Results 205 to 221 of 800
Thread: Badminton Photography
11-27-2004, 12:23 PM #205
i haven't shot b/w pix for long long time.
i took this one at night with my canon v3 digital compact. i switched it on b/w mode at asa 400 without flash.
that was my friend's wedding day. in fact, all photographers there were my friends. most of them were using canon 1d, 1d mark 2 and i was the laziest guy who shot with a "little point and shoot".
Last edited by red00ecstrat; 11-27-2004 at 12:29 PM.
12-02-2004, 09:14 PM #206Originally Posted by fan
now i need to dig a hole and hide...
5fps will be really really nice. but make sure you get a few CF cards as i was able to fill one 1G card in just one match.
12-02-2004, 09:26 PM #207Originally Posted by kwun
the D70 first of all feels rather good in the hands. a plastic case but with a unique texture that feels less plastic like. i was able to use all my previous Nikon lenses with it. i also purchased the 18-70mm kit lens as it provides a nice zoom range for P&S and any other purpose shooting. that sits along with my prime lens for sharper images.
for badminton, the fast shutter response and the fairly OK 3fps burst rate is nice. however, the AF speed is a bit slow. another photographer i met during the Singapore Open uses the D70 as well (with the nice US$1500 70-200/2.8 VR lens) also noticed the same thing and he has resorted to single frame shooting. i instead use manual focus most of the time which bypasses the AF lag.
otherwise, it works just like a normal SLR. the rest is up to your experience and imagination!
12-03-2004, 07:45 AM #208
here is a difference in lens used for my photos.
the first one was taken in close range with a Nikkor 50/1.8 prime lens (effective 70mm on the D70). a cheap lens but gets pretty respectable reviews. setting was 70mm f4 1/200s.
the second one was taken with a Sigma 70-210/3.5-4.5, a cheapo $200 zoom that i could afford when i was younger. setting was 135mm f5.6 1/200s.
as can be seen very clearly, the difference in quality between a cheap prime and a cheap tele zoom is quite apparent.
12-03-2004, 11:48 AM #209
thanks for posting uploading all those photos kwun and all those tips on taking pics with a digital camera.
as a newbie myself, i often debate wif myself whether to get a good (& smart) camera or a decent camcorder. A camcorder would capture those special moments that only experienced photographer would able to which i'm not, plus that i can leave the camcorder unattended while it's capturing images.
12-03-2004, 04:28 PM #210
interesting. i guess while both camcorders and cameras captures images, they are fundamentally very different. a frozen motion and a continuous motions tells the story in a very different manner. the skill requires are also very different as well.
to me, i am still trying to learn how to take one good picture, i don't think i will do very well trying to manage doing that 30 times every second.
12-03-2004, 08:50 PM #211
Re: fixed vs cheap Telephoto lens.
Hmm...I wonder whether the difference in optical quality would seem so apparent if you had used ASA 400 film (the difference in grain size is so negligible between 200 and 400). Is 5.6 the maximum aperture size on that lens ? Eww..if so. Is that Kodak film?
Last edited by ynexfan2003; 12-03-2004 at 08:53 PM.
12-03-2004, 08:59 PM #212Originally Posted by ynexfan2003
they are both digital and shot at the same ISO, either 1200 or 1600. the spec on the lens is as specified in my post, f1.8 on the prime, f3.5-4.5 on the zoom. so neither is at their widest. the 1.8 is supposed to be sharpest starting from f4 up. the zoom appears to be rather poor in any settings...
i need to save up my next 5 yrs of xmas/etc present to get the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 IF ED VR ETC ETC lens. one of the sharpest lens as reviewed by others. maybe i can get it in time for the WC this August. but at US$1400+, it won't be easy to swallow, or actually, probably get chooked to death.
12-03-2004, 09:06 PM #213
Does anyone know the brands and the going rate of a high frame-rate (60 + fps) and high resolution motion camera? Black and white is fine. The purpose is only for analyzing high-speed movement like a badder's stroke execution. I am totally ignorant in this area.
12-03-2004, 09:11 PM #214
Oh...I must have overlooked that (I just got in and headed for the computer via my bed); film is passé? That is sacrilegous (hehe).
Actually, in my experience basic SLR's with a decent fixed focal length lens with very good slow film tends to produce more interesting results for museo-scenic work where you can take your time, and carefully prepare the shot, than mid-range Digital.
The reason I asked if the film used is Kodak is that the colours (esp. the yellows) in the first pic appear especially luminescent. Kodak Gold tends to cause that effect.
12-03-2004, 09:36 PM #215Originally Posted by ynexfan2003
but as we are talking about badminton here, using those films will mean that the badminton match will be over before the exposure finishes...
12-03-2004, 09:53 PM #216Originally Posted by kwun
12-06-2004, 01:51 PM #217
I shrunk and blurred this pic. The original one in Page 71, image DSC 1366, Singapore Open. http://www.badmintoncentral.com/pics/
Thanks Kwun. Do you remember camera settings, such as ISO, aperture/shutter speed, menu/auto focus, etc when taking this picture? Some of the info. got deleted in the post editing process.
This picture is quite sharp. I can’t see how can you pre-focus manually with this picture.
They are very nice pictures. I can see how much have you improved at the end of tournament. The last portion of pictures you took are much better than the early ones.
12-06-2004, 02:21 PM #218
thanks, that was one of the better ones! too bad the feet was cropped and so was part of Jonassen.
it was ISO1600, f/4, 1/120s, manual focus.
MF is ok as i mostly pre-focus and waited. being at f/4 gives me a DOF around +/- 1 meter so total of 2m window. i was standing maybe 4-5m away so it was not too bad pre-judging the distance. not 100% of course, but if i get say, 30% focused correctly and then 30% timed correctly and then 30% ok composition, then i get around 20+ good pictures out of 1000....
for continuous AF to work, i need a much faster camera body which are US$2-3000+, that's way too much money and unless some generous soul would donate one to me, i am afraid that just not gonna happen.
12-06-2004, 06:05 PM #219
A better lens may help with AF. It usually can focus faster with plenty of light.
12-21-2004, 05:05 PM #220Originally Posted by fan
the most important one is the problem with the AF speed. as fan says, a better lens could've done better. but there was this other guy who had a 70-200/2.8 IF ED VR AF-S and he too was complaining that it is too slow for continuous shutter.
my solution then was to bypass the AF all together and use MF. but as shown, there are way more out of focused shots than focused one.
the realization i have recently is to use the AF lock button. use AF to focus on the first frame, then immediately press AF-L to lock the focus and then shoot the next few frames with that focus. given that you are not taking running shots, this will AF for you, and then shoot the next few at MF speed. getting the best of both worlds.
12-21-2004, 05:26 PM #221Originally Posted by kwun
By DoublesPlease in forum CCC Badminton ClubReplies: 40: 10-01-2007, 05:32 AM
By Sealman in forum Badminton PhotographyReplies: 13: 03-07-2007, 10:34 PM
By Shabok in forum Chit-ChatReplies: 685: 09-30-2006, 03:02 AM
By omnislazh in forum Market PlaceReplies: 0: 06-28-2005, 04:32 PM
By Virocon in forum General ForumReplies: 2: 03-15-2003, 11:32 PM