Football: Shooting goalmouth action with small aperture

Russ MCR

Russ MCR

Suspended / Banned
Messages
101
Edit My Images
No
Hi All

Just a quicky for football photographers.

It's a 'done thing' to switch from your 400 to a 70-200 for goalmouth action (when perched being goal obv). Has anybody ever had a go at reducing the aperture to get more players in focus, or more importantly more likely to get the goalscorer in focus?

Obviously the trade-off is that you get a ton more of the background in focus which isn't necessarily what you want given there could be any number of distractions in play (hi-viz stewards / adverts / building works etc) plus you'll have to ramp up the ISO to get a quick enough shutter speed.

Anybody any experience of trying this, or even some examples?

Cheers,
Russ
 
There are plenty of examples of shots taken at F/8+ in the Sports photo sharing forum and they generally look gash. I wouldn't really want to go lower than f/5.6 (as a random generalisation) unless it's for a specific effect - ie remote etc.
 
If the light allows, I'll often shoot my 70-200 at f/3.2, f/3.5 or f/4 instead of f/2.8 precisely to get more depth of field, particularly for corners when you're not sure which player is going to get a header. Also with so many bodies in the box, getting focus on the right one can be difficult.

This shot was at f/3.2 for example.

This can be a shot-saver when there's a lot of action going on. It also gives you a bit more sharpness of the subject that you do get in focus (though the latest 70-200 mk II is amazing at 2.8).

I wouldn't go smaller than f/4 though.

As always, it's a juggling act with the ambient light, shutter speed, ISO & aperture.
 
I already made a post on this subject in the critique area..

For corners I would be happy to go f8 or anything else to get more players in focus.. so long as you ahve the light... i generally use my 70-200 at around f5.6 if at all possible.

if your behind the goal your pointing at players in the penalty area.. think about how far away the backgound is...its not really going to effect your picture in that situation

with amatuer or childrens games where there are no backgrounds other than a few trees half a mile away.. i will deffo go to f8 for a corner no problem
 
The problem is that all the kids matches I have shot have been on 3G with that ghastly tennis court stylee surround fencing. Mind you, even wide open you won't really lose that! :D
 
Cheers all, I'll start at f4 as standard and dabble with f5.6 while I'm at it.

Part of me says in the longer term I shouldn't be going for the safety net and should learn to hone focusing skills fit for 2.8. Practice makes perfect? Hmm.

There's also the issue at which moment I should swap the lenses given that a swapping time (when an attacking team approaches the near goal) might be in the region of a second and maybe a second-and-a-half, which of course a lot can happen in football at that time.

There's a really good interview which briefly covers this subject on this Podcast:
http://biglensfastshutter.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/blfsepisode2final.mp3

I suppose the cautious photographer swaps earlier where as the 'artist' might delay. Big generalisation? Probably. I suppose as much it's down to the end user's taste that matters?
 
Russ MCR said:
Part of me says in the longer term I shouldn't be going for the safety net and should learn to hone focusing skills fit for 2.8. Practice makes perfect? Hmm.
Click to expand...

Oh dear.. this is all wrong... Do you think after all these years shooting football I cant focus at f2.8 on the penalty area? My point is.. Its not about safety net.. its about getting more players in focus..

Kids games its a godsend.. the more players in focus the more parents want the picture..

profesional games.. the background is far enough away to use f5.6 and get more in focus.. Thats the way i like to do it.. I am NOT for one moment saying you or anyone else should..

However............

You seem to ahve the f2.8 problem... just because you have f2.8 doesnt mean it has to be used all the time :)
 
I never change aperture when taking pics of corners

I set shutter speed where needed to keep to around F4 and use autoISO for evening games to keep a nice shutter speed

What I do (not always) is flick between focus modes for free kicks or corners, the image below is the focus switch on the Nikons, I flick from bottom to middle sometimes but never really change anything other than that, never really felt the need to

200_9779-sensor-mode-switch.jpg
 
Russ MCR said:
There's also the issue at which moment I should swap the lenses given that a swapping time (when an attacking team approaches the near goal) might be in the region of a second and maybe a second-and-a-half, which of course a lot can happen in football at that time.

There's a really good interview which briefly covers this subject on this Podcast:
http://biglensfastshutter.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/blfsepisode2final.mp3

I suppose the cautious photographer swaps earlier where as the 'artist' might delay. Big generalisation? Probably. I suppose as much it's down to the end user's taste that matters?
Click to expand...

This is a great question actually. I've missed too many goal strikes due to changing cameras too late. I now change early and crop into the picture if required. Plenty of pixels these days. It is a bit of a psychological nightmare though.

If it's a corner or free kick (i.e. controlled environment) I'll be on the 400 as long as possible to get headshots of players, and then switch to the 70-200 just as the corner is being taken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top