Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion The Water Cooler Photography advice

Frank, thanks very much for your advice. I do appreciate it.

When I told the missus about the price tag on even a modest setup like we've been discussing, she said "they know we're not submitting these to Sports Illustrated or National Geographic, right?"

I'm sure I'd be happy with either one of those cameras. I just have to go check them out in person. Thanks again.

In reply to:

---

When I told the missus about the price tag on even a modest setup like we've been discussing, she said "they know we're not submitting these to Sports Illustrated or National Geographic, right?"

---

"Me? I was thinking of all the wonderful moments I'll capture of our children. I forgot about the swimming thing honey; it was about remembering the smile on our child's face. That feeling, which just warms my heart, is why I recommended a camera capable of capturing those beautiful children we've had together. I love you".

Try that. If it works, let me know and I'll try it with an EP500:

"Me? I was thinking of all the wonderful moments we'll hear in War of the Worlds. I forgot about that silly "upright bass in a jazz combo thing"; it was about remembering the explosions and the dinosaur's first footsteps. That feeling, which just warms my heart, is why I recommended a sub capable of capturing those beautiful frequencies we've missed together. I love you".

Damn you're good Mark.

In reply to:

---

When I told the missus about the price tag on even a modest setup like we've been discussing, she said "they know we're not submitting these to Sports Illustrated or National Geographic, right?"

---

True enough. Another good option is something like a Sony Cyber Shot. It's not going to give you the flexibility of the digital SLR's, but then again it costs less then most of the accessories on the bigger cameras. A friend has something similar to the Sony Cyber Shot, and he's quite happy. It might be a nice way to get your feet wet.

Thanks.

It's really just an updated variation on the classic "Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?" theme.....

Yeah, Mark you're not just an artist, you're a stylist. My wife sees right through that stuff. She cuts to the chase faster than Jon Stewart.

Thanks for the link, Frank. I like the looks of that (and the Canon that Adam mentioned). My concern is that the ISO and f-stop range on those models will not be adequate for me to campture the sort of action that I want to.

I mean, it's clearly time to step up from our P/S Canon (which has been great), but I don't want to spend good money and then be disappointed. You know, it will be easier to swing the Rebel or the D50 if I haven't already pissed away $400 on something else that wasn't satisfactory.

So, do you guys think the Canon S2 or S3 or the Sony H1 (at only 400 ISO) would be fast enough to get me usable shots of swimmers without so much noise that they are unusable? Remember - most of the time we're talking about inside with no flash in a big room. Sometimes the lighting is pretty good (to my untrained eye).

Muchas gracias!!

In reply to:

---

So, do you guys think the Canon S2 or S3 or the Sony H1 (at only 400 ISO) would be fast enough to get me usable shots of swimmers without so much noise that they are unusable? Remember - most of the time we're talking about inside with no flash in a big room. Sometimes the lighting is pretty good (to my untrained eye).

---

I guess that it depends on what you mean by usable. In my opinion though, no. Lighting is pretty variable indoors. Basically, camera lenses aren’t nearly as good at compensating for light conditions as the human eye. For example, awhile ago I was attempting to take some shots indoors with my Rebel XT and a friends Sigma 18-200mm lens using the sport mode on my camera which increases the shutter speed to freeze the baton twirling action. I was up in the stands and tried to zoom all the way in to fill as much of the frame as possible with my daughter, but the pictures were very dark. So I took my camera outside to play with the settings. It was one of the typical Michigan winter days where the sky is so overcast that the sun doesn’t even try to peek through the clouds. Anyway, outside the shots looked great so there was obviously a bunch more light. I guess that it really depends on the lighting because UofM basketball games seem to be lit pretty well.

Btw, I’ve later learned that even with the Sigma 18-200mm lens, I can compensate for poor lighting somewhat by switching to manual mode on the camera and adjusting the ISO and aperture settings. Still, there’s no substitute for good lighting or big lenses.

This is the lens that I now covet for those indoor action shots from the stands. Canon Telephoto EF 300mm f/4.0L IS Image Stabilizer USM Autofocus Lens. It is *very* expensive though – at least to me. You can get some nice 200mm Sigmas for half the price that would probably do a nice job too.

Frank, Thank You. That is exactly the kind of guidance I'm looking for.

In reply to:

---

I’ve later learned that even with the Sigma 18-200mm lens, I can compensate for poor lighting somewhat by switching to manual mode on the camera and adjusting the ISO and aperture settings. Still, there’s no substitute for good lighting or big lenses.

---

Very interesting, indeed. Do you find that you get "acceptable" results this way, or just "better"? What aperture/ISO do you use? Is it a PITA to make these adjustments on the Canon?

That Canon lens you linked to is nuts. I'd never get the value out of it. I don't want to spend the money on prime lenses, but it is beginning to sound like that might be the only strategy to get the results I want.

In reply to:

---

It was one of the typical Michigan winter days where the sky is so overcast that the sun doesn’t even try to peek through the clouds.

---

From what I remember from my years spent in photo classes in college, I loved shooting outdoors on overcast days. Some of the best diffused lighting one can find.

Yeah, I think I get pretty good results as long as I take my time to set things up properly. I can't remember off the top of my head what ISO/Aperture settings I use, typically, I just switch to manual mode and increase the ISO level until the photos are bright enough. I don't find it too cumbersome to switch either, it's just taken me a little while to get used to it.

Yeah, those lenses are expensive, it's just that the primes let in *way* more light. I bought a 50mm prime and it's great for indoor portraits. Of course, for that I just could have bought a bigger flash. I doubt that I'll ever buy that lens that I linked because I'd have a hard time justifying the cost. Still, it's nice knowing that if I ever did get that serious, my camera's compatible with it.