Looking for 35mm or MF Film Camera for Sports

[analog65]

Hi, I wanted to ask the group here about 35mm and medium format camera options that are suited for sports photography. I would like to make some darkroom prints from my grandkids sporting events. I will be using Tri-X or HP5+ rated at ISO 1600. I understand that I will need to pair the camera choice with a fast lens to help freeze the motion.

Which cameras have the best autofocus systems on them that would perform well for kids sporting events? I was thinking about the Nikon F5 would be good when paired with a fast telephoto lens, but I know there are more options out there that I am not thinking about. Having the option for medium format would be wonderful too.

Thanks

Andy

 

[fstop]

Nikon would be a good choice, the lenses interchange with digital format so when you step up to digital you won't have to buy new glass.

 

[analog65]

Step up? I thought that was a downgrade...

Nikon would be a good choice, the lenses interchange with digital format so when you step up to digital you won't have to buy new glass.

 

[RichardJack]

Hi,
I assume your shooting film. I would highly recommend a used Nikon F100 or N80 for sports. The AF is quick and precise. And if you should decide to wander over to the darkside (digital) you can use the same lenses. I would avoid medium format for sports because 35mm is more convenient. I did it years back with a Bronica SQ-AM (motorized) but 220 was available then. You'll blow through film very fast, and it gets expensive. Team shots are another story. Indoor sports, I used a 135mm f2 most of the time. Keep an open head, if the results matter, the darkside is the way to go.
Rick

 

[jimjm]

I'd also recommend the F100 for sports/action shooting. If I really shot a lot of sports, then I'd consider the F5, but it's a beast if you don't really need a high fps all the time.

The F100 works great with the current Nikon AF VR lenses, which makes shooting action significantly easier. Here's one with the F100 and 70-300/4-5.6 AF-S VRII lens, shot on Provia 100:

 

[Alan Gales]

Hey Andy!

I've shot a lot of fast pitch softball over the years. I've helped manage a Select team and was the unofficial team photographer. I've also photographed High School and College fast pitch Softball. I've also shot CYC and Rec Soccer.

A DSLR is the way to go. Ok, I told you. I've also shot 35mm and medium format film. Get a late model Nikon 35mm with autofocus and matrix metering. Like Fstop very wisely suggests you can swap lenses between it and a Nikon DSLR if you later decide to try digital. Also if you can afford it you may want to buy an inexpensive TLR like an Autocord, Yashicamat or Mamiya C220/C330.

You will need the 35mm with fast lenses for shooting action. For posed portraits and team shots use the TLR on a tripod. A 16X20 image of the whole team with the coaches is nice because you can see all the players faces. You can then sell some to the other parents to help pay for your hobby. Of course it would be nice to give the coaches each a photo. They work hard helping the kids.

Be sure to ask the coach where you can photograph from. All sports are different. Also CYC and recreational sports usually differ from Select or High School or College. If you are interested in doing team shots then ask the coach about that too. He/She may help you set it up.

Good luck and have fun! It's all over too soon.

 

[juan]

Any slr from the last few decades will work. Learn your sport and learn to prefocus on the place the next action will probably happen. I used this technique successfully as a newspaper photographer before there were reliable auto focus systems.

 

[guangong]

Juan is right on. Be familiar enough with the sport in question so that you can predict oncoming action. Of course you will get better with practice and soon prediction and shooting become one. In years to come you pics will become priceless. MF is probably too unwieldy for any sport other than golf. If your sport is an indoor sport such as fencing or wrestling a 35mm camera with fast lens is the only way to go.

 

[Paul Howell]

Most of the pro level cameras, Nikon F5, F100, F4, F6, Canon EOS 1, N or V, Pentax MZ, Minolta 900 or 9, 800si are very capable of action photography, perhaps more important are the lens. Good fast lens are expensive. All of Canon's lens will work with the EOS 1, the Nikon with all lens expect the new E lens, Pentax will not work with new motor drive lens, some Minolta 9s and all 7s will work with motor drives lens including full frame Sony A mount. For lens, depending on shooting in doors or out doors, indoors need fast zooms like a 70 to 200 2.8, even then you will need to shoot fast film. A 50mm is often too short, I have a 85 1.8 Minolta which I use on my Minolta 9, AF is the fastest but does work in low light, I am looking into a 100 2.8. For football soccer a fast long zoom like the Sigma 150 to 600 5.6, can be soft at 600 or a prime, I shoot with a Tonika 400 5.6. A 600 would be better.

I have shoot Rodeo with a Kowa Super 66 and a 250 lens, even then the 250 is more like a 135mm on 35 so just too short for most shots, hand crank, slow, takens more time to change film, and only 12 shots per frame. Better would be a 645 system with a 500mm and motor drive.

On the cheap. Minolta 900 with motor drive (the only AF pro level camera with a detachable motor drive, make sure you get the drive not the winder) Minolta 70 to 200 F4 zoom, 35 to 70 F4, 50mm, 1.4, Tonika or Sigma 400 5.8.

 

[Tony-S]

If these are outdoor events you probably don't need to shoot at 1600. Get a camera with a good autofocus system (I have an EOS 3) and lenses with ultrasonic motors (e.g., ring USM in Canon).

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Honestly the Nikon F5 would be the one for fast moving sports coupled with a good 80-200 F2.8 and an SB-28 when permitted. Robust,reliable and inexpensive for the quality you'll receive.

Eli Tomac mid air F5 w/70-210F4 on Fuji Superia 400 overcast. Grainy but IMO adds to the image.

 

[Alan Gales]

Honestly the Nikon F5 would be the one for fast moving sports coupled with a good 80-200 F2.8 and an SB-28 when permitted. Robust,reliable and inexpensive for the quality you'll receive.

Eli Tomac mid air F5 w/70-210F4 on Fuji Superia 400 overcast. Grainy but IMO adds to the image.

View attachment 168599​

Nice shot, Martin. I agree that grain makes the shot look "gritty" which is a plus for motocross photography.

 

[trythis]

Honestly the Nikon F5 would be the one for fast moving sports coupled with a good 80-200 F2.8 and an SB-28 when permitted. Robust,reliable and inexpensive for the quality you'll receive.

Eli Tomac mid air F5 w/70-210F4 on Fuji Superia 400 overcast. Grainy but IMO adds to the image.

​

Looks exactly the way it should. Especially on the trees, it looks like the way the dots of old magazine images.

 

[Agulliver]

As has been discussed in the "why shoot film?" thread, you do not need to go digital in order to shoot fast action sports. But the techniques used may well differ.

Speaking personally, I advocate the idea of having a zoom lens capable of at least 70-200mm, no harm in having a longer range as long as the image is sharp and not distorted at either extreme. Consider how close you can get to the action, which sports are involved and are you going to be in a stadium or track/pitch side? That as much as anything defines the zoom range you need. Use ISO 400 or higher film unless conditions are very bright. Get to know the sport you're photographing, and the arena/pitch/track. Choose to sit or stand somewhere you can get a good view of action. I do like the technique of focusing somewhere you believe there will soon be some action and waiting your moment.

You won't shoot 500 shots of one event. Maybe only a roll or two of film. But you will probably have as many truly good shots out of that film as you would burst shooting hundreds of shots on a DSLR. Both techniques work, but if you specifically wish to shoot film the former is probably the way to go.

Find a SLR body and lens combo that you are comfy with...something that feels intuitive to you. Pretty much any SLR with a decent range of lenses available will work but features such as varying metering modes can be useful. You will likely want matrix metering but could use centre-weighted or spot if any events are floodlit. So that puts you into relatively recent Nikon or Canon territory for the most part. Again think about exposure lock and if this will be useful to you given the sports you're hoping to cover, and how easy that feature is to implement on various cameras. Think about fast autofocus, or manual focus. If you're going to pre-focus then manual has no disadvantages and auto may well need to be locked to prevent any hunting as competitors move in and out of the frame. Autofocus systems vary and improve a LOT with time.

High ISO such as 1600 will freeze action and potentially allow smaller apertures and greater DOF. Do consider if this is what you want. Sometimes a bit of blurring is good, arms of runners moving, bats being swung etc. DOF can help keep focus worries at bay but sometimes a pin sharp subject against a blurred back/foreground can be great. So experiment. Tri-X and HP5+ are both good for pushing to 1600, and of course work well at 400 and 800 too.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

Looks exactly the way it should. Especially on the trees, it looks like the way the dots of old magazine images.

Nice shot, Martin. I agree that grain makes the shot look "gritty" which is a plus for motocross photography.

Thank you both. Praise coming from anyone on this forum means a great deal to me. Thanks again.

 

[tomfrh]

Canon EOS system and EF lenses.

EOS 1v, 3, 30, 30v, etc

 

[Leigh B]

High ISO such as 1600 will freeze action and potentially allow smaller apertures and greater DOF.

In the early 1960s I was shooting Kodak Royal-X Pan (ASA 1250) developed in Acufine, yielding a speed over 8,000 ASA.
That allowed me to shoot basketball games with available light using a Graflex 4x5 press camera.

- Leigh

 

[TSSPro]

35mm format, F5 Nikon, and some fast glass. It's totally doable, as testified by our fellow APUGers using larger formats, but I think that the words of advise about the difference in process can't be stressed enough. Optics, auto focus, motor winder, etc all make the sports photog's job a little easier. However, if you want a huge negative and your project requires a huge negative I'd try the formats that you are needing and then modify your process as needed to optimize them for the sports photography you're making.

All the best-

 

[CropDusterMan]

Nikon F5 with 80-200 2.8 or Canon EOS 1V with 70-200 2.8. Even the Nikon F100 is great.
Shooting sport with medium format is going to be tough if you're not used to it.

 

[analog65]

Hi Everyone, thought I would provide an update. I have been using a Nikon F5 with the Nikon 70-200 F2.8 lens with a 1.4TC for extra reach and Kodak Portra 400 rated at 400 to 1600 (on the same roll) for color images to scan and HP5+ rated at 250 to 1600 for myself (darkroom prints). I have really been liking the results so far. More time and practice will help, but I really enjoy doing this with film over digital. Next I want to try doing some wildlife with this system and looking into a longer lens.

Thanks for the help and suggestions. APUG is wonderful.

 

[Alan Gales]

Don't forget your large format camera. Use it to take a team photo with all the players and coaches.

My buddy who is in his 60's showed me a team photo his dad took of his childhood team with a 4x5 Super Speed Graphic. He still treasures that photograph!

 

[Paul Howell]

I think the new Tamron 150 to 600 5.6 G2 will work with an F5, G rather than the newer E mount.

 

[John_Nikon_F]

If you're ok with a prime and don't need AF for the photography, there's the 300/4.5 and the 400/5.6 Nikkors... Both are slow, compared to your 70-200, but good image quality can be had. Plus, at least the 300/4.5 is cheap. If you don't mind an old H version, you can usually pick them up for less than $100, even with the factory AI conversion done to the lens. The 300/4.5 balances pretty nicely on an F5, too, especially if you're using the Energizer lithiums. The non-ED 300/4.5 is decent. Lower contrast than the ED and IF-ED versions, but not bad. The 400/5.6 has always been ED, even with the original Nikkor-PC version. With the manual lenses, you'll be stuck with A or M modes and centerweighted or spot metering, but, it works well.

-J