Canon 24-105 4L, 70-200 2.8L, and Rebel T4i issues

[Wakalimasu]

Originally posted by C_Dave45


Still learning. I realize shooting a black dog on snow is probably the hardest setting too.
I've not completely switched over to RAW shooting. Mostly jpg and just use FastStone for editing. Free. Quick and easy. Has curves, levels, does RAW etc, etc. But I still haven't made the pro leap to full RAW shooting and a proper editing program like LR or PS.

RAW's awesome!. I used to think that you can just use the jpg and it should be ok. You lose so much info by discarding the RAW data. Also Photoshop is like $10/month. You already spent all that money, why not bring the best out of what you shoot

[RealJimmyJames]

Does GIMP have the high-end editing ability like PS and LR? I have used it previously and liked it, but that was for much more simple tasks.

[killramos]

From what i remember gimp is about a technically capable as PS. Its just a huge PIA to use.

I have used it from time to time for minor image manipulation type stuff that goes beyond what aperture or something like MS paint could do in combination.

I have always found the system extremely unfriendly to use.

[msommers]

Sounds like your problem is sorted which is really great to hear!

I think your idea of buying glass first and upgrading the body later was the right choice. If you're using sub-par glass, you'll always have sub-par results, but not the other way around. In fact, using FX glass on a DX body will usually lend more leniency in terms of the lens' limitations because it won't use the whole image circle, whereas FX it will.

Keep your eye out for sales or even consider the used market for a new body. If hockey and shooting birds/your dog is what you think you'll be doing most, a new body such as a 70D will make the most sense now that you have a 70-200 2.8, a workhorse lens for a lot of pros.

With respect to processing software, I'd recommend Lightroom. Give it a free trial run for 30 days and see what you think. It's easy to organize files and considerably more intuitive than Photoshop (or most editing software out there IMO).

A couple other things.

1) When creeping into the higher ISOs like 2500+ (especially on DX cameras), getting the ISO dialed in correctly in camera will produce better shots than using a lower ISO that has been boosted considerably in processing.

2) For the AF system to have the least amount of work to do in servo/continuous, stick to a single-point, center position, if possible. Understand that your technique may need improvement here. You'll need to experiment what AF modes (single vs. 9-point etc) will, at the moment, produce the best results for you on a personal basis.

[C_Dave45]

Okay, so I got to try out the 70-200 2.8L on Sunday for some hockey shots. And again, I'm not impressed.

Don't know if it's the limitations of the body (T4i) or something wrong with the lens. At 70 mm, the focus won't lock onto anything further than 20 feet. As soon as I zoom into around 100mm, then it works fine. Most of the shots I'm fully zoomed in, so that really wasn't an issue.

Anyways, here they are. To me they're crap. Compared to shots like these. I realize those were taken with $10,000+ gear. Is that the difference?

Some were RAW others were jpg in the camera.
Please critique.



Settings: Manual mode, 1/1000 or 1/1250, 2.8 and ISO at "auto" (usually around 1600 or 3200).
AI SERVO focus mode with centre point focusing.

[msommers]

What is making them crappy in your eyes? The noise?

If so, that is strictly a limitation of that camera and if you want improvements you're going to have to purchase a newer body.

Regarding the focusing, how close are you to the players? All lenses have a minimum focusing distance and will not work if the subject is closer than that specified distance.

[C_Dave45]

Yeah, the noise. Focus seems a little soft. Just no "pop".

Ice level shots are taken through the plexiglass (up tight against the glass) and I'm about 30-50 away. The higher up shots are over the glass from around 6 rows up. 50-70 (?) feet.

[98type_r]

Does it make a difference if you toggle the focus distance switch on the lens? I can't say I've ever encountered the problem, but I'ma different flavor of the lens on a 6D.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by 98type_r
Does it make a difference if you toggle the focus distance switch on the lens? I can't say I've ever encountered the problem, but I'ma different flavor of the lens on a 6D.

I didn't notice any difference unless I was trying to focus on something that was less than 10 feet away.

Yeah
I've been thinking of jumping to a full frame. Either that or the 7D for the faster drive.

[Wakalimasu]

photoshop does a lot to the photograph too

[Projek01]

I too had a 650D not too long ago. Here are my experiences

650D->7DMK1
Auto focus is a night and day difference. I had wayyy less blurry photos when shooting moving images. Camera locked on focus much better even with the same lens. Noise improved but was still noticeably present when used indoors without a flash (F4 lens).

7DMK1->6D
Holy crap noise is basically gone unless you are using a stupid high ISO. Dam i miss the autofocus of the 7D when shooting fast objects. Also the SD slot/processor is no where as fast doing bust shots compared to the CF slot of the 7D.

SD card technology has probably caught up now but I regret not getting a 5D instead sometimes.

[muse017]

Your pics look pretty good tho I'd suggest to learn some photoshop skills.
Shooting raw + white balance + unsharp mask

BTW If you are interested in 5d mark II, Let me know~!

[benyl]

I think that part of the issue with respect to "Pop" is the venue. You are shooting in a place with light that isn't flattering and through plexiglass.

The other thing is you are shooting manual mode with Auto ISO. There's no point. I would suggest that you shoot AV, set the aperture you like and set a minimum shutter speed with Auto ISO. Let the camera do the thinking while you choose the depth of field.

When shooting with snow / ice, you could probably do well to bump EV to +2/3 - +1 or a little more. Play with it. You can fix it later if you shoot raw, but why not get it right to begin with.

5D MK IIs have come down in price and are a great camera. rage2 still uses his for car shows, etc. 5D MK IIIs are also dropping and will drop more when the MK IV comes out (if ever).

I find it funny the Nikon guy is the most helpful in this thread with the Canon equipment. haha

Lightroom 6 has amazing noise reduction compared to 5. Worth the upgrade.


That photo you linked on smug mug is definitely shot through a hole in the glass.

[msommers]

Benyl provided great suggestions. To add on top of that, a couple things about settings:

1) I see you're changing aperture, ranging from f/2.8 - f/3.2 - f/4. Stick to f/2.8.

2) Shutter speed - 1/1000 or 1/1250 should be ok, but see below for reference.

3) Auto ISO - adjust EV + however much is needed. Try it before the game starts.

4) If that lens has image stabilization, turn it off.

Also I just saw that link you provided. Here's the information tied to that photo:

CAMERA Nikon NIKON D4
LENS AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED II
ISO 5000
FOCAL LENGTH 300.0 mm (300.0 mm in 35mm)
APERTURE f/4
EXPOSURE TIME 0.0025s (1/400)
NAME DSC_2170.JPG
SIZE 1600 x 1065
FILE SIZE 815.78 KB
DATE TAKEN 2015-09-05 20:07:58
DATE MODIFIED 2015-09-06 09:46:55
COPYRIGHT DYNAMIC-PHOTOGRAPHY

He's shooting at 5000 ISO, with a D4. This was Nikon's flagship pro camera a few years ago. There is zero comparison between your camera and one that originally cost over $7,000. Sorry that came off more prickish than intended, my bad.

I'm a quite surprised with the shutter speed used here but it could be something worthwhile experimenting with if you can get away with a slower shutter speed without things being blurry because that would casue your ISO to come down.

[SilverKast]

Hockey will come down to your equipment in a lot of cases. I had the same problems you are experiencing when I first started taking pictures at my kids games. I ended up constantly upgrading my gear to the point where I'm using the same stuff pros use - which gets really expensive as my wife likes to remind me.

Indoor arenas for hockey and lacrosse I usually end up around the following:

- Manual mode, RAW
- F2.8 with either a 70-200 or 300mm
- 1/800 usually works
- ISO will be 3200 if it's really good lighting, but can go up to 8000 and still get nice shots
- Can use a custom WB off the ice if needed, although recently I just use auto WB and adjust in Lightroom if I need to
- I try to avoid shooting through the glass where I can, although this will depend on the level of the sport and whether they'll allow you to or not (and if you don't mind the occasional lacrosse ball near your head, lol)

Half of what you'll end up with is your equipment. I originally started years back with a Sony Alpha 100 and couldn't understand why I couldn't replicate the type of photos I liked either. Now I'm using a D4s and it makes a world of difference.

Your photos look like they do a great job of capturing the action, maybe try renting a different body just to see what sort of difference it makes and see if that gets you the result your after?

[blitz]

The last 3 posts cover everything you need to know.

The only thing I want to add is that I think a full frame camera isn't going to offer much to you. You've mentioned your almost always zoomed in with your 70-200mm, if you loose the 1.5x crop factor you'd need a 300mm 2.8 lens to get the equivalent FOV. You need good ISO performance and Fast AF, which points you to the 7D line.

[C_Dave45]

Thanks to all for the advice and suggestions.
MSOMMERS, no you didn't come off as prickish LOL....I checked out his gear and was comforted to see what he was using. If a lot of the success comes down to hardware then at least I know it's not ALL my lack of skills/knowledge.
Most of his shots he's shooting from a spot between players benches where's no glass at the Okotoks arena. Max Bell has no areas without glass, unless I stand on the boards hanging over top of the glass...right in everyone's view. I'll just have to adapt.

Thanks for the advice re full frame vs something like the 7d. I've been eyeing that one for awhile.

Also I'm going to step up to Light room and learn that.

I really appreciate all the knowledge from the pros here. Thank you.

[msommers]

If indoor sports is something you think you'll enjoy and want high quality results, I hate to say but things are going to get expensive for you

That said I think stepping up to this will give you a lot of use for a long time. If you need more reach, you can address that later.

http://www.thecamerastore.com/7458-C...k-II-Body.aspx

Samples like this may be of use:

http://photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00cvok

https://www.flickr.com/groups/2378139@N23/


Direct samples:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/129510...-7dmarkiidslr/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129510...-7dmarkiidslr/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/114673...-7dmarkiidslr/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/montho...-7dmarkiidslr/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/114673...-7dmarkiidslr/

[LongCity]

Originally posted by msommers

4) If that lens has image stabilization, turn it off.
.

Wouldn't he want that on if he's shooting at the long/(er) end?

[msommers]

It depends entirely on the shutter speed used. Using the shutter speeds I suggested, I personally would turn it off to negate any issues with the lens' vibration motor.

In my experience when shooting high FPS scenes using a high shutter speed with VR on, it has a tendency to 'stick' and doesn't focus as well.