baseball action at a distance
Jan 30, 2015 13:19:41 #
I wanted to cover more of the baseball field; so bought my 70-300/4.5 lens. It does fine for me in full daylight, and is not too heavy for my senior body to manage, ha! Next chapter: the summer team that we follow plays many night games.
Jan 31, 2015 16:47:01 #
Jim Soholt
Loc: California Central Coast
SquareRoot wrote:
...bought my 70-300/4.5 lens.... Next chapter: the summer team that we follow plays many night games.
Square',
Atta' boy. Your timing is dang-just-about perfect.
Too bad about the funky background, but we shooters of less-then-professional sports have to take what we get sometimes, eh?
For those dimly lit night games, lens speed seems to win hands down over length. Bonne chance.
Keep Shooting.
Rspectfully,
Feb 2, 2015 20:59:09 #
Feb 2, 2015 22:24:32 #
Thanks Jim & JR for encouraging me.
Looks like I'll be able to handle my 70-200/2.8 lens too.
I'm mostly on my feet for the entire 2+ hour game.
That's work for my aging body; but 'good for me', huh?
Thanks again.
wayne
Looks like I'll be able to handle my 70-200/2.8 lens too.
I'm mostly on my feet for the entire 2+ hour game.
That's work for my aging body; but 'good for me', huh?
Thanks again.
wayne
Feb 16, 2015 16:30:58 #
There is a reason sports shooters use a monopod. Take all the weight off you and put it on the pole.
I forgot mine once and spent an 8 hour day handholding the 70-200. Exhausting!
I forgot mine once and spent an 8 hour day handholding the 70-200. Exhausting!
Feb 16, 2015 17:26:47 #
CaptainC wrote:
There is a reason sports shooters use a monopod. Take all the weight off you and put it on the pole.
I forgot mine once and spent an 8 hour day handholding the 70-200. Exhausting!
I forgot mine once and spent an 8 hour day handholding the 70-200. Exhausting!
'Exhausting' would certainly be an understatement for me, CaptainC!
I absolutely could not endure it.
Shot a double-header Friday. 34 degrees both games -- BRRR!
Used my 70-300 lens for the 3hr game #1. On my feet all game long.
Wore me out!
Switched to the 2.8 lens for game #2. And took some breaks to sit a while.
Don't know how I would have gotten the game-winning hit with the
4.5 lens.
I have 2 reservations on a monopod.
First, am I nimble enough to follow the action while tied to the pole; and second, would my back tolerate it. I handle the weight of the 70-200 OK when I can keep my back erect. But I won't know till I try it; will I?!
Thanks for your advice.
Feb 16, 2015 17:45:48 #
SquareRoot wrote:
'Exhausting' would certainly be an understatement ... (show quote)
You will be able to adjust the height of the camera's view finder so you are not having to bend over at all. Using one take a a little getting used to, but not much and the ability to transfer ALL the weight off your hands and arms is worth the loss of some flexibility. I use mine with a Manfrotto pistol grip head, so if I need to adjust the angle, just a squeeze by my left hand unlocks the ball.
Feb 16, 2015 18:17:39 #
Feb 16, 2015 19:05:08 #
A monopod does take the weight off, but I feel that it restricts me too much, especially with the smaller lenses such as the 70-200. I would definitely use the monopod on a 400 2.8, but with anything smaller, I will hand hold just for the nimbleness. I guess it just comes down to what you are comfortable with and what you are willing to give up.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.