[Biro]

He was shooting a Canon, but...

Flashback: The story behind Dixon?s wild Indy crash

[KiloHotelphoto]

Incredible shots. He got 105 images in the sequence, I'm guessing he was using the 1D X Mark II. I was shooting next to a guy with one and it's amazing how fast that thing is.

[twilhelm]

It's all about paying attention, and a little bit of luck. It's a great shot, but 105 shots, that is fast!

[Blacknight659]

I wonder what kind of image sequences we will start to see after the Panasonic and Olympus cameras start making there way to these events. I think they do 20 fps or more.

[normhead]

I wonder what kind of image sequences we will start to see after the Panasonic and Olympus cameras start making there way to these events. I think they do 20 fps or more.

These are the results of 36 years of going to Indy and some extremely insightful anticipation of events, awareness of shooting angles and positions etc. Assuming that anyone with that skill set will actually be buying Panasonic, Olympus or Sony cameras is somewhat of a leap. We'll believe it when we see it. He used Canon 100-400 zoom for these shots. Maybe we should be asking when those companies will be making a comparable lens.

This constant assumption that different equipment would produce superior results is getting real old. I guess free speech entitles us to share our assumptions. It's also OK if most of us don't take them seriously.

[bigdavephoto]

105 images? Talk about spray and pray! It makes you appreciate how little skill it takes to get photos like this compared to something like these from the days of film, even with the advantage of things like motor drivee:

I think you could have used another picture then the third one to get your point across.


Third picture was removed by mod.

[CDW]

These are the results of 36 years of going to Indy and some extremely insightful anticipation of events, awareness of shooting angles and positions etc. Assuming that anyone with that skill set will actually be buying Panasonic, Olympus or Sony cameras is somewhat of a leap. We'll believe it when we see it. He used Canon 100-400 zoom for these shots. Maybe we should be asking when those companies will be making a comparable lens.

Panasonic has been producing a Leica branded 100-400mm (200-800mm equivalent) zoom with IS for a year -- works on either Panasonic or Olympus m4/3 bodies.

[normhead]

Panasonic has been producing a Leica branded 100-400mm (200-800mm equivalent) zoom with IS for a year -- works on either Panasonic or Olympus m4/3 bodies.

And who uses it for professional sports work?

[BrianR]

105 images? Talk about spray and pray!

"Spray and pray" always makes it sound like someone shuts their eyes and just rattles off shots in the general direction of the action. I'd wager that if I was standing next to him, at least 90 of his 105 photos would have been better than any of the 400+ I could have sprayed and prayed during the same time frame with an Olympus in one hand and a Panasonic in the other.

I think you could have used another picture then the third one to get your point across.

I looked it up, apparently the driver's car caught fire in the pits and he suffered some burns but no serious injuries.

Kinda interesting to compare the images over the years selected in this blog: The Most Spectacular, Death-Defying Crashed in Indy 500 History. Many of the earlier ones were after the peak action. A result of more photographers, better photographers, better equipment, or are they better at crashing now, or is it just the photos they happened to select?

[normhead]

There are two things in spray and pray. First it's inaccurate, praying has nothing to do with it. Personally I use exactly the same technique I'd use setting up for a single shot. Then I press the shutter release and hold it down. A good 25% to 40% of the time, the image I select is not the first image. A good percentage of the images I set up for, the first image is still the best image, the single frame image, but I'm not giving up to the up to 40% of the images where it isn't. just because someone uses a derogatory term like "pray and spray". Call it what it is, an extended burst. There is no more praying than any other method of shooting. IN fact in anything, single frame shooting requires more praying.You're praying your attention span is up to the task, that your finger will depress the shutter at exactly the right moment, and that you've properly interpreted which moment is the right one.

Shooting burst reduces the need for prayer (and blind luck) and increases your odds of getting a great image. I like that.

It's amazing how as camera capabilities have increased, terms like pray and spray come into use by those who want you to think they are some kind of purists, or use some superior technique. Well, the set up for a good extended burst shot is just as critical and requires just as much skill as setting up for a single shot. You just have better odds of getting an image you really like. Some people seem to think there's something wrong with that. I don't pray or spray, I set up for an extended burst as has the photographer in this case, You may think that requires less skill, but you're delusional.

We don't pray, and we don't spray. So in the future maybe it would be more appropriate to apply the term "pray" to single frame photographers. They are in more need of prayer than anyone setting up for an extended burst.

This is about efficient photography. Not about luddite attitudes. Some folks seem to feel anything but taking a single frame every 5 minutes is cheating. They think they're on to something, I think they are missing something.

[bigdavephoto]

"Spray and pray" always makes it sound like someone shuts their eyes and just rattles off shots in the general direction of the action. I'd wager that if I was standing next to him, at least 90 of his 105 photos would have been better than any of the 400+ I could have sprayed and prayed during the same time frame with an Olympus in one hand and a Panasonic in the other.



I looked it up, apparently the driver's car caught fire in the pits and he suffered some burns but no serious injuries.

Kinda interesting to compare the images over the years selected in this blog: The Most Spectacular, Death-Defying Crashed in Indy 500 History. Many of the earlier ones were after the peak action. A result of more photographers, better photographers, better equipment, or are they better at crashing now, or is it just the photos they happened to select?

The picture I was talking about was removed by a mod. I was not saying it should be removed but a warning of its use should have been put in place. If you are wondering what the picture was, look up Alex Zendari Germany crash. The picture is graphic when you realize that the aftermath was Zandari loosing both legs.


I will edit my post about the picture.

[BrianR]

Call it what it is, an extended burst.

It also falls under the umbrella term of "an intelligent use of available equipment".

The picture I was talking about was removed by a mod. I was not saying it should be removed but a warning of its use should have been put in place. If you are wondering what the picture was, look up Alex Zendari Germany crash. The picture is graphic when you realize that the aftermath was Zandari loosing both legs.

Gotcha. Also... ack!

[CDW]

And who uses it for professional sports work?

I have no idea, but that wasn't your original question. I answered it.

It's likely the pro Canon shooter was using the Canon lens because it met his needs and Canon Professional Services has its act together in supporting professional photographers, as opposed to Ricoh, Olympus or Panasonic.