|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-12-2016, 07:59 PM
|
| |
Hi,
Pursuant to my comments above,,,here are some examples of what I have been trying to do with the faster aperture...I usually stay at f2.8.
I try to get my subject/player in focus and get the others in the foreground and background as out of focus as possible.
My feeling is that it emphasizes the action and the "active" player.
Please comment on the photos and what are your thoughts on the f2.8 aperture?
Looking at the football photos above, it seems to me that I am sacrificing sharpness by trying to get the players "isolated"
These are my first photos posted here ever (as far as I can recall)...I usually hesitate to put myself "out there"
Thanks for any and all feedback,
radman
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
09-12-2016, 07:48 PM
|
| |
Settings are- K-5iis shooting RAW DNG files
- DA* 200mm no uv filter...this is the first year i've shot without it and I think it has made a difference in quality and faster shutter
- Sirui monopod / leg from N-2004X tripod
- Sirui K-20x ballhead
- aperture priority usually set at 5.6 ... sometimes 8.0 if i want more DOF. by the end of 1st half i will usually be opened up to 3.5 and by end of game wide open at 2.8
- auto iso fast setting -- daytime at 200 - 21560 and evening/night time 800 - 21560. I have iso set to 1/3 stop increments.
- auto white balance
- center-weighted metering
- AFC spot auto focus tracking using single frame drive mode
- DarkTable
- Adobe Creative Cloud -- Bridge and Lightroom
I'm also open to and welcome any suggestions.
Varsity had a bye last week, so here are this weeks varsity favs. I'll mix up the middle school and varsity next week.
Hi,
I am not sure I can offer anything to make your shots any better...they are already outstanding.
One thing I have been doing different than your technique is staying at f4 or below. Usually f2.8 for most of the game, even when the game starts during the sunny times.
I like trying to isolate the players from whatever is in the foreground and background. After seeing your photos, I am going to mix it up though, you have some SHARP pictures.
Please comment on your use of the fixed 200mm lens. Do you feel limited compared to a zoom?
I am using the tamron 70-200 f2.8 on my K-3, and I zoom in and out all the time.
Is the picture quality better on the 200mm vs the 70-200 at 200mm? If so, in what way? DOF, sharpness?
I thought about getting a 200mm, but that seems redundant to me.
Then I thought about the 300mm f4 (or the older version 300mm f4.5 for cheaper) but the f4 and more so the 4.5 seemed like it would be too slow...especially after sunset.
I appreciate your thoughts and insight!
Sincerely,
radman
|
