Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

Sports Corner Rules
Sports Corner Resource
  

FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Question about subject isolation.
  
 
mitchel674
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Question about subject isolation.


Another vote for a used Nikon 70-200mm, f2.8

I've been shooting my kids playing soccer for the past 18 years. Separation and your position are key to make your photos stand out. Those little soccer fields are packed together and surrounded by distracting background elements all set out there to ruin your photos. A good, fast (f2.8) lens on FX is your only hope. I shoot my 300mm, f2.8 even on the little soccer fields.

Don't forget, some of the best action when they are young is away from the ball.



May 18, 2017 at 02:16 PM
schlotz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Question about subject isolation.


love the capture Mitchell


May 18, 2017 at 10:05 PM
UCDEngBoss
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Question about subject isolation.


Buy the best quality 70-200 f2.8 you can afford. This should be considered a work horse of a lens for you and not just for sports. This focal length will come in handy for indoor shooting, portraits of family, events, labdscapes, etc. It is a lens that I expect to own for the rest of my life and I use it for much more than its primary use... youth sports.


May 24, 2017 at 04:55 AM
sk66
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Question about subject isolation.


Lauchlan Toal wrote:
Background blur depends on the distance your subject is from the background, the aperture, and the focal length (and the actual diameter of the aperture).

Excellent post Lauchlan, but I think it's worth including subject distance as well... at any given distance the 200/2.8 will have a little less than 1/4 the DOF of the 50/1.8, and the 300/2.8 will have something like 1/6. In fact, I think it might be the most significant factor in this scenario. I.e. as the subject moves farther away and closer to the BG the 50/1.8 gains no advantage...




May 24, 2017 at 01:22 PM
Lauchlan Toal
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Question about subject isolation.


sk66 wrote:
Excellent post Lauchlan, but I think it's worth including subject distance as well... at any given distance the 200/2.8 will have a little less than 1/4 the DOF of the 50/1.8, and the 300/2.8 will have something like 1/6. In fact, I think it might be the most significant factor in this scenario. I.e. as the subject moves farther away and closer to the BG the 50/1.8 gains no advantage...



Good point, thanks Steven. I was going off equal framing rather than equal distance, and totally forgot to talk about the effect of equal distance even though that is indeed important.

The easiest way to think about that might be to figure out how far you'd have to crop to get the same framing with different lens at the same distance, and then apply that ratio to the f-stop of the wider lens. You can also compare the physical aperture size (focal length divided by max aperture), but that's less intuitive.

For example, if you shoot at 200mm f2.8 and crop in to match the 300mm, that's 1.5x crop. Applying that to the f-stop, that cropped 200mm f2.8 is equivalent to a 300mm f4.2.

This is why the Nikon 105mm f1.4 and Sigma 135mm f1.8 give pretty much the exact same image when you crop the 105 to match the 135 - it's a 1.2857x crop, so the 105mm f1.4 looks like a 135mm f1.8 when cropped.

The Brenizier method uses this in reverse - let's say you use that 105mm f1.4, and take several shots and stitch them together to get a 50mm field of view. That's a 0.4762x crop, so it's equivalent to a 50mm f0.6667.



May 24, 2017 at 08:04 PM
mb126
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Question about subject isolation.


Go for a 300 f/2.8 or at the very least get a 1.4 extender for your 70-200. Good sports photography is about quality, not quantity despite what the parents on the sidelines blazing away 1000 frames a game will tell you.


May 25, 2017 at 11:20 AM
Sierra Hotel
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Question about subject isolation.


I'm still shooting on my Nikkor 70-200 VR1 f/2.8 and it gets a large amount of my attention when shooting kids sports from Little League up through HS indoor and outdoor sports. However, even on LL fields it gets real short real quick.I shot for years with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 VR1 and that lens is incredible, and I got some fantastic air show shots coupling it with the Nikon TC20 EII TC. I sold it when I left Alaska 4 years ago, and got pulled back into youth sports with my grandson. I found shooting FX I was well short on lens with the 70-200. So I pulled out the wallet and found a good used 200-400 f/2.8VRI. It is far more capable than I, but gives me what I want in terms of speed and reach.

My recommendation to start out would be any version of the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 with VR, followed by the Nikon 70-200 f/4. I have not used the Tamron or Sigma version, so can't comment on their capabilities, but I do believe in Nikon's quality. Don't forget a TC - it can help on those bright sunny days where you have plenty of light to take the hit on aperture. And as the kids grow and continue to play sports, you'll find your lens collection alongside them ;-)



Jun 12, 2017 at 02:34 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Question about subject isolation.


The OP has said he can get fairly close and feels 200mm is enough.

The Sigma 50-500 would be a very poor choice. Big, heavy, and cumbersome. Also not the best image quality.

The Nikon 300 f2.8 would also be a very poor choice for his shooting requirements. Big, heavy, cumbersome, and expensive. Real overkill for the OP's needs.



Jun 12, 2017 at 05:32 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



mbphoto_2.8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Question about subject isolation.


Blur is a variable of aperture diameter and subject distance only (assuming background to be constant).
A 200/4 has 50mm diameter, like a 100/2, or a 50/1.
Obviously, the field of view will be different at identical subject distance, but the amount of blur should be the same, no?

Also, due to compression, the background will look more blurry with the 200mm, because details appear larger and hence get "blown up" by the bokeh circles.



Jun 12, 2017 at 10:48 PM
vitalishe
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Question about subject isolation.


I had a chance to play with 70-200 VR2 and G2 side by side. My impression was that VR2 had an edge for AF performance for sports. I kept G2 for mostly portraits and work indoors.

If we are talking about depth of field as a measure of isolation it is a function of (1) aperture and (2) the subject size (that fits into e.g. FX frame). Check in DoF calculator that DoF will be the same when shooting at f/2.8 with 50mm from 5 ft and 200mm from 20ft.

Thus, if you can fill the frame with your subject it should not matter which focal length you use (compression being a different issue).

So, as long as you don't need to crop while using 200mm at f/2.8 it is your best option.

Once you need to crop, DoF "changes" similar to using TCs. E.g. cropping to DX size is similar to using 1.4x TC, which reduces your maximum aperture by one stop.



Jun 13, 2017 at 04:53 AM
runamuck
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Question about subject isolation.


Nikon or Tamron 70-300 VR lens. The bird was about 12 feet away. You CAN blow the background if you know what you are doing. About 300MM FL. I have another like this shot at f7.1 and the Dof on that one was about a half inch.




  NIKON D300    300mm    f/8.0    1/500s    560 ISO    0.0 EV  




Jun 13, 2017 at 05:45 AM
Vcook
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Question about subject isolation.


runamuck wrote:
Nikon or Tamron 70-300 VR lens. The bird was about 12 feet away. You CAN blow the background if you know what you are doing. About 300MM FL. I have another like this shot at f7.1 and the Dof on that one was about a half inch.



He wants it for field sports. You're not going to get much subject isolation with a 70-300 shooting field sports. I've done it, it will produce nice photos but not much of what he's looking for. Birding at close distance and long focal lengths is not a fair comparison.



Jun 13, 2017 at 01:36 PM
Fish On
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Question about subject isolation.


Take a look at the Sigma 120-300/2.8


Jun 13, 2017 at 04:22 PM
CW100
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Question about subject isolation.


Vcook wrote:
He wants it for field sports. You're not going to get much subject isolation with a 70-300 shooting field sports. I've done it, it will produce nice photos but not much of what he's looking for. Birding at close distance and long focal lengths is not a fair comparison.


I agree with that! it's easy to "blow the background" with birds ..... but sports - you're gonna need something larger or longer


www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless



Jun 13, 2017 at 05:21 PM
Vcook
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Question about subject isolation.


Fish On wrote:
Take a look at the Sigma 120-300/2.8


This is what I use for my kids youth sports. Even with sideline access, or smaller baseball fields, I still want for more reach at times but for now it's the right answer for me on FX.



Jun 13, 2017 at 07:20 PM
1      
2
       end






FM Forums | Sports Corner | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password