those shots look awesome!
out of curiosity, do you sell these images to anyone? if so, who, how much, how often, etc.
I'm just trying to get an idea of whether or not buying gear like this will ever pay off financially (i know it will pay off in terms of being awesome).
out of curiosity, do you sell these images to anyone? if so, who, how much, how often, etc.
I'm just trying to get an idea of whether or not buying gear like this will ever pay off financially (i know it will pay off in terms of being awesome).
Upvote
0
R
Richard Lane
Guest
Thanks Keith, your comments are greatly appreciated! 
Sure, I sell my photos constantly 24 hrs a day, it's just that no one ever buys them! ???
You see.., a while ago I learned the difference between selling and buying!
Unless you do this for a living full time, you won't make your money back. I'm a serious hobbyist and I do sell some photos, but truth be told I don't promote myself and I don't advertise. The money is minimal in sports, the big money is in weddings and advertising. I do it for the love of the game!
If you like playing with high-tech gear then it's certainly worth it!
I will add, that if you would like to take shots like this, then the 7D with a 300mm f/2.8L IS version I is completely capable. I used that setup in addition to the MKIV before I upgraded to the 1DX.
Rich
Sure, I sell my photos constantly 24 hrs a day, it's just that no one ever buys them! ???
You see.., a while ago I learned the difference between selling and buying!
Unless you do this for a living full time, you won't make your money back. I'm a serious hobbyist and I do sell some photos, but truth be told I don't promote myself and I don't advertise. The money is minimal in sports, the big money is in weddings and advertising. I do it for the love of the game!
If you like playing with high-tech gear then it's certainly worth it!
I will add, that if you would like to take shots like this, then the 7D with a 300mm f/2.8L IS version I is completely capable. I used that setup in addition to the MKIV before I upgraded to the 1DX.
Rich
Upvote
0
Yup, making a living as a photographer is 80-90% selling, and much less time taking the photos. The big money? is made by the franchise, not the photographer. The Getty sports photographer at the Super Bowl may have a photo sell for $$$$, but it's not his photo, it's Getty's. His salary, and residuals are probably good, but he did not get to go to the Superbowl his first year, maybe his 20th. And his plumber still makes more money than him.
There are exceptions, but photography is a bad way to make a good living. Just like with acting, 99% never quite the day job.
Awesome Photos btw. I'll bet the photographer may have had something to do with that, not just the gear.
I am in the same boat. I am told all the time: Dude why don't you go pro? Dude, because i enjoy eating and living under a roof and seeing my kids in shirts and stuff....
There are exceptions, but photography is a bad way to make a good living. Just like with acting, 99% never quite the day job.
Awesome Photos btw. I'll bet the photographer may have had something to do with that, not just the gear
.I am in the same boat. I am told all the time: Dude why don't you go pro? Dude, because i enjoy eating and living under a roof and seeing my kids in shirts and stuff....
Upvote
0
Thanks for the replies everyone. I do weddings on the side, and it is beginning to pay for all the gear I've purchased so far, and hopefully I'll get out of the red and into the black pretty soon.
I figured sports were a low return sector, but they sure do look like fun to photograph.
I figured sports were a low return sector, but they sure do look like fun to photograph.
Upvote
0
R
Richard Lane
Guest
Thanks for the nice comments Tex and John (Neuro)!
I rented the 500mm II for 10 days (this way I get 2 weekends with it), as I figured I could get in at least 2 Football games, and maybe some Soccer too, plus I have a Surfing tournament this week, but the waves are flat right now, they better pick up soon before this bad-boy has to go back. I'll be deciding between this lens and the 400mm f/2.8II.
I was very impressed with the 500mm II. It feels relatively light for a super-telephoto and it's really well balanced too. I shot with it on a Gizto 5 series monopod, which essentially rendered it weightless. The AF is fast and the lens appears sharp. I shot this game from 11am to 2pm and there was no sun flare and the contrast was very nice too for a mid afternoon game. There is quite a bit more vignetting in the corners on the FF body, than I had anticipated, but I think it looks pretty good for sports shots and in some instances I just corrected for it in post. I think I'll try the peripheral illumination setting. I never had a need for it before. I hadn't noticed any CA either.
I also tried out the new IS Mode 3 and it works as advertised. It didn't fight my movements like Mode 2 does, and I was basically unaware that it was in use. Mode 3 is only activated with the shutter-press and is inactive and in standby while shooting.
Tomorrow I'm going to try and shoot some BIF handheld with this combo. I already purchased the 1.4X III figuring I would need that no matter which super-telephoto II lens I get, since I only had the version II extender.
I rented the 500mm II for 10 days (this way I get 2 weekends with it), as I figured I could get in at least 2 Football games, and maybe some Soccer too, plus I have a Surfing tournament this week, but the waves are flat right now, they better pick up soon before this bad-boy has to go back.
I'll be deciding between this lens and the 400mm f/2.8II. I was very impressed with the 500mm II. It feels relatively light for a super-telephoto and it's really well balanced too. I shot with it on a Gizto 5 series monopod, which essentially rendered it weightless. The AF is fast and the lens appears sharp. I shot this game from 11am to 2pm and there was no sun flare and the contrast was very nice too for a mid afternoon game. There is quite a bit more vignetting in the corners on the FF body, than I had anticipated, but I think it looks pretty good for sports shots and in some instances I just corrected for it in post. I think I'll try the peripheral illumination setting. I never had a need for it before. I hadn't noticed any CA either.
I also tried out the new IS Mode 3 and it works as advertised. It didn't fight my movements like Mode 2 does, and I was basically unaware that it was in use. Mode 3 is only activated with the shutter-press and is inactive and in standby while shooting.
Tomorrow I'm going to try and shoot some BIF handheld with this combo. I already purchased the 1.4X III figuring I would need that no matter which super-telephoto II lens I get, since I only had the version II extender.
Upvote
0
Richard,
Really great shots. Look to Camera Canada for the best price for either the 400,500 0r 600 Mk 11 best prices. USA and Canada warranty and thousands cheaper than B&H, Adorama and Amazon. If you are out of country no tax from Canada. Just ordered the 400 mk 11 @ $10,299.00. The 500 mk 11 is $8899.0 and the 600 mk 11 is $11,389.00
Keith
Really great shots. Look to Camera Canada for the best price for either the 400,500 0r 600 Mk 11 best prices. USA and Canada warranty and thousands cheaper than B&H, Adorama and Amazon. If you are out of country no tax from Canada. Just ordered the 400 mk 11 @ $10,299.00. The 500 mk 11 is $8899.0 and the 600 mk 11 is $11,389.00
Keith
Upvote
0
Just thought I'd add a few...
1DX, 400mm 2.8 2... the one of the QB is 8000 iso... just whatever in camera NR... nothing post, jpegs out of the camera.
I bought the camera specifically because I shoot in the dark most of the time....
Sorry for the watermarks... have to do it on my site as most of these images end up as Facebook profile photos... and then in their printers....
1DX, 400mm 2.8 2... the one of the QB is 8000 iso... just whatever in camera NR... nothing post, jpegs out of the camera.
I bought the camera specifically because I shoot in the dark most of the time....
Sorry for the watermarks... have to do it on my site as most of these images end up as Facebook profile photos... and then in their printers....
Attachments
Upvote
0
Richard,
I have a football game Saturday the 8th, at night of course (damn it!) but I will take my 400 f/2.8 and see if that works much better, with less cropping. The thing I noticed about the 1DX is that I didn't need to give much AF time. I could just point the lens and shoot the shot, without a half-press sometimes and bang, it nailed the focus anyways. I suppose that would have more to do with the lens though too. My 1D4 was not doing that however, even with the same lens, and I cannot recall any DSLR that I've used that could do that. Cool camera!
I have a football game Saturday the 8th, at night of course (damn it!) but I will take my 400 f/2.8 and see if that works much better, with less cropping. The thing I noticed about the 1DX is that I didn't need to give much AF time. I could just point the lens and shoot the shot, without a half-press sometimes and bang, it nailed the focus anyways. I suppose that would have more to do with the lens though too. My 1D4 was not doing that however, even with the same lens, and I cannot recall any DSLR that I've used that could do that. Cool camera!
Upvote
0
Richard Lane said:
I totally agree. There some seems to be so many points of interest in what is actually a fairly uncluttered shot - you can see the field, the players are there, the assistant is in the background and the coach has got it all covered. The fact that he looks like he is saying something or just about to say something adds to it. It does what a good photo does and helps you to feel like you were there.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
