Speedway help

[SinceNow]

Hi Everyone,

I'm new to photography and to this forum. I'm off to see speedway today and would love to get some shots of the bikes. I'm hoping for a bit of advise before i go. I have very basics kit, Nikon D3100 and the kit lens. I know this is probably the wrong kinda lens but I'm looking at this more as a learning experience. Should i be in shutter priority or full manual? I'm i meant to start panning the camera before i take the shot?

Thanks in advance

 

[artyman]

I assume your kit lens is something like 18-55mm in which case it will be a bit short unless you can get very close to the track. I would shoot in full manual, take a reading of the scene and adjust as to whether the bike and rider is going to be darker or lighter. Check your first few shots to see if you have it correct. As regards shutter speed 1/125 gives a decent amount of blur for panning shots and yes you should start tracking your subject before pressing the shutter. Also use Servo focus so the camera is continually focusing as the subject comes towards you, you also need to strat the focusing before taking the shot to give the focus system time to pick up on the movement.

You should then get something like this

 

[SinceNow]

Thanks for the advice, ill give it a try today.

 

[Teflon-Mike]

One of the atractions of Motorcycle Speed-way is the fact that you are SO close to the action! It's not like a short circuit, with run off arias... they are tearing around a ruddy dog-track (the wrong way I think... they run anti-clockwise?) with nowt but bales against concrete wall and a chain-link fence between you and the action.

Which is fast and furious!

The bikes are simple push-bike frames with no suspension, fitted with a big single cylinder engine pumping perhaps 60bhp, giving a power to weight ratio near infinity, as they weigh about as much as a bag of crisps, and will out accelerate almost anything but a rocket to 40mph, on thier way to a 70mph top speed... round a 1/4 mile oval, surfaced with loose cinders!

Much of which they negotiate in an almost un-ending power slide spraying rooster tails of ash up the stadium walls!

And they have NO BRAKES! (they are utterly, bizarly, and certifiably MAD!)

It used to be the most popular form of motorsport, and had its regular slot on ITV Grand-Stand, (Which was where I first saw and was wowed by the sport, as a nipper) getting almost as much coverage as soccer... races used to almost draw as large crowds too!

Unfortunately I have only ever seen one Speed-way 'live'... and it was a spur of the moment decission to go, while on holiday, and I only had an old VHS Video cam to hand... and what I got of the action was disappointing.

Close up, if you pick a suitable vantage you can get some pretty good action, even with a reletively mild lens (I should expect). Though be mindful of the fact that the action is fast, some sections of track may not have chain-link in the way, though I suspect most will in modern H&S obsessed times, there are posts at about 12ft intervals to support the tannoys and lighting stacks.

Obstructions if panning, and lighting in general is the tricky bit I suspect.

They race under flood-lights, of an evening, not in good day-light.

If you can get on the infield, then you can get the kind of action shots they show in the books, panning from the radius of the turns, with the bikes picked out against the grandstand behind... but at the one event I went to, that was restricted access... I dont now if you can pay extra or anything for speactator entry to the infield...

From the bleachers... it's going to be tricky... you'll be shooting almost straight down onto the bikes beneath as they go past you. The angle is messy and not very interesting.
While as they go away from you, so you can get side on angle showing whet they are about, you will either be shooting head or tail on to them, or through the clutter on the infield.

It was a frustrating photo-scenario... the action is captivating, and incredibly dynamic, and SO close, and so bludy NOISY... big banger singles, on methanol, with no silencers... you FEEL the noise, and not just of the exhaust but the percussion of the valve gear of those engines running flat out, back wheel constantly spinning!

BUT, the angles, the clutter, the mist of sprayed cinders between you and bikes as they go past you, obscuring your view.... it is hard to photo.... especially from spectator points.

My advice? Don't be too optimistic of what you may get, especially if you are in the stands, not the infield.... treat it as a sighting expedition, to inform furture Speed-way photo's if you like it, and if you get any decent snap-shots while you are there, great.

Pay attension to the tannoy and who's in each heat, and fill in the results sheet, so you can try and work out who, what you have shot, if anything, or it can be a bit meaningless... and its a team sport; I think that there are four riders in each team, and they ride two-against two, in heats, to a final, to get an individual winner as well as a team win... it's a little confusing... and there are different classes as well.

Best of luck and enjoy!

 

[Stuart M]

I appreciate this is a little late as the Glasgow v Berwick meeting has now finished but assuming you might want to go do it again ...

1). Clubs frown on people shooting with flash from the outside of the track. It's generally regarded as a no no.

2). I strongly suggest you get a UV filter onto the front of your lens. Shale flies in all directions at speedway and it's far better to wreck a UV than the front element of a lens. A lens hood will offer no protection at all in this scenario.

 

[Nod]

Never shot speedway but used to go from time to time for an "R" fix! Used to hear it, even though it was a couple of miles away and behind a big hill.

I would echo the advice given by Stuart above - some sort of protection filter is a must. Might be best to avoid the outside of the bends too - a faceful of grit is never pleasant!

When I used to go, I don't remember there being any catch fencing but it's been a while so regs have probably changed. Unfortunately, we no longer have a track in town - it's been developed. Pretty sure the Falcons used to race round a rugby pitch rather than a dog track but basically, any oval track would do!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_speedway

 

[SinceNow]

Thanks for all the advise guys. I've ordered a UV filter from Amazon so hopefully that will help my shots the next time.

With the setup at the Glasgow track the side closes to the spectators has a fence. So to get an unrestricted view i need to be on the far side of the track. Unfortunately my 17 -55 kit lens doesn't seam to cope too well with this. Any ideas on a cheap lens that would suite this type of photography?

 

[pete.rush]

Taken at the Eastbourne Eagles Speedway Team press day which gave me unlimited access to the infield and outside of the track, however for a race event you access will be limited to the grandstands and spectator areas. The other problem would be the race event take place mostly in the evenings, so you'll have to also contend with failing light conditions under floodlights, so the faster you lens (example 70-200mm f2.8) the better chance you'll have of capturing the action, so there's not really a cheap option.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

 

[Stuart M]

Don't misunderstand Charlene. The UV filter won't make your shots any better. You use it at speedway purely to protect your lens from getting smashed from flying shale pieces.
I don't really know the Glasgow track but generally speaking, you'll need to get as high as possible on a raised section of banking and shoot over the fence with something like a 200mm or 300mm zoom.

Depending on your budget, you may like to consider ...

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR (£185 on Amazon)
Nikon 55-200MM F/4-5.6 AF-S VR DX Black Lens (£110 on Amazon)
Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG Macro (£118 on Amazon)

to name just a few.

 

[Teflon-Mike]

shoot over the fence with something like a 200mm or 300mm zoom.

Argh! No that would be a 200 or 300mm Telephoto!
Or perhaps a 200-300 'zoom' or more likely, a 55-200 or 55-300 zoom
Zoom merely being a lens of variable focal length, and available in ranges covering both wide angle and or telephoto ranges

Nikon DX 55-200's can be picked up on e-bay 2nd hand for under £100, 55-300;s for a couple of hundred.... fair wack given the price of the camera, but not exhorbitant as far as lenses go.

For cheap reach on the Nikon though..... M42 'infinity-correction' adaptor for about a tenner of the bay, you can then mount any of the 'old' M42 thread Manual Focus lenses of the last century, and these can be very good value for money.

Most will be 'Prime' or fixed focal length, ie not 'zoom' (hence comment above).

Cheapest reach for your cash? Probably a 135mm portrait lens. These were common short tele lenses in thier day, and there are an awful lot of them knocking about, and 'slower' ones dont command a lot of money.

I have a couple, and one within reach is a Hanimar 135 f3.5. this is not a very fast lens, but its still one stop faster than any of the zooms mentioned above, which are only f4.6 at the short end, and two stops slower f5.6 at the long end you are most interested in using.... You can pick up a lens like that for probably less than a tenner, and while its not a modern multi-coated lens, and wasn't even considered a 'great' lens in its day, on a cop sensor camera, using only the centre portion of the field of view, probably as good optically as a kit lens. Bit short, perhaps, but 135mm x 1.4 crop factor is equivilent of 190mm nb a full frame camera, which is only a noggin off the long end of my general purpose 70-210 zoom for 35mm film cameras, used for most track-sport photography a decade ago, and at far greater ranges over run-off area and gravel traps than you have at a Speedway....

For cheap reach, could be quite a lot of bang for your buck.

Want even more? Well, with M42 prime's; you are likely to find 300mm the next most popular long reach lens. Again, many knocking around, and all usually keenly priced. Often slightly slower max aperture, but slower ones likley to still be as fast as common AF kit Zoom's at the long end, around f5.6, and they are going to be uber cheap... spotted one a minute ago an f5.5... 16 hours ago, yet to reach £2! A faster F 4.6 in good nick ought not cost you more than £30 delivered to your door! Again, on a crop sensor, that's equivilent of a 400mm lens on a full-frame camera, and an AWFUL lot of reach... you can take almost full frame pictures of the moon with that.... come to think of it, I have!

Zoom lenses were less popular in M42 mount; people that bought M42 cameras generally chose them for the wide availability of reletively good value primes available; this means that they are often even cheaper, though in M42 fit, few were 'as good' as equivilent primes and usually not as 'fast'.. though still you ought to be able to get an f4.5/5.6 70-210mm for around the £20 mark...

Only bug-bear of using MF lens and adaptor on the Nikon, at least on mine, is the camera offers absolutely NO metering modes through the lens. This means using seperate hand held meter.... I got one not long back for under £3 off the bay! Or as I have done.... taking meter reading through the kit lens, noting the ISO, shutter and appature settings; selecting manual mode, and then setting that shutter and ISO on the camera and the aparture on the M42 lens when fitted, then adjusting from there.... It's fiddly, but it's not hard.

Anyway, that's cheap reach. And you can get an awful lot for under £30... that's 1/3 the way to an AF 55-200 kit lens... if you think you'd use it once you have it....

 

[pete.rush]

Yes you can use manual lenses, it was what photographers were using before we were blessed with autofocus. So using manual focusing, you pre focus on a point that the subject will move through – and shooting at that point. You need to get your timing just right but you can get some really great shots – as long as the subject always moves through that pre focus area., but if the track of the subject differs, thats when manual focus can become a real challenge, but perhaps a very good ability to master

For Motorsport it can be achievable, but it can becomes more difficult because the distance between you and the subject isn't constant, so pre focusing becomes very much more a challenge and if the speed of the subject is great, probably a small % of success. It takes a lot of practice.

 

[Teflon-Mike]

Yes you can use manual lenses, it was what photographers were using before we were blessed with autofocus.

Why doe you make that sound as archaic as preparing wet-plates and timing exposures with the lens cap and a fob-watch.....

So using manual focusing, you pre focus on a point that the subject will move through – and shooting at that point.

Basic technique, yup, and was more than moderately successful for decades before AF came along!

And there's a rather wonderful self compensator working for you, particularly with shorter telephoto's.....

Infinity focus.

On the 135 I just had to hand... (Really ought to get Daughter better trained at putting stuff away!).... infinity focus even at max aperture, is just over 50 ft... 20 meters.... couple of dozen paces.....

So, provided your subject is further than that from the camera... and lets think about this one, if it wasn't would you need the extra reach of a long lens?... it's going to be in focus (well, provided you have remembered to twist the focus ring!)... who needs Auto-Focus, when you are 'focus-free'?

It's really only if you want to try getting a bit smart and using wide aparture, very shallow depth of field to blurr back-grounds that it becomes tricky, and to do that you really do need to get a long tele-photo, but needs to have a fast apparture as well, or you wont get that super-shallow DoF.....

But.... even if you can, and my old 70-210 was a pretty fast f3.5 both ends... shooting bikes at Redgate at Donnington, from, what, 80m behind the run off? DoF even wide open was still more than the width of the track, and trackside marker-boards or kerb-striping, was still not blurred to indistinction, and the only way to get really dissasociated back-ground was by panning.

So its not such the problem it may seem.

 

[the_womble]

One of the atractions of Motorcycle Speed-way is the fact that you are SO close to the action! It's not like a short circuit, with run off arias... they are tearing around a ruddy dog-track (the wrong way I think... they run anti-clockwise?) with nowt but bales against concrete wall and a chain-link fence between you and the action.

Which is fast and furious!

The bikes are simple push-bike frames with no suspension, fitted with a big single cylinder engine pumping perhaps 60bhp, giving a power to weight ratio near infinity, as they weigh about as much as a bag of crisps, and will out accelerate almost anything but a rocket to 40mph, on thier way to a 70mph top speed... round a 1/4 mile oval, surfaced with loose cinders!

Much of which they negotiate in an almost un-ending power slide spraying rooster tails of ash up the stadium walls!

And they have NO BRAKES! (they are utterly, bizarly, and certifiably MAD!)

It used to be the most popular form of motorsport, and had its regular slot on ITV Grand-Stand, (Which was where I first saw and was wowed by the sport, as a nipper) getting almost as much coverage as soccer... races used to almost draw as large crowds too!

Unfortunately I have only ever seen one Speed-way 'live'... and it was a spur of the moment decission to go, while on holiday, and I only had an old VHS Video cam to hand... and what I got of the action was disappointing.

Close up, if you pick a suitable vantage you can get some pretty good action, even with a reletively mild lens (I should expect). Though be mindful of the fact that the action is fast, some sections of track may not have chain-link in the way, though I suspect most will in modern H&S obsessed times, there are posts at about 12ft intervals to support the tannoys and lighting stacks.

Obstructions if panning, and lighting in general is the tricky bit I suspect.

They race under flood-lights, of an evening, not in good day-light.

If you can get on the infield, then you can get the kind of action shots they show in the books, panning from the radius of the turns, with the bikes picked out against the grandstand behind... but at the one event I went to, that was restricted access... I dont now if you can pay extra or anything for speactator entry to the infield...

From the bleachers... it's going to be tricky... you'll be shooting almost straight down onto the bikes beneath as they go past you. The angle is messy and not very interesting.
While as they go away from you, so you can get side on angle showing whet they are about, you will either be shooting head or tail on to them, or through the clutter on the infield.

It was a frustrating photo-scenario... the action is captivating, and incredibly dynamic, and SO close, and so bludy NOISY... big banger singles, on methanol, with no silencers... you FEEL the noise, and not just of the exhaust but the percussion of the valve gear of those engines running flat out, back wheel constantly spinning!

BUT, the angles, the clutter, the mist of sprayed cinders between you and bikes as they go past you, obscuring your view.... it is hard to photo.... especially from spectator points.

My advice? Don't be too optimistic of what you may get, especially if you are in the stands, not the infield.... treat it as a sighting expedition, to inform furture Speed-way photo's if you like it, and if you get any decent snap-shots while you are there, great.

Pay attension to the tannoy and who's in each heat, and fill in the results sheet, so you can try and work out who, what you have shot, if anything, or it can be a bit meaningless... and its a team sport; I think that there are four riders in each team, and they ride two-against two, in heats, to a final, to get an individual winner as well as a team win... it's a little confusing... and there are different classes as well.

Best of luck and enjoy!

You definitely haven't seen speedway for some time!
The bikes have silencers, kick out around 75bhp, 0-60 in about 2.4 seconds, have air fences at most tracks, have suspension on the front forks, 7 riders in a team.

www.flickr.com/the_womble/sets

 

[cebrooker]

Hello all, I thought I would piggyback on this post as I am planning to do the same. Would my Canon 75-300mm F4:5.6 III be a good enough lens to get any sort of useable result given darkness?