Reply #3 - April 03, 2007, 09:35:03 AM
In my experience over the years, the biggest weakness in sports photography (done by those who don't specialize in it) is equipment. Few photographers not making their living at sports photograhpy own 300f2.8, 400f2.8 or 500f4 lenses. But, without long, expensive, optics it is truly difficult to get good tight, sharp, photos on a soccer, football, rugby or baseball field. With shorter lenses, you just can't get close enough and with slower lenses, they don't focus fast enough or blur the distracting backgrounds that kids fields generally have.
When I used to teach a class called "How to take better photos of your family and children" I recommended that parents take these pictures before games (during warmups) or after. Then you can go out on the field and shoot from shorter distances. You account for the slower focus of less expensive lenses and shoot from the proper angle to minimize background issues.
Now to you images! In sports, timing is everything . . . 1/10th second too early or too late and have a mundane image. But, get that timing right on and you can have a winner. In your first image, I would say that you are just a little early. In the second and third you are pretty close to spot on.
The first two images could be cropped closer, but the third is what you are looking for.
Mike and Stew talked about camera height. I would rather shoot down and eliminate bad backgrounds than get low and have parking lots and houses in the back. This is another place where a long, fast, lens can help a lot. It will allow you to get low and blur the background so that you don't have to worry about it.
None of these images look very sharp. It may just be a result of the size and quality that you chose for web display, I can't tell from here.
Ed

Logged