In photographing my daughter figure skating, I've been renting pro lenses for my DSLR. But wondering if it would be worth while going to micro 4/3 for this. I much prefer using my M 4/3 camera (a GX7, and am planning upgrading to a G85, GH5 or the new OM-D), and would prefer to invest in this platform. Should I even consider investing in a M 4/3 lens for this? Figure skating is one of the most difficult sports to photograph because low light is thrown into the mix of long distances and a moving subject. If so what would be the best bet? Oly 40-150 2.8 or one of the faster Panasonic lenses? Or should I just suck it up and buy a large sensor set-up for this? Sounds like the biggest issue may be AF rather than the lens, correct?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Micro Four Thirds for low light indoor sports.
- Thread starter funkle
- Start date
Colin K. Work
Veteran Member
to be honest, the combination of lowlight and fast movement do not play to m43's strengths, and if that was my subject I'd stick to DSLR. That's of course without knowing how the EM1 mk ii will perform in this respect.
Whatever your interest in m43 might be, I would consider continuing as you are for figure skating.
I have used dslr bodies and top end lenses to shoot roller-blading. Which must be as hard as they get. Figure skating would be similar.
The problem is low light, fast moving - distance then close up. Just about as hard as it gets. Need f2.8 at least, a zoom would come in handy. C-AF or very fast reflexes very useful (and this is just roller blading
)I would suggest a Nocticron as ideal but it might not be telephoto enough for your purpose at 42.5mm.
Otherwise the Pansonic 35-100mm f2.8 would give more reach but borderline light capture. Any other slower zoom may be too slow and show movement blur.
Using Canon EF lenses on M4/3 might open up a wider range of choices of fast lenses (if money is not an object) but Metabones adapters still don't allow C-AF.
I must try and get myself to another roller blade meet to see if my M4/3 gear is up to it.
brycesteiner
Veteran Member
I would start with the 75 1.8 prime. Even though I have the 40-150 and it works well, the 75 1.8 is great because I can shoot at night football games at iso800. Whereas shooing with the a f2.8 lens (any sensor) I need to go up to 2400 or 3200 iso just to get the same results with a lot more noise (any sensor).
Depends on how close you can get. I'm shooting a lot from the sideline and behind the doors, using my GH4 and my E-M1 with Nocticron 42,5mm (@f/1.4) and Oly 75mm (@f1.8). Even f/2.8 is already a problem for ISO and subject separation mostly. But I shoot Raw up to 3200 ISO if necessary and develop in LR.
In my Flickr-Sports-album you'll find many examples with this equipment:
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk7M234b
Handball:
Last edited:
Tim Reidy Productions
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,302
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1,941
I was shooting dance with a g7 yesterday
so you wanting to shoot with g85 and either one of the 35-100 or 40-150 would be great to do what you are looking for.
although you may lose detail the panasonics have digital zoom to give you 3 lengths when mounting a prime.
so you wanting to shoot with g85 and either one of the 35-100 or 40-150 would be great to do what you are looking for.
although you may lose detail the panasonics have digital zoom to give you 3 lengths when mounting a prime.
Martin.au
Veteran Member
Might be useful. Have a lot of similar threads.
JeanPierre Martel
Veteran Member
Yes, a 16 MP (or better) µ4/3 camera can be used.
Set the mode to 'S' (for speed) and set it to the speed needed. For example 1/1000th of a second is very good for action sports, like the example provided by horsth.
Secondly, use the brightest µ4/3 lens that you can have (the Lumix 42,5mm F/1,2 or the M.Zuiko 75mm F/1,8 are good examples). Use it a its widest aperture.
Don't worry if the arena is dark. The skater are never skating in the dark. The audience, yes, but not the skater. So use aperture compensation to take into account the fact that the light meter could be fooled by the dark background. Usually, I'm using a -1,7 aperture compensation. If that's too much, you'll compensate in post-production.
Take a lot of picture. If you think that you took enough, take more. Delete 90% of them and keep the best.
You also have to know that not all RAW file readers are equal. To be blunt, Lightroom is a very bad tool to read high-ISO µ4/3 RAW files. It's very good for ordinary RAW files but not for under-lit ones. DxO Optics Pro (there a free version available on the net) is my favourite tool.
Last edited:
Same recipe for live theatre and circus. The exposure meter is easily fooled by large dark areas outside the spotlights. Try to take exposure readings off faces or light clothing and not off anything dark.
If the exposure is consistent light but difficult to replicate there might even be a case for getting it right once and then using M setting.
If the exposure is consistent light but difficult to replicate there might even be a case for getting it right once and then using M setting.
If your DSLR is APS, you'll probably lose 1/2 to 3/4 stop of higher ISO performance.
Rent the 75mm or 40-150 f/2.8, and try shooting with higher ISOs.
If you're just doing screen output, and it's for family and friends, you can definitely shoot 3200 without a problem. Maybe even 6400, if you shoot RAW and are good at post processing. IMO if you use JPEG, by default the camera will apply lots of NR, and the images won't look great.
addlightness
Veteran Member
and go wider if you can. f2.8 is too slow for me. Here's one that is barely acceptable with 25/1.8 @f1.8. 45/1.8 was too long for this venue. Keep rate is very low - about 15%.
Ice-skating show on cruise ship
Ice-skating show on cruise ship
More debate than suggesting but it is surprising what can be picked up in image quality by eliminating the DR necessity of the dark surrounds by getting up close and personal with a lens and flooding the image with whatever light is available.
Obviously 1/500 is normally quite fast enough but not fast enough for this particular event.
But the image is good and a technical achievement for a difficult subject.
Obviously 1/500 is normally quite fast enough but not fast enough for this particular event.
But the image is good and a technical achievement for a difficult subject.
Tim Reidy Productions
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,302
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1,941
image was shot at iso250 but you can easily go to 1600 on a modern panasonic.
Sranang Boi
Veteran Member
That is a cracking lens for indoor sports and concerts. Fast enough to get the action in a hand held position. See review at https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympus-m-zuiko-75mm-f1-8
Clayton1985
Veteran Member
If you're going to get a fast zoom just get it for your DSLR. This is the most logical thing to do unless you have other reasons to try to make your m 4/3 setup work.
Thanks for the responses. If I end up upgrading to one of the newer Panasonics, I would not be able to take advantage of DFD AF with the Olympus lens. Any issue there?
pannumon
Veteran Member
My experience of shooting ice hockey with my Panasonics is that the high ISO noise is bigger problem than AF. I shoot bursts with AF-S. Nailing the focus is not essential, because lot's of detail is already lost at ISO 3200. Perhaps a faster lens than Panasonic 45-175mm would change the situation. 100-300mm is faster, but otherwise slow.
The team I shoot wears a very dark jersey. Lighter color accessories might change the situation. On the other hand, in figure skating shows the lighting is often very dim.
brianric
Veteran Member
Decide for yourself. All bicycle riders shot with GX-8 and Olympus 40-150/2.8.
http://www.brianric.com/Multiple-Sclerosis--Events/2015-MS-Events/2015-MS-Bike-to-Bay-Day-2/
I use the Olympus 75/1.8 on non-stabilised non-DFD GM series bodies quite regularly.
It is a fast sharp lens and Pansoninc native CDAF is pretty quick and accurate.
Similar threads
- Locked
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum