In reply to Sput:
I'm fighting the same problem
codrus wrote: Unfortunately, with relatively low cost equipment this is probably going to result in a soft image with a lot of noise, but hey that's better than no images at all, right?
And that is where rental companies are a great option. One thing not specifically mentioned is a good lens. For events like Rolex 24 and Sebring 12hr I rent a 70-200mm ƒ/2.8 lens (typically a $2k lens). That along with what many have already outlined, bump up the ISO, ensure your set to Continuous focus, practice panning & with a steady hand you'll start to have fewer and fewer rejects.
ISO 400, 1/100 @ ƒ/2.8 plus some post work:
also remember... if you shoot RAW and end up under exposing a little you can pull out so much detail still, it's amazing stuff
went to my first rally x yesterday.. cold but alot of fun..
http://s1323.beta.photobucket.com/user/wheelsuppics/library/?#/user/wheelsuppics/library/?&_suid=135990882930909159518933750432
Dark photos are all about the glass. The more you can open up the aperture the better, which is why the 2.8 glass is so damn pricey.
Cranking up the ISO is a bandaid.
donalson wrote: also remember... if you shoot RAW and end up under exposing a little you can pull out so much detail still, it's amazing stuff
thats what i'm starting to learn
Even shooting high end JPG I can get some extra detail out of an underexposed image in Photoshop. Under can be fixed, over is just gone.
In reply to kabel:
Man that is a nice pic. Do you have any of the #52 audi? My fiance LOVED that car. She would love a framed pic of that in her room.
Cuda wrote: In reply to kabel: Man that is a nice pic. Do you have any of the #52 audi? My fiance LOVED that car. She would love a framed pic of that in her room.
thank you! full set of Rolex24 photos here: http://smu.gs/14NOhqA Should be a shot of #52 in there. That set of drivers was not nearly as hard on the brake as the #51.
You'll need to log in to post.