Gear - everything changes - part II - Lenses

What gives?

My photos weren't looking like the shots you see in the magazines. Not sharp.
I was using a monopod and working at being steadier. Besides, with a fast shutter speed, surely camera shake wasn't the problem?

I had the fast camera and what I thought was a fast lens (Nikon 80-200 2.8), so what gives?
Back to the books.
I looked through Peter Reed Miller's photos. I *analyzed* his photos.
Charted out the lens, shutter speed, focal length, ISO.

There were two things he was doing that
I see that he was shooting with a prime (non-zoom) lens.
This means that your camera only has small changes to make to focus, it isn't zooming in and out to find something to focus on.
He shoots with 300mm, 400mm and 600mm lenses.
Worth a try.
How do I lay my hands on one? No one I know has anything like this to borrow.
I end up renting one from LensRentals.com, just to try it out.
What a difference!
Sharp, thank goodness, but it's a challenge shooting with this.
You can see at the other end of the field, but nothing up close.
Do you change your shooting style? What do you do with this?

The rental period ends so I go down to Service Photo in Baltimore to see what these cost.
Actually, I've done my homework online,
I know what they cost, way beyond anything I can afford, but one can hope, right?

The Nikon lens, new, costs in the $3,000 to $5,000 range. Used is little different.
However, they had a Sigma prime lens, used, for the $1,500 range.
That's more than my D200 cost new!

Anyway, done. I walked out with this and haven't looked back. Well worth the price.

This process is one that I will use again. That is, if I hear about some whiz-bang lens, I'll rent it first, check it (and me) out and then look for it new, used, online, in stores, on Craigslist. 

In another post I'll talk about what else Peter Read Miller does that I don't do.
Later!

Gear - everything changes - part I - Camera bodies

Ca plus change...

My equipment is a hodge-podge of stuff that I've accumulated over the years, not all of it suited to sports photography.

Basically, I shoot Nikon bodies and lenses which is the topic of today's post.

My go-camera body was a Nikon D200 - a very nice camera, has served me well.
This is what I started shooting with.

A colleague at work offered me a Nikon D2H on indefinite loan, to see if it was better for sports shooting.
And so it proved to be. It has a far greater burst speed (frames per second) than the D200, so it ended up as my primary camera.

I was shooting with a Nikon 80-200 2.8 lens (maybe ten years old) - internal focusing, unlike its contemporary cousin the Nikon 70-200 2.8 lens.

I put this on the D2H.

I used my general utility lens 18-200 3.5 lens on my D200, but I wasn't really using this camera for sports.

Phase 2

Remember the indefinite loan on the D2H?

Well, the loan got called in. Someone else needed it.
Fair enough, I had it way past any reasonable loan period.

However, there was a scramble to replace it. I had gotten dependent on it.
Off to the usual sources to find a replacements, stores, online, friends.
First idea was to find the latest-and-greatest. Why not upgrade while I was at it?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The Nikon D5 had just come out. $$$$$$$$$

OK, can't afford it.

What about the D4? it is now obsolete.$$$$$$$$$$

Apparently no one told the vendors that they were carrying stale merchandise, because the price was practically the same.
D4, used? $$$$$$$$$ i.e. $4,000 or more.

OK, go down one generation to the D3
This is better, in the $2,000-$3,000 range. 

Its still money that I didn't have.

OK, back to the original idea - the D2 series -  D2H (known) or its upgrade, the D2X.

I found lots of them on eBay, at prices that I can afford. Now we're talking!
The lower priced items had been heavily used - 250,000 clicks or more.
The work horse of some studio, now to be retired in some hobbyist's home.

Didn't want something worn out or with replacement parts (shutters, in particular)

I found a couple of items that I liked. Was outbid on one, got the second one.

Until the first seller told me that the other bidder reneged so it was now mine.
This was just fine with me, except for the $$$$, since I could use two fast bodies and retire the D200.

So that's how it stands today.

I use two cameras for shooting games

Nikon D2H with prime lens (Sigma 300mm 2.8) - for long, cross field shots

Nikon D2X with 70-200 mm 2.8 lens for closer action (wings running right at me)

Turns out that D200 isn't retired after all.

I use that for my establishing shots - fans, pictures of players with parents, refs, color shots of players entering the field, etc.

To come - discussion of lenses, shooting modes, software change.

Later!

In search of heroes

When people speak of heroes, we use the contemporary meaning - those in service to others - police, firefighters, military service people, doctors, and teachers. Selflessness in action.

For today's post, I'm speaking more of the Joseph Campbell type of hero.
Mythic. Larger than life. Perhaps unreal.

Most of the great stories have a hero at the center. In today's terms that's Luke Skywalker, Indiana Jones, Harry Potter, Superman.
We are drawn to these figures for their ability to rise above the normal, to take on a task that sane people would pull back from.  

Rugby players, like many sports figures, are larger than life as well.
For some reason they go willingly into an endeavor that will almost certainly get them thrown to the ground. Pummeled. Repeatedly. Beyond caution.
They can take this on because they spent countless hours learning to do this safely, or, at least, to minimize the risk. Spontaneous contact in the loose. Choreographed contact in the scrum.

Unlike the solo heros like Superman, they are social beings, accepting that they must bind themselves to others, that they cannot work alone, but must learn their role in the greater assembly of the team. So they spend more time learning the work of cohesive action, working together.

They learn obedience to a hierarchy, that of the on-pitch playmaker, the captain, the coaches, and, above all else, the officials.
Especially the refs. Yes, sir, No, sir. No backtalk, no whining.

All of this applies to any organized sport.
But there is an extra dimension to rugby.
Respect.

You respect other players, helping novice players become better.
You respect the coaches with preparation and timeliness.
You respect your opponent - if you didn't have a worthy opponent, you wouldn't have an epic contest.
You respect the officials; their knowledge of the Laws keeps players safe and provides a fair match.

This creates a code where you can play hard without the danger of real violence.
You thank the opponents for a good game.
You knock someone down then give them a hand back up.
Bloody someone's nose, then wait for them to get cleaned up.

And afterwards, everyone goes out, together, for a beer. Without fear that the passion and intensity of the pitch will ignite in the pub.

It sounds like stories of the knights of old - be responsible for your own skill, don't take advantage, help people less gifted. Play fair.

Mature men. Adults. In control.

Is that a bad thing?

Maybe there's a reason we still tell stories of the Knights of the Round Table.
Or the Lafayette Escadrille. Or Jedi knights.

For now, I'm enjoying the efforts of high schoolers looking to become men (sorry, ladies), college players looking to become adults and club players believing in a dream outside themselves, all while dealing with real life.

Because I don't see a whiner in the group.
I see people who work hard in college, who move across countries to play this role.
For no guaranteed monetary gain.

I'm in.

The Navy-Army game, part I

This is going to be an interesting game.
Both Army and Navy are competing in the Varsity Cup, Division I.
More importantly, my father is coming to the game.
Logistically speaking, I will have to add some steps to my process to make sure he is comfortable while I'm busy shooting.

The game will be held at the US Naval Academy rugby field.
There are two plain fields adjacent to each other. For the last game someone brought in portable bleachers for one side of the field. Given that Navy will be playing Army, I'm expecting more fans than before - busloads from Army - and so more bleachers. So parking will be tighter; arrive early.

Projected temp is 55 degrees and sunny. Meaning high contrast shooting. Shooting on the bleacher side means shooting into a background of trees. Shooting from the other side means getting shots of the bleachers in the shot. Good? Bad? It really depends on where the sun is. Last time it was cloudy with no shadows, so I don't know where the sun will be, and where the shadows will fall.

The plan is to use the THREE cameras with lenses as follows.

Nikon D7200 with 70-200 2.8 lens. Supplemental lens
Nikon D2H with Sigma 300m prime lens, 2.8. Primary shooting setup.
Nikon D200 with 24-70 2.8 lens. Rented lens as a trial.
Monopod for D2H (too heavy for hand-holding),
7200 on a sling on one hip, the D200 on a sling on the other side.
I shouldn't need rain gear.

About the wide-angle lens...
I have rented a 24-70 2.8 zoom lens. This will be used for close-in action, when I'm at the try zone and want to capture all the close action, stuff that is much too close for the 300 prime lens.
EVERY GAME I've had a situation where I've almost been mown down by a wing coming down the side looking for a try. I can only capture so much of that before the he's too close for the camera to focus. So I need something that can take closer shots, closer than the 70mm zoom can take.
So, an experiment with the wide-to-tele zoom.

This will have to go on the Nikon D200, on a sling on my hip.
When using cameras on a sling, I have to cradle the camera on the monopod in the crook of my left arm while I shoot with the right.  Two cameras on the hip? This will take some doing.

The experiment with the cane chair worked very well. I could get some shots pretty low down.
That is, I was closer to the ground so I was looking UP at players, which works well with tackles where the guys are generally looking down and tackling around the waist or torso.
Like in cycling, where the best shots are taken by sitting on the curb, as the guys whiz past with their focus on their front wheel.

That's it for now.

Why rugby? part II

There's the beauty of the sport.

I will be the first to admit that I don't thrill at the contact, bodies crashing to the ground. This doesn't do anything for me.
BUT these moments can be beautiful once you freeze them in a photo.

The players, themselves, are young and fit and confident. At any age.
They are proud of their fitness, their health; it radiates from them.

Golden autumn colors, flying above the pitch for the lineout

Consider the drama of the sport

Massive tackle taking down several players

And the superhuman feats.

Knee braced, cold, wet and muddy in the rain, fighting against the tackle

The private moments that we aren't supposed to see

(lineout exposure, changing shirts)

And finally, the joy of the moment

Soaking wet in the late autumn rain, but winners none the less.

The players play the game just once.
Processing the pictures, I play the game again and again.
And only pass on the good parts.

Then I share it and the players can see what they only felt when they were playing.
And they can share that moment with the others and with their friends and family.
So I'm just a little bit of glue that connects a never-to-be-repeated event to ... forever.
That's worth doing, isn't it?

Why rugby?

Of all the sports played in the USA, why focus on rugby? There are so many other sports that are more accessible - football, basketball, baseball, etc.

Rugby first caught my eye because my niece and nephew played youth rugby. The niece dropped out but the nephew was consumed by it once he progressed to the tackle game. I didn't understand why.
It got more intense as he got older. He transformed himself to be a better player.
Looking around, I found guys all around me who were in this secret rugby club. My cousins in Ireland played and were fervent fans. Why?

Rugby is familiar... and then not.
It has touchdowns (trys) and a big ball kinda like a football, but bigger.
There is a lot of running and plenty of contact. Kicking, too, and a huddle-like set piece called a scrum. Similar in that respect.

But different. 
The obvious difference is the absence of helmets and pads.
Helmets protect against skull fractures; rugby changed the game so you couldn't use the head for tackling.
Pads distribute the force of a tackle; rugby tackles require a low tackle, where you don't have pads anyway.

Rugby doesn't stop. The game is continuous. No timeouts, no yellow flags for commercials. You have to be fit to play rugby for the full eighty minutes.
There are no substitutions. If a player comes out of the game, they are replaced and may not return. No rest and recuperation.
Players play defense and offense. No separate or special teams. Kickers tackle, forwards pass. Everyone runs. 
Coaches prepare the team; the players play the game. No interference from the coaches on the pitch.

This is hardcore. But there's something else, a spirit, an ethos that is the soul of rugby.

Today's plan - Rocky Gorge v Schuylkill Exiles - Part II

OK, followup on Saturday's shoot.

It was cold, as expected. The parka was essential. I used all of my rain gear to protect the cameras.
I didn't have any protection for the monopod, so it got trashed when it got in the way of a rugby player. OK, that's an exaggeration. The player fell into me, I moved, but the monopod didn't.
The bottom leg of the monopod was sheared off. Have written to the manfacturer to see if I can replace just that piece. Spent the rest of the game using the monopod with my cane chair behind the try zone, where it's shortened height suited the cane chair perfectly.

Shooting manual worked a lot better than expected. Once I got the exposure right, I didn't have to change it much. The dark, dreary day resulted in slow-ish shutter speeds, so, in the resulting photos, you see raindrops streak across the frame. Nice! Not expected, not planned for, still nice.

My D7200 continues to give me problems. At times it just stops auto-focusing. The answer is to turn the camera off then on again, which is a nuisance, and results in clusters of images that are not in focus which you have to skip in post. Poo.
It is still not as fast as the much-older D2H, so it is jarring to switch from one to the other.

I used the D2H with the zoom lens, the 7200 with the 300 prime on the monopod.
This was I was able to use the D2H to get some closer shots (the try line) with the zoom lens.
Conclusion? Somehow I need a *third* option, so I can shoot action that is coming at me.
I need to try something like the Nikkor 24-70 2.8 zoom for the really close work.

For post-processing ("post") I have started using Lightroom.
I hate learning something new from scratch just to get the shoot done, but Nikon has changed the software that I used to use so it doesn't work with the D7200 , and the replacement software (Nikon View-I, Capture-D) just can't handle the capacity. So Lightroom it is.

So I have to learn to import the files, add ITPC data during import, rename them to use my convention, etc.

Then learn how to mark the files I want to skip and pick the files I want to focus on.
The process now has me looking at every file (1500+) and marking the rejects. Then delete all the  rejects. From the hard drive (all those failed auto-focus shots).

Go through the files again, mark the ones you want to look again.
Filter things so you just see the marked 'good' shots. (1 star)
Edit (Lightroom "develop") the good shots, mark them as better (2 stars).
Run a slideshow of the 2 star items, while marking the keepers as 3 stars.

The three star shots should be your hero shots.
Export these as jpgs. Move these to the Google drive for safekeeping and sharing.

Things I haven't figured out yet -
how sync with LR on iPad so only the hero shots are copied to the iPad?
I don't want to see the rejects there.