For indoor basketball:
Manual mode:
1/500th shutter to freeze action
f/2.8 to get in enough light
ISO: 1600 or higher depending on how much light there is.
This is where having a full frame really helps.
High ISO - Best practices?
(35 posts) (14 voices)-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
I think the shots look good to me. My first impression was how bright it was - Matrix metering doing it's wonders.
Personal preference I would have dropped the exposure a step down. That is my preference but so you know where my base line is for settings. I tried finding some photos but the last BB game I have stuff from is archived off site on disks. As MSMoto said, technically they look good. If you are a Photoshop-a-lot person, you should be able to do a ton with those for sure.You might try spot metering as well. Matrix metering has a primary of exposing for the subject AND everything else. Spot metering will just focus on the subject. This may help kick the shadows in the background down and add shutter speed or lower iso that you are using. It can help out a ton in some situations.
I saw the F-stop creeping up as well. You might try what I do with Auto ISO - (I think the D5100 is able to do this) Set the min shutter at 1/250 (or whatever shutter speed), set your max ISO at 1600, and then shoot in Aperture "A" mode and keep the lens at 2.8, spot metering, Dial in -0.3 to -0.7 exposure and let the camera do it's wonders. At least for me, I found those settings help push the ISO lower when it can. You might try 3200 as well to see if the camera pushes/keeps the isos below 2500 as well. The problem sometimes is that you start missing a ton of shots using that though. I just use it by feel now and know when it won't work and adjust what I need to. Never is a "real" solution - just a bunch of compromises.
On the Cameras - Anymore I think we have to be really, really, careful about assuming the need for FX for higher ISOs and even the AF capabilities of the cameras being released. If the DxO "sports" score is under a full stop+, that is not really any difference. If Nikon uses a Sony made sensor in the D600 (24mp which it sounds like they are going to use an update of their next FF) and the D400 utilizes a DX sensor from a different manufacture, that could make a real difference. On the flip side, if the D600 is just a FF D7000 we know what the AF will be, but if it's updated, that may mean it's much better. Either way, it sounds like the assumed D600 specs are fairly reliable and there still is nothing on the D400 at all.
Posted 11 months ago # -
This is a quick 10min edit (simulated) of what I would try to get to. I find it really hard to explain in words what the "look" would be. If that is not even close to what you are looking for - throw out everything I said :)
This is not well done, but I think the idea comes across.
In LR4 - I took the original and dropped the whole exposure -1.7 and then started from there. Selective tool on dude +1.3 exposure, shadows up, clarity up, highlight down a bit. Selective tool on net +.6, highlights up, saturation down. That brought the focus on the subject while letting the background fall out. Pushed background shows down and added vignette. Used default noise settings.
So for me, I would start at about a -1.7 to -0.7 with the Spot meter on the subject and then post edit the subjects back up and leave the backgrounds out. I find I get lower isos with more detail and color, so recovery is better. Shooting Raw is a must in these situations as well.
(Anyone remember me saying how I will "force" things into Lightroom rather than open PS? Since I have just loaded LR4 a month ago I tried the clone and heal on some chairs. Now your eye will get drug there since it looks odd. Nope not much better than before :)
Original:
Posted 11 months ago # -
tsitalon1 said:
You are right, but I wasn't really trying to capture anything captivating. I was simply testing exposure/high iso and strobist style lighting.As long as you guys think the exposure's/iso are ok, I will keep on working on interesting shots.
A question: If a decent portion of my shooting is this style (indoor basketball, do you guys think I should pursue the D600 (for iso) or the D400 (for AF)?
Obviously a D4 would be best, but I don't have >$6k lying around. I might be able to pull off a D800, but I'm not sure the iso performance of the D800 is *much* better.
Oh, and the sandal shot was before the game. LOL
Have you considered a used D3? It will give you a high frame rate and good high ISO capability. You can get a used D3 for less than a D800. Since you are primarily interested in sports, a D3 makes a lot of sense. If you get a D3 with under 100K actuations on the shutter, then the camera still has a lot of life left in it (Shutter is rated to around 300K). I have shot a lot of sports with both a D3 and a D3S and right now a D3 is a real bargain... Figure somewhere between $2200 & $2800.
Posted 11 months ago # -
I still see the shadows, TTJ, but I never would have guessed it if you hadn't pointed out the post work that you did. Nice capture, btw.
Posted 11 months ago # -
That's actually one of tsitalon1 shots that I edited. I can't take credit for that.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Looks like a good start. When spot focusing, stick to skin tones or the face if you can. That really is what you want to be exposed correctly. Exposing on a white jersey or shirt works as it will underexpose that usually (just like a camera does with snow.)
Posted 11 months ago # -
This is an interesting thread... a few comments..
#1) You mentioned a replacement for your D5100, why not a D700? I just picked up mine new for $2200 and couldn't be happier. Video is frankly the only tangible thing I believe the D800 gives you over the D700 as long as you don't feel you need 36Mp and 12Mp is not enough (should be very few of us). This camera will deliver roughly two stops better performance in terms of ISO so shooting at 3200 isn't a problem and 6400 is useable (it's essentially a D3).
#2) If I were in your situation I'd first try to shoot in manual mode, set the shutter speed to 1/320 or 1/500th. Set Aperture to 2.8, then lock ISO into 1600 and make that your starting point. Shoot a few shots, check the histograms for exposure data making sure you're not either vastly under or over exposed and then adjust ISO down if possible first, then secondly moving shutter down to 1/250th or 1/320th if necessary. ISO 3200 on your body is likely not much of an option where even good PP can't do much with that considering the subject matter.
#3) Your shots look pretty good to me in terms of the balance of freezing motion, exposure, etc however you were using speed lights and I presume this will not normally be an option.
#4) Consider panning... Remember you can also use a bit of a panning technique, drop your shutter to 1/60th or so and chase the players in a panning motion as they move. This should freeze them, but provide motion blur to the background. This will only work well on fast breaks and such but it's an option and should allow you plenty of room in terms of exposure.
Posted 11 months ago # -
@tsitalon1: don't forget to look at the image critically when you are sliding those sliders, there are some 'over PP'd' halos around the subjects calf muscles. Check before and after.
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
