I recently switched to prime lenses. I shoot wide open with a 35mm 1.4 and a 85 1.4 at the high school basketball games and getting amazing results. Since most of the time we tend to crop, shooting wide open at 1.4 allows me to use high shutter speed, lower ISO, and more depth of the field for subject separation. I shoot with two Sony a7R3 42 megapixel cameras so even if I crop, I still have a lot pixels to work with. These mirrorless cameras like the Sony and Nikon have amazing autofocus so most of my shots are tack sharp even at 1.4.
I’m really enjoying your videos and I think they’ve been really helpful so far.. found you thru your recommended cameras. Just followed you on Instagram!
Very useful! I currently work as a part-time sports photographer and my camera bodies are Nikon D3S and D4S. I'm not ready for the mirrorless system yet due to the high price, maybe I will retire my D3S and get a second-hand Nikon D5 next year.
Me too basically! D3s, D4 and D750. I just can’t justify a wholesale switch to mirrorless at this point. The outlay to switch to a couple of pro bodies and 3 or 4 new lenses is eye watering at current prices.
Any experience with the Z6II Jack? Just opened a photography business in South Florida and looking to purchase an upgrade to the D7500 I currently use, This page has given me great insight on some steps I need to take to get started! Cheers
I had a Z6ii for awhile, but I didn’t think its AF was all that great - especially for fast action. I ended up selling it. Having said that, it would still be a good upgrade to the D7500.
When shooting youth sports, curious how you carry your gear on the sidelines? Do you just have your normal bag nearby? Or do you just bring what you need to the field and then have a smaller bag with you to have accessories? Etc.
Another very nicely done video, Jack! I really appreciate your thoughts on the Z lens line sizing. After getting some great advice from you from another vid, I went with the Z 400 4.5 prime, and Z 70-200 2.8 for the sidelines for the upcoming soccer season. The only Z option other than the 400 4.5 prime for now at least, is the 400 2.8, which my camera supplier locally has said to expect maybe by the end of 2024. Yikes. Obviously, the concern with the 4.5 is later in the season when the sun will go down earlier during evening soccer games. But, even though I’ve only had that lens for a few days, the images are stunning! Anyway, your vids are great, and very, very helpful! Thanks and keep up the great work.
@@351linzdoctor Hi Linzdoc, Actually it’s been hit/miss as the sun sets and stadium lights come up. I think Jack mentioned in one of his vids that brighter stadium lighting is usually a result of bigger schools (more money for better stadiums) and especially if night games are broadcast in some way at that facility. He’s right on…. I’ve already seen a bit of everything this soccer season. At kickoffs with good sun, I’ll even use the 1.4 TC with the 400mm 4.5 and get as many good shots as possible while I can. As it gets darker, the TC comes off. Later, it’s the 70-200mm Z 2.8 with the 1.4, and then finally just the 70-200 2.8 toward the end to get the full 2.8 out of the lens. The real learning curve now is to decide where to position on the soccer field as the conditions get worse, and still get interesting shots. Frankly, an evening usually starts out great, but I’m swearing by the end of the night. Jack’s suggestions about max ISO is good guidance, and you can come off of say, 1/1000 min shutter speed down to maybe 1/500 to keep the ISO under control as it gets darker. Bottom line though…. The 400mm 4.5 does quite well until it gets really dark. Very satisfied with buying it. Funny, the camera shop called me 2 days after I bought it, saying that the 400 2.8 was enroute and wondering if I still wanted it. They earlier had said that it would be at least 6-9 more months to wait. Serenity now.
Great video. Like you said, everyone has a different approach but ours is fairly similar. I really like the idea of 120-300mm for my sports photography. If I wasn't already fully converted to mirrorless, I would consider picking up the Nikon version. It's just hard to justify that level of expense for me when I know I'm going to be running it full time with an FTZ adapter. If Nikon makes a Z version I may have to reconsider. I currently use a Z9 in combination with a Z6. I'm waiting to see what Nikon releases this year before replacing the Z6 as my second body for sports. The Z 70-200 and the Z 400 TC are my main two go to lenses for field sports. The built in TC has been great for softball. Although my 70-200 is my main lens indoors and occasionally the 24-70 gets use, again the 120-300 would be very useful. I occasionally use my 300 f/2.8 for volleyball when shooting elevated in the stands. I have a 200-400 f/4 I got used in great shape that was great last year for swimming. I suspect that it will continue to not get as much use now that I have my Z 400mm f/2.8. It's not just the lighter weight of the new 400, it's how it's distributed with the weight more balanced towards the back. It makes the 300mm f/2.8 I have feel heavy and more unwieldy in comparison even though they're almost identical in weight. I also use a lot of Think Tank gear. I've used their stuff for a long time and they make quality gear that suits my needs. I also have a leather sling but instead I use the Holdfast Moneymaker Solo since I prefer to carry my second body on my hip via a Spyder holster mounted on my Think Tank belt. I also use a stool to get that low "hero" look particularly for field sports as well. I use one of those three legged folding camp stools instead. I find it very light, portable and stable. I look forward to seeing a video from you on the Sypdercube. I wasn't even aware of it. I've used the ExpoDisc for a long time although Auto WB is much better in cameras these days. However, recently I've been using my Color Checker Pro that came with my Xrite color calibrator as part of a kit to good effect. I do a custom WB prior to the start of a volleyball game for example and then take a photo of the color card. I then create a custom profile when I get home that I then use in DxO PL6 since that's my main editing tool. Doing that take less than five minutes and then I have a custom profile for that particular gym. Between that and the Deep Prime capability of PL6 I've been very happy with the results. Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge!
Hoping to replace my D5’s with Z6iii ( assuming Nikon does it right ). Also, for indoors, pretty excited for Z version of Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8. It’ll replace the 24-120. ( I find the 24-70 just lacks enough reach to be useful ). Thanks for all your insight.
Thanks for watching! I have my fingers crossed that the Z6iii or the Z8 are viable sports options. I tried the Z6ii for sports and I was unimpressed. Sold it.
Hi Jack, I usually see like a key (black and red) on the side of the camera, I supposed that it is to hang the camera with a vest or something. But, what is it? And what's the model? Thanks! Great videos!
I believe you are talking about shoulder strap quick-release clips that are made by a couple different manufacturers. They're designed to allow to you put on and take off should straps quickly, and move it from one camera to the next. There are several different manufacturers that make them.
Hi Jack. Can you suggest a mirrorless camera aiming for sports under $1000? Can go with the 2nd market if possible. Thanks! I'm really inspired and learning a lot on your channel.
Mirrorless? That's a tough one. Mirrorless cameras are a rather new technology and the decent ones for sports are very expensive. Keeping it around $1000, I'd have to do with a good used DSLR.
You talked about how a less expensive version of the Z9 could replace your D5, with the release of the Z8 it sounds like it fits your ideal replacement almost perfectly with how similar it is to the Z9. I've also noticed the Z5 to be a great beginner camera into the world of fullframe mirrorless, much better than what the other brands are currently offering, so it looks like Nikon's spread of options is working to their advantage really well.
@@JackBeasleyMedia Nice! Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on how it compares to the Z8 but more importantly how well it integrates into your workflow opposed to the D5.
I picked up a Z9 this year and run a D4s as a backup. Also purchased the sigma version of that 120-300 2.8. they are super heavy compared to the 70-200 but great option to have. Also have the 24-70 2.8. I am debating on picking up the sigma 60-600 for daytime sports like baseball and soccer. what are your thoughts on that?
Any advice on wether to get the D5 or go all in on the Z9? Im looking to go professional and become one of the photographer for a major sports team within the next year. What do you think would be best In todays time. My only hesitation with the Z9 is the price and that I could get 2 D5's for the price of one Z9. I just want to know if the D5 will hold up for years to come even in mirrorless world of if I will need the Z9 when going professional
I don't know what you've already got to work with, but I can assure you, the D5 still cranks out great photos. The Z9's greatest leap over it is in the ability to AF on the subject's eyes and head with little trouble. The D5 also performs excellently in low light and some would argue the low light images are better than the Z9's. I went to the Z9 because I could afford it, and I also wanted to shoot video (which the D5 sucks at). If you're just making the leap into the pro realm, I think the D5 will still be viable option for several more years.
@@JackBeasleyMedia I currently work with the D750 which the D5 would be an incredible leap from the D750 so either way it would be a big upgrade. I have also heard the same thing about the low light which is why I has leaning more towards the D5 along with the price. Thank you so much this really helps!!
@Chris Denver I been using thr d750 as well and it does a good job just not as fast. I just upgraded to a used d5 with116 k actuation and have been blown away. Like you, I don't make 3nough money to justify a z9 right now but the d5 paired with my 750 will help me get there. It's deffinently improved my indoor results
Hi Jack. As usual a great video. I've been trying to research what camera body makes the most sense to move to next. Most of my situations are low light (high school football and gyms). I mostly shoot with AF-S 300 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 and have read mixed things about the 300 wide open with the FTZ adapter and Nikon mirrorless. I'm thinking given I am shooting High School sports with a D750 and I'm not looking to invest in Nikon Z series lenses, a D5 might make the most sense for me. I value your thoughts and experience.
I’m not sure what problems you’ve heard about, but from what I’ve seen, the Nikon f-mount lenses work perfectly fine on Nikon mirrorless with the FTZ adapter. I think the bigger issue is that the face tracking on the Z5, Z6 and Z7 cameras leaves something to be desired. I’ve been very impressed with that AF face tracking on the Z9 and I’m hoping the Z8 matches it.
It was on the earlier models as you mentioned and they were vague only stating times to acquire focus was much slower unless the aperture was F4, F5.6, etc. I'll start saving for the Z9. Thank you.
Thanks for all of your videos! Question - I have an A57 (it was brand new at the time, and all I could afford [at the time]) - I now have my children's sports that I would like to take good pictures of. I have DT 1.8/50 SAM and a 3.5-5.6/18-55 SAM lens. Test running these recently and it's not giving me that look that I'm looking for - the blurry background, subject isn't really "the main focus", crisp image, etc.. just looks like a picture I took with a phone..🙈 Can you help me up my picture game? Do you think I should purchase a whole new setup (if so, suggestions without breaking the bank)? Just a lens? Or is it me?? 😅 Thanks!
That blurry background effect comes from longer telephotos that can open up to larger apertures. Unfortunately, right now you've got a good starter camera and lenses, but not optimized for sports. Where you go from here really depends on your goals, and your bank account. I think most people would say to go for a better lens first, then work yourself up to a better camera body after. You should be able to find a good, used 70-200mm/f2.8 lens that will fit your camera. That's probably where I'd start in your case.
@@JackBeasleyMedia your monopod head snapped off on you. I don’t think I would trust another copy of that monopod. Especially given how much money you got sitting on it.
It’s probably because I had developed the habit of carrying the rig around by the monopod rather than by the lens mount. I had been doing that for weeks, so I probably had it coming.
Do you think the 400 2.8 Nikon lens is worth spending the extra money on or do I just get the 400 f/4 for the cheaper price for football games? I have a Z9 but I don’t have another camera body yet. I also have a 70-200mm 2.8 which I am currently using for basketball but I want to get into football photography in the upcoming season.
It really depends on the venue. There are few high school or similar football fields that are lit well enough to shoot at f4 and 1/1000 sec. Most of the ones I go to require ISOs in the 8000 to 16,000 range at f2.8.
Slowly working my way through your videos. Great stuff, Jack.
Really nice, great help all the information about the lens and flash tahnk you
I got the 400mm f/4.5 for my Z9 for daylight sports. It’s absolutely amazing and so light.
I recently switched to prime lenses. I shoot wide open with a 35mm 1.4 and a 85 1.4 at the high school basketball games and getting amazing results. Since most of the time we tend to crop, shooting wide open at 1.4 allows me to use high shutter speed, lower ISO, and more depth of the field for subject separation. I shoot with two Sony a7R3 42 megapixel cameras so even if I crop, I still have a lot pixels to work with. These mirrorless cameras like the Sony and Nikon have amazing autofocus so most of my shots are tack sharp even at 1.4.
Glad you got the Z9, I got sick of nikons lack of ability and switched to a canon R6 best move I have ever made
I’m really enjoying your videos and I think they’ve been really helpful so far.. found you thru your recommended cameras. Just followed you on Instagram!
Thank you for your video! Would love to hear more about that spydercube
You have a versatile collections of lenses. I enjoy sports photography. I will probably purchase the 70-200 Z lens.
Great info. Thank you sir.
I would like to see more about that spyder cube
Very useful! I currently work as a part-time sports photographer and my camera bodies are Nikon D3S and D4S. I'm not ready for the mirrorless system yet due to the high price, maybe I will retire my D3S and get a second-hand Nikon D5 next year.
D5s are going pretty cheap these days.
@@JackBeasleyMedia Indeed, and it's still a perfect camera for fast moving subjects.
Me too basically! D3s, D4 and D750. I just can’t justify a wholesale switch to mirrorless at this point. The outlay to switch to a couple of pro bodies and 3 or 4 new lenses is eye watering at current prices.
Any experience with the Z6II Jack? Just opened a photography business in South Florida and looking to purchase an upgrade to the D7500 I currently use, This page has given me great insight on some steps I need to take to get started! Cheers
I had a Z6ii for awhile, but I didn’t think its AF was all that great - especially for fast action. I ended up selling it. Having said that, it would still be a good upgrade to the D7500.
Thanks for the videos Jack!! I live near you and would love to connect sometime and talk about shooting beach volleyball matches.
When shooting youth sports, curious how you carry your gear on the sidelines? Do you just have your normal bag nearby? Or do you just bring what you need to the field and then have a smaller bag with you to have accessories? Etc.
I have a fairly large roller bag with everything in it that can lock the zippers and has a cable that I can lock to something substantial.
Another very nicely done video, Jack! I really appreciate your thoughts on the Z lens line sizing. After getting some great advice from you from another vid, I went with the Z 400 4.5 prime, and Z 70-200 2.8 for the sidelines for the upcoming soccer season. The only Z option other than the 400 4.5 prime for now at least, is the 400 2.8, which my camera supplier locally has said to expect maybe by the end of 2024. Yikes. Obviously, the concern with the 4.5 is later in the season when the sun will go down earlier during evening soccer games. But, even though I’ve only had that lens for a few days, the images are stunning!
Anyway, your vids are great, and very, very helpful! Thanks and keep up the great work.
Thanks, I'm glad I could help!
You are the first photographer that I found that uses the 400mm F4.5 for sports how is the night photos working out?
@@351linzdoctor Hi Linzdoc,
Actually it’s been hit/miss as the sun sets and stadium lights come up. I think Jack mentioned in one of his vids that brighter stadium lighting is usually a result of bigger schools (more money for better stadiums) and especially if night games are broadcast in some way at that facility. He’s right on…. I’ve already seen a bit of everything this soccer season. At kickoffs with good sun, I’ll even use the 1.4 TC with the 400mm 4.5 and get as many good shots as possible while I can. As it gets darker, the TC comes off. Later, it’s the 70-200mm Z 2.8 with the 1.4, and then finally just the 70-200 2.8 toward the end to get the full 2.8 out of the lens. The real learning curve now is to decide where to position on the soccer field as the conditions get worse, and still get interesting shots. Frankly, an evening usually starts out great, but I’m swearing by the end of the night. Jack’s suggestions about max ISO is good guidance, and you can come off of say, 1/1000 min shutter speed down to maybe 1/500 to keep the ISO under control as it gets darker.
Bottom line though…. The 400mm 4.5 does quite well until it gets really dark. Very satisfied with buying it. Funny, the camera shop called me 2 days after I bought it, saying that the 400 2.8 was enroute and wondering if I still wanted it. They earlier had said that it would be at least 6-9 more months to wait. Serenity now.
Great video. Like you said, everyone has a different approach but ours is fairly similar. I really like the idea of 120-300mm for my sports photography. If I wasn't already fully converted to mirrorless, I would consider picking up the Nikon version. It's just hard to justify that level of expense for me when I know I'm going to be running it full time with an FTZ adapter. If Nikon makes a Z version I may have to reconsider. I currently use a Z9 in combination with a Z6. I'm waiting to see what Nikon releases this year before replacing the Z6 as my second body for sports. The Z 70-200 and the Z 400 TC are my main two go to lenses for field sports. The built in TC has been great for softball. Although my 70-200 is my main lens indoors and occasionally the 24-70 gets use, again the 120-300 would be very useful. I occasionally use my 300 f/2.8 for volleyball when shooting elevated in the stands. I have a 200-400 f/4 I got used in great shape that was great last year for swimming. I suspect that it will continue to not get as much use now that I have my Z 400mm f/2.8. It's not just the lighter weight of the new 400, it's how it's distributed with the weight more balanced towards the back. It makes the 300mm f/2.8 I have feel heavy and more unwieldy in comparison even though they're almost identical in weight. I also use a lot of Think Tank gear. I've used their stuff for a long time and they make quality gear that suits my needs. I also have a leather sling but instead I use the Holdfast Moneymaker Solo since I prefer to carry my second body on my hip via a Spyder holster mounted on my Think Tank belt. I also use a stool to get that low "hero" look particularly for field sports as well. I use one of those three legged folding camp stools instead. I find it very light, portable and stable. I look forward to seeing a video from you on the Sypdercube. I wasn't even aware of it. I've used the ExpoDisc for a long time although Auto WB is much better in cameras these days. However, recently I've been using my Color Checker Pro that came with my Xrite color calibrator as part of a kit to good effect. I do a custom WB prior to the start of a volleyball game for example and then take a photo of the color card. I then create a custom profile when I get home that I then use in DxO PL6 since that's my main editing tool. Doing that take less than five minutes and then I have a custom profile for that particular gym. Between that and the Deep Prime capability of PL6 I've been very happy with the results.
Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge!
Great inputs, thanks for watching
Flashes get used heavily for night skateboard photography.
Hoping to replace my D5’s with Z6iii ( assuming Nikon does it right ). Also, for indoors, pretty excited for Z version of Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8. It’ll replace the 24-120. ( I find the 24-70 just lacks enough reach to be useful ). Thanks for all your insight.
Thanks for watching! I have my fingers crossed that the Z6iii or the Z8 are viable sports options. I tried the Z6ii for sports and I was unimpressed. Sold it.
Hi Jack, I usually see like a key (black and red) on the side of the camera, I supposed that it is to hang the camera with a vest or something. But, what is it? And what's the model? Thanks! Great videos!
I believe you are talking about shoulder strap quick-release clips that are made by a couple different manufacturers. They're designed to allow to you put on and take off should straps quickly, and move it from one camera to the next. There are several different manufacturers that make them.
Hi Jack. Can you suggest a mirrorless camera aiming for sports under $1000? Can go with the 2nd market if possible. Thanks! I'm really inspired and learning a lot on your channel.
Mirrorless? That's a tough one. Mirrorless cameras are a rather new technology and the decent ones for sports are very expensive. Keeping it around $1000, I'd have to do with a good used DSLR.
You talked about how a less expensive version of the Z9 could replace your D5, with the release of the Z8 it sounds like it fits your ideal replacement almost perfectly with how similar it is to the Z9. I've also noticed the Z5 to be a great beginner camera into the world of fullframe mirrorless, much better than what the other brands are currently offering, so it looks like Nikon's spread of options is working to their advantage really well.
I've already ordered a Z8, and the D5 will be retired.
@@JackBeasleyMedia Nice! Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on how it compares to the Z8 but more importantly how well it integrates into your workflow opposed to the D5.
I picked up a Z9 this year and run a D4s as a backup. Also purchased the sigma version of that 120-300 2.8. they are super heavy compared to the 70-200 but great option to have. Also have the 24-70 2.8. I am debating on picking up the sigma 60-600 for daytime sports like baseball and soccer. what are your thoughts on that?
I haven’t personally used that 60-600, so I don’t have first hand knowledge. I’d be like - watching TH-cam reviews!
@@JackBeasleyMedia other option would be Nikons 200-500 I guess.
Yes, I used to own one before I upgraded. It’s a good lens for the price
Any advice on wether to get the D5 or go all in on the Z9? Im looking to go professional and become one of the photographer for a major sports team within the next year. What do you think would be best In todays time. My only hesitation with the Z9 is the price and that I could get 2 D5's for the price of one Z9. I just want to know if the D5 will hold up for years to come even in mirrorless world of if I will need the Z9 when going professional
I don't know what you've already got to work with, but I can assure you, the D5 still cranks out great photos. The Z9's greatest leap over it is in the ability to AF on the subject's eyes and head with little trouble. The D5 also performs excellently in low light and some would argue the low light images are better than the Z9's. I went to the Z9 because I could afford it, and I also wanted to shoot video (which the D5 sucks at). If you're just making the leap into the pro realm, I think the D5 will still be viable option for several more years.
@@JackBeasleyMedia I currently work with the D750 which the D5 would be an incredible leap from the D750 so either way it would be a big upgrade. I have also heard the same thing about the low light which is why I has leaning more towards the D5 along with the price. Thank you so much this really helps!!
@Chris Denver I been using thr d750 as well and it does a good job just not as fast. I just upgraded to a used d5 with116 k actuation and have been blown away. Like you, I don't make 3nough money to justify a z9 right now but the d5 paired with my 750 will help me get there. It's deffinently improved my indoor results
Hi Jack. As usual a great video. I've been trying to research what camera body makes the most sense to move to next. Most of my situations are low light (high school football and gyms). I mostly shoot with AF-S 300 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 and have read mixed things about the 300 wide open with the FTZ adapter and Nikon mirrorless. I'm thinking given I am shooting High School sports with a D750 and I'm not looking to invest in Nikon Z series lenses, a D5 might make the most sense for me. I value your thoughts and experience.
I’m not sure what problems you’ve heard about, but from what I’ve seen, the Nikon f-mount lenses work perfectly fine on Nikon mirrorless with the FTZ adapter. I think the bigger issue is that the face tracking on the Z5, Z6 and Z7 cameras leaves something to be desired. I’ve been very impressed with that AF face tracking on the Z9 and I’m hoping the Z8 matches it.
It was on the earlier models as you mentioned and they were vague only stating times to acquire focus was much slower unless the aperture was F4, F5.6, etc. I'll start saving for the Z9. Thank you.
Thanks for all of your videos! Question -
I have an A57 (it was brand new at the time, and all I could afford [at the time]) - I now have my children's sports that I would like to take good pictures of. I have DT 1.8/50 SAM and a 3.5-5.6/18-55 SAM lens. Test running these recently and it's not giving me that look that I'm looking for - the blurry background, subject isn't really "the main focus", crisp image, etc.. just looks like a picture I took with a phone..🙈 Can you help me up my picture game? Do you think I should purchase a whole new setup (if so, suggestions without breaking the bank)? Just a lens? Or is it me?? 😅 Thanks!
That blurry background effect comes from longer telephotos that can open up to larger apertures. Unfortunately, right now you've got a good starter camera and lenses, but not optimized for sports. Where you go from here really depends on your goals, and your bank account. I think most people would say to go for a better lens first, then work yourself up to a better camera body after. You should be able to find a good, used 70-200mm/f2.8 lens that will fit your camera. That's probably where I'd start in your case.
@@JackBeasleyMedia thank you very much!! This helps a lot!!
I tried the Siruis monopod with the 400/2.8 but it had to much flex. I use a Gitzo and Leofoto with a higher load capacity.
Really? I haven’t seen an issue. On the other hand, I rarely have it extended all the way as I’m usually down near the ground.
@@JackBeasleyMedia your monopod head snapped off on you. I don’t think I would trust another copy of that monopod. Especially given how much money you got sitting on it.
It’s probably because I had developed the habit of carrying the rig around by the monopod rather than by the lens mount. I had been doing that for weeks, so I probably had it coming.
@@JackBeasleyMedia yeah that can do it. I’m a Canon user but that 120-300/2.8 seems very interesting for indoor photography.
Do you have any recommendations on laptops?
Not specifically, but pretty much anything listed as "gaming" should work fine.
Nice but have you tryed auto racing? Sports are not all stick and ball try drag racing
what about the new 100-400 Z lens??
It’s another great option, for daylight. I’d buy that over the older, f-mount 200-500/5.6.
Do you think the 400 2.8 Nikon lens is worth spending the extra money on or do I just get the 400 f/4 for the cheaper price for football games? I have a Z9 but I don’t have another camera body yet. I also have a 70-200mm 2.8 which I am currently using for basketball but I want to get into football photography in the upcoming season.
It really depends on the venue. There are few high school or similar football fields that are lit well enough to shoot at f4 and 1/1000 sec. Most of the ones I go to require ISOs in the 8000 to 16,000 range at f2.8.
@@JackBeasleyMedia okay, do you know any places where I could get the 2.8 faster since it seems to be quite a wait list
Used from B&H or EBay