For the first time, Canon didn’t just tweak the settings on a camera with a firmware update, they actually enhanced the camera. But after updating the 5D II to allow manual exposure, they still had a lot to do. And today, finally, it seems they’ve done it.

So what’s the big deal with the new firmware? Hit the jump to get a simple explanation of frame rates and audio samples, as well as the complete list of firmware changes. But if that sounds all too boring, feel free to just click here (scroll down, hit “I Agree”) to get the firmware and be on your merry way!

First, a list of the changes, and while it’s only a list of six, they are huge:

Firmware Version 2.0.3 incorporates five enhancements to the movie function and a fix to the manual sensor cleaning function of the EOS 5D Mark II camera.

1. Adds or changes the following movie frame rates.
   • 1920×1080 : 30 fps (changed – actual 29.97 fps)
   • 1920×1080 : 24 fps (added – actual 23.976 fps)
   • 640×480 : 30 fps (changed – actual 29.97 fps)
   • 1920×1080 : 25 fps (added – actual 25.0 fps)
   • 1920×1080 : 24 fps (added – actual 23.976 fps)
   • 640×480 : 25 fps (added – actual 25.0 fps)

NTSC: PAL:

2. Adds a function for manually adjusting the sound recording level (64 levels).
3. Adds a histogram display (brightness or RGB) for shooting movies in manual exposure.
4. Adds shutter-priority AE mode (Tv) and aperture-priority AE (Av) mode to the exposure modes for shooting movies.
5. Changes the audio sampling frequency from 44.1 KHz to 48 KHz.
6. Fixes a phenomenon where communication between the camera and the attached lens is sometimes interrupted after manual sensor cleaning. (This phenomenon only affects units with Firmware Version 1.2.4.)

Next up, What’s the deal with all those frame rates?

It’s all about standards. NTSC is the standard used for broadcast across most continents (PAL being the other standard). It’s also the standard used for DVD’s and Blu-Ray discs. And the players. And the standards for most editing programs that create those DVD’s and Blu-Ray discs. Basically, to not adhere to NTSC (or PAL) standards, is to ask for a whole lot of work just to get your video to work within those standards. So what are those standards . . .

29.97 fps for video, and 48Khz for audio. Which means every time you used a 5D, you had to resample that video and upsample the audio to match the standards. And that resampling was not perfect. your audio might not match perfectly so it would get slowed down (albeit by .1%, but still). And that audio, 44.1khz on the 5D II, is a great standard . . . for CD’s. But video has required 48khz for over a decade (maybe two. When did DVD’s come out again?)

Sure, the 7D and now 1D IV offer all these features. But neither has the one killer feature that made the 5D II such an attractive camera despite all those issues.

Being a full frame sensor, the 5D could really simulate the “film look” in video, which is a mix of that shallow depth of field (check), and the old film speed of 24fps (d’oh!). Which is funny because we were just talking about the NTSC standard of 29.97, and here I am harking for 24fps. Well, actually, since the beginning of film to tv and dvd conversion, a process called telecine has been used to turn 24fps film into a compatible 29.97fps video. After a while, they decided to make it easier by switching that standard to 23.976 (which is a perfect 4/5 of 29.97 and therefore easier to work with).

So, back to the point: Canon, with this firmware, has made the 5D II compatible with the NTSC standards, 29.97 and 23.976 fps, with 48khz audio.

On top of that, they added a few nice features, like allowing 64 levels of audio recording. Previously this was automatic, which meant you couldn’t really capture consistent sound levels, and without sound, your video is basically pre-talkie.

The histogram feature for video is also nice to have, as it lets you see exactly what the camera is capturing, rather than relying on the back of the screen (which may all well be fine, but isn’t very scientific at all).

All in all, this is a great step forward for Canon. Their support for an older camera shows that they are listening to their current user base, and attracting new users, all without forcing users to buy a new camera, and without having to release another new camera.

Here’s how important this is to me: I’m currently a Nikon user, and formerly a Canon user. I still have the equipment, but haven’t used it much (except for remotes). I own a D3s, and love it. It also does video, and also has a full frame sensor, but it suffers from some of the same issues as the 5D II. Only 24fps, not 23.976 or 29.97. Oh and it’s 720p, rather than full 1080p (so 2004). I even bought a 7D, figuring it had everything I needed (except that full frame sensor). Hated it. Sold it 3 days later (at cost, so no loss to me). Figured after that, I wouldn’t really dabble in Canon for a while, using my remaining equipment as alternate and remote gear.

But now? that 5D II really has me considering a purchase. Nikon, the ball is in your court. Better step up that video game.

BTW, if you need more details on anything I said, I will gladly elaborate on anything asked in comments, via meebo, email, phone, smoke signal, morse code. You send the message, I’ll be there to answer it. I understand some of the standards I mentioned above might be confusing. It’s confusing to me, and I’m a video guy, having worked at a TV station as a broadcast graphic designer. You’d think this stuff would just make sense to me, but it has me shaking my head from time to time. BTW, you think this is bad? Ask me why TV’s were 4:3 standard forever, but DVD’s were 720×480 (a 2:3 ratio), yet fit perfectly. Damn engineers.

Goodnight!

1/1000th, f/4, ISO 4000, D3s and 200-400 f/4.

Just a quick post. I received my D3s yesterday.  Merry Thanksgiving!

Today I shot the ASU vs U of A game, and it was the perfect storm of circumstances that let me shoot the D3s under several scenarios. The game was in full daylight, then got cloudy, then it started to rain, then hail. Lights were on (even in daytime) and as the clouds and rain and darkness took over, I ran the gamut from Auto everything (ISO, WB, etc) to full manual. I full expected it to outdo the D3 as far as high ISO capability, and it did. Handily.

ISO auto worked as well as it did on the D3. I rarely if ever use Auto WB, but the mix of stadium lighting, mottled sunlight, direct lit to overshadowed field, let’s just say I was hoping Auto WB would do ok. And it did. But just ok.

Oh and weather sealing was excellent. Once it started to rain and hail, I figured I’d test that out. Just in case I asked another long time Nikon user if their weather sealing was any good. He affirmed, and I held steady and shot in the rain. The D3s didn’t skip a beat, but I also had a D3 on my shoulder and that took the rain well also.

I loved the new histogram. You can zoom into a part of an image and it will give you the histogram for that area only.

My full take on the camera and its features will come later on. I’m hoping to shoot at the fringe of available light (12,800 to 25,600 and beyond!), and perhaps shoot a video interview with it. While I can say with confidence that I’m happy with the D3s, I really want to test it out more for a full write up.

It sounds good. But so did the 1D III, which hasn’t faired so well for Canon.

Continue after the jump, and you’ll get some links to more info and specs, including some videos on the 1D (boring, except for the fact that you might recognize the host if you were at all interesting in throwing a Microsoft Windows 7 party. That’s right. . . a party for an operating system), and more importantly a video made with the 1D.

And of course you can find all this on the net. Most likely you will find them before you find me. But if you found me, you’ll also get my take on both camera systems. Of course, all this is speculative since I don’t own either of the new cameras, just a few of the older 1D III’s and D3′s.

More after the jump (and I mean a lot more. I wrote way too much).

First, the bad. Canon has two videos on the 1D IV image quality and Autofocus, both found on the Canon Digital Learning Center Site. But if you have a second, check out the Windows 7 Party videos. The same guy is the host here. Epic Fail, Canon.

But Canon was smart enough to get Vincent Laforet (of Reverie fame) a few 1D IV’s, and he put out another video to intro the camera: Nocturne. Enjoy. Did you notice (if you clicked) that the Digital Learning Center Site looks a little unfinished? No clue why, but that’s weird. Anyhow, their Canon USA site looks complete. Check it out for more info. And of course, Rob Galbraith breaks the announcement with a few pages, images, specs, and other information. In fact, I don’t buy anything except as a rumor until he announces it as real.

So, looking at the specs and features, you can see that Canon really tried to match or surpass Nikon, offering the same or better feature set with more megapixels, and even a better MSRP (4999 vs 5199). On paper at least, the horse race is very even. But as I said before, the ID III was also impressive when the specs came out (remember, at the time the D3 was months away, and Canon was handily beating them on high ISO image quality), and really put the screws to Nikon. Once it came out however, the technical marvel of the 1D III was overshadowed heavily by reports of less than stellar autofocus. And then Nikon came out with the D3. And slowly but surely, we saw photographers switching from Canon to Nikon.

So in announcing the 1D IV right on the heels of the D3s, Canon is trying to keep up, and perhaps regain some users back. While announcing quickly so as to avoid losing more users was a smart move, their efforts to announce seem hurried. And the biggest problem I have with them? They never admitted problems with the 1D III, so they’re not endorsing their 1D IV as anything other than having “improved AF”. So it’s definitely buyer beware if you want to get a 1D IV.

All that aside, I have an interesting choice to make. I can go either way and get tremendous ISO performance, HD video (24fps 720p with an awesome full frame sensor, or 30fps 1080p video with a sorta awesome 1.3x crop sensor), and a big file, which honestly, after 10 or so mp, was more than enough since I don’t shoot panoramic landscapes or anything. But what about the intricacies of each camera, and their detailed feature set. They do things differently, and so you have to pick a side.

If my main interest was 1080P video, then the 1D IV really makes a statement. It’s not the full frame sensor of the 5D, but the high bitrate and quality of the image is insane. If I need video but it doesn’t have to be anything more than 720P, then the D3s and it’s full frame sensor would give you that awesome cinematic DOF that people loved so much about the 5D II.

That full frame sensor is so hard not to love. The D3s has it, and it’s very much like the old high speed film cameras, which is why so many people loved the D3 when it came out. If you want full frame, you just want it, and the D3s makes sense. Of course, if you need the reach of a crop sensor camera, that 1D IV turns your 300 or 400 mm lenses into 390 and 520mm lenses, which helps on the various large fields of play, or for wildlife shooters.

Nikon certainly had the advantage when it came to flash. Even when Canon was trouncing them in high ISO image quality, Nikons iTTL was remarkably better than Canon’s eTTL (and eTTL II). But with ISO 12,800, is that going to matter as much anymore? Well of course, but it just won’t be as necessary in low light situations. You’ll still want it for creative purposes, and in that case, Nikon still has the edge.

Nikon seems to like making a button for everything. Everything. The D3 has buttons to change the usual shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. But they also have buttons to change the sensor crop, white balance, image quality, autofocus mode, bracketing, image exposure mode, etc. It’s awesome if you want access to the most used features quickly, but it can be overwhelming. Canon makes a cleaner camera, with less buttons, each having multiple screens for features. It’s interesting, but sometimes the most important features are often buried in menus. You can create your own menu, which is great, but it does take time to do that. Honestly, I prefer the buttons, but I wouldn’t sacrifice image quality over it. It’s a push if you ask me.

Optics are very important. Nikon has the advantage of something like 50-80 years of lenses being compatible to some degree with all their cameras. This means you can pick up good glass for cheap, if you’re willing to shoot manual focus and exposure. This is great if you’re setting up remotes. With Canon, their old FD mount lenses won’t work without an adapter that is not sold anymore. Is this a big deal? That’s your call. But I had to mention it.

Current lens lineup? Canon has more primes available. 24 1.4, 35 1.4, 85 1.2. Can you live without those? No? Well you know your answer. But Nikon seems to excel at making zooms. the 14-24 2.8 image quality can’t be explained. You just have to see it for yourself. Their 24-70 and 70-200 are both excellent. Nikon also makes the 200-400 4, a zoom Canon has no answer for. In daylight, attached to a D300, it’s a 300-600mm effective lens, and very sharp. Put it on a D3 and you get a very usable 200-400mm range for most sports. Both have the usual assortment of super telephotos. 200 2, 300 2.8, 400 2.8, 500 4, and 600 4. But Nikons telephotos are much more expensive. However they do have a 5 year warranty, vs Canons 1 year.

VR vs IS. Under normal circumstances, I prefer IS. VR seems jumpier to me, and doesn’t always seem to engage. Both have standard modes where you shoot at a low shutter while not moving. Canon’s second mode only inhibits camera shake across one plane, thereby allowing you to improve panning shots. While I don’t do these a lot, it’s a common technique for sports photographers. Nikon’s second mode is for shooting from a vehicle while trying to maintain a low shutter. If you’re on safari, awesome. Otherwise, when could you use this?Aside from that, like I said, I really do prefer IS to VR. Canon’s been at it longer, so I sorta expect them to be better at it.

Image quality. Nikon is amazing at high ISO, but Canon is no slouch. And Canon can go down to ISO 100 normally, and seems to have amazing quality in detail at those ISO’s compared to Nikons files. It’s not that the D3 files aren’t any good, they’re just not as crisp. If you shoot a lot of daylight work, there’s something to a Canon image. But if you shoot in poorly lit environments, the D3 really had no equal. The ID III was good, but the D3 was just better. This may even out with the newer cameras matching at high ISO, but until I shoot some samples, I can’t say.

AF. As I said before, the 1D III has had consistency issues with it’s AF. If this weren’t true, I probably never would have considered shooting Nikon. Even now, having both, I have to say the Canon AF is faster, but wilder. The Nikon AF is much more deliberate, so it’s slower, but once it pegs its mark, it sticks to it. The 1D III is always thinking, perhaps too much, so it finds initial focus amazingly fast. After that, it’s a crapshoot. The D3 is funny, in that if it can’t find focus, it will sometimes get stuck hunting. I’ve often had to “reset it” by focusing on something very close or very far to quickly start it up again. Hard to explain but if you have a D3 you might know what I mean. Still, it’s been much more consistent and that’s very important. Enough so that I don’t know what to think of the improved 1D IV autofocus. I want it to work. I want it to be excellent. But I just don’t know, and until I use one, I won’t know.

Overall, I have to say that it all depends on the 1D IV autofocus. If it’s as inconsistent as the III, then I can’t imagine people jumping into it, and more people will switch over to Nikon. But if you held out, and waited for the IV, and it comes through, there’s no point in switching (unless you really want full frame and high fps).

And one last note: I can’t wait to see what’s going to happen in the prosumer range. The improvements on both sides will trickle down to the smaller cameras, and soon we’ll have these cameras, like a 60D or a D400 that will be able to shoot ISO 3200 that looks like ISO 800. If you’re shooting in reasonable lighting a lot, it almost makes sense to see this new technology trickle down, and rather than get 1 1D IV or D3s, get 2 or 3 of these other cameras, and have a more complete kit for the same price.

Amazing. I still remember when I had a 1D and thought it was amazing that I could shoot 4mp at 8fps with ISO 1600. I still miss the file from that camera. 4 meg RAW files are so easy to deal with.

So, now that this all came out in 2009 instead of 2010, I can’t wait to see what happens in 2011.

Comments, questions? Feel free to reply or email me.

We laugh now, but wait til we hit 2011 or so, and ISO 102,400. At some point the ads will just start saying that we can shoot under any lighting circumstance. Like during a power outage with no moonlight. Or black holes. Ok, I’m getting silly (until 2011).

Ya, so apparently Nikon decided that we couldn’t wait for the new decade, and just released this in time to put it on your Christmas list.

I would love to say that this is the perfect camera, but I can’t. Damn close though. More after the jump, including links and my take on it.First things first: check out www.RobGalbraith.com to get the scoop on this thing. He writes it up pretty well, and includes specs and other technical goodies.

How bout pictures? the Nikon Imaging Site has a D3s page. Take a look at that shot at 12,800 ISO. Wowwowweewow (yes that’s a word. Go watch Borat).

But the D3s does video now, right? So let’s see some movies. Nikon has a D3s/D3x microsite with videos. Too bad they’re tiny and in Flash video format. Great way to show off the quality, Nikon. Epic fail.

Finally, a D3s Brochure. So, enjoy the downloads to your hearts content.

So let’s start with the “bad”. First off, 720p video at 24fps, Nikon? really. So 2007. The 5D does 1080p, has full manual, and records at a fairly nice 38mbps. So what could Nikon have done to mix things up?

Well 1080p would just be a match, but how about variable framerates? 23.96, 24, 29.87, 30, 59.94, and 60. This would really make the D3s an amazing action camera, and force people looking to spend 5-10K on video equipment to reconsider. This could almost even infringe on the RED territory.

How bout something very editing friendly. The JVC GY-HM100U can record in a Final Cut friendly .MOV format. The 5D II records in AVCHD, which is standard, but Final Cut tends to rerender that file, which can take some time.

By going in the .MOV format, Nikon could have presented itself as THE camera for media journalists on the go. Imagine taking a CF card, copying files over, and being able to drop clips right into a timeline. While others are rendering files to start editing, you’re rendering out your video to publish.

I’d ask for some sort of audio options, like XLR, but that’s physically too big to introduce to the camera without major restructuring of the shape. But how bout an addon that would take wireless audio through the same port that the WT-E4A uses to transmit files wirelessly. Possible? No clue. But that port is there, so might as well use it.

Ok enough about the video. How bout the images?

Listen, they beat what I said (102,400 ISO) by a year and a few months. I’m still amazed. I totally expected 12,800 native (which the D3s has) and ISO 51,200 for the next rendition. Not this. So, ya, wow.

But why no low ISO love? Unless you get a D3x, you can’t get ISO 100. And even then its 100-1600 native, 6400 extended. Is it too much to ask for a compromise of say, 100-12,800, with extended to 51,200?

Any hope of a true 16bit NEF file? The pipeline for image data is already at 16bit, so keeping it at 16bit could be possible. And of course, higher dynamic range is always welcome. Imagine being able to shoot one of those dreadful high noon games and actually being able to see detail under the helmet/cap/sombrero.

I can’t really gripe about the lack of change in frame rates and megapixels. To be honest, 12 is a nice sweet spot and I hoped we could stay at that. I could even forgive 15mp in a full frame camera (which is why I have no love for the 50D and its clown-in-a-volkwagen-beetle stuffing 15mp on a 1.6x crop camera. Don’t even start me on the 7D). So kudos for sticking to 12mp, Nikon.

So that’s the bad. I think I took it easy on Nikon. Most of these things seems quite possible given todays technology. I won’t go asking for anything like an electronic shutter so you could go back to high shutter sync speeds of 1/500th or 1/1,000th  (CMOS sensors just can’t do that because they have a warm up and cool down time, whereas CCD can turn on and off instantly, hence the electronic shutter). I won’t ask for 15 fps or something crazy, or even RAW video (which the RED does now, but thats very proprietary and built from the ground up to do so, while Nikon is a camera company that happens to put video in their cameras now).

The good? Really, by now you should have read the links.

102,400 ISO. Anyone who’s ever shot HS football, or soccer, or volleyball, or any other sports in one of those horrible fields that’s lit by prayers and fireflies will rejoice. Once they can pony up the 5k for the camera.

Me? I’m hoping Santa has a soft spot for me. Maybe I can cash in a couple of Christmas’ worth of gifts for this one gift. Well two actually. I like two of the same camera. Maybe a third. Ya know, so I could set up a remote.

One last bit: For those of you that don’t know, I am currently using Nikon equipment, but even as recently as this weekend, also use Canon equipment. So if you think I’m biased to one or the other, I’m not. I really really want Canon to come out with something epic. Ultimately this type of competition is good for the consumer. Remember, a few years ago, if you needed to shoot at 1600 ISO and have it look good, Canon was pretty much it. Now? Not so much.

Questions, comments? lemme know.

So, uh, why the picture of Lisa Leslie? Because it’s all about  smiles and cries (If you haven’t seen Training Day, go see it). A better way to put it, for those that haven’t seen the movie, is that you need genuine emotion to make a photo work. You’ll always hear people saying things about their images featuring a players face, and that’s true, but beyond that you need a face that shows a genuine emotion. Smiles and cries.

When a player is injured, there’s no hiding it. Leslie took a bad fall and could barely walk off the court (hip injury, out a week). Another example I like is the look of dejection, often happening after a game losing shot or your final game in the regular season or playoffs. With most games, there’s always tomorrow. When there isn’t, it’s a somber feeling.

More after the jump.

With injuries, you normally don’t hope or expect it, so anticipation is difficult. Often I see the play through when there’s a lot of contact or some extraordinary physical effort. In basketball this is a hard foul at the basket. In football, it’s that high pass over the middle that turns a wide receiver into safety bait. In baseball its that dive in the outfield.

After it happens though, you can take follow up images. Easy enough when they stop play, as they did with Leslie (above), but sometimes the player toughs it out. When that happens, I’ll shift my focus to that player. Yes, I still want to cover the game, but this may be an important long term story. Dewanna Bonner ended up with a sore wrist, but a more serious injury could have impacted her standing as a top rookie, and the teams ranking as a top team. So I keep my eye on that player, waiting for something to happen. Sometimes it’s subtle. A limp and maybe a wince of pain when walking. Sometimes it’s worse.

Several more examples of the followups to both injuries are in the gallery below.

Jubilation or jube is catching a great positive moment for a player or team. For me, these are a little bit easier to anticipate. You see the momentum changing in a game, a deficit being overcome, or the final nail in the coffin score that seals the game. In basketball it’s the go ahead basket. In football it could be a key touchdown, a sack to kill a drive, or an interception. In baseball, it’s a double play to end an inning or a key strikeout with runners on base.

Jube is what happens after the big play. If you can anticipate well, you’ll know the key play before it happens. But it goes beyond that. As I’ve mentioned before, getting a feel for the players is important. On every team, there’s usually a few players that are very open, heart on the sleeve types. These are the players that will go crazy when a big play happens, either for or against them. Others are a bit more serious. Temeka Johnson is a fierce competitor, so even when she’s happy, she looks mad. I like it.

Jube isn’t just about a player either. It’s about the team. So usually after a play, I’ll see if the player shows something, but then I’ll also pan towards the benches or sidelines. Often, they are as or more excited about the play than the players. If you’re in the right spot, sometimes you can get the team cheering as a background to the key player also jubing it up.

Getting the crowd in a jube shot is also a nice way to show the importance of a play. If you can, try to position yourself where your crowd serves as a background. When a big play happens in that area, you shoot wider than normal, and try to get the crowd cheering as that background, while your player or players jube it up.

As with anything, doing these things just takes some focus, and a bit of practice. If you keep at it, eventually, you won’t need to think about how or when to shoot it, you’ll just know. Once you get that feel for it, it’s a matter of mixing it up. Try different compositions (like the wide shot vs the vertical for basketball), different backgrounds (clean, crowd, players, coaches, opposing team sulking), anything.

Practicing this during the regular season is a great way to be prepared for the more important games. And it doesn’t need to be the same team. Some of my best jube shots came from high school games. Be thankful you don’t have to hear the audio that goes with a jube shot in girls softball or basketball at the high school level. But their jube is amazing, because it’s so completely and utterly open and genuine.

As always, comments and questions are welcome. The gallery is below.

WNBA: Los Angeles Sparks at Phoenix Mercury – Images by Max Simbron

Generally speaking, after a few games, you get a feel for the style of the team (if they have one) and the tendencies, both good and bad. Understanding the team allows us a better opportunity to catch moments, and make some nice photos.

For example, I’m sure that Diana Taurasi has a chip on her shoulder. Was it from not making the playoffs last year? Does she see that perhaps this team has the talent to go far, and wants to display a level of intensity as a standard for her team? I don’t know what the answer is, but I like it so far. Every game has had her reacting to foul calls and non-calls. Every game, she’s been playing very aggressively (which may explain the fouls). I wouldn’t be surprised if she ends up MVP and leads the league in technicals.

So what else am I noticing two weeks into the season? More after the jump.

Dewanna Bonner. She’s actually ranked as the top rookie pick in the league. While she doesn’t have a polished skill set, she’s a very talented player, and plays hard. You can teach skills, but talent and heart are hard to come by. Photographically, I find it difficult to get a nice shot of her on offense. Rebounds? Defense? No problem. But a sweet jumper or play at the basket? Nothing that looks good. Hoping she cleans up her post game.

Temeka Johnson is a great fit for the Mercury. She’s tiny, but she really pushes the offense, allowing the offense to run at a high tempo (the Mercury are leading the league in points per game, and already set a single game record). She’s fearless and scrappy. I like seeing her slashing against obviously larger players without doubt, and on defense, she’s very scrappy (even if it does look funny when she covers a player a foot taller). I could use a good scrum image of her, maybe a loose ball dive. She’s already dove into the stands a few times. At least the fans won’t need to worry as much as when Shaq is on the rampage.

There’s a lot more I could cover, but I’ll save that for later in the season. Needless to say, it seems like the Mercury have the right mix of longtime players, veterans, and a rookie. As the season goes on, I’ll keep looking for tendencies and try to work with them to come up with the right images.

Lastly, I’ve now switched my image gallery over to Photoshelter’s own gallery feature. I even mentioned it last year in a quick update post, but hadn’t really used it for more than archived images. The gallery is listed below, can be displayed in fullscreen, and works in slideshow format. And all I had to do was upload the images. If anyone is really interested in Photoshelter, I’ll be glad to answer any questions about it, and even have a discount code for anyone really interested.

As always, comments and questions are more than welcome.

WNBA: Minnesota Lynx at Phoenix Mercury – Images by Max Simbron

Despite the shooting woes, Diana contributed in other ways, grabbing five boards and five assists, as well as two steals and two blocks, rounding out her stats.

When one of the bigger names on the team is having an off game, or even the entire team seems to be in a funk, what do you do? I mean, you gotta show something for being there. So what do you do? Just like players can contribute in other manners, we can look for something other than the usual “player driving to basket” shots.

Read on to for more pics, a gallery, and the type of shots I look for besides the usual peak action.

If you can’t already tell, Diana, or the team for that matter, wasn’t too thrilled with the officiating. So I went for shots that represented that frustration. To be honest, it’s fairly easy to catch those shots, if you know to look for them. Let me explain.

I usually try to shoot a player as they drive or take a shot at the basket, then switch over to the paint, looking for rebounds and hustle plays. When I see that a player is frustrated though, I stick with them. They missed, but maybe they felt they were fouled. They feel sleighted, like the officials aren’t calling anything in their favor. So I wait for it. And it happens. For some players, it’s a rare outburst (like Grant Hill), and for others, it’s as common as breathing (Rasheed Wallace). But you can see it build. So wait for it. It will happen. And tonight, it happened a lot. Enough so that I got every combination of frustration (single player, team, coach, ref, and every combination of those). Just check the gallery.

Besides that, I try to get hustle plays, like a loose ball dive, known to many as the scrum. For those, I’ll usually keep on the defender instead of the ballhandler, waiting for them to make their move. Again, it’s a matter of patience. You might miss a great pass or cut for an easy score, but those happen so often (I mean, it’s the point of the game). So you stick on the defender. And wait. Eventually, something happens. And you get it.

Yes, sometimes you get lucky. A great shot happens right where you were, and it’s awesome. But if you want to make it happen again, you need to anticipate. Learn the mannerisms of the players, the style of the team, get a general feel for the vibe of the game. If you do that, you’ll see that every sport has more than just peak action, and getting those different images is what rounds out the body of your work.

Gallery link is below. As always, comments are welcome.

New York Liberty at Phoenix Mercury

Another season of the WNBA season began on Saturday. The Silver Stars came into town, a strong contender after making it into the finals last year (only to be defeated by the Shock). So to kick it off, I tried to get a little bit of everything. I won’t necessarily start backwards, but if you look at the starting image, I’m pretty sure you can tell who won and who lost given Becky Hammon’s expression. Most people like jube shots, I prefer dejection.

So, what else do I try to get when a new season starts? Read on to find out.To start, I try to get a few of the new players on the team, hoping to get them in action, and hoping that they offer some emotion. Temeka Johnson, is the new veteran point guard, coming over from LA. She’s pretty gritty, and I liked the way she played, like she had a chip on her shoulder because she was the shortest player on the court (even for the WNBA, 5’3″ is short). I also tried to get shots of Dewanna Bonner, the Mercury’s drafted rookie.

I like to get good shots of the new players, because this is the first game, and you will only have anything you get from that nights game. With some of the other players (Diana Taurasi, Cappie Pondexter, etc) you can always use a stock photo if necessary. Because of that, it’s important to try to get shots on both offense and defense, though you would lean more towards whatever they tend to do best (blocking shots, rebounding, shooting or slashing).

This year though, the Mercury struck up a deal with Lifelock, to feature their logo on the Mercury jerseys. How European. This means all those stock photos suddenly get dated. So you sorta have to get photos of each new player. But beyond that, it’s always good to look around and see what else has changed.

Sometimes it’s something related to the players or the teams, like the new players or the jerseys, a new team intro, etc. And sometimes it can be something that affects how you shoot, like the lighting being changed (usually for the worse), or something you did to change things, like a new lens or camera. That was the case with me.

This was my first WNBA game shooting Nikon. While I’ve been using Nikon for about 7 months now, I haven’t shot any WNBA games with it. And it was certainly different. A full frame camera really worked well up close during the NBA season, but even with a 70-200, I felt like I needed to shoot at the longer end to get the smaller WNBA players tight in the frame. And for farcourt, the 300 2.8 was pretty good for NBA games, but for the WNBA players, it would be like shooting with a 70-200 on my old Canon gear. So I went with a 200-400, stuck it at 400 most of the way, and felt it tightened up shots much better. And with the D3 being so good at high ISO, I had no problems shooting at ISO 4,000.

With my equipment figured out, an idea of the shots I wanted to get, and generally having checked and double checked everything I needed to, I could relax, and just have fun with the games and get my shots.

Like Diana Taurasi clotheslining someone. Maybe that’s a Phoenix thing (I totally miss Raja Bell. Always had a chip on his shoulder, and willing to chop, knock, or whack someone). I’m still missing some of her other moves. She has this spin move, where instead of using her elbow against your body and spinning off, she goes high and catches people in the neck area. Stuns them while she spins. It’s great.

Oh and and before I forget: I try to get a few shots of each coach. In both teams cases, the coaches were incumbents, but you still want to get a few shots. Shots of Corey weren’t too exciting, but Silver Stars coach Dan Hughes came through for me. Towards the end of the game, he really felt his players weren’t getting too many calls. Ranting, raving, and then a nice showdown with one of the refs.

I like the ranting and raving stuff, but the ref sold me on this one. He looks really thrilled to be having this conversation.

All in all, it was a good game. Even had a few shots of a halftime event where they had dog racing. I gotta admit, shooting dogs at full speed up close: damn near impossible. Which means I need to go find me some dog agility events and get my practice in.

More pictures in the gallery, available at:

San Antonio Silver Stars at Phoenix Mercury

As always, if you have any comments or questions, please feel free to write in or email me.

BTW, it’s good to be back. I’ll try to start blogging regularly again.