Couple of amateur boxing shots.

Shaunf,
having tried boxing photography I understand how challenging light can be. IMO you have done a decent job.
 
Thanks Riu. This was my first real attempt (I've shot boxing before but never from ringside) so I was quite happy. Lots more planned in the new year!
 
Never tried it myself but I expect it to be quite challenging. However these do seem a little soft to me. Maybe a faster shutter speed is needed.
 
Thanks for your reply ploddles. Yes I agree about them being a little soft but I really was pushing it with the gear I was using. Think I got away with it as they were for web display only and not print.
 
Last edited:
What's the shooting data on these? To me it looks as though you were using far too small an aperture.
 
That's the reason they're soft. At f2 you need to be bang on with accuracy and at the speed some of the fighters move at, that's never going to happen with such a small depth of field.

I shoot boxing at f3.5/f4 and usually at 17mm. 35mm is a weird one. It's either here nor there for boxing shots at ringside imo. It's not tight enough for detailed head shots and it's not wide enough to get the whole body in.

Was you allowed to use flash? That would have made your life easier with lower iso's and a narrower aperture. I'm on my phone atm so can't comment on the pics fully, but I will check them out when I'm on the computer. I hate my d7000 at iso 1000 so will be interesting to see them at 4k.
 
Thanks for your reply minnt. Using flash when shooting boxing is a massive no no and even if it was allowed I wouldn't out of respect for the boxers.

The combination of f2 and a fair bit of noise reduction meant they were going to be softer than I'd like but the lighting was really poor so I'm not sure what else I could've done with the gear I had.

I found the 35mm to be ok tbh. Obviously not tight enough for detailed head shots but getting the boxers full bodies in the frame wasn't a problem.

I think the best way to solve the problem is a new body with better low light capabilities. I think I best start saving up!
 
A FF camera will make the world of difference to you.

Non of the the above shots are full body though.

And I've never been questioned about flash. But I don't blast it at them, it's always bounced with a diffuser. Usually on 1/32 or a maximum of 1/16 power.
 
number 5 is great
at ISO4000 you were lucky, stop complaining :p I shot one recently which was more or less in the dark!
no ring lighting and with the stage (social club) at my back they put some VIPs on there and turned off all the lights so the whole thing was back lit (from my point of view).
not bad.
don't be afraid if they look gritty in processing.. it's a boxing match, not a walk-off :)
 
minnnt said:
35mm is a weird one. It's either here nor there for boxing shots at ringside imo. .
Click to expand...
done a lot of boxing.. got a lot on my website.. all done with the 35mm f2 lens.. its perfect for boxing IMHO .gets you cole up if at this side and full length if at other side of ring... . the magazine and newspapers I cover boxing for would seem to agree :)

However I try not to shoot at f2.. But sometimes the lighting forces you into things like that...

These with the 35mm Theres other threads and 90% on my website with the 35 :)


http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/boxing-last-friday.520849/
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/some-boxing.512152/[/QUOTE]
 
Decent action in a lot of them - obvious main issue as mentioned, is that most aren't in focus. Difficult to do, especially with possibly limited gear, but therein lies the challenge. Stopping down wouldn't make them in focus either.

KIPAX said:
done a lot of boxing.. got a lot on my website.. all done with the 35mm f2 lens.. its perfect for boxing IMHO
Click to expand...

You shoot with a full frame camera though don't you Tony? Not a 1.5x crop sensor like the OP.
 
FF vs Crop... 35mm vs 52.5mm...

I found stopping down helped a lot with my boxing pics. I got all obsessed with shooting wide open and most of the pics were dire (some would argue they still are :D ) and went in the bin. My next gig was paid so I had to get it right so decided to stop down a bit to give me a bit of leeway with the dof. I got alot more keepers so have decided to stick with it. I'm not saying it's the right way or the only way. Worth a go though, it's no big deal to click the wheel back a few times if you hate it. ;)

I shoot alot at 17mm ringside and have the option to go in to 55 if I want a bit of headshot action.

I had a quick look last night at these. For iso 4000 they're clean as a whistle. Maybe the noise reduction has softened them alot. The last is my favourite, the spray and facial expression is really effective. (y)
 
Jayst84 said:
You shoot with a full frame camera though don't you Tony? Not a 1.5x crop sensor like the OP.
Click to expand...

now I do.. have posted a lot of boxing with the canon 1dmk4 which is a 1.3 crop and always used the 35m on that.. when i went full frame i got the 50 1.4 to compensate ..but soon went back to the 35mm so yeagh FF now but used it all the time on 1.3 crop.
 
Like I say.. sometimes the lighting forces you to shoot wide open.. if it doesnt then I dont understand why anyone would shoot wide open.. you dont need dof for boxing.. in fact the bigger the f number the better... but again.. most venues force your settings on you :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top