How to deal with energetic performers in poor lighting?

[kmb]

Hello,

Any specific tips on how to deal with performers who move a lot (jumping or just generally not-being-still) in poor lighting (meaning the amount of light)? I've learnt from here to watch for the "stop point" of movement, I'll be trying to take pictures bearing that in mind. Then there's the problem with shallow DoF. I typically 1) focus on the performer's nearest eye with the primary (middle) focus point which is the most sensitive in my 20D (one-shot mode), 2) recompose and 3) take the shot. I fear that between 1) and 3), the performer has moved oof. I guess I could try to use another focus point to minimize the time needed for recomposing the shot(?)

Any help will be appreciated :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Wide open aperture with a fast lens,. and timing for the pauses/breaks as best you can. :)

"Focus/recompose" is useless on moving subjects IMHO.. use the focus point that gives the correct composition and keep it on the eyes.. don't get married to the center AF point,. and consider AI servo with CF 4-1 to help keep up with moving subjects.

[kmb]

Thanks for the tips, CDS :)

and consider AI servo with CF 4-1 to help keep up with moving subjects.

Will continuous focusing work well with erratic movement? The trouble is not that the subject would be running around but if the DoF is a few centimeters a very slight movement would cause soft pictures. I have presumed that the continuous focusing modes won't work well unless there is some predictability in the movement, but then, I don't know much about the subject.

I've been considering learning to use CF 4-1 or 4-3, but I think it'll be frustrating at first to try to get rid of old habits, and I haven't yet had the energy to try to do that.
I'm also a bit unsure about the "shooting workflow". Is it like this (4-1):
1) push * down to achieve focus
2) If recomposition is needed release * if other than One shot focusing mode is on
3) Push the shutter button fully.

I guess AE lock is set when I push the shutter button halfway, so I shoud push it fully to make sure the shot is taken as quickly as possible after metering the light level?

Rarely there's no recomposition needed (because I really have to focus on the eye, don't I?), so I'm a bit doubtful if I should really use other than the center focusing point. It performs much better in low light with some of my lenses - I'm just testing with the Tamron 28-75/2.8 focusing on my bookshelf in low light. With the center focusing point the af is rather fast, no noticable hunting. With a secondary point, no focus is achieved, it only hunts through the whole focusing range. Using the camera in portrait orientation helps, then achievhing focus lock is fast even with the secondary point (which does make sense given the subject I'm focusing on - there are vertical lines - and because the focusing point is not cross type).

[narlus]

i've heard that the center AF point is the most sensitive/accurate...is that true, or hearsay? dependent on lens?

what does CF 1-4 mean? custom function?

[kmb]

i've heard that the center AF point is the most sensitive/accurate...is that true, or hearsay? dependent on lens?

It is true, it is a "cross type sensor", at least in 20D. That means it is sensitive to both horizontal and vertical contrast edges, while the non-cross-sensors are sensitive to only horizontal or vertical, but not both. That's why the performance of focusing with a secondary focus point on a row of DVD cases in my bookshelf is dependent on the camera's orientation, as I mentioned. It's very noticeable in low light and with a not-superfast lens (e.g. f2.8 ).

what does CF 1-4 mean? custom function?

Custom function, yes, and 4-1 on 20D it separates the auto focus to the "*" button while exposure is locked by the shutter button.

[DwightMcCann]

I agree with CDS on all points. And I use the "*" AF activation and I use almost all the 13 AF points available with spot metering on my 1D Mark IIs, which may not be available to you. Sad to say, but expensive equipment does a much better job in poor conditions ... in good conditions it is hard to tell the difference.

[René Damkot]

One thing on CFn 4-3: Allthough the manual says 'no AE lock', AE *is* locked in one-shot / evaluative for as long as the '*' button is pressed. Thats one reason I'm trying to get used to AI servo. I find it works reasonably well with a few exceptions:
1) poor light
2) low contrast
3) smoke
4) low light
5) higer contrast objects moving in front of faces (I have a few sharp shots of tattooed arms ;))
6) did I mention low light?

[DwightMcCann]

Rene, I think the real problem is low-light smokey flat colored lighting and bright shiny contrasty microphones!

[blackshadow]

Rene, I think the real problem is low-light smokey flat colored lighting and bright shiny contrasty microphones!In other words nearly every environment I shoot!

[DwightMcCann]

In other words nearly every environment I shoot!

Well, you are NOT alone! :-)

[TooManyHobbies]

No flash so...

Center AF point only.
High ISO
An IS lense works wonders
I put it in drive mode especially with action. Plus the second shot doesn't have shake from button pushing or mirror movement.
Monopod
#1 THING: Anticipate the peak of movement!

[Sir Vic Alsmear]

Best piece of advice I can give is to know your subject. Go to as many rehearsals as possible too, that way you can be ready for a lot of good shots you know are coming up.

[Greg P.]

i must be a loser. i put it on AF, M mode, 1/6 sec, and go. i hardly ever change settings during a show, and most certianly not lenses, and i try not to involve myself in the complex settings. And i dont even know what you mean my focus and recompose. compose? i guess im having too much fun dancin and rockin out that i dont compose, i just shoot.

[kmb]

i must be a loser. i put it on AF, M mode, 1/6 sec, and go. i hardly ever change settings during a show, and most certianly not lenses, and i try not to involve myself in the complex settings. And i dont even know what you mean my focus and recompose. compose? i guess im having too much fun dancin and rockin out that i dont compose, i just shoot.

The difference of styles comes from the fact that we have different goals :).

[Greg P.]

you hit it on the head there. Cept my goal is really do something with band photography. What i dont get is, when i look at some "photographers" website, and its garbage, horrible horrible stuff, yet theyre shooting bands like The Used and Fall Out Boy, not neccesarily good bands, but big ones. I know i have better stuff then they do, so what? am i not out there enough? do i now know the right people? do i just need to be patient and my break will come?

[DwightMcCann]

you hit it on the head there. Cept my goal is really do something with band photography. What i dont get is, when i look at some "photographers" website, and its garbage, horrible horrible stuff, yet theyre shooting bands like The Used and Fall Out Boy, not neccesarily good bands, but big ones. I know i have better stuff then they do, so what? am i not out there enough? do i now know the right people? do i just need to be patient and my break will come?

Greg, are you asking why you aren't rich and famous? :-) The truth is that it is 80% who you know and luck, 10% talent and 10% marketing. I agree, as do many professionals in the field, from musicians to promoters to managers, that the images we see very often are very poor. But that seems to be OK with the PR folks. It is also the case that the best bands want photographs that convey their vision of their work and are not interested in "shutter drag" and swirling light trails, which may be fine for the little bands without any investment in the production end of their performances. I can shoot technically excellent images on demand. I can also do shutter drag and motion blur. I can do whatever the guy who signs the checks wants. Since there are fewer of us who can do both we are more in demand.

[Greg P.]

Greg, are you asking why you aren't rich and famous? :-) The truth is that it is 80% who you know and luck, 10% talent and 10% marketing. I agree, as do many professionals in the field, from musicians to promoters to managers, that the images we see very often are very poor. But that seems to be OK with the PR folks. It is also the case that the best bands want photographs that convey their vision of their work and are not interested in "shutter drag" and swirling light trails, which may be fine for the little bands without any investment in the production end of their performances. I can shoot technically excellent images on demand. I can also do shutter drag and motion blur. I can do whatever the guy who signs the checks wants. Since there are fewer of us who can do both we are more in demand.

Rich? eh. Famous? Def. not. My main goal is to just shoot the bands i love and that i know would make for killer photos, bands like the Mars Volta, which im sure ill probably never shoot, but it is my goal. and again, my "drags" and "light trails" are subtle, not overdone or cheesy, flow off of the instruments for the most part, and most certainly add to the photo. Also, its not that they cant afford better, believe me, i shoot alot of these bands for free, because then ill charge them for CD art or press shots. Why would a band pick my style of photography? becuase its certainly not cornball motion and lines, theyre pretty sweet, they look good, theyre interesting, and theyre different.

as for "technical" images, honestly, i dont know if i can do that, to a professional extent at least. ive been using a d70 my whole life until very recently when i got the 20d, and im gonna have the 17-55 2.8 for it as soon as that comes out, so lets see what i can do then with the technical side.