important than the brand. Canon and Nikon are just as good as each other; you need to try both brands and decide which feels better, more natural, easier to use. This has to be a personal decison.

In the end, decent equipment can help, but what matters most is the talent of the photographer.

also, with sports photography, the choice of lens is as important as the choice of body.

Which sports are you going to shoot? This will influence the lenses you need

Choose the lenses then the body

Also, how much do you have to spend?

[Chris350]

hi. I have recently just done sports photography for my work experience and want to buy a camera. I have been told to get a Nikon camera, I was just wondering does anyone have any suggestions of a camera i should get?

The camera is not nearly as important as looking at which lenses you are going to collect. Your lens selections are going run toward expensive f/4 (ideally f/2.8) and faster telephotos and zooms. Variable aperture zooms that fill the pro/comsumer niche aren't generally fast enough even when coupled with good high ISO performance. Also plan on buying IS (Canon) or VR (Nikon) Image Stabilized lenses. Nikon's wide angles are said to be better than Canon's while Canon may still have a better AF system for fast moving sports, which is why you see so many sports shooters with Canon gear. You also notice they have old trusty lenses. I shoot pro cycling, with Nikon gear, and see an even split between Canon and Nikon among the pros I work around. I think Canon may have an advantage in that they may offer a wider range of medium length tele-zooms. At minimum I see working pros with a 70-200 f/2.8 (Canon also does this one in 4.0 I believe) and a tele/wide angle equivalent to a 28-70 also f/4 or faster. For field sports you 're looking at 300mm F/2.8's so that a tele-converter can be used to achieve longer focal lengths. The good news is that in most major markets, there are places to rent all this exotic stuff, so you don;t have to spend a life saving to get started.
The primary consideration for camera body as I see it is to make sure if you're going to be shooting indoors or in poorly lit venues (many times flash photos will be prohibited..) you get good high ISO performance. That also means no consumer level camera bodies, in the Nikon line up you're looking at a D-300s at minimum. I'm not up on Canon, so I do not know what they equivalent body is in their lineup..

[sarahd]

Ok well I mainly want to do outdoor sports like soccer hurling gaelic and rugby.
So what type Canon do u suggest i get and what type lense?
I dont have alot to spend but i want to get a good camera and lense because i really want to do sports photography so i suppose under €1000?

[SmartWombat]

Why were you told to get a Nikon, do you know?
I can see they have an advantage indoors, in low light, if you spend around €2000 on the body alone. But for outdoors?

I can still do fine outdoors for everything except motorsport with my old Canon 20D. So I disagree with "no consumer level bodies".

But if you're planning on shooting sports like gaelic football, hurling, rugby; then you're going to spend more than your entire budget just on one Nikon or Canon lens!

In the end, even if you economise now buying Sigma or Tamron lenses, you may change your mind (I did when I saw the results).

A wide zoom lens like the Sigma 80-400 might be a good starting point. I started out there and replaced it after two weeks because it did not focus fast enough for motorsport, but got good results on slow action. So for you with field sports it may be OK.

For the body, just for ease of use don't go for the cheapest (unless you have no choice) with only the direction-buttons; the slightly more expensive models with the control wheels are easier to use in a hurry - and in sport you'll always find yourself in a hurry to get the shot.

Don't worry about water sealing - get a lens sleeve over the lens and body (Optech make a good one) and you won't need the professional level of water seal I have on my pro bodies.
I don't need to worry about light rain, and can leave the gear out in heavy rain while I get my waterproofs (and the camera's waterproofs!) out of the bag.
You'd need to be a little more prepared, but not much worse off.

Chris says "It's not about the camera" he's right, the camera can make it easier to get the picture, or harder (if you use a P&S) but it's you that take the final image.

You can do it without IS, in fact for most panning shots IS has to be turned to mode 2 so there is no side to side stabilisation anyway.
You can do it without fast AF, if you can predict the action and prefocus.
You can do it without wide aperture fast lenses, if you can accept noise in the image.

It's all a compromise on budget, weight, and quality.

Sometimes I leave all my heavy pro gear at home and go light with micro 4/3.
It's a challenge, but it can be done, even motorsport.


MOST IMPORTANT is the camera fits your hand, and you can work with the controls blindfold. When you're in a hurry you don't want to be looking at the dials and buttons, you want to be able to just do it.

[SmartWombat]

An example of the d-buttons I don't like: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...-body/p1519448
And the control wheels I like: http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...-body/p1027971

Now, how about a "special" deal?
Watch the Canon Outlet ebay site: http://stores.ebay.co.uk/Canon-Outlet
Sometimes they have great deals. I bought my 1DSmkII from there 4 years ago for £3500 (saved me £1000) and there was an identical camera there last week with 1 year warranty for £1400 !!

Be careful though, you can find good deals online (e.g. http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...-body/p1027970) on brand new cameras for only £70 less than the refurbished, warrantied, ebay price.

[Chris350]

Why were you told to get a Nikon, do you know?
I can see they have an advantage indoors, in low light, if you spend around €2000 on the body alone. But for outdoors?

I can still do fine outdoors for everything except motorsport with my old Canon 20D. So I disagree with "no consumer level bodies".

My thoughts here were aimed strictly toward better High ISO performance for low light levels. I might have been more specific in my wording... You're correct outdoors nearly any body with a descent AF and good ISO range will work well.

MOST IMPORTANT is the camera fits your hand, and you can work with the controls blindfold. When you're in a hurry you don't want to be looking at the dials and buttons, you want to be able to just do it.

Can't argue that at all. Whatever you buy it needs to have controls that are easy to locate and easily used. Basic functions like ISO selection cannot be buried in menus.

[zerodog]

Why would anyone say don't get a Nikon for sports? The Nikon autofocus system is the best for sports now and has been for quite a while. So you guys are saying a D300/300s is no good at sports? Or the D3s? Or the D90 for that matter? What have you guys been reading?

A Nikon D90 is a great choice for sports on a budget.

In the end, it is all about how much money you want to spend and what system you feel most comfortable with. I picked Nikon because I liked the controls and the feel of it over Canon. It is all about lenses. You can't judge any of them on the kit lens alone. You need to look at the higher end ones especially for sports. The 70-200 2.8 lenses especially and all other 2.8 lenses in general are what you will end up with if you do shoot action.

[JETA]

Why would anyone say don't get a Nikon for sports? The Nikon autofocus system is the best for sports now and has been for quite a while. So you guys are saying a D300/300s is no good at sports? Or the D3s? Or the D90 for that matter? What have you guys been reading?

:confused5: :confused5: I don't think anyone here is debating Nikon - Canon.

For the poster you've been given wonderful information. When I first started I went with the lens first. I couldn't shoot football at night without a f/2.8 lens. If you are shooting in broad daylight there may be cheaper options, but none that I have experience with. I don't think you can ever go wrong going with a good lens first in sports photography. My first camera was a canon 300d which was more than lacking, but the lens rocked and I was able to get shots.

[straightarm]

Why would anyone say don't get a Nikon for sports?

The point was don't blindly get Nikon without looking at Canon as well

the Canon 7D is the mutt's nuts when it comes to APS-C cameras and the Canon lens range is at least on par with the Nikon range.

The most important component of sports photography is neither the body nor the lens, but the photographer. Having said that, the photographer must feel comfortable with the equipment

[OldClicker]

The point was don't blindly get Nikon without looking at Canon as well

Don't "blindly" stop with those two either. Analyze what you need and look at them all. - Terry

[Photo-John]

Don't "blindly" stop with those two either. Analyze what you need and look at them all. - Terry

Thank you to our Sony advocate!

As others have said, lenses are more important than the camera. And proper technique is more important, too. I can make good sports photos with almost any camera provided I take its limitations into consideration. I think we need to know what your budget is to really help. If you've got only $500 you obviously can't buy a Nikon D3S. So tell us a little more and we can give you better direction. It wouldn't hurt to tell us a little about your experience and what kind of camera you've been using.

[racedraper]

i would say rent some camerasso you can see which one you like before making the investment. I do this with lenses ,Id rather spend 40 bucks to rent then spend $8000.

[sarahd]

I only have two weeks of experience! But i loved every minute of the two weeks and i really want to do sports photography now. I have around €1000 to spend. I was thinking of getting a second hand camera and lense to start. So i dont want to spend loads of money on my first camera and lense.

[SmartWombat]

If you're going second hand, then your budget is more realistic.
But you will have to be careful about selecting the seller.

[gaapaul]

hi like the original poster i am interesting in making progress on doing some sports photography. I have an Olympus e30 digitial slr with 2 lenses (35-90mm, 80-300mm zuiko). I have been able to get some good shots but feel limited by how close i can get. Would be intersted in any suggestions people would have on next steps camera wise...what should i get lens wise, i can see there are additional olympus lens (140-600, pro type lense 600mm) but seem really expensive..any suggestions.. or should i just look for a whole new set of kit, sports i am interested in are like original poster (guess we are both from ireland)..hurling, gaelic footbal, soccer, athletics....
thanks in advance

[fidgety]

hi like the original poster i am interesting in making progress on doing some sports photography. I have an Olympus e30 digitial slr with 2 lenses (35-90mm, 80-300mm zuiko). I have been able to get some good shots but feel limited by how close i can get. Would be intersted in any suggestions people would have on next steps camera wise...what should i get lens wise, i can see there are additional olympus lens (140-600, pro type lense 600mm) but seem really expensive..any suggestions.. or should i just look for a whole new set of kit, sports i am interested in are like original poster (guess we are both from ireland)..hurling, gaelic footbal, soccer, athletics....
thanks in advance

I have to say that I am not experienced with Olympus gear so I cannot speak firsthand about it. If you do decide to change systems I certainly recommend a Nikon or Canon system. I'll let a Nikon shooter describe their systems but as a Canon shooter for many years I can give you some firsthand accounts of what you might want to look into.

Budget is always an issue as well as what you are shooting and wht you expect to get in return ($$) as that helps you pick up better gear down the road. If you're just getting started you might want to look at a Canon 7D. Nice camera body as we use one for backup. High megpixels, fairly fast autofocus and a nice frame per second rate. However I don't believe the camera is weather resistant sealed in the event you do outdoor shoots and expect bad weather. If you're looking to step up you might want to consider some of the Canon beasts such as the 1D series. Fantastic sports cameras and you can pick up a used 1D Mark IIN for about a $1,000 (search fredmiranda.com or sportsshooter.com for a good used camera). These are the bodies that we use and have had tremendous success with them. They are 8.2 megs, 8.5 frames per second, super fast autofocus, they're built like tanks plus their weather sealed. For the latest and greatest there are the Mark III's and IV's but then you're getting into the thousands of dollars range with those bodies.
For glass it depends on what type of events you are shooting. For almost any sports shooter I have to recommend the Canon 70-200 2.8L. It's a staple among 95% of Canon sports shooters. Great for basketball, volleyball, swimming, etc., and it makes a great second lens for field sports. If you're shooting field sports such as football, soccer, etc., you may want to look at a Canon 300 2.8L but you're starting to get into a much higher price range as these go for around $4,000 new but you can pick up a good used example for a decent price. A 300 2.8L goes a long way for field events and you can even add a 1.4 tele-extender for more reach if you need it. Another great lens is the Canon 24-70 2.8L or the 16-35 2.8L but again, it's Canon "L" glass and can get pricey.
If you're just starting out and have a limited budget I'd suggest the 70-200 2.8L and then add the 1.4 tele-extender for a bit more reach.
Hope that helps. Again, I've been using Canon gear for years and have had it banged around, it's been rained on, been used in dust storms, been spit and sweated on and it hasn't failed me yet. Bets of luck!

[SmartWombat]

Welcome, gaapaul

We have a few people here who shoot with Olympus, I hope they see this!

Because it's a four thirds sensor, the images are equivalent to using 2x the focal length on 35mm, the smaller sensor gives a narrower angle of view.
It has the angled LCD display I really like for low shots, and live view on the LCD.
Also it's got dust reduction and built-in stabilisation, which is better then the old 1DmkIIN and it's higher resolution too!

If you want better lenses (much more expensive) then you don't have to buy image stabilised lenses like Canon and Nikon, so the longer focal length wider aperture lenses are a bit cheaper.

The E30 is the non-weatherproofed version of the E3, but that shouldn't be a problem.
Normally if you don't want to be out in the weather unprotected, then your camera and lens shouldn't be either
Particularly the external focussing and zooming lenses where even if they are sealed (like the Canon 24-70L and 100-400L) you will get a tiny amount of damp in them if you zoom in bad weather.

If you're not getting close enough with the 80-300 (that's 160-600 in 35mm terms) then a longer lens probably isn't the answer, accreditation and good access may be!

However, the Zuiko pro lenses are comparable to the Canon and Nikon pro lenses.
The ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 300mm 1:2.8 is pretty near my Canon 300 EF L IS f/2.8 lens - of course I have to pay for IS in each lens, and Olympus it's in the camera.
And the price? Astronomical in the UK: RRP: £6,699.99 and a "special" offer at Only £5,695.00 at my nearest pro store.

[dhyravy]

I'm always amused when folks specify "VR" lenses for sports. With the shutter speeds required to stop action the vibration reduction is not really useful. I have been shooting sports for many years and have yet to own a lens with this feature. The photogs I know who do have them never use this with action shooting since it can in many circumstances actually prevent accurate focus with high shutter speeds. Just my $.02 worth.

[SmartWombat]

I only use IS for handheld with long focal length in head-on shots.
Or for the podium and in-car shots on the grid - where there's no panning and little subject movement.

[LightBright]

hi like the original poster i am interesting in making progress on doing some sports photography. I have an Olympus e30 digitial slr with 2 lenses (35-90mm, 80-300mm zuiko). I have been able to get some good shots but feel limited by how close i can get. Would be intersted in any suggestions people would have on next steps camera wise...what should i get lens wise, i can see there are additional olympus lens (140-600, pro type lense 600mm) but seem really expensive..any suggestions.. or should i just look for a whole new set of kit, sports i am interested in are like original poster (guess we are both from ireland)..hurling, gaelic footbal, soccer, athletics....
thanks in advance

I agree with a lot of the points maid by SmartWombat and will add a little bit from my perspective.

I think if you are already invested in olympus, you might want to stick with it. There is a rumor that Olympus might release a successor to the olympus e3. Note that the current olympus e3 was claimed to have the fastest AF performance (dont know if that is still true today) but the e30 uses the same AF system as the e3. The e3 is weather sealed, and has a 2x crop factor like all 4/3rd camera systems. The 2x crop factor is wonderful for sports because if you have a 70-200mm f2.8 lens, your lens becomes a 140-400mm 2.8, this is great for sports because you get greater "standard" reach with the same lenses than the apsc cameras offered by Canon(crop 1.6x),Nikon (crop 1.5x),Sony (crop 1.5x), and Pentax (crop 1.5x). However this is due to the smaller sensor of current 4/3rds cameras and although you gain reach you lose in high iso noise performance. If you plan on shooting in good light, noise shouldn't be a problem, but in low light you will find Canon, Nikon, and Sony better suited in this area.

As for your question on lenses. If you want great fast lenses above 200mm, you are going to have to spend what you would on a small car. There is just no way of getting one if you are on a budjet. You can get this lens http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...6_3_DG_OS.html . Its a sigma and they should sell it for most camera mounts however I do not know if they sell it for olympus, but if they did, noise would again be a problem with the aperture at the long end limited to F6.3. When at 500mm with this lens it becomes f6.3 and the aperture opening doesn't let much light in for fast shutter speeds in low iso settings. You would have to bump up the iso and noise will start to creep in. If you went with another camera system, maybe like the canon 7d or the Nikon d300s or the Sony a500/a550, this lens still might be usable in slightly dim light compared to olympus.

A better option would be to get closer to the action (dont know if you can)? If you were on the field, and wait for the action to come to you rather then going after it with more zoom, you can get some great shots.

If you are considering other systems...

My opinion on Noise

Nikon is usually better at high iso low noise performance than all the others, however I think color quality is significantly reduced to fix noise.

Sony seems to gear more towards color fidelity then noise but still has good noise performance

Canon I think is almost near Nikon at noise performance. I find that Canon cameras bring out the best colors when in over-cast situations from the 3. But I prefer olympus and sony cameras for color's that pop

As far as auto focus, you should do well with any camera. Many will say this camera brand is better than that one, but this is just being biased. The truth is all DSLR's even non dslr's are capable of great images, and in the end, skill always matter's more than what system you use. Some camera brands do somethings slightly better than others, but there is no such thing as a perfect camera. But you can find one that is almost perfect to suit your needs. Best of luck