tdekany Loc: Oregon

I am very sorry for you. Holy shit!! Be strong.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Obviously, God keeps killing our kids because we don’t pray hard enough.

It’s rather a pity that he chooses to kill the ones who are devout enough to do so, as both of our lost boys were. I’ll just pray to their souls that they do better in heaven.

Taking great photos of professional drug abusers and wife beaters ought to be a piece of cake for such an all powerful being.


Just pray harder and your photographic skills will improve. God is down with pro football!

👍

aubreybogle Loc: Albuquerque, NM

[quote=amfoto1]Don't "cheap out" on equipment. If you truly want to break into pro football photography, you will need the right gear to do it.

You haven't told us what, if any, gear you have already... so it's hard to recommend. But I'll give an example, simply based upon the gear I use and am most familiar with....

You need two DSLRs. The reason you need two is in order to have different lenses ready and set up for immediate use, as well as backup in case anything fails. Do not buy a mirrorless camera (yet). You need the optical viewfinder and lens selection of a DSLR to shoot sports. Most mirrorless cameras use an electronic viewfinder (if they have a viewfinder at all) and those consume a lot of power, reducing the number of shots per charge. A DSLR with a battery grip (either accessory or built in) can get 2500 or 3000 or more shots per charge. Most mirrorless only get 400 to 600 on a single battery and the few that can be fitted with a battery grip might double that. Shooting a football game at pro level you will probably take between 3000 and 5000 images. With a DSLR, that means carrying one extra set of batteries and making one battery change during the game. With mirrorless you will need to carry 2 or 3 extra sets of batteries and swap them out several times during the game. You'll miss shots while changing batteries, too. Not to mention, high performance (sports level) mirrorless are more expensive than DSLRs (due to current popularity). They also have only been around in large numbers for a few years, so I don't know that they've proven their durability with hard use. There's no shutter mechanism to fail in mirrorless, like there is in DSLRs.... but mirrorless put a great deal more time on their sensors because they use them to create the image seen in the viewfinder, as well make the images. Eventually you might end up "graduating" to mirrorless, once they've matured, become more efficient and proven their dependability. But I do not think I'd use one for serious sports photography yet.... maybe in 5 or 6 years when you find yourself upgrading.

I use Canon gear and can recommend their 7D Mark II DSLRs as a more affordable sports camera... 20MP is more than enough resolution for most sport photography purposes, 10 frames per second shooting rate is plenty and its APS-C format allows you to use smaller, lighter and considerably less expensive lenses. The 7DII also has very high performance autofocus, which is important with moving subjects. It's 65 AF array uses an arrangement similar to Canon's more premium (and a lot more expensive and full frame) 1D-series cameras. It has a discrete chip running the AF system, separate from the dual processors handling images at up to 10 frames per second (most other DSLRs and mirrorless use a single processor for everything). The 7DII is also rated for 200,000 "clicks" or shutter actuations. That's sort of like the "mileage" Canon says you can expect from it. This is double what many other DSLRs expect... which can be handy if you're shooting 3000 to 5000 images per game! (FYI: nearly 4X more expensive Canon 1DX-series are rated for upwards of 400,000 clicks.)

7DII are currently on sale for $1400 (body w/W-E1 wifi adapter, which you may or may not need or use). BG-E16 battery grip for 7DII costs $210 and OEM batteries are $64 apiece (you'll need 3 per camera & grip, in addition to the one that comes with the camera). So you're looking at about $3600 for 2 cameras, 2 battery grips and 6 extra batteries. You'll get two chargers with the cameras, might want an additional pair of them to be able to charge four batteries at a time... figure another $110 for a couple LC-E6 chargers.

Lenses are the next major consideration. Day games aren't as demanding of lenses as night games. At night, pro arenas are usually better lit than college and high school arenas.

Sports pros using full frame DSLRs (like Canon 1DX Mark II... 20MP, 12 frames per sec, $5500 apiece) use hefty, expensive lenses with high performance autofocus. Some common ones:
- Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM II... $1700
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM III... 3.25 lb., $2100.
- Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM II... 6 lb., $6100.
- Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM III... new model, coming soon, 6.25 lb., $12000.
- Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM II... 8.5 lb., $10000 (current model, heavier but excellent)
- Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender... 8 lb., $11000 (built-in, matched 1.4X teleconverter)
With many of the above, you'll want a monopod to help support the lens for several hours of shooting (tripods may not be permitted on sidelines).

By using an APS-C camera like 7DII, you can reduce the size, weight and cost of your lens kit considerably. Where you needed a 300mm f/2.8 with full frame, on APS-C you can instead use a 70-200mm f/2.8 that costs $4000 less and weighs almost half as much. Or, instead of a $10000 to $12000 400mm f/2.8 on FF, on APS-C you can use a 300mm f/2.8 that costs half as much. "Crop only" lenses cannot be used on full frame, but offer add'l opportunities with APS-C cameras. In other words... APS-C cameras can use both crop only and full frame lenses.... while full frame cameras need full frame-capable lenses. Some possibilities for use on APS-C (many of which can be used on FF, too):
- Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM... $880 + $50 lens hood, 1.5 lb. (27-90mm full frame equiv.)
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM III... $2100, 3.25 lb. (112-320mm full frame equiv.)
- Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS HSM... $3400, 7.5 lb. (192-480mm full frame equiv.)

In better lighting conditions (day games and well lit arenas) some other high performance f/4 or even f/5.6 lenses can work well, while reducing weight and cost:
- Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM II... $1300, 2 lb. (tripod ring separate: $165)
- Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM... $1350, 2.75 lb. (tripod ring separate: $165)
- Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM II... $500, 1.5 lb. (no tripod ring poss.)
- Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM... $1350, 2.75 lb.
- Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II... $2000, 3.5 lb.
- Tamron SP 100-400mm f/5-6.3 VC HSM... $800, 3 lb. (tripod ring separate: $129)
- Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 OS HSM... $700, 2.75 lb. (no tripod ring avail.)

Note: All the above lenses use an ultrasonic form of autofocus, which is very fast in most cases and needed both to acquire focus quickly and to be able to follow moving subjects. Look for similar in any system you consider.

You'll find similar choices in other systems. The Canon 100-400, 70-200mm 300/2.8, 400/2.8 and 200-400 Extender lenses mentioned all use fluorite for exceptional image quality. Few other manufacturers use fluorite, due to the cost and difficulty forming it into lens elements. (Right now, only Nikon is using fluorite in some of their telephotos. "FL" Nikkors are considerably more expensive than comparable Canon lenses. For example, the Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 "FL" is 33% or $700 more expensive than the equiv. Canon lens.)

If you're still serious about pro sports photography, you will need top quality gear. Above are what I'd consider minimums.... IMO, you really can't go much cheaper (especially with lenses) or you'll start having problems. Also, you may want to consider getting a college degree in journalism or photography and while in school you can get involved shooting college's football games. Local high school games would be a good proving ground, too. You also might look for opportunities to assist a pro.... learn from them and perhaps open some doors to your own career.

Hope this helps![/

I enthusiastically agree with the college education aspect of this excellent post. There is no better investment in establishing oneself in a profession (and enhancing quality of life generally) than in an education for yourself. There are so many more aspects to being a professional photographer than taking good photographs. If OP feels he can't afford the money or time for a 4 year college degree program, many community colleges will offer much shorter and less expensive programs. Scholarships are also available. It will be time and money well spent. Besides enhancing his photographic skill, it will: facilitate networking in the profession, help establish his bonafides among potential customers and other professionals, educate him on the myriad of business aspects of being a professional photographer, and potentially open career doors upon graduation. I wish OP the best in his chosen career path. I have no doubt he can suceed if he lays a solid educational foundation and pursues his future opportunities prudently.

aubreybogle Loc: Albuquerque, NM

I am sorry, but I cannot help but respond to this, and what I view as other inappropriate posts. I recognize they are heartfelt. Although, I probably never knew them, I grieve for your sons and too many thousands of others. I am a veteran of Vietnam and Desert Storm. I lost classmates, close friends, and colleagues in both conflicts. Although the OP invited these responses with one of his early posts, these comments are neither informative for the OP or useful for other readers. Nor do they honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

A Pro is a person who earns a living doing something specific, for example, a Pro or professional photographer is a person who earns a living, their primary source of income, from photography. Now you know. As for the rambling, I believe, after reading your post, you get the top prize for rambling in this particular conversation.
You proposed a guestion you referred to as the impossible question. After taking the time to decipher the question, here's the simple answer. Maybe. If the person who shoots in the places mentioned for the reasons mentioned earns their living doing so then, yes, they are a professional photographer. If they do not earning their living doing so then they may be referred to as an enthusiast or an advanced enthusiast or even other lables, but not a professional photographer. I hope that helps clear the water a bit.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

That's more times in one day than I agree with rm1116.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. Either way it sparked a conversation and isn't that what social media websites are all about, people conversing?!

aubreybogle Loc: Albuquerque, NM

Yes, but I have better things to do with my time than engage in conversations that offer more heat than light.

skingfong Loc: Sacramento

Everyone has mentioned cameras, lenses and other gear. That's just part of it. You have to know the sport the players or team tendencies. It's just as important to anticipate what you're going to shoot. No matter what sport, anticipation and knowing the sport is key. All the equipment in the world wont help unless you know when and where to shoot. That's not always easy, especially with baseball. I learned this from when I worked in TV behind the camera.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Yes, that is interesting that you bring up drag racing as a comparison. Congrats to your son. My wife and I are both fans of NHRA Drag Racing and even the "big" pros there seem to have other businesses that they actually make money at. Conrad Kalitta owns a cargo airline business to earn money, Don Schmacher also makes battery chargers. John Force builds frames for others' Funny Cars and Dragsters as well as racing. Other auto racing families sell oil, auto parts, coolants, and own auto dealerships. Drag racing is a money sink hole like photography. We'd be apt to buying a late-sixties to early-seventies muscle car and drop a new engine in it, install a roll bar, and go drag racing! But I've spent a near fortune on my photo hobby thus far since 1978. So we'll probably keep auto racing as a pipe-dream or spectator sport for us.

CCChuckles Loc: Michigan

WOW this thread has gone from Pro Football to Religion, to PTSD, to Photo Equipment and other subjects...
I would think the OP would do well as a Religious Preacher & forget Pro Photo career...

deer2ker Loc: Nashville, TN

Streets Loc: Euless, TX.

Anyone who uses the user name "PhotoPro" should not need any advice. You seem to me to be a very immature individual that is looking for encouragement to become something you are not suited for. Why not begin your career by photographing Pop Warner football games and selling your results to parents. See how that works out before you progress to high school football games. By the way, Pray that your photographic skills will be better than those you have for the written word.

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

Sorry for the diversion. These “God will give me everything I need, so I don’t need to make an effort” posts hit me particularly hard while I’m in the midst of arranging my war hero son’s funeral and saving his house from foreclosure. We have spent the past month literally at his bedside while hearing hundreds of people offer up those “thoughts and prayers” so frequently and casually given to the dead and dying.

He did plenty of praying, and not just in foxholes, but his PTSD and 80% physical disability were
non theist in nature.

Get back to me in that disrespect for veterans thing after you’ve buried your own hero.

Photopro

I !always usE Canon cameras and ACCESDORIES.