Martial arts photography

I'm looking for some advice with respect to martial arts photography (aikido specifically). I recently photographed a number of people testing and I'm unhappy with the results. I suspect that part of the problem is with my technique and part of the problem is with my equipment.

All of the following images were shot with a D60 and the Nikkor 55-200mm VR. Since I could get close to the matte and because the lens is faster at shorter focal lengths, I shot almost all of my photos at 55mm, f/4, and ISO 800. For metering, I used matrix with a -0.33 exposure bias (the white dogi seemed to cause over exposure). For focusing, I used Continuous Servo and Dynamic Area AF.

The results are evident in the following images. Shutter speeds ranged from 1/25 to 1/60. I think I would like to have some motion blur to express the speed of the action, but I'd like only the legs and such to be blurred. My results ended up with blurred faces as well.

It seems to me that my shutter speeds are way too slow and I suspect that my focus is off as well (it's hard for me to tell with all the motion blur). Focus sure did seem slow though.

What would you recommend for technique? If you were to upgrade a piece of equipment, what would you recommend first? The lens or the camera (for higher ISO and faster focusing)? It seems that most fast lenses (zooms at least) cost significantly more than a camera upgrade (a D90 without lens is less than $1,000). Since I can get unusually close to the action, perhaps the new AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1.4 would work well?

My current equipment:
D60
18-55 VR
55-200 VR
16-85 VR
SB600

Yes, I think you would be well served here by the 50/1.4G.

Try 50mm AFD at f/2 and shutter speed at 1/200. You may not need to have AF. Preset focus with a little bit practise should serve you will. You may also try a longer lense and stand further away. Longer focus lense will exclude the busy background. If you feel that you can use preset focus, then try 105mm f/2.5, 85mm f/1.8, they are quite inexpensive.

Thanks. The Nikkor 1.4 has the advantage of costing about half that of a D90. It would also be great for portraits.

I've heard the Nikkor 1.4 focuses slower than the Sigma. Is it that much slower though? Has anyone used it for sports?

I would prefer to see the subjects in better focus/without blur and with some isolation.

A higher shutter speed would resolve the former situation and a longer focal length and/or wider aperture the latter.

Unfortunately, in this situation the solution is not necessarily cheap - a long f2.8 lens. Alternatively, try getting much closer with a short, fast lens shot wide open. I would keep the shutter speed up until you can regularly get sharp results -reducing the SS gradually until you get the requisite amount of blur in some areas. Manual pre-focussing may work better if the camera is struggling to aquire good focus on a fast moving subject.

Regards,

Steve D.

mzwang said:

Try 50mm AFD at f/2 and shutter speed at 1/200. You may not need to have AF. Preset focus with a little bit practise should serve you will. You may also try a longer lense and stand further away. Longer focus lense will exclude the busy background. If you feel that you can use preset focus, then try 105mm f/2.5, 85mm f/1.8, they are quite inexpensive.

Click to expand...

Both those lenses sound promising. Too bad the 85mm isn't AF-S.

Thanks. Sounds like I'd better start getting comfortable with manual focus.

SteveD53 said:

I would prefer to see the subjects in better focus/without blur and with some isolation.

A higher shutter speed would resolve the former situation and a longer focal length and/or wider aperture the latter.

Unfortunately, in this situation the solution is not necessarily cheap - a long f2.8 lens. Alternatively, try getting much closer with a short, fast lens shot wide open. I would keep the shutter speed up until you can regularly get sharp results -reducing the SS gradually until you get the requisite amount of blur in some areas. Manual pre-focussing may work better if the camera is struggling to aquire good focus on a fast moving subject.

Regards,

Steve D.

Click to expand...

George Orwell said:

All of the following images were shot with a D60 and the Nikkor 55-200mm VR. Since I could get close to the matte and because the lens is faster at shorter focal lengths, I shot almost all of my photos at 55mm, f/4, and ISO 800.

Click to expand...

This is your biggest problem, low ISO and small aperture. If you're happy with the angle of view at 55mm on the zoom, then I'd suggest buying the 50 f/1.8. It is the cheapest fast prime that you can buy, about $100. If you want wider, the 35 f/1.8 seems like a good buy and longer is the 85 f/1.8. Any one of those 3 lenses give you 2 more stops of real light to play with over your f/4 zoom and none of them are high dollar lenses.

Then I'd suggest upping that ISO to 3200. I don't know how noisy the d60 sensor is, but I'd rather deal with noise than OOF photos. You could go with the sigma 50 f/1.4 for the fast HSM focus and good bokeh, but IMO that isn't going to be a big deal over the 50 f/1.8.

George Orwell said:

The results are evident in the following images. Shutter speeds ranged from 1/25 to 1/60. I think I would like to have some motion blur to express the speed of the action, but I'd like only the legs and such to be blurred. My results ended up with blurred faces as well.

Click to expand...

Those shutter speeds are far too slow for action sports. You could shoot at 1/250 and still get motion blur from the extremities.

My advice would be to shoot your next session at ISO3200 or 6400 if you have it. Blow out the highlights of the white jackets on the top, where the overhead lighting hits. Convert to B&W if the noise is too bad. At f/4 minimum aperture, you shouldn't have an issue with them being in focus. If it's too dark for the AF to work properly, then you need to use manual focus.

--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

Unfortunately, the D60 won't do 6400 ISO. In fact, it doesn't even really do 3200 ISO. Also, the D60 won't auto focus with the 50mm 1.8 or the 85mm 1.8. I hate to spend money on a lens that won't auto focus, but I may consider it since using 1600 ISO will only give me one additional stop, which is still far from 1/250. I'd get the 35mm 1.8 in a heartbeat if anyone had it for sale (even so it's probably a little short for shooting aikido).

On another note, why do you suggest "Blow out the highlights of the white jackets on the top, where the overhead lighting hits."?

Kerry Pierce said:

George Orwell said:

All of the following images were shot with a D60 and the Nikkor 55-200mm VR. Since I could get close to the matte and because the lens is faster at shorter focal lengths, I shot almost all of my photos at 55mm, f/4, and ISO 800.

Click to expand...

This is your biggest problem, low ISO and small aperture. If you're happy with the angle of view at 55mm on the zoom, then I'd suggest buying the 50 f/1.8. It is the cheapest fast prime that you can buy, about $100. If you want wider, the 35 f/1.8 seems like a good buy and longer is the 85 f/1.8. Any one of those 3 lenses give you 2 more stops of real light to play with over your f/4 zoom and none of them are high dollar lenses.

Then I'd suggest upping that ISO to 3200. I don't know how noisy the d60 sensor is, but I'd rather deal with noise than OOF photos. You could go with the sigma 50 f/1.4 for the fast HSM focus and good bokeh, but IMO that isn't going to be a big deal over the 50 f/1.8.

Kerry Pierce said:

The results are evident in the following images. Shutter speeds ranged from 1/25 to 1/60. I think I would like to have some motion blur to express the speed of the action, but I'd like only the legs and such to be blurred. My results ended up with blurred faces as well.

Click to expand...

Those shutter speeds are far too slow for action sports. You could shoot at 1/250 and still get motion blur from the extremities.

My advice would be to shoot your next session at ISO3200 or 6400 if you have it. Blow out the highlights of the white jackets on the top, where the overhead lighting hits. Convert to B&W if the noise is too bad. At f/4 minimum aperture, you shouldn't have an issue with them being in focus. If it's too dark for the AF to work properly, then you need to use manual focus.

--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

Click to expand...

George Orwell said:

Unfortunately, the D60 won't do 6400 ISO. In fact, it doesn't even really do 3200 ISO.

Click to expand...

It will do Hi1, 3200 equivalent. That's what I'd shoot. I'd also shoot bounced flash off of the ceiling, sb800, even several remote units, if it were allowed.

George Orwell said:

Also, the D60 won't auto focus with the 50mm 1.8 or the 85mm 1.8. I hate to spend money on a lens that won't auto focus, but I may consider it since using 1600 ISO will only give me one additional stop, which is still far from 1/250. I'd get the 35mm 1.8 in a heartbeat if anyone had it for sale (even so it's probably a little short for shooting aikido).

Click to expand...

Dunno. If you're planning on staying with photography and eventually buying a body that will AF an AF-D lens, then it doesn't matter. AF that doesn't work in poor light forces you to use MF anyway. Of course, I understand that you want AF for the other times that you use the camera. That doesn't leave you with many options, none of which are cheap. If you wanted to upgrade cameras, the d90 would be the way to go, IMO. Then you could buy the 50 f/1.8 when the cash was available, while still using your 55-200 with better results now.

IIRC, the d90 will operate AF-D lenses and it has excellent high ISO performance, up to 6400 or higher. Can't remember for sure, been a while since I looked at the specs.

George Orwell said:

On another note, why do you suggest "Blow out the highlights of the white jackets on the top, where the overhead lighting hits."?

Click to expand...

My impression is that there is overhead lighting, which will cause the shoulders of the white coats to be much brighter than any other area of the photo, when the rest of the photo is properly exposed.

--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

Thanks for the tips. I do plan to get something like a D90 eventually. In the meantime, I'll give Hi1 a try. I'm told that it has terrible dynamic range and should be avoided, but I guess in my case, it's still better than horribly blurry photos.

As for using bounce flash, I don't know if I feel comfortable with that. I'd hate to distract folks who are testing.

Kerry Pierce said:

George Orwell said:

Unfortunately, the D60 won't do 6400 ISO. In fact, it doesn't even really do 3200 ISO.

Click to expand...

It will do Hi1, 3200 equivalent. That's what I'd shoot. I'd also shoot bounced flash off of the ceiling, sb800, even several remote units, if it were allowed.

Kerry Pierce said:

Also, the D60 won't auto focus with the 50mm 1.8 or the 85mm 1.8. I hate to spend money on a lens that won't auto focus, but I may consider it since using 1600 ISO will only give me one additional stop, which is still far from 1/250. I'd get the 35mm 1.8 in a heartbeat if anyone had it for sale (even so it's probably a little short for shooting aikido).

Click to expand...

Dunno. If you're planning on staying with photography and eventually buying a body that will AF an AF-D lens, then it doesn't matter. AF that doesn't work in poor light forces you to use MF anyway. Of course, I understand that you want AF for the other times that you use the camera. That doesn't leave you with many options, none of which are cheap. If you wanted to upgrade cameras, the d90 would be the way to go, IMO. Then you could buy the 50 f/1.8 when the cash was available, while still using your 55-200 with better results now.

IIRC, the d90 will operate AF-D lenses and it has excellent high ISO performance, up to 6400 or higher. Can't remember for sure, been a while since I looked at the specs.

Kerry Pierce said:

On another note, why do you suggest "Blow out the highlights of the white jackets on the top, where the overhead lighting hits."?

Click to expand...

My impression is that there is overhead lighting, which will cause the shoulders of the white coats to be much brighter than any other area of the photo, when the rest of the photo is properly exposed.

--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

Click to expand...

George Orwell said:

I'm looking for some advice with respect to martial arts photography (aikido specifically). I recently photographed a number of people testing and I'm unhappy with the results. I suspect that part of the problem is with my technique and part of the problem is with my equipment.

Click to expand...

Actually, most of it is your technique...

Specifically, timing. There are a lot of Aikido shots that will look OK at 1/60 (although 1/100 is probably better), but the ones you show aren't them. You have to know when the body and head are going to be moving less than the arms and legs. Flips are not those times. Blocks are.

Do you do Aikido, or just photograph it?

George Orwell said:

All of the following images were shot with a D60 and the Nikkor 55-200mm VR. Since I could get close to the matte and because the lens is faster at shorter focal lengths, I shot almost all of my photos at 55mm, f/4, and ISO 800. For metering, I used matrix with a -0.33 exposure bias (the white dogi seemed to cause over exposure). For focusing, I used Continuous Servo and Dynamic Area AF.

Click to expand...

Go to center AF. Dynamic wastes a ton of time in decision making.

Better still is to learn the routines well enough to position an AF zone where the action will be.

George Orwell said:

The results are evident in the following images. Shutter speeds ranged from 1/25 to 1/60. I think I would like to have some motion blur to express the speed of the action, but I'd like only the legs and such to be blurred. My results ended up with blurred faces as well.

Click to expand...

There's two things conspiring against you there.

The first is your general sense of timing.

The second is your shutter speed. You really need need to be up in the 1/100-1/250 range. Most of my Aikido shots are at f2 or f2.8, ISO 800 or 1600. So, it would appear I'm usually working with about the same amount of light as you. Basically, you need a slightly faster lens, because it gives you both a bit of shooting speed and a more blurred background, so the sharp in-focus parts of your image "leap off" the background.

George Orwell said:

It seems to me that my shutter speeds are way too slow and I suspect that my focus is off as well (it's hard for me to tell with all the motion blur). Focus sure did seem slow though.

Click to expand...

You've got the winning combination of the slowest AF camera and the slowest AF lenses in the Nikon lineup. Using the AF-On button might help, but I'm not sure how to set a D60 to use it (or if it even has one).

George Orwell said:

What would you recommend for technique? If you were to upgrade a piece of equipment, what would you recommend first? The lens or the camera (for higher ISO and faster focusing)?

Click to expand...

Camera, probably. Although the updates really do go together.

Are you going to do this commercially? What percentage of keepers do you need? Technique will give you a few good shots from every match. But if you need good shots from every trial, you're going to have to throw money at the problem.

A used pro body can be had surprisingly cheap (I just saw one go on CL for $700), and dramatically outshoots a D60.

On a pro body, the screwdriver lenses almost always focus faster than AF-S lenses. I do a lot of martial arts with an 85mm f1.4, but an 85mm f1.8 would do just as well. I'd expect under $300 for a used one. So, all in all, you should be under $1000 for something that can keep up with the action.

George Orwell said:

It seems that most fast lenses (zooms at least) cost significantly more than a camera upgrade (a D90 without lens is less than $1,000).

Click to expand...

A D90 is not a significant update from a D60. Think used D300 or D2X.

George Orwell said:

Since I can get unusually close to the action, perhaps the new AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1.4 would work well?

Click to expand...

On a low voltage body (D60, D90, D300 without a battery pack) that lens is a dog. It's not much faster on a high voltage body (D2X, D300 with a pack).

A D2X or D300 will slam the older screwdriver 50mm f1.4 around a lot faster than the new AF-S lens can manage. That's another lens you can get into for under $300 used.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

I've seen some good advice here. Let me add my 2 cents.

I don't know Akido, but I'm a taekwondo instructor, and I've shot that on and off for years.

Some action in tkd is fairly predictable, especially forms. Even some sparring moves can be anticipated.

Certainly your shutter speeds are way too slow. However, I do not think the answer is to get faster lenses. Then you'll just trade motion blur for depth of field focus issues. Maybe you can get adequate depth of field with F4, maybe not, but the answer here is higher iso or add some light.

I know from experience that on-camera flash can be very distracting for competitors doing forms, less so for sparring. But it might be worth having a look at the strobist web site for examples and advice for lighting gyms with a radio-controlled flash. (Costs nothing to read).

Otherwise, you're going to need to boost ISO as far as you can. I've simply come to the conclusion that I need to go to a D3 or D700 to get another stop in the never-ending battle to shoot high speed action in low light scenarios. My D300 will be too noisy for me at ISO3200. (Though the suggestion to use B&W is a good one - seems much more natural to see 'grain' in B&W).

If you do want to play with fast lenses to see how little depth of field you can get away with, try a 50F1.8 - around $130 new I think, and I doubt you'd see a significant (or usable) difference between F1.4 and F1.8, and the depth of field at either of those is going to cause you fits.

D60 or D90 seem to me to both leave a lot to be desired in terms of good fast AF performance. I'd think D300 as a minimum on this, for both AF performance and high ISO performance.

George Orwell said:

Thanks for the tips. I do plan to get something like a D90 eventually. In the meantime, I'll give Hi1 a try. I'm told that it has terrible dynamic range and should be avoided, but I guess in my case, it's still better than horribly blurry photos.

Click to expand...

Lots of folks get strung out on minor details like loss of DR at high ISO. If you can't get the shot without using high ISO, then the loss of DR is a moot point. Likewise, if you can't afford a d3 and a bucket full of expensive glass, it doesn't matter how good that gear is. You have to work with what you've got and then make what you've got work.

George Orwell said:

As for using bounce flash, I don't know if I feel comfortable with that. I'd hate to distract folks who are testing.

Click to expand...

Direct flash may not be a good idea, but bounced flash shouldn't bother them at all. If they're in full concentration as they should be, almost nothing should distract them. Bounced flash off of the ceiling is nothing like the bright pulse of light from a small light source like you get with direct flash. Try it on yourself to see the difference.

If you have an sb800 or sb600, I'd advocate trying it, bounced off of the ceiling, with ISO3200 and ISO1600. The higher your ISO, the less power is needed for the flash or in your case, the more benefit you would receive from the low power light that is bounced flash with an f/4 lens. The flash will help reduce noise and increase color fidelity. You might have to use manual mode, if you have it or shutter priority at 1/250, rear curtain sync, if you have it.

--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

I am an TKD instructor and have shot many sessions. Like many people who have pointed out, your shutter speeds are too low. You need at least 1/250 and higher. To do this you need to up the ISO what ever it must be, even upgrading the body to a high ISO capable one to maintain IQ. Flash, bounced or direct is distractive and annoys everyone around, so better off don't use flash and myself I don't shoot with flash for these martial arts shots. I don't know how fast the shutter can do from your D60, but I always attach the grip to my D700 and use the big battery EN-EL4e to get the fastest shooting rate. You need to shoot at a fast rate in order to pick out the best frame from a round of burst. Because competitors move around I think you need a bit of DOF, hence around F4 is ok and fast lens may not needed, but fast lens go hand in hand with sharpness an better build quality. Lastly, I prefer AF than MF as I said before, these people move around a fair bit. Why don't you consider a used D2Hs, it's fast and AF is very good for sports.

BM

I haven't shot martial arts in ages but used to about 25 years ago. IMO your camera is fine and so are your lenses, but you need to improve your technique. I'm not familiar with the SB-600 but you'll get exactly what you want with an Sb-800 by dragging your shutter in TTL mode. Instead of AF you could always use hyperfocal for faster action. Of course you're going to need to practice to get it right, there's no quick fix here, even if you bought a D3.
--
david
http://www.pbase.com/ddk

Hi George,

I think using a shutterspeed of 1/25 to 1/60 is way too slow for Aikido.

Looking at the movements and throwing and stuff you're going to have to use a faster shutterspeed. I would say 1/125 or so.

I noticed you are shooting without flash, so this will mean that your pictures will become darker. But no problem here!
Just shoot RAW and afterwards PP them.

One thing that IS essential at martial arts photography is anticipation.

I think you are either an Aikido martial artist yourself or a big fan of this sport.
If you know the movements/techniques, timing IS essential.

You will know when certain movements/techniques will be done and know when to capture them to get that part of the pictures sharp and other parts blurred.

One thing you also might try is using AF-C when shooting Aikido.

Hope this helps.

--

Thanks in advance for your replies.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Bedde
DX6490
Sunpak 383

I think you've got a good range of advice already George. Some of the different opinions contradict each other (eg. "use AF" vs "use Manual focus") and esp whether flash is a good idea or not. You can now start deciding how you wish to proceed.

Two other things for you to consider:

1) Are you basically trying to take these shots during classes or formal sessions? If so, it's probably important for you to make minimal intrusion. Under these circumastance you're probably best off not using additional lighting, but also need to accept that your pictures won't be the optimum that's possible.

2) If some of the participants are interested in doing some sessions with you on your own (maybe after the main class?) and are happy to help you take pictures, the situation changes completely:

• They may accept some use of flash or additional lighting
• They may be prepared to walk through some moves, so you can decide optimum points to shoot, and also maybe prefocus or choose your angle.
• You can get a chance to arrange the settings so there are the minimum other distracting elements in your shot. The ones you provided had lots of other students, or different parts of the room that draw the eye away from the action.

Try to arrange a fairly plain background and if possible have the subjects several feet away from it so it is thrown out of focus (you will probably struggle to use a lens over 105mm unless you're in a pretty big room).

Finally, I have no personal experiance of Aikido, but have been asked to shoot some people at a Tai Chi class. Once the subject has an active interest in what you're doing, the situation changes completely. They will look at the results on your LCD, help you analyse how it can be made better etc. As a side effect, my subjects were genuinely interested in what had been captured as it helped them understand points of their technique they then wished to work on - you may get asked back for more shoots (ok, maybe not for the Jedi Masters, but you get the point!).

HTH

--
Colin
-------------------
http://www.pbase.com/celidh

I have shot Mixed Martial Arts for a couple years and I currently use a D700 w/ a 24-70 and 70-200mm lens. It allows me to use high ISO with fast shutter speeds. Remember that with throwing and striking action you want a shutter speed no slower than 250, but 500 is ideal to stop motion. with the d60 and 18-55 0r 55-200, that is impossible. With the D60, I would reccomend the 50 1.4g and the 85 1.8 and throw in a 24-70 to give you a 36-105 coverage.

Set your camera to AF-C, CL and 11 point focusing. This will help you keep focus as the fighter change possition. I have never shot Akido, but looks similar enough to Jiu-jitsu and MMA.

It is expensive to photograph high speed action with no flash, but you can easily earn your return.

Greg

In that dark dojo you don't have much of a choice. I would not shoot the D60 over ISO800 or 1600 for small prints if I could help it. Then apply some NR with Noiseware Comunnity eddition if you are tight on $$$. So, use flash. The SB-600 may not work as well for that as SB-800 or the latest top model flash but should allow you to trigger it remotely I think and this way get the right direction of light, bounced ideally.

Pre-focus. With the D60 and the slow lenses (aperture-wise) you got, I doubt you can reliably track in continuous focus. Use full manual exposure and flash from the side for best results.

Even at that, you will still have motion blur unless you really crank up the ISO.

Another interesting experiment would be, since they obviously allow you on the tatami, is to choose your angle, follow the motion and anticipate when the peak of the move will be - you can this way have a panning effect: would work really well with some techniques where the two partners move against each other like in irimi nage during the approach phase. You can get sharp face on the tori and nice motion blur on the nage and the background as well...

Using a longer lens and open aperture would allow better background blurring but will make your job focusing even more tough (and expensive). Good luck!