I don't know how to phrase this question so I don't get a bunch of questions asking for clarification but I was trying to set reasonable expectations for the shots I take of my son who is currently playing basketball in dimly lit elementary schools. What I mean is, if I have a bunch of OOF images is that all user error or in dark gyms, even if I do everything right, I can't expect a high hit ratio. My is only 5 so the action isn't hard to track but I still find shooting in these conditions challenging.
Yesterday I shot with my Mark IV and 85mm 1.4 (ISO 800-1250, SS around 1/1000) for the entire game. I took about 500 shots and kept about 100. These are all by no means peak action shots, but they are nicely focused and would work for a photo book. I did have a bunch of shots that simply weren't in focus and some where the focus was on the defender directly behind my son. Looking at the focus point afterwards, even though it appeared the point was on my target the focus was behind the action or just not there at all.
I know with practice things will improve, but from your experience what is a successful day on the court?
That is about 20% keeper which is not to bad for someone that does not shoot often. Granted, I am only guessing that you don't shoot sports often.
If your son is only 5 you might wanna decrease your SS to about 1/400th and open your lens a little more. with a larger DoF your keeper rate should jump.
Canon doesn't make an 85mm 1.4 lens, so it's either the 1.2 or 1.8. Regardless, what mode are you shooting in and what is your aperture? There are many, many threads on this general topic of focusing to maximize sharp action photos, and all of them eventually reach the point where it becomes clear that technique (including while you shoot and your post-processing) is everything. As well, the process of shooting action is a complex one with many moving parts, so it will be difficult for anyone to help you much without knowing a good deal more about your settings and approach to shooting.
If you're shooting with a shutter speed of 1/1000 and never going above ISO 1250, it's hard to think of the gym as dimly lit. I'm shooting in an NBA arena at ISO 3200 and I'm lucky if I can get away with 1/1000. So again I'll say that if you want more than feedback on what's a decent keeper rate, you're going to have to provide more information, and maybe post a few shots.
Agree, your keeper rate is not bad. Actually the gym you shot is not that awful, if you are shooting wide open at 1.4 and getting 1/1000 SS at ISO 1250. I often shoot at gyms with a 50mm 1.4 at ISO 1600 and get only 1/500.
SS needed depends on the speed of the action. Older players move faster. HS requires faster SS than, say, shooting six-year-olds.
Post some images...there are some amazing sports photographers here who are often happy to provide C&C to sports shooters looking to improve their technique.
Sorry meant 85mm 1.8. Also had the 50mm 1.4 with me but didn't use it. I can post some pics tomorrow. As for settings I was using servo (obviously), used both AF expansion and single AF center points, priority to tracking, ISO as previously stated, and all shots wide open. Taking mostly short bursts trying to catch good moments. I was positioned at the corners of the court along the baseline. Also using back button focus.
The gym in question from yesterday had a row of windows near the ceiling on one end of the court. So when my son was shooting at the end with the windows the light was actually pretty good and I got more in-focus shots. When he was shooting at the non-window end, everything was a lot darker and shots were not as good.
I will get some pics posted tomorrow. Thx in advance. Things were so much easier during football season!
If you were shooting wide open, I stand corrected. The settings I shared are at f/2.8 so that's a full 1-1/3 stops less light you're talking about. I'd recommend stopping down your aperture and raising your ISO. As Dave said, a relatively shallow depth of field isn't going to help you much. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot the 1DIV at ISO 4000 or 5000 if that's what it takes, but a shutter speed of 1/500 probably will be plenty for the action you're seeing. Also, give some serious thought to whether the AF expansion might be contributing to your focus shifting to a defender (or any other target).
Mark IV and 85mm 1.4 (ISO 800-1250, SS around 1/1000)
I'd say go to about 1/640-1/800, f2.8 and whatever ISO gets you to proper exposure. the 85 1.8 is a great lens, one of the few Canon lenses I miss using (I still have mine, but I'm a Nikon shooter now).
Try the different focus modes to see which ones work best for you. And think about where you are shooting from in relation to the action so you can work an angle that will help you track your subjects better.
If you're looking at a ballpark figure of the percentage of in-focus shots of the main subject, then I agree 20% is something you'll need to work on with practice, especially considering that you're primarily focusing on just one child. That will get much better with experience. All suggestions up to this point are valid, but I can't overemphasize the point of shooting, shooting, shooting more, and shooting more. The keeper rate will increase naturally just by doing that.
Thanks all! I am soaking this all in and can't wait to get out there and shoot, and shoot and shoot some more. Just one bit of clarification - I got a lot more than 20% of my shots in focus. After deleting OOF shots, no-action moments and duplicates or shots slightly worse than ones I was keeping, I ended up keeping 20% of the day's shots to work on for a my son's photobook.
jakita33 wrote:
Thanks all! I am soaking this all in and can't wait to get out there and shoot, and shoot and shoot some more. Just one bit of clarification - I got a lot more than 20% of my shots in focus. After deleting OOF shots, no-action moments and duplicates or shots slightly worse than ones I was keeping, I ended up keeping 20% of the day's shots to work on for a my son's photobook.
That's pretty good then. It's tough to evaluate a true "keeper" rate. What you call a keeper, might not be a keeper for someone else, so it's a lot less scientific. Whereas, OOF is OOF. That's a lot more empirical in nature.
What you call a keeper, might not be a keeper for someone else, so it's a lot less scientific.
Great Point. I can go out and shoot a hockey game for a local University and they want EVERYTHING from peak action to player "on ice Portraits". My keeper rate for them might be 75-100 images for one game. If I were to cut it down based on my personal thoughts I would be around the 30-35 image rate......
Keeper and sellable for me is virtually the same thing. So my keeper rate for an event might range in the high 90's depending on the sport. If I have a face, if it's exposed properly and in focus, the BG is good, it's a "keeper". Out of 1000 images taken, I may post 95% of those. Out of those 950 images though, 50-100 are culled as "second lookers"... basically those that go above and beyond a face and the technicals. There's either peak action, or a certain look, or something special going on. From that 50-100, I'll cull maybe 10-20 of what goes into a "BEST" folder. And from there, 8-15 might wind up in an FM post if I choose to post them.
interesting paul I dont feel quite so bad when I see how many I keep now. In my mind I had this vision that every picture you took was like the ones you post......I'm sure many of your throw aways would be keepers for me though!
950 is small. When We do regionals in baseball, it's not uncommon to have over 2000 shots per six inning game and We will shoot the same team six times in one week. And its still not enough sometimes. I can't sell what I don't have. Regionals is a unique bird though.
Good lord. I'm assuming you guys are tagging them to make it easier? Not questioning your workflow, I've just found it hard to sell with that many images.
Paul, you post 950 shots on the web? That'll be one heck of a gallery to click through!
Trevorma wrote:
That was kind of my thought too....... some parents HATE digging through a ton of photos.
950 is small. As in really small. Last month, I posted an event with over 60,000 photos shot over just one weekend. It's all a matter of organization. In a matter of 6 clicks, any parent can be viewing photos of their child, they just need a couple little pieces of information that they should be able to answer very easily, such as "Boy or girl?", "What level?", "What gym?", and they've found them.
Easy peasy.
And for the OP, the posted photos seemed very good, but they're quite small. Care to repost them at 700-900 pixels on the long end?
