Is Canon 85mm f/1.8 good for marathons?

Hi everyone, in the next weekend I'll photograph my first marathon. For context, it's a 21K race (half-marathon) that starts at 6:30 AM, will go over the coastline, and the athletes will be facing the sunrise (over the Atlantic).

My plan is to position myself at around 10K, at the side of the road, and the beach behind the athletes (so me -> athlete -> beach). I estimate that the closest distance the athletes will get from me is around 4-5 meters (13-16 ft), but, of course, I should capture them when they come towards me.

My camera is a Canon EOS RP, and as a prime guy, my lenses with the longest focal lengths are the Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4.

So, as the title says, is my 85mm good enough for the marathons or its lack of flexibility (compared to zoom teles like 70-200 f/2.8) would reduce my possibilities of capturing athletes' headshots? I could focus on full body if that's the case.

As this is my first time working in a marathon, any tip will be helpful.

edgareler said:

- snip -
My camera is a Canon EOS RP, and as a prime guy, my lenses with the longest focal lengths are the Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4.

So, as the title says, is my 85mm good enough for the marathons or its lack of flexibility (compared to zoom teles like 70-200 f/2.8) would reduce my possibilities of capturing athletes' headshots? I could focus on full body if that's the case.

Click to expand...

I think the answer is obvious -- yes, the 85 will be limiting. From what you say it will not be long enough to do headshots. This is easy enough for you to check -- focus on a person at your anticipated working distance and see what you can do.

A 70-200 would be a much better choice.

I was a working news photographer back when primes were the only practical option. If you'd been around you would have seen us working with two or three cameras hanging around our necks, each with a different focal length lens. That was what we had to do so we could quickly switch focal lengths as needed.

As to other tips, you need to be thoroughly familiar with your camera focus tracking capabilities if you want to cover runners coming toward you. If you're not familiar get out and practice until you master it.

Gato

edgareler said:

Hi everyone, in the next weekend I'll photograph my first marathon. For context, it's a 21K race (half-marathon) that starts at 6:30 AM, will go over the coastline, and the athletes will be facing the sunrise (over the Atlantic).

My plan is to position myself at around 10K, at the side of the road, and the beach behind the athletes (so me -> athlete -> beach). I estimate that the closest distance the athletes will get from me is around 4-5 meters (13-16 ft), but, of course, I should capture them when they come towards me.

My camera is a Canon EOS RP, and as a prime guy, my lenses with the longest focal lengths are the Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4.

So, as the title says, is my 85mm good enough for the marathons or its lack of flexibility (compared to zoom teles like 70-200 f/2.8) would reduce my possibilities of capturing athletes' headshots? I could focus on full body if that's the case.

As this is my first time working in a marathon, any tip will be helpful.

Click to expand...

Is this a paid shoot assignment?

Back before I started shooting weddings, around 12 years ago my first "pro" gig was shooting assignments for a local independent newspaper near where I lived at the time. I shot a lot of high school football, track meets, and some cultural events. One time, a local VIP was running in the NYC marathon and so me and another photog got assigned to track and capture him. I had an old Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8, the other guy rented a 300mm. We both got about a dozen keepers of our assigned guy but we were shooting random marathoners as well. I'll see if I can dig those out and post. It was fun and challenging.

Runners facing the sunrise is ideal and I think you'll be fine with the 85. A 135mm would be better, 70-200 would be ideal. The RP might allow for some scaling in closer in LR if some of the best shots are a little wide. If I were doing this shoot at that time of day my starting point for settings would be: f/2.8 to f/4, around 1/800 to 1/1000, auto ISO, AF Servo with tracking, and the highest fps your RP allows. "Spray and pray" my friend, don't worry about it. You'll be able to spot the keepers quickly in post and delete the rest. My assumption is these images are for online viewing or small print and not giant posters?

My personal framing preference (and ones that got published) of marathoners is head to toe of a runner in front with a trail of runners behind, capturing some of the background. I'd probably go more portrait orientation rather than landscape, but definitely do both. It's cool when both of the runners feet are off the ground, but one foot down and the other kicked behind is cool too. A wider landscape shot of a big pack of runners is great too.

I would not be inclined to take head shots of runners, maybe a few half body, but the story is runners and runners use their legs, and handicapped maranthoners have prosthetics and wheelers, so I'd focus on telling the story. Get some candid shots of the spectators too. Good luck and have fun.

I would also note, that runners start to look pretty worn out as the race progresses.

My wife and I once shot personal stuff at the NYC marathon, at the finish line, and people looked awful. I remember one shot of a woman who was just broken down in tears. It looked like we had photographed in a war zone.

So, you might plan to begin at the start, as mentioned above, certainly, the lead runner(s) with the pack behind.

To finish the story, a lot of runners made it over the finish line to realize that they had no money on them and no way to get back to their hotels. So my wife and I spent the rest of the evening ferrying people around.

It was a lot of fun!

If the goal is to have some fun, and you don't care about particular runners, you'll come home with some satisfying pictures.

If the goal is more serious, tight shots of particular runners and multi-runner shots of peope competing with each other, a zoom lens would be a good idea.

Canon RF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 Zoom Lens



This is new lens, and a bargain. If you are in the USA, under $300.

HINTS: pay attention to the lighting if the runners move from sunsine to shade.

Pay attention to focus-tracking settings.

Don't over shoot with continuous setting.

Figure out how to get steaady shots when pivoting the camera to follow the runners.

BAK

Thank you all for the tips, they're very helpful.

My plan is to make money by selling those photos to the athletes. I'm one of the 30 photographers registered in the marathon, and we get a commission on each photo we sell (65%), so I want to take the best shots possible to maximize the probability that the athletes will pick and buy my photos. There are 3,000 athletes registered for the marathon.

I believe it's not worth buying a lens for that event, as here in Brazil, usually lenses cost more than in other countries (that RF 75-300mm costs 440 USD), and specifically in my region, there are no rental stores anymore. I'd love to use a 70-200 f/2.8, but for now I'll need to work around the limitations of my 85mm. If I get good revenue from this event, I can plan to get a used one over time.

One option would be applying the APS-C crop in camera, which would get me to 135mm (so headshots), saving some time in post. The final resolution (after the 1.6x crop in my RP) would still be within the limits established by the event.

Also, once most athletes pass my position, I'll probably switch to my 50mm for contextual shots, focused more on starting my sports portfolio.

edgareler said:

Thank you all for the tips, they're very helpful.
-SNIP-
One option would be applying the APS-C crop in camera, which would get me to 135mm (so headshots), saving some time in post. The final resolution (after the 1.6x crop in my RP) would still be within the limits established by the event.

Click to expand...

That could be a good idea. I don't know what it takes to switch on your camera, but if you can configure something like a one-button switch - maybe with a custom setting - that could open up opportunities.

Gato

edgareler said:

One option would be applying the APS-C crop in camera, which would get me to 135mm (so headshots), saving some time in post. The final resolution (after the 1.6x crop in my RP) would still be within the limits established by the event.

Click to expand...

dx cropping of a full frame viewfinder make the image small and hard to frame properly

I would shoot full frame and crop later.

Hey guys, to give some feedback, nature took over and it rained over the entire marathon, with some unconfortable wind speeds right in front of me, blowing droplets in the front element of my 85mm even with the lens hood attached. I cleaned it between sessions (10K - 21K), but that was only enough for the first few hundred athletes of each rouhd.

But anyways, I managed to take around 3,000 shots, most of them full-body. Clearly if I had a 70-200mm, I could start taking shots (and headshots) way in advance. With the 85mm, I had two main issues: first, people had to get close for me to get usable photos, and second, whenever they got close (at headshot level), my RP was unable to focus, even though they were further from the minimum focus distance of my lens (850 mm). The rain also played some role on making it harder for the autofocus to work. As you can see in some pictures below, even with the droplets making some pictures more "washed", the athletes still bought them.

By the way, another outcome that I got from this experience was that my RP didn't perform as I expected, even below its limitations. I know it can only get to 4 fps, but at peak groups, when I tried to take several pictures in a row, the shutter button stopped working after a few seconds, which I think should be a low buffer issue (and I choose JPEG, not RAW). Clearly if I want to take that serious, I'll need to migrate to a faster camera, like the R6.

If I manage to sell 60 photos, I'll continue with this. Photography is a passion and a hobby for me, but if I can get serious income from this, I can take it to the next level.

You can find some of the images that athletes bought below. Any additional advice for the future is more than welcome.

The uploaded images didn't carry the EXIF data, but you here it is:

• Canon EOS RP
• Canon EF 85mm f/1.8
• Aperture: f/2.2
• Shutter speed: 1/1000
• ISO: 400-500 (Auto)

This was heavily affected by the droplets in front of my lens, but let's say it added some drama

edgareler said:

By the way, another outcome that I got from this experience was that my RP didn't perform as I expected, even below its limitations. I know it can only get to 4 fps, but at peak groups, when I tried to take several pictures in a row, the shutter button stopped working after a few seconds, which I think should be a low buffer issue (and I choose JPEG, not RAW). Clearly if I want to take that serious, I'll need to migrate to a faster camera, like the R6.

Click to expand...

I used a RP for three years before upgrading to a R8. Using a high speed UHS-II card, the buffer would never fill shooting JPG or C-raw. If you are using a slow card, a new high speed card would be a worthwhile (and inexpensive) upgrade.

edgareler said:

Hey guys, to give some feedback, nature took over and it rained over the entire marathon, with some unconfortable wind speeds right in front of me, blowing droplets in the front element of my 85mm even with the lens hood attached. I cleaned it between sessions (10K - 21K), but that was only enough for the first few hundred athletes of each rouhd.

But anyways, I managed to take around 3,000 shots, most of them full-body. Clearly if I had a 70-200mm, I could start taking shots (and headshots) way in advance. With the 85mm, I had two main issues: first, people had to get close for me to get usable photos, and second, whenever they got close (at headshot level), my RP was unable to focus, even though they were further from the minimum focus distance of my lens (850 mm). The rain also played some role on making it harder for the autofocus to work. As you can see in some pictures below, even with the droplets making some pictures more "washed", the athletes still bought them.

By the way, another outcome that I got from this experience was that my RP didn't perform as I expected, even below its limitations. I know it can only get to 4 fps, but at peak groups, when I tried to take several pictures in a row, the shutter button stopped working after a few seconds, which I think should be a low buffer issue (and I choose JPEG, not RAW). Clearly if I want to take that serious, I'll need to migrate to a faster camera, like the R6.

If I manage to sell 60 photos, I'll continue with this. Photography is a passion and a hobby for me, but if I can get serious income from this, I can take it to the next level.

You can find some of the images that athletes bought below. Any additional advice for the future is more than welcome.

The uploaded images didn't carry the EXIF data, but you here it is:

• Canon EOS RP
• Canon EF 85mm f/1.8
• Aperture: f/2.2
• Shutter speed: 1/1000
• ISO: 400-500 (Auto)

Click to expand...

Good job on all the photos!! The first one of the woman in black, both feet off the ground, really nice. Yep, rain can and will cause chaos with AF systems, but the 4fps of the RP like you found out, is just not enough speed IMO. Faster SD cards would help the buffer speed help in burst shooting, but yes 4-5fps is a handicap for sports shooting.

Your shutter speed was good but I think f/2.2 on a FF camera is a pretty wide aperture for this type of action and speed and distance of your subjects in the rain. I probably would have stopped down to f/2.8-f/4 and let the ISO go up as needed, but my personal preference is a little more DOF.....everyone's mileage will vary of course. Don't take my word for anything, experiment and analyze your results, see what works best for you and your clients.

If I were to take a guess, 99% of the people you sell the photos to are going to view them on their phone or tablet, or make small prints, so even if your ISO went to 800-1000 or even a little higher you would have been totally fine. But hey you did sell some photos, so that's a success man, congrats!!

Good job!

Nice photos. Even more considering the rain. I really like that you got some good faces and expressions. As a retired newspaper editor, I'd have been happy to run these in my paper.

I'll reinforce what's been said about a fast card and smaller aperture. With a modern camera you should be able to easily shoot ISO 1200 to 1600, and I often see the pro sports shooters, the national magazine folks, shooting much higher.

Gato

edgareler said:

blowing droplets in the front element of my 85mm even with the lens hood attached.

Click to expand...

If it's blowing, not much you can do. If it's calmer, you can have someone hold an umbrella or clamp one to a sandbagged stand.

edgareler said:

my RP was unable to focus, even though they were further from the minimum focus distance of my lens (850 mm)

Click to expand...

I think you would find the 70-200mm much faster to focus. It's designed for that, while the 85mm is a portrait lens.

edgareler said:

As you can see in some pictures below, even with the droplets making some pictures more "washed", the athletes still bought them.

Click to expand...

They're all good (expression, action). #1 is great.

Given that you sold some: what is your marketing, payment, and distribution system?

Thank you all for the comments about the photos. In total, I sold 43 photos (out of 2,900 that I took). I'll try to follow your tips on usong a faster card (I used SanDisk Extreme), and stepping down to f/2.8.

Regarding marketing, I didn't do any, but I registered to the official marketplace of most marathons in Brazil, called "Foco Radical".

If we consider that I made around $65 USD in total, burning 3% of my RP lifetime in that shooting session, risking losing it and the lens to the elements (and to the robbers), I'm not sure if it's worth it to shoot another marathon.

I'd love to buy a second-hand EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II, but I would need to have an additional use for it to justify the $2,000 investment.

edgareler said:

Thank you all for the comments about the photos. In total, I sold 43 photos (out of 2,900 that I took). I'll try to follow your tips on usong a faster card (I used SanDisk Extreme), and stepping down to f/2.8.

Regarding marketing, I didn't do any, but I registered to the official marketplace of most marathons in Brazil, called "Foco Radical".

If we consider that I made around $65 USD in total, burning 3% of my RP lifetime in that shooting session, risking losing it and the lens to the elements (and to the robbers), I'm not sure if it's worth it to shoot another marathon.

Click to expand...

It's clearly not if you're charging $1.50 per finished image, spent $30 on body wear and left yourself $13 in profit, assuming you walked to and from the location and ate and drank nothing while there.

A quick dive into foco radical shows images going for a bit more than that, but not much.

Seems a no-win way to make money. I expect it's way for people who would be there anyway to say they're making some money.

edgareler said:

- snip -
If we consider that I made around $65 USD in total, burning 3% of my RP lifetime in that shooting session, risking losing it and the lens to the elements (and to the robbers), I'm not sure if it's worth it to shoot another marathon.

I'd love to buy a second-hand EF 70-200mm f/2.8 II, but I would need to have an additional use for it to justify the $2,000 investment.

Click to expand...

As you say, that's not much money, and aside from the wear and risk on the camera, how many hours did you put in?

I suspect these days, with cell phone cameras all over the place, it would be very hard to make serious money on this kind of project. At those kinds of prices and sales you wouldn't be doing it for the money. Maybe if you just enjoy being out and shooting you could cover your travel and lunch, but not much more.

Gato