Sharper Hitter (No TC)

Discussion in 'Sports Photography' started by fdevyatkin, Jul 28, 2008.

  1. My last baseball posts used the 80-200 2.8 with a 2X TC. I think my SS was too slow for the focal length and the pics came out soft. Here's one after I removed the TC. I think it looks much better.
    2709295648_3ffcc3fb58_b.jpg
     
  2. nipprdog

    nipprdog

    Jun 8, 2006
    IN
    Most likely, it was the TC that made them soft, not the SS. While some people get good results using a zoom and 1.4, fewer get good results with a 1.7, getting high image quality using a zoom and a 2.0 is rare.
     
  3. Looks good!
     
  4. topher04r1

    topher04r1 Guest

    Well I can tell you that from the screen of my blackberry I think that besides being a bit early on the trigger the shot looks nice and sharp,well exposed and cropped well !!

    Looking forward to seeing more !
     
  5. shtarka1

    shtarka1

    Feb 1, 2008
    Boston
  6. The TC turned the lens into a 400mm 5.6 with the crop factor of 1.5 and no VR, you really can't hold it for more than 1/600s and 1/1000s is more like it, so now I'm bumping the ISO on a D80. Ah, the 400 2.8 VR!
    Fred
     
  7. Thanks Tofer!
    The ball players tell me they have .28 sec to decide to swing at a 90 mph fastball. I tell them if, they'd make solid contact more often, I'd have more money shot opportunities. Good thing they like me.
    Fred
     
  8. Thanks
    Good luck with Manny.
    Fred
     
  9. Oldtime

    Oldtime

    Jul 5, 2006
    Durham, NC
    This image looks sharper
    If your using the VR turn it off -- as others have said anything over a 1.4 TC and IQ really suffers
    No data attached so I'm not sure what ISO you were shooting, Looks like there was still some decent light when you shot this so get the ISO up so we can see the faces-- I know helmets and shadows are a pain but it can be done
    Now we need to work on exposing the faces and getting a ball in the frame Keep working at it
     
  10. nice capture
    i like it
     
  11. Thanks Mark.
    The 80-200 2.8 doesn't have VR.
    I was at ISO 160
    I think I need to lie down on the ground because the photographer's area is not sunken.
    The ball is in this frame.
    I'm not happy with the 2XTC, but the reach helped with getting faces.
    Ah, the 400mm 2.8 VR!
    Fred
     
  12. Oldtime

    Oldtime

    Jul 5, 2006
    Durham, NC
    ISO 160 , if this is in fact the case and not 1600- go to 400-640 you'll get faces
    I only mentioned VR since you did - I must wake up more before posting:biggrin: I know the 80-200 ha no VR:eek:
    Getting lower will also help get under helmet
    Good luck
     
  13. Thanks Greg!
    Fred
     
  14. It was ISO 160 with a SS of 1/4000s.
    I'll have to get down and dirty.
    Thanks, Fred