Part 3 – The Conclusion
I want to start this last post with a little setting thing that can make a big difference when shooting at these events:
Selecting the proper Auto Focus Setting –
I’d like to start with a little story:
When I first started shooting my daughter’s dance competitions, I would try and setup in the best position I could, lock in my settings, and would go to work clicking away wildly as I tried to grab as many shots in that short 3:30 song I could. As I was shooting, everything looked fine through the viewfinder and I didn’t want to take time to see what was happening on the preview screen. Staring at your screen takes too long and you’ll miss stuff, I promise. So, I thought because everything looked ok in the viewfinder, “Yep, got them, I’m good”. Walked in the house after the meet, chest held high, thinking that I’ve got all these epic shots only to find out…nope…80% of them were out of focus. Imagine how I felt when I reviewed the photos. I’m supposed to know what I am doing and here I botched a lot of them up. That’s a punch right in the….erm…stomach. It’s especially frustrating when your daughter is harassing you to edit them so she can share them with her friends and looks at you and says “That’s it?”…I mean, I’m not the greatest photographer to ever walk into a gymnasium…and I’m sure I never will be, but I know my way around a camera and I think I do an alright job.
So, how did this happen? There are always things I could improve on, but, because I was focused more on assuming I knew what I was doing, I failed to do such a little thing as flipping a switch to “Continuous Focus”.
Since I spend most of my time shooting portraits, I left my camera in Single-Point Auto Focus (I’m going to try and use generic terms for those that don’t shoot with a Nikon). Now this wasn’t on purpose, it was just because I was not used to selecting different focus modes, despite watching how many hours of videos on YouTube (Learning point…just because you watch it, does not mean you will remember to do it…practice, practice, practice). I don’t really do action shots like this, and when I am shooting any action, I am in control and I can just make people jump around as much as I want until I get the shot…(ahhhh it’s nice to be on the other side of the lens). In dance competitions, much like every sport, you get one chance to get “The Shot” and if you miss it, it’s not coming back.
So what settings do I use right now? Currently when shooting anything action related, I use AF-C with D 9 selected (for people who shoot Nikon). For those who aren’t Nikon shooters, this is Continuous Auto-focus meaning the camera is always adjusting focus to compensate for your subject’s movement. The D 9 tells the camera I am only interested in using with the center 9 focus points to achieve focus. Why wouldn’t I want to use all of them? Because I found that the larger the range I used, the more inaccuracies the camera had, like focusing on the lines on the gym floor, or the paint lines in the hockey ice. Your camera looks for contrasty stuff and since the floor is not moving, it’s easier for the camera to lock on to those objects which will result in out of focus images. By limiting where the camera is looking, you will achieve a greater success rate than just leaving it on “Auto” to have it try and figure it out. I don’t shoot on the automatic selection where the camera decides what focus setting to use. It can get tricked into thinking your subject is stationary when it’s not and will select the wrong mode that may result in an out of focus shot. I have used 3D-Tracking (on Nikon, I don’t know what other brands call theirs….or if they have something like that, probably depends on your model) but I get a mixed bag of results. I find that particular setting is best when you have plain backgrounds that aren’t busy…like shooting birds in the sky…so yeah I don’t use it often.
The other thing to keep in mind is that auto focus is not 100% accurate. It’s hard to find a definitive number, but I have seen reports that auto focus can be off 10-20% of the time (based on camera, system, and a bunch of other factors). So if we split the difference and say focus is off 15% of the time, that means your camera may only produce “in focus” shots 85% of the time. Of course, the more light there is the easier it is for the camera to grab focus, but now we are shooting in low light and the focus system has to work harder to lock in. I am sure we have all noticed when the camera “hunts” for focus. That’s where the lens is moving back and for a bunch of times and you get frustrated because it keeps going in and out of focus without allowing you to take the shot. So, no, you’re not alone, and no you’re not going to get 100% of your shots in focus. I want you to know I don’t get 100% of my shots in focus, nor do professional photographers get 100% of their shots in focus. That’s just the way it is.
Lenses –
First of all, the intent of this write up was to help you with what you already had. That being said, I wanted to give some direction, if you want to upgrade, which way I would go. I have had my fair share of lenses over the years and these are ones I have either used or know people who have. I’m not throwing these out there “just because” nor do I receive and monetary compensation for recommendations (thought I would like too). Anyway, let’s talk about spending your hard earned money.
These choices are just my opinion. Maybe there are better options out there, but I am basing this on my experiences or experiences from people I know and trust. Believe it or not, most of my photos are taken between 90mm – 135mm. I don’t have some super zoom lens that makes all this magic happen for me. It’s a combination of knowing where to be (which I still miss sometimes, believe me) and being familiar with your lens. I try my best to guestimate what it would look like zoomed all the way out and all the way in. Sometimes I am wrong, it happens. Either way, I tried to suggest lenses that would get you into that range. If I suggested one that falls out of that range, rest assured there is a reason.
Pro Level Lenses –
Why not start at the top right?
So, my first recommendation would be a 70-200mm F/2.8. Price is from $1500 - $2100 depending on brand. I recommend making sure it has some type of VR, IS, VC, OS, whatever the manufacturer’s vibration reduction system is. No, you don’t have to have it and yes it can save you some money. I promise you’re going to miss it later on, trust me. This is of course if you have the money to spend and are trying to decide if you really want the vibration reduction or whatever.
As mentioned, I have the Nikon 70-200 F/2.8 VR II and it works darn well. I use a full-frame camera so what I see is 70mm-200mm. If you are using a “dx” camera or “crop sensor”, things look a little different.
Due to the smaller sensor size in a “crop” sensor there is a side effect of using a full-frame lens like the one above. That 70-200mm lens works more like a 105-300mm lens (if you’re on a Nikon) or a 112-320mm (if you are on a Canon). This “crop factor” helps bring the action closer to you…but when you zoom out, it’s very tough to get wide shots…even on my full-frame camera I have had to stich images together to get the whole group in, but you have to decide which is more important…or buy a second body and a wide angle lens.
These lenses also work really well with a teleconverter (see below). It can give you a little extra reach without sacrificing light/image quality too much. I say too much, because there is a small amount of image degradation when using a teleconverter (again more on this below).
If you are really far away all the time, you can start looking at the 300mm lenses. A 300mm F/2.8 lens will run you around $6,000. I don’t know about you, but this is out of my price range. There are a few 300mm F/4 lenses around that work very well, but at the sacrifice of losing a stop of light. Those retail around $2,000. Long lenses are expensive.
Mid-Level Lenses –
So if you can do without vibration reduction or a small loss of light, there are a few great choices.
Tamron 70-200mm F/2.8 DI LD IF SP Macro – Tamron made a bunch of these without Vibration Compensation (VC) that were a great less expensive alternative to the “Name Brand” 70-200 f/2.8. They can be found used for around $700.
Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 APO EX DG HSM Macro II – Another great bargain lens, this Sigma this also does not come with Optical Stabilization (OS). These can be found used for around $600
Nikon Nikkor 80-200mm F/2.8 D Macro ED – Nikon has an 80-200 F/2.8 that is every bit as good at the 70-200 F/2.8, but does not have VR. They can be found from $500 (for the older “push/pull” zoom style) through about $1300 for the newer version.
50mm F/1.8 Prime lenses – Fast, Sharp, and cheap. No, you don’t get zoom, other than moving your position, but these lenses belong in everyone’s bag. Used, you can get them for around $100 - $125. Brand new they are around $220. On a crop body the lens acts more like a 75mm (Nikon) or an 80mm (Canon). These are great low light lenses. If I got one of these used, I’d drop a 1.4x teleconverter (see below) on it to make the lens a 105mm (Nikon) or a 112mm (Canon), but it also depends on where you are going to be sitting in relation to the action you are trying to capture. If you’re up front, there isn’t a need. I know when I was shooting my daughter’s volleyball games, I used the 50mm straight up with no issues. If I needed to, I cropped a little later when I was post-processing.
Teleconverters – These look like mini lenses that go in between your lens and your camera body. They come in a variety of magnifications, but if you research, most don’t recommend anything over the 1.4x. The tradeoff for lost light and drop in image quality on anything over the 1.4x does not make it worthwhile. Don’t bother with the ones that screw into the end of the lens, they suck. Don’t put these on the kit lens that came with your camera, it will suck and probably won’t autofocus. These were designed for high quality lenses that were F/2.8 and below.
The 1.4x adds that amount of “extra” reach on the lens. So if I put my 1.4x on my 70 – 200mm lens, the lens now becomes a 98 – 240mm lens. It does steal some light, and instead of shooting F/2.8, I would be shooting around F/4, but, if I were to put it on say an 85mm, then I get a 119mm F/2.8 lens…not shabby at all.
If you decide to get one, make sure you get a high quality one. Not all of them work like they advertise. I have a Tamron version I got off eBay a long time ago for $100 and it works pretty alright. Most people recommend you get the brand that matches your camera body for best reliability and I agree. I have had some quirks with mine, but I hardly ever really use it. Steer clear of the 2x or above, they just aren’t worth it.
85mm F/1.8 Prime lenses – Fast, sharp, but not as cheap. Awesome portrait lens…I haven’t gotten one yet only because I have my 70-200 F/2.8. Retails for around $500 brand new, or $350ish used. On a crop sensor camera you get a 127.5mm (Nikon) and a 136mm (Canon). Another great lens for low light, but you don’t get zoom. If you want more reach, they are still a great value.
Nikon/Canon 70-200mm f/4 VR/IS – Here we are sacrificing 1 stop of light because we went from a f/2.8 lens to an F/4, but we did gain our stabilization back and at a price tag of $1400 brand new. Still every bit as sharp as its counterpart 70-200 F/2.8, given the choice I’d probably buy one of the Tamron’s or Sigma’s with VC/OS if I were buying new and only had $1500 to spend. Used they can be found used around $800 - $900. Not a bad price, but you have to decide if the VR is worth it or not. Given the choice, I would probably get one of the Tamron’s or Sigma’s F/2.8 lenses first without VC/OS.
Tokina AT-X Pro SV DU 28-70mm F/2.8 – You can find these used for around $250. On a crop sensor Nikon it would be the equivalent of a 42 – 105mm, on a Canon 45 – 112mm. It’s not going to pull you into the action as some of the other lenses, but to have a zoom that is an F/2.8, it’s a start.
Camera Body -
Shoot with what you have. If I can pull off volleyball shots with a Nikon D80 that is now almost 11 years old and you have a camera that has been made in the past 5 years (which a lot of us do), you can do this. If you have made it through this entire post and have not yet gotten a DSLR body or are thinking of upgrading the one you have - please check out:
https://www.reviews.com/digital-camera/dslr/
The information they provide is solid and definitely worth a look...especially for those of you just starting out down this path. I think the best part about reviews.com is they cut right to the chase. They don't ramble on for pages about specs that most people don't care to understand. Heck, they even have a 30 sec review for those who really want to streamline their reading. Reviews.com has done a great job making everything very easy to understand for those who don't speak "Photographer", so take some time to paruse.
Closing thoughts –
Honestly, the biggest piece of advice I can give is: practice, practice, practice. There is no way around it. You’re going to just keep getting better and better. You’ll learn where you can push your camera and when to stop. It’s going to help you get those images you want.
If you really want to get into it hardcore, find a sports photographer who's work you like, and follow them on social media. See what separates them from "everyone else". See what kind of gear they are using, what are their settings, how do they approach certain situations, etc.
Another little nugget I can offer is: Shoot before the game starts or before your team comes out. What does that mean? In my case, it means before the dance competition starts while people are still moving around I am setting my white balance and dialing in my rough “starter” settings. Once the first dance team comes on, I start testing my settings and making sure that they are correct. That way when my team come out, all I need to do is shoot.
Take time early when the other teams are out to look at the back of your camera to see what it looks like, don’t do it when your team comes out. That way when your team hits the floor, you just focus on capturing awesome images of them.
Have fun and good luck. Thanks for sticking in there!