S2 vs. S3/S5 or ?? ANY advice to improve my Lakers/sports pix welcome!

Another season, another desperate attempt to figure out why my Lakers pictures are getting worse and worse....

I was very happy with the results from my first season with the S2, especially considering I had no idea what I was doing and we were up in the 300s:





I spent the off-season learning everything I could about sports photography and using the S2. Then, at last season's opener they unveiled the "Lights Out" lighting scheme which cloaked everything but the court in darkness. No matter what I tried I'd come home with a few hundred photos so ovrexposed I was lucky if I had two or three photos I could massage with Noise Ninja and PS and salvage:





I searched flickr and found a few other sets taken from either my usual vantagepont or the same games I went to and found well-exposed photos taken with the S3. Went I checked the EXIF data I was shocked to see some of the best shots were taken in sports mode! Could it really be that simple? (It would explain my futile attempt to reproduce the settings with my S2....)

I'm open to any suggestions y'all might have: upgrading to the S3 is a no-brainer, but perhaps there is a better Canon for the low-light situation? I hate to lose that 12x zoom, but I'd drop down to 6x (and since excess noise is the biggest problem I have, maybe hanging back a little on the zoom would help? The only caveat is that they have to let me into Staples Center with the camera That means no interchangable lenses, and no lenses over 2 inches (basically no dslrs allowed.)

Thanks all, I appreciate the help

You have less light. So you have to lengthen the exposure time, open the aperture or use a higher ISO speed.

Look at the parameters of the underexposed shots and try to keep the shutter speed as high as possible (at least 1/200 s).
Use the histogram to adjust the exposure.
--
Victor
Bucuresti, Romania
http://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/

I kept thinking that I was doing something wrong, but after seeing those comparable S3 photos on Flickr I realized that the S2 just wasn't enough camera for the shooting conditions at Staples anymore....

Upgrading to the S3 or S5 was my first choice because I really, really love the S2, but now I'm thinking I should look into some of Fuji's that have great low-light reviews. (I'm not sure if they have a low-light/long zoom combo, though.)

I don't even need the super ISO: The S2 at 400ISO produces an acceptable exposure, but the noise just kills it. That's why I'm thinking there must be some newer cameras now that can handle a task like this.

I'm thinking of giving up a little zoom and just going for the G7. Sigh.... It was so easy before! i just had to set the white balance and it worked. Well, any excuse to get new gear, right

low light, big zoom, responsive for sport-photo ---> only a DSLR can meet all

it's been very, very frustrating, and they're really strict at Staples Center about the cameras. I've thought about a few times, but then I just picture myself having to walk back to my car and leaving it in the trunk

I'm doing some research on the Fuji S6000 right now; it doesn't make much sense to go from the S2 to another camera that can't shoot raw....

Sports Shooter has a great article about the adjustments they had to make with the pro equipment. The difference is dramatic in their before and afters:
http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1671

Thanks

I would also get the Fuji S6000 if it get IS

e_fisheye said:

e_fisheye wrote:
I would also get the Fuji S6000 if it get IS

Click to expand...

Have you heard about the new F50 on the Fuji forum? The so called IS doesn't work worth a damn and the new sensor is a megapixel stuffed mess. Virtually all the advantages of the old F31 sensor are gone. The next iteration of the S6000 will have that 12MP sensor and the useless IS, if the F50 is saying anything. If you want an S6000, get it before it goes the way of the F31.

I also use the canon superzooms in sports mode.

I've had success with the S1 in sports mode and I just bought the S3. I've used the S3 at two football games, one at night (sitting in the upper deck) and one during the day (sitting about eight rows from the field).

I don't understand why the S3 takes pics that are more noisy than the ones taken by the S1.

Hi sarlo

would you get one also?
same as you, I am a F31 user, for the F50, here is an interesting comment:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=25198884

actually, there is a S8000 with IS but the sensor is even smaller, all the businessman is the same, they won't put all you need in one dc, they want you to buy more than one...

sarlo100 said:

sarlo100 said:

e_fisheye wrote:
I would also get the Fuji S6000 if it get IS

Click to expand...

Have you heard about the new F50 on the Fuji forum? The so called IS
doesn't work worth a damn and the new sensor is a megapixel stuffed
mess. Virtually all the advantages of the old F31 sensor are gone.
The next iteration of the S6000 will have that 12MP sensor and the
useless IS, if the F50 is saying anything. If you want an S6000, get
it before it goes the way of the F31.

Click to expand...

you meant S3 is noiser than S1??

streetshooter said:

I also use the canon superzooms in sports mode.

I've had success with the S1 in sports mode and I just bought the S3.
I've used the S3 at two football games, one at night (sitting in the
upper deck) and one during the day (sitting about eight rows from the
field).

I don't understand why the S3 takes pics that are more noisy than the
ones taken by the S1.

Click to expand...

Yes, S3 pics have more noise than S1. I find it hard to understand why...

sarlo100 said:

If you want an S6000, get
it before it goes the way of the F31.

Click to expand...

I took your advice, and it was perfectly timed. I bought one on 10/27, which turned out to make me eligible for the $50 Fuji expiring three days later! With the free shipping I ended up with a very good deal for $275.

streetshooter said:

I've had success with the S1 in sports mode and I just bought the S3.

Click to expand...

streetshooter said:

I don't understand why the S3 takes pics that are more noisy than the
ones taken by the S1.

Click to expand...

In all my research that kind of question came up over and over again (regardless of brand). There seems to be a lot of frustration out there with so-called upgrades that are actually worse than their predecessors and, in some cases -- like the 6000 -- even models two generations or more back.

The fact that I was willing to pay a lot more for a camera with the newest technology but ended up with a camera released 18 months ago is a perfect example. instead of companies with passionate customers evangelizing their latest products (a la Apple) you have frustrated buyers pining for the good old days of the f30.

I was a loyal Canon user and LOVE my S2, but what were thinking?! Why would their latest top-of-the-line consumer model (that is so great it skipped from s3 ot s4) still lack a feature like RAW yet add a new red-eye reduction feature that is standard in even basic photo editing software?

Thanks so much for all the advice! I bought the 6000fd just days before the season opener and I'm very excited about the potential. My big problem was x-treme overexposure; The photos below are a great example of the 6000's low-light capabilities. Most of the photos only needed a tiny levels tweak here and there. I had almost time to play with the camera or read the manual, so unfortunately I messed up almost every other setting (including using the wrong AF mode, lol) so the overall quality isn't the greatest but that's not the camera's fault.





I'm really stoked about the camera and dpreview

Are you comparing images at the 100% view, or comparing images at the "fit to screen" view?

I think you'll find that, because the sensor SIZE is the same but there are more pixels on it, that the overall image (say, printed 8x10) will look much better on the S3 image than the S1 one; but if you zoom to 100 percent, you blow the S3 image up to double what the S1 could achieve; hence that view will have more noise.

Do the comparison with the same view of the image; because that's what really matters.