Photographing FIRST Competitions

[Dan 1038]

For all of you "REAL" photographers out there, I am curious as to how you shoot FRC events, specifically settings and equipment. I am an amateur photographer who has been shooting FRC for 4 years and think I get decent results (see www.frcpics.com for examples), but I am curious as to how others approach the challenges of low light coupled with action and reflective surfaces not conducive to flashes (ie the driver windows). Below is how I do it:

Camera: Canon 40D
Format: RAW for Saturday, LJPG or SRAW for practice and qualifications (mostly for scouting, saves space on the PC and cards)
Lens: Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 DC HSM II (Best bang for the buck)
ISO: 800 generally, but some venues have forced me all the way to 1600
Short Lens: Kit Canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.4 (hate it, shopping for something around a 17-55 f/2.8)
Flash: None (Shopping, considering Canon 430EXII or Sigma EF530)

The challenge, as I see it, is getting the right aperture and ISO combination to allow the 200+ speeds to stop the action. Is this along the right track, or am I missing something??? Any recommendations on a short zoom for general shots (like team portraits and wide angle field shots) or flashes? As this is a hobby to me, I have a problem dumping >$1000 for a lens or >$500 for a flash, if I can get similar results for half the price. The Sigma lens is a perfect example, it was around $800 - almost half the cost of the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 at the time - and on a I get the bonus of it being smaller and very effective. I appreciate any responses in advance!

[ThatHubrexGuy]

This will be my first time photographing a FIRST event. These are my specs:

Camera: Nikon D3000
Lens: AF-S DX VR Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G
Wide Lens: AF-S DX VR Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G
Flash: Nikon SB-600

And here is what I think I will be using as far as settings go:

ISO: Hopefully 800 (The D3000 doesn't handle ISO 1600 and 3200 (Hi 1) very well)
Format: Large Fine quality JPEG for field shots, RAW for scouting and team photo
Flash Angle: The high roof of the stadium will not allow for very much bounce flash capacity, so 0 degrees
Flash Mode: Manual (Automatic wouldn't know a good fill-flash setting if it bit it from behind)

I've never really photographed in a large, open indoor area before and I expect it to be a challenge, and I'm open to suggestions for adjuestments to the above settings from photographers more experienced than myself.
And to all photographers, good luck! Light conditions will be tough to deal with!

[Dan 1038]

You may find it a challenge to get driver shots with the zoom at f/5.6, as the flash will not help much through the glass... Before I got my 40D and f/2.8 zoom, I used a digital rebel with a similar f/4-5.6 zoom, a way to cheat and retain some speed is shoot RAW a few stops low and then adjust the exposure on the PC... Give it a try if the arena is dim!

[ThatHubrexGuy]

I'm thinking that adjusting the exposure compensation could do something to the same effect. I won't be using RAW format for field shots because of memory limits. My team demands I take a lot of photos, lol

Also Dan, I highly reccomend getting a Flash. Like most photo equipment, you don't need to spend a lot of money to get something that works well. I don't know much about anything not made by Nikon, but what I do reccomend is getting one by Canon. Because it is made by the same manufacturer as your camera, it will most likely integrate better with it, particularly with TTL and i-TTL modes. I can't say I know this for sure, but it's what my common sense suggests.

[SteveGarward]

I (and my wife) were shooting at GSR mostly from the stands, as I was the drive coach and couldn't get down closer much. I found that I had to push it all the way to ISO 1600 often. I was using the Tamron 28-300 VC which is a great lens, but f/3.5-6.3 so was still a bit slow at ISO 1600 in a lot of cases. Still, better to get the shot than miss it.

For a shorter lens, I highly, highly recommend the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. I've used it for 18mths now and it is almost permanently attached to my camera. Only when I know for sure I need more reach do I use the 28-300. But the quality of the glass in the 17-50 with the constant f/2.8 gives stunning images.

My Canon 50mm f/1.8 is also great for team member photos etc. One of the sharpest images out there, and the best $130 (Australian) I ever spent for my camera!

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by SteveGarward

I (and my wife) were shooting at GSR mostly from the stands, as I was the drive coach and couldn't get down closer much. I found that I had to push it all the way to ISO 1600 often. I was using the Tamron 28-300 VC which is a great lens, but f/3.5-6.3 so was still a bit slow at ISO 1600 in a lot of cases. Still, better to get the shot than miss it.

For a shorter lens, I highly, highly recommend the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. I've used it for 18mths now and it is almost permanently attached to my camera. Only when I know for sure I need more reach do I use the 28-300. But the quality of the glass in the 17-50 with the constant f/2.8 gives stunning images.

My Canon 50mm f/1.8 is also great for team member photos etc. One of the sharpest images out there, and the best $130 (Australian) I ever spent for my camera!

Ive found that it depends on the location whether or not I have to bump it to 1600. I was shooting with a Canon 70-300 IS f/4.5-5.6. In Ann Arbor I had no problems, at West Michigan I had all sorts of problems.

I will second the Canon 50mm f/1.8 BEST money ever spent. Build quality may not be way up there but it is a cheap flexible lens. (Plus, once you start shooting prime you hate shooting anything else)

[Dan 1038]

You guys with the 50mm prime have full frame or 1.6x digitals? My understanding is that for the 1.6x cameras, a 35mm is better prime... Thoughts?

[Mori1578]

yeah for the not FF cameras you rather get the 35mm and not the 50mm.
(btw im talking about nikon but im almost sure its the same with canon...)
f/2.8 lenses are great for indoor photographs and fo course for taking photos of robots and matches.

Those who talked about 1600 ISO - i dont know what kind of camera you have, but you should have a really good camera if you can take 1600ISO pics without lots of noise

Last year taking photos with my Nikon D60 with the kit lens - 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 with SB600 flash worked really great. A better lens will make the photography much easier and much more comfortable

[SteveGarward]

Unfortunately my Canon 400D starts to bring in some noise at 1600. You can remove some in post processing, but it's just not the same.

The available light changed during the awards presentation so they were a bit better, and some possible at 800. But during the matches was a bit darker so I was out of luck.

[SteveGarward]

Sorry, meant to add I'm using a 50mm on a 1.6x sensor. Not ideal, but it's still a beautiful lens!

[SteveGarward]

I also highly recommend one of these white balance lens caps . I would be sure you can get this brand in the US. They are cheaper than some of the big-name brands.

One shot with one of these under the lighting conditions you're in, set your camera's custom white balance using that shot, and you're away. It's not 100% perfect (I notice a slight blue cast on my Canon), but you can tweak it either in camera or in software later. And most of the time it's near enough to not worry.

[Matt Howard]

My Dad and I both switch between a 24-70 and 70-200. I typically use a flash pushed up about a stop, in the neighborhood of ISO 800. Typically F 5.6.

[David Brinza]

Check out this post from a mentor from the Killer Bees with a few years experience of photographing matches. It's not all about equipment, photography is an art. Jason allows some blur to create action in still photos, but also describes how to avoid "bad blur".

In a subsequent post, Jason addresses lighting and white balance. Some of this can be compensated in post-processing software (PhotoShop), but getting the exposures right when you take photos reduces unintended distortions in the corrections. Looking at the referee's shirts and seeing something other than pure white with black stripes is an indicator that the original exposure wasn't quite right.