<U>*WARNING* NOT TOM BRADY SAFE</U>

Well i just got back from a weekend in Miami and was able to snap some pretty good shots of the game with the camera/lense/location I had to work with. Didnt want to fill the "NFL Thread" with pics, so i made a seperate post here and thought Id get some feedback.


*Note* This is what i had to work with. (If your a photographer, you will know it wasnt "ideal")

This:


+

This:


+

This: (I was in the yellow circle)



=

These:



















How did I do?

 

Last one is the only one that doesnt suck.

 

Not bad at all, considering you were only shooting with a 200mm.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ZacCarter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Last one is the only one that doesnt suck.</TD></TR></TABLE>

*shrug* Im sure with that lense in "nose-bleed" heights you could have had crystal clear pics huh?

Thanks for the feedback though

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by AMG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">*shrug* Im sure with that lense you could have had crystal clear pics huh?

Thanks for the feedback though </TD></TR></TABLE>Usually on the bigger lenses its safer to shoot at about 75% of what they max out at.

 

those is my dolphins, dont expletive with them (theres always next, ive been saying that since 1998)

 

I thought the pics were good. I can't believe NE got just absolutly rocked by the Dolphins. It sucks that you guys picked up Culpepper, he is the worst QB ever, it brought tears of joy when he left us here in MN. tight pics though.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ZacCarter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Usually on the bigger lenses its safer to shoot at about 75% of what they max out at.</TD></TR></TABLE>

True, but these were all cropped. So thtas what gives them that appearence of a "so much closer" picture. At 75%, it would have been too far of a shot.

I.E Original:



Crop:



But i do agree. I just need a better lense.

I guess this was more of a "how did i do" with the action pics?

EDIT: Actually that wasnt a very good comparison. lol

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ZacCarter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Last one is the only one that doesnt suck.</TD></TR></TABLE>

so mean, but i guess it is true. lol.

 

some nice pics...and once again you guys go on a tear too late in the season

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DxHatchback &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">so mean, but i guess it is true. lol.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Its very true. I knew I would get alot of bad feedback, but you have to take into consideration of what I have, Im new at this, and first sports shots ever.

Give any professional my camera, lense, and location and I bet you wouldnt see a noticable difference. Pics suck. yes. But my lense is not advised for these shots. its a good "walk around". So being a mile away from the filed and capturing most of the exciting plays that happened in that game, I dont think I did a bad job a shooting, just didnt have the right equipment. Which was already considered.

 

nice pics

 

brady being abused

great pics

 

Not bad from being super high

 

Cool pics.

 

******* new england secondary getting picked apart as usual . . . . where's rodney?

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ZacCarter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Last one is the only one that doesnt suck.</TD></TR></TABLE>

word, harsh but yea.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NIKE SB’d &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

word, harsh but yea. </TD></TR></TABLE>
what do you know about pics

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by AMG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Its very true. I knew I would get alot of bad feedback, but you have to take into consideration of what I have, Im new at this, and first sports shots ever.

Give any professional my camera, lense, and location and I bet you wouldnt see a noticable difference. Pics suck. yes. But my lense is not advised for these shots. its a good "walk around". So being a mile away from the filed and capturing most of the exciting plays that happened in that game, I dont think I did a bad job a shooting, just didnt have the right equipment. Which was already considered.

</TD></TR></TABLE>


Here's a tip
Usually posting a thread and defending yourself on the original post... = blood in the water

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NIKE SB’d &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">word, harsh but yea. </TD></TR></TABLE>

True. Wrong lense = poor quality.

So lets change the direction of the thread:

How did I do to capture the emotion of the game? With a better lense, were these good pics? Comparing to pro's down on the field, I think mine were in some ways better:

I.E www.NFL.com Pro Pictures:

http://www.nfl.com/photos/foot...E@MIA

Mine: (Location: Upper Deck; 28-200mm lense)



NFL.com Pro photographer: (Location: On-field; Pro Lense)



And i know most are harsh b/c this is the internet and you can sit behind your computer and give harsh criticism about something you may know nothing about, but remember this isnt a damn photoshoot guys! I dont have but a split second to take these shots. Its not as easy as saying, "they suck haha".

i appreacite all feedback, but zack actually had some advice which is true, while others just qouted his and had nothing to contribute.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ZacCarter &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Usually on the bigger lenses its safer to shoot at about 75% of what they max out at.</TD></TR></TABLE>

a 28-200 zoom is not a "bigger lens..." 200mm from the nosebleeds is a tough place to get any decent shots...

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by AMG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Give any professional my camera, lense, and location and I bet you wouldnt see a noticable difference.</TD></TR></TABLE>

It's good to be confident in your shooting, but IMHO your framing could use some work...

 

 

Ballin' *** pics from my point of view.

Well done.

 

I'm impressed considering the players probably look like little ants running around from where you sat.

Good job

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by AMG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">How did I do to capture the emotion of the game? With a better lense, were these good pics? Comparing to pro's down on the field, I think mine were in some ways better:</TD></TR></TABLE>

A lower angle always adds more feeling of "power" behind the hits in football games... From up high, the big hits just lack... [madden]boom![/madden]

And since you probably cant qualify for a press pass, the next best thing is to get better seats, a sharper lens (i.e CANON ) and a monopod... I spy a lil camera shake...