Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Sports & Action Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 3, 2005, 1:05 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 198
Default

I haven't gone back all the way in the message board, but don't think I've seen any volleyball shots, so...

Kevin
Attached Images
 
klfatcj is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 3, 2005, 1:07 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 198
Default

A successful block
Attached Images
 
klfatcj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 1:57 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 67
Default

Can I ask what your settings were for these shots? I've had poor luck capturing volleyball action images. Your pictures look great.
gredan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 6:45 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 198
Default

I used a Rebel XT, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lens, settings: f3.5, 1/640, ISO 1600, both of these were shot at 97 mm. I was using aperature priority. (I realize that 2.8 vs 3.5 doesn't add much to DOF.) Probably the main reason I got good shots is that this was ina university gym and therefor well lit.

This was my first time shooting volleyball, sowas still trying to figure out the tricks. I used auto focus to focus on the top of the net on either side or the centre, switched thelens to manual focus so it wouldn't change, and waited for the action to happen where the camera was pointed. I think this works the best for volleyball as most of the real action happens within a few feet of the net. Getting the digs is harder and I haven't tried yet.

I found it better to watch the action directly rather than through the viewfinder, as I was missing too many shots. I therefor had to use a wider shot and crop later, although I still found the aim wasn't always where it should have been.

Still, it's fun learning. I printed up a few of the pics for the team and they liked them, so worth the time.

Kevin
klfatcj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 6:51 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,538
Default

I think that Sigma lens helped you out, for sure.

I wonder what would have happened if you shot shutter priority at 1/500th, and maybe used F2.8 aperture?

Or just shoot aperture priority, wide open at F2.8.


Maybe the background a little more blurred?

terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 7:04 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
thatsanicepicture2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 859
Default

Kevin,

I've shot HS volleyball and all i can say is you did a great job. I used a Sony f707 and had to "fix" every shot. Before that i had aold Maxxum film and it was even tougher. But my daughter didn't play this year so i didn't get to see how my D Reb Xt would do. I guess it would have done OK. Gotta love those Sigma lenes.

Great job.

dale

PS: What did you pay for your 70-200 2.8?




thatsanicepicture2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 3, 2005, 7:11 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 67
Default

Thanks for the info.I'm in the matket for a new lens and your results here will help me make a decision. A well lit gym is a definite plus. I've shot most of my volleyball pics in high school gyms and the lighting is less than ideal.

Catching a dig is very difficult indeed. i gave up trying. Instead, i found it easier to focus on one of the primary receivers during the serve. You can usually tell by their actions, even through the view finder, who is going to receive the ball.



Thanks again. Greg
gredan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2005, 6:34 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 198
Default

Thanks for the comments.

The lens cost $1300 Canadian at a local camera shop. I try to buy my stuff there, even if I can find a somewhat better deal on the web. I trust them, they spend time with me (and with friends I have sent there). I didn't like the focus on my original 17-85 IS canon lens and the salesman spent the next 20 minutes shooting with several combinations of the XT bodies and their instore 17-85 lenses until we found the best combination.

Service is worth supporting.

And the $1300 matched the price I found at Henry's, a Toronto based dealer.

Kevin
klfatcj is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:50 AM.