Tech / Special Interest → Digital Imaging > High ISO Sports Photos

Re: High ISO Sports Photos

AJH-0331.dng 20,810,358 bytes

AJH-0704.dng 22,214,510 bytes

I don't think you need the noise reduction. It just makes the photo look blurry. Can you post a raw file from one of your football shots? I can be a throw away...just want to see how it looks from the camera

Although I shoot Canon, I think the Nikons are ahead of Canon with the issue of noise. I would say a low end Canon will not come close to a high end Nikon. This is my opinion from files I have seen. The more you crop the more noise you will see, and this applies to both crop and full frame cameras

I do think you can find a Canon that will work for you, as many folks shoot sports with Canon.

I do shoot manual at the games and always make sure my exposure is pretty set. Which is why I have to use 800-1600, but my noise is just really bad on it. I look at some of my colleagues and they are shooting with much more expensive cameras but I feel like I should be able to get near that quality. Maybe I'm expecting too much.

When you expose your images correctly you have less noise. Should they be underexposed and you need to use curves to adjust you will see more noise. Probably true with all Canon cameras, but the full frame cameras seem to be more forgiving.

Can you expand on the exposing issue? I must be missing something. I shoot weddings regularly and have no issues when I can control the lighting(somewhat) my shooting of sports has been horrible. I can not get decent results when shooting 800+ on my t3i.

I'm going to rent a 6d and try it out next week.

I think I will upgrade to the 7d and see where I'm at.

In the mean time, I'll try that software.

Thanks for the feedback and help!

I just looked at the file again, and it has a red color cast. You can fix that in a photo program and it will improve your file somewhat. Try a grey card the next time you shoot.

I have a canon 7d and in low light, it shoots with a color cast in all ISO's when the white balance is on auto, so I have to correct for a blue or green color cast. I'm not sure how the full frame cameras handle color for low light.

At this point I'm thinking it is a focus issue. I don't think entry level cameras were designed for tough jobs like night sports. You might also try the Canon 7d.

All my other images, especially during the day, look fine.

I've tried both. I have left it in ai servo and gotten same results. I've not checked focus to make sure its accurate.

Are you shooting in AI Servo or one shot, if not have you tried AI Servo? Have you checked to see that your focus is spot on? You can check this on the raw files.

I may rent a 5d and see what that gets me with the 70-200 lens. If its dramatically better, then I may have to bite the bullet and switch.

I can post one of the raw files. I'll do that when I get to work.

To everyone else. Thanks for the feedback. I am kind of stuck with the body at the moment. I'm just trying to get the best shot I can with what I have. I have been cropping the images but the one I shared is not cropped very much at all.

Here are the rest of the images from that one game.

»www.goherd.com/football/1656-gar···-gallery

Is there any chance you could share a jpeg right out of the camera from one of these shots? It would be helpful to be able to see all the exif data of the settings used to take it. That camera and lens combination should be able to take much better photos than that, even in somewhat low light.

I'm agreeing with bfreas. It's likely the body and it's ability to handle noise at higher ISOs.

I was at the Alabama / VT game and had front row seats in the end zone. When the game wasn't going on I was watching what all of the Photographers were doing. The over whelming majority were shooting with Nikon D4s or Canon 1Ds. Almost everyone with a D4/1D had a D700 or D7100 (or the Canon counterpart) with a smaller lens.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.

I'd say you may want to look at a different body that gives better high ISO results. Maybe a 6D and a 1.4 teleconverter. The full frame camera will give you a wider shot at the short end of the lens (won't get you to 28 mm but you'd be surprised). The 28-300L has a maximum aperture of 5.6 on the 300 mm end and will be almost useless at night for long shots.
--
"The world is big and I want to have a good look at it before it gets dark." — John Muir

For them to look like that, you are either REALLY underexposing, or you are cropping them too much.

It may sound counter-intuitive, but you may actually need a higher ISO to get your exposure where it needs to be.

If you are cropping them heavily, then you need a lens with longer reach.

It's hard to say for sure, but it also looks like the focal point is behind the players.

Use flash if you are allowed.

If the noise is mostly in the background, make a duplicate and clean image. Layer it on top of the un-cleaned image and erase what you don't need to clean, then merge the two. Don't do any sharpening before you remove noise. Make sure you get your exposure right in the camera, doing so in software brings up more noise.

I've moved in to shooting college sports this year. I'm having issues with football night games. I'm trying to limit my shooting to 1600 but to reduce blue I'm having to shoot 3200 some times. No matter what though if its above 800 I cant get the noise reduction to look right with out killing all the detail.

Heres an example: »www.goherd.com/images/galleries/···0647.jpg

Heres what the other photog is getting: »www.goherd.com/media/k2/items/ca···e_XL.jpg He uses a 300mm lens with a nikon d3 I believe

Any thoughts or suggestions on what I can do?

My workflow is pretty straight forward. Canon T3i with a 70-200 2.8l lens -> I shoot raw -> lightroom -> reduce images to top 100 or so 1 star for web gallery -> then 2 star photos go to our print magazine -> photoshop to change color standard to cmyk

During the day my shots are coming out pretty good. I do think I need a longer range lens too though. I'm thinking about the 28-300L 3.5

Thanks for the help/advice.

Alex