p.1 #1 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Been shooting sports for almost 2 years now, and it's probably close to 50% of my workload at this point. Haven't had any complaints from the companies I work with about my results, but regardless, I'm always looking for ways to improve. So, for outdoor field stuff (soccer, baseball, football), I use a Tamron 150-500 on a monopod. Unfortunately, this makes it awkward/basically impossible to switch cameras when the action gets too close to use that lens and there's no room to back up. So, I'm wondering if anyone has a workflow to quick-switch cameras when situations like these arise.
Right now, I'm mostly shooting baseball. I'll be around 1st and 3rd by the dugouts so I can get good reach from the batter, across to the other dugout, and to the outfield. My job is mainly to get every hitter hitting, some pitching, whatever action occurs, and candids. Unfortunately, I'm too close to get much happening at 1st and 3rd beyond sliding, since the players are too tall for 150mm at such close distances. My 28-75 or even 70-180 would get the shot without issue, but trying to balance the 150-500/monopod combo (also on a shoulder strap) while shooting another camera is awkward at best, and spending the time to put it on the ground 100% misses the shot.
I've been thinking of rigging up a mount for a 2nd camera using cine support gear and rods, but that seems like overkill. But it IS one way to switch cameras in a split second if needed. Would also help with closer candids for the same reason (fast switching). I tried using a dual camera strap to hold a 2nd camera, but all it did was make me fumble around with the 150-500/monopod (same as without), and the extra weight and weight imbalance wore me down on 12hr days. I only use a strap on the 150-500/monopod to prevent it from falling. There's no actual weight being supported 99.9% of the time.
So, what does everyone here do for situations like these?
p.1 #2 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
I'm not following some of your post. Mainly, you balance the 150-500 monopod combo with a shoulder strap? I have used Optech Pro-Loop and most recently the Peak Design quick-release straps and remove the strap completely from the body/lens that is attached to a monopod. It just gets in the way.
Basically, have the body/lens that is NOT on the monopod around your neck or over your shoulder ready to grab at a moments notice. When you need to, loop one arm around the monopod, turn the lens over your shoulder and grab the second body. It would be easier to show you than explain in text. Maybe the video I'm including here might help. It's an older video and I should probably update it, but it might give you something to think about.
You can see what I'm talking about at about the 1:20 mark in this video. Even though I'm on my knees in the video, you can do that same thing standing.
p.1 #3 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm doing, though I'm standing to quickly get out of the way of everything that's flying toward me. Literally saw 2 players behind me on Fri get hit in the head with 2-1 practice throws that went awry. Guess it's their fault for not paying attention, but I dodged them. Soccer's similar, but the ball generally isn't as deadly! 😅
Guess my problem is that the camera wants to whip around endlessly when it's on my shoulder, and the monopod wants to capsize (turn upside down) when it's tilted back and not held in my hand. I do have to take team photos with the 28-75 camera, so the monopod camera is already on my shoulder when I do, and it just has a mind of its own, even under calm conditions. Maybe if I drop a clamped weight on the bottom?
p.1 #4 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Most people that shoot a lot of sports use a two or three body set up with either a two camera harness of their choice with a long lens on a monopod. The two cameras on the side are kind of counterweights. Folks that use two have one on a strap and the other on a monopd. it sounds like a matter of finding a good position for your long lens on a monopod when not using it and using the shorter lens. No doubt it can be a little awkward juggling a long lens on a monopod when it is not in use. The crook of the neck over a shoulder is my go to if I have to hold it. Often I am kneeling or sitting on the ground so it is easy to lay by my side when not in use.
p.1 #6 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Llewtwo wrote:
Most people that shoot a lot of sports use a two or three body set up with either a two camera harness of their choice with a long lens on a monopod. The two cameras on the side are kind of counterweights. Folks that use two have one on a strap and the other on a monopd. it sounds like a matter of finding a good position for your long lens on a monopod when not using it and using the shorter lens. No doubt it can be a little awkward juggling a long lens on a monopod when it is not in use. The crook of the neck over a shoulder is my go to if I have to hold it. Often I am kneeling or sitting on the ground so it is easy to lay by my side when not in use....Show more →
Yeah, I do the dual harness thing for hockey and basketball, since the 70-180 and 28-75 cameras aren't far off in weight. Especially with a solid aluminum palm grip added to the 28-75 camera. It's fine there since the 70-180 is featherweight, so it can be put down to my side and picked up quick enough to make switching back and forth between cameras all day a non-issue. The hulking 150-500 on a monopod, though, needs more thought put into relocating and stabilizing while shooting the other camera to keep it from spiraling out of control. I tried the 150-500 on the dual strap, but it was still too flailing to quickly put down. Heavy thing, too.
One of the issues I'm facing could be the strap itself, mounted to the bottom of the camera/battery grip. That means I can't turn the setup backwards, because the strap doesn't reach far enough. There's no strap lug on the monopod, though, so the camera is currently my only attachment point.
p.1 #7 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
carl_g wrote:
For soccer I usually run 3.
one 400
one 70-200
one wide angle(14-24), either remote behind the goal or sitting on the ground next to me "just in case"
Yeah, depending on how the field is divided, I sometimes use the 70-180 for soccer. That opens me up to using my dual harness to add a 28-75. But half and full field stuff needs the full 500 (and beyond).
p.1 #8 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
The 150-500 is a big lens but most of the 400 f2.8 lenses are heavier I believe. I have never used a strap on my monopod and it seems like it would create more problems than it solves. Yes, there is some risk of dropping it but I have never dropped the body and lens on a monopod except one time in nongame situation where I carried too much while unlatching a gate. I just usually turn it and hold it on my neck or shoulder while I am using the other lenses and if I am sitting or kneeling I will lay it down quite often. I run a lens coat on all my long lenses to avoid nicks and scratches.
p.1 #9 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Llewtwo wrote:
The 150-500 is a big lens but most of the 400 f2.8 lenses are heavier I believe. I have never used a strap on my monopod and it seems like it would create more problems than it solves. Yes, there is some risk of dropping it but I have never dropped the body and lens on a monopod except one time in nongame situation where I carried too much while unlatching a gate. I just usually turn it and hold it on my neck or shoulder while I am using the other lenses and if I am sitting or kneeling I will lay it down quite often. I run a lens coat on all my long lenses to avoid nicks and scratches....Show more →
I've already trashed around $6K in gear from dropping, so yeah, straps for me!
p.1 #10 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
150-500 is not a big lens. I am trying to understand your original issue.
Are you having a problem switching between your "Big" lens and a wider one on the fly?
Are you sitting down?
p.1 #11 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
carl_g wrote:
150-500 is not a big lens.
I think that's a bit presumptuous. We don't know the OP's abilities. A 4-pound lens certainly isn't large compared to any of the big whites/blacks from Canon, Nikon or Sony, but comparatively speaking, it's bigger than many lenses out there.
p.1 #12 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Caleb Williams wrote:
I think that's a bit presumptuous. We don't know the OP's abilities. A 4-pound lens certainly isn't large compared to any of the big whites/blacks from Canon, Nikon or Sony, but comparatively speaking, it's bigger than many lenses out there.
OK...What does ability have to do with size? And what's your point other than stating the obvious? I was going to try and help based on the OP's feedback to my question. There are plenty of people running a 2/3 camera set up for field sports using a 400 2.8 prime as their long lens. There are ways to do it with much bigger equipment compared to a Tamron 150-500.
p.1 #13 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
I shoot with two cameras for these very sports. I have a Canon 100-300 (with 1.4 converter) on monopod and then have a short lens / body combo strapped over shoulder (cross body actually). From there, I set the short lens up with focus on shutter button (instead of back button) so that I can switch quickly if action heading super close. As example - in third base well and play headed into third, I hold monopod camera with left hand, grab short lens from right side of body and shoot with only right hand. The more you do this, the better your reaction time will be. Just have to get the muscle memory going.
Also, I often set up a single remote camera for these sports. Baseball can vary (maybe home plate, maybe third base, just depends on how I feel and where I can set up); soccer (behind goal) and basketball (on floor or mounted to basket stansion).
Just have the second camera and force yourself into switching when play comes your way. You will build the reaction time and get it down before too long.
p.1 #14 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
I shot lacrosse for 3 local universities for 15 years! I used a Cotton Carrier multi camera vest and it worked very well. Yes I did have a monopod with me also.
I have seen many photographers at sports events using a few different kinds of multi-camera vest.
Get the one that you feel most comfortable with and does NOT restrict body movement with cameras "bouncing" around in their "holsters", straps et al!
Good luck!
Dan
p.1 #15 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Most of the time, I take two bodies/lenses. Nikon 200 f2 for low light which works on a D850 since I can crop deep and still hold resolution. 100-400 on Sony A1 for more range of reach - but truly hate shooting at 16000 ISO. But it’s 30fps on the A1. I can opt for a 70-200 f2.8, which I’ve done also. I’m a PJ sports shooter so I’m in the end zone of the team I’m covering because our goal is scoring shots - and sidelines are crowded with players, cheerleaders, staff. The f2 is super heavy and attached to a monopod always. I alternate by setting the f2 down perpendicular to a padded goal post or next to the filming crew - but I’m shooting at schools where I know all the people there - and I’m media credentialed. ADs and high school associations are cracking down on field access so things are better with fewer parents allowed on the field now. So, alternating gear is easier. The 100-400 never leaves my side and I hook the lens foot on my waist pack between plays so I don’t have constant weight tension on my shoulders. The 200 f2 is a truly magic lens - the highest quality lens in my Nikon kit.
Background separation is a huge requirement for me but so are fps. My D850 maxes at 9fps. It pains me now that I’m considering letting that kit go to get the Sigma 200 f2, which would jump my fps to 14 or 15 with my A1.
The lack of light at these high school games is a huge PITA. The current denoise software is the only way I can keep going.
I do have a 300 2.8 Nikon I could use but it’s just as big of a beast as the f2 and much more limiting as players get closer to the end zone. I use it more for daylight soccer.
I know people love super long lenses but like I said, scoring is my main objective so shorter lenses are fine for me. Also, since I’m credentialed media, I’m held to conduct standards such as nit interfering with refs or players (can’t be in player boxes), so I’ve created a system of operating that achieves my objectives of capturing peak game moments.
p.1 #16 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
pasblues wrote:
Most of the time, I take two bodies/lenses. Nikon 200 f2 for low light which works on a D850 since I can crop deep and still hold resolution. 100-400 on Sony A1 for more range of reach - but truly hate shooting at 16000 ISO. But it’s 30fps on the A1. I can opt for a 70-200 f2.8, which I’ve done also. I’m a PJ sports shooter so I’m in the end zone of the team I’m covering because our goal is scoring shots - and sidelines are crowded with players, cheerleaders, staff. The f2 is super heavy and attached to a monopod always. I alternate by setting the f2 down perpendicular to a padded goal post or next to the filming crew - but I’m shooting at schools where I know all the people there - and I’m media credentialed. ADs and high school associations are cracking down on field access so things are better with fewer parents allowed on the field now. So, alternating gear is easier. The 100-400 never leaves my side and I hook the lens foot on my waist pack between plays so I don’t have constant weight tension on my shoulders. The 200 f2 is a truly magic lens - the highest quality lens in my Nikon kit.
Background separation is a huge requirement for me but so are fps. My D850 maxes at 9fps. It pains me now that I’m considering letting that kit go to get the Sigma 200 f2, which would jump my fps to 14 or 15 with my A1.
The lack of light at these high school games is a huge PITA. The current denoise software is the only way I can keep going.
I do have a 300 2.8 Nikon I could use but it’s just as big of a beast as the f2 and much more limiting as players get closer to the end zone. I use it more for daylight soccer.
I know people love super long lenses but like I said, scoring is my main objective so shorter lenses are fine for me. Also, since I’m credentialed media, I’m held to conduct standards such as nit interfering with refs or players (can’t be in player boxes), so I’ve created a system of operating that achieves my objectives of capturing peak game moments....Show more →
Interesting perspective here. I recently attempted to photograph my first HS football game and the lighting was terrible. But I was also shooting a Z 70-200 with a 2.0TC and my exposure was not great. I needed th extra two stops a 2.8 lens would get me. But using a shorter f2 lens is an interesting idea. I felt like I could definitely use a 600mm lens when they were further away, but the 140mm perspctive ended up getting too tight, but I was on the sideline at about the 10 yard line or the goaline, not in the endzone.
p.1 #17 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
Vorpahl wrote:
Interesting perspective here. I recently attempted to photograph my first HS football game and the lighting was terrible. But I was also shooting a Z 70-200 with a 2.0TC and my exposure was not great. I needed th extra two stops a 2.8 lens would get me. But using a shorter f2 lens is an interesting idea. I felt like I could definitely use a 600mm lens when they were further away, but the 140mm perspctive ended up getting too tight, but I was on the sideline at about the 10 yard line or the goaline, not in the endzone.
I've been experiementing with the potential of using the Siggy 200mm f2.
Question, then, would a 400mm f2.8 done a better job in the following example?
Here's an uncropped and cropped version of the same capture:
p.1 #18 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
but I was on the sideline at about the 10 yard line or the goaline, not in the endzone
IMO, sidelines are a messy position. There's not enough room to back away without then having a line of people in the way of your shots - and there's just too many people on the sidelines. Some of the issue for me is that I have a HS association media pass - and that comes with stringent rules of conduct for having field access at games. I have to stay clear of interfering with any of those participating in the game activities so I have chosen the least likely place where that could happen. It's also, however, the most likely position for capturing players facing my direction as they advance to their scoring goal. I also have the most room to back up as needed. I mean, it's just something to run through your mind and maybe experiment with.
I learned long ago not to worry about the shots my lenses can't reach. It's just a pointless consideration. Especially, like in soccer. If they are on the total opposite end of the field from me, I'd have to consider is it worth lugging all that weight just to relieve a FOMO?
There's tons of activity around a goal area and that's where you get the scores and the celebratory shots.
As far as your comment about choosing the 70-200 f2.8 with the 2X - I think you still showed yourself an important experience, which is choosing gear based on reach vs exposure choice in low light.
So, what I'm offering as a consideration is to think about shooting for better exposure potential while going for plays that are within the reach of your 70-200mm f2.8 lens.
If you take a look at the 180 degree field of view you have from the end zone, you can see that you have a much less obstructed and more even camera to subject distance potential than you have from a sideline. From the sideline, you are either going to be really close to the subject or far away from the subject if they end up on either side line during the plays - whcih they often do. From the end zone, you can see pretty evenly the sidelines and the middle of the field on a lot more plays.
I don't remember if I ran the following through any denoise software - but at f2, I was only at 5000 ISO. But, I'm shooting from the end zone area. The first image is is from before I got the Siggy so it's with the Nikkor 200mm f2 VRII.
The second photo demonstrates an end zone position with a 70-200mm f2.8 - which I apparently accidentally bumped to f3.2 for that shot. I did have to run that through some denoise software but, still, the point is that from that end zone position, the players are more likely to be running towards me in a more peak action pursuit towards their end zone. Does any of what I'm sharing seem helpful?
If you had been shooting with your 70-200mm f2.8 with a 2X on it - do you feel you would have been better off without that 2X - given what I'm showing you? Also, there's that 1/800 SS - which was risky - how do we feel about being flexible when we're up against the wall on exposure?
NIKON D850200.0 mm f/2.0 lens200mmf/2.01/1250s5000 ISO+0.3 EV
ILCE-9FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS lens200mmf/3.21/800s8000 ISO0.0 EV
p.1 #19 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
So, here are some shots I got with the 70-200 with the TC-2.0. I was at f5.6 with an ISO of 12800 and I couldn't speed up my shutter speed any more since I was already around a stop under exposed at shutter speeds of 1/500 and 1/800. I liked having the reach, I'm just wondering if the sharpness suffered because of the shutter speed or the TC. This scenario is why I'm considering picking up a used 400 2.8G and having one camera with that and another with the 70-200 2.8 without the TC. I just do this more as a hobby, to get good at this to get photos of my kids since they are getting older and into HS sports (soccer). I took it out the following day and took some test photos of one of my kid's soccer games and the results were decent, but it looks, to me, that some of the details, like the hair, is getting mushy. There is slight haloing around letters and skin but not at an unacceptable level.
p.1 #20 · Anyone Shooting Outdoor Sports with 2 Cameras?
The 70-200 + 2.0 TC adds 2 stops so widest open is 5.6. Some were shot at f8 which is actually 3 stops. I would set the camera in manual to force f5.6 which would lower the necessary ISO. You should be able to get by with 1/1600 with the conditions seen in the soccer photos which would also lower the necessary ISO.
In general 2.0 TCs degrade IQ (usually 1.4 TCs aren't too bad). High amount of cropping further degrades sharpness. Action sports photography, especially under HS lit fields, requires fast glass i.e. 2.8 or better. Put a 400 2.8 on your Z8 and you will immediately recognize why it's the goto glass for those who make their living shooting sports.
