A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Sports > Advice on camera settings

Featured Equipment Deals

Equipment for Wedding Photographers Read More

Equipment for Wedding Photographers

Weddings can be stressful events, but with the right tools in your bag, photo.net will help you be best prepared to capture the day! This guide covers everything from camera bodies and lenses to...

Advice on camera settings

Alan Russo , Feb 15, 2008; 11:15 p.m.

Hi - I shot my first basketball game yesterday (outdoors) at work, and while I was really happy with the composition, I was disappointed to see that the shots were all a bit soft. This was exacerbated when I converted from RAW to JPEG to share with the guys on the team.

I was using a Canon 5D, Tv priority 1/500. ISO 500. The lens was a 70-200mm f/2.8L. The apertures were in the 4-5.6 range, with a polarized filter to cut down on the sun's glare.

What settings would you typically use to get tack-sharp action photos with acceptable depth of field? I'd like the aperture to be narrow enough so that the the 2-3 players relevant to the action will all be sharp, not just the ball or the one player I focused on. How high would you go on ISO when shooting outdoors as to not have too much grain?

Thanks for the advice!



David Haas , Feb 16, 2008; 06:10 a.m.

Alan -

An example photo might help but here's what I would do...

ISO no higher than 400. Autofocus center point / continuous server mode. Shutter speed 1/500 aperture 5.6

What program are you using to covert to JPEG?


William W , Feb 16, 2008; 07:44 p.m.

>>> I was disappointed to see that the shots were all a bit soft <<< (AR)

Please analyse (or post examples) and accurately define `soft`:

1. Focus in front or behind key subject / photographer reaction time / inappropriate AF procedure

2. Slight subject movements (1/500 might just be too slow)

3. Underexposure / inappropriate AE

4. Too shallow DoF / FL too long

5. Camera jitter (yes, I read Tv = 1/500)

6. OoF on near shots only / AF selection at 3m to infinity

7. Inferior PF

8. Combination of any or all.

Please reconfirm the lens is: EF 70 to 200F2.8L USM (i.e. not IS version)

A few image examples might help comments.

>>> What settings would you typically use to get tack-sharp action photos with acceptable depth of field? <<< (AR)

I should be happy with 1/500sec in most instances for BBall, but being outside I think I would most likely use 1/640 or even 1/800

The DoF when working this lens is greatly dependent upon the SD (Subject Distance) and the Focal length.

I know that previous statement is obvious: what I am meaning is the awareness of this fact is very important.

I have mental `go` and `no go` areas etched into my brain, as I use exactly this lens, usually at F2.8 or F3.5, for swimming events.

This is why I am, without image evidence, I am leaning towards a DoF and or an Auto Focus issue which is bothering you: rather than the lens being `soft` or something else.

Just for clarification, and as an example:

From my rules which I commit to memory:

At 200mm I need to work at 20 to 25 ft for the Half Shot on a 5D (Vertical Framed Image)

My `rules` tell me I have DoF @ F2.8 = 6 inches, and then add 3 inches for each stop, thus:

F2.8 = 6

F4.0 = 9

F5.6 = 12

F 8.0 = 15

At F8 it is probably more DoF, especially at 25 ft, but I hardly use F8, and at F2.8 @ 20ft I have probably less DoF: understand these are my rules` and are my shooting `guide` only, from using a 200mm on a film SLR covering sports.

The point is you can see there is not much to play with at F4: and this fact, combined with a little AF issue could just be the causes of your concerns.


Alan Russo , Feb 16, 2008; 11:12 p.m.

William/David, Thank you for your responses. I am using Photoshop Elements 6.0 to do my conversions. The lens is a 70-200 f/2.8L with IS, which was on in mode 1 (X & Y stablization). Attached are 2 images which are examples of what I'm experiencing. The first is converted to max quality JPEG, resized to allow for posting here. It's a shot I like taken from about 20-25 feet away as one of the guys muscles though for a lay up. The second is a crop of his face and part of his hand with the image at 100% magnification. Here is where you can see what I mean by soft. When I take portraits or architecture or landscape photos, the images are tack sharp at 100%, and prints are very satisfying. Obviously - movement is negligible, and I often use a tripod. While it may not be possible to get exactly that same quality of image, I've seen lots sharper than what I took! Image 1: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikecrazy/2270676208/ Image 2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikecrazy/2270676272/ Your advice is appreciated! Alan

Back to top

Notify me of Responses