Ford Fair 06 Silverstone

[jaymes]

http://jaymesd.fotki.com/car_shows/ff06/

theres my photos from ford fair 06 - i borrowd my mates sigma 70-300mm (but the AF didnt work) i am quite pleased but always happy for some constructive critism (mainly the ones on the track)

[DOverton]

Look good

but too far away, they need a tighter crop if possible

Dan.

[Pete]

Shame about the watermark obscuring the object in many of the pictures. Yep, should be cropped tighter, or got in closer. I managed fairly well there, despite a fence getting in the way... http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=201147

Really wished I'd got down to the 0-60 strip though.

[asylumxl]

look pretty good especially consider the af on the lens wasnt working.

[Pete]

Just have to close the aperture down, focus on something track side around the area the cars are going to be and just keep the focus where it is. At those kinds of ranges, the focusing won't change very much. Could even go for the hyperfocal method without too much trouble.

[Trung_EP3CTR]

Most of the track photos look very static. The first set on page 1 looked like you stood and wait for the cars to go past and then you shoot.

http://images18.fotki.com/v24/photos/8/861141/3885264/IMG_3870-vi.jpg

Try panning with the cars.

[Jimages]

It's quite difficult to fully appraise those images due their small size, but I would generally agree that the cars look very small in the image. There isn't an awful lot at Silverstone worth having as a background back drop, except perhapps the BRDC clubhouse building.

I'd recomend on getting the cars much larger in frame, and don't worry about gettting multiple cars in frame. Concentrate on 1 and the rest come as a bonus.

300mm is short for many viewing points at Silverstone especially in the public areas, and I can see from your pictures that did shoot from the areas I'm about to suggest.

Outside of Bridge corner. Get up high on the seated terrace, and get a close up pan of the cars as they take the apex.

Inside of Bridge, 3/4 shots to pans as they arrive/apex brooklands priory.

Luffield, you can get a good degree of close up angles here, and there is a spot in the disabled viewing area, where you can get right up againt the fence without trespassing.

Outside of Club exit, where the fence is low, 3/4 pan shots here are relavtively easy as you can get the car in frame without the fence in the way too much.

[jaymes]

thanks guys

yeh i know what you mean they look static :( the ones that i tryed of panning they were just blurry

the lens was on full zoom - couldnt get all that near to track i thought unless i just didnt find a place

the watermark i may take off, just put on some of them

[Jimages]

Or have a watermark and credit line in the corners.

like... http://www.j-images.com/2006/FIAGT24HrsofSpaFrancorchamps/img_1591.jpg

Trouble is with having a large watermark across the middle of a small image is that it puts people of looking at the image.

[jaymes]

yeh i see what you mean

didnt think as they get resized when i upload them

i can only get better at taking pics i suppose - i should be going to some more motorsports events soon i hope so i can 'practise' then but hopefully i will be gettin a new lens soonish

i quite liked the sigma 70-300mm and i think would like it better if it autofocused

ive seen these brand new for around the £100 mark - are there any other lenses for this sort of stuff around same price?

[Jimages]

Depending on how serious you about your photography, I'd encourage you to look at having a much higher budget for a lense.

Look at something like a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8, you can often pick up these in excellent condition on ebay, and you always put a 1.4 or 2.0 convertor on it. My 70-200 cost me about £350 and my tele-convertor cost about £80.

[jaymes]

ive re uplaoded them all without the watermark on the photos so might be able to see them a bit better now

well i am and am not - i like taking pics etc and i know that a good lense helps a lot. i was lucky enough to come into some money to get my camera - i could come into some more soon but dunno whether to 'blow' it all or save some

i dont have a clue whats best for what and what everythin means on lenses - eg whats the f2.8???? i thought a 70-300 would zoom more than a 70-200 but am guessin not now :(

[asylumxl]

ive re uplaoded them all without the watermark on the photos so might be able to see them a bit better now

well i am and am not - i like taking pics etc and i know that a good lense helps a lot. i was lucky enough to come into some money to get my camera - i could come into some more soon but dunno whether to 'blow' it all or save some

i dont have a clue whats best for what and what everythin means on lenses - eg whats the f2.8???? i thought a 70-300 would zoom more than a 70-200 but am guessin not now :(

it will zoom further, but the 70-200 f2.8 is faster (aperture wise) allowing faster shutter speeds, has fast AF and is most definetly sharper.

[jaymes]

the f2.8 bit - does that mean how quick it is?

[asylumxl]

the f2.8 bit - does that mean how quick it is?

aperture wise, yes, the lower the "f" number, basically the more light the lens can let in, meaning you can get faster shutter speeds, useful for low light work or where you need to freeze the action. :).

here is a whole wikipedia page on f numbers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-number

you can ignore the mathmatics if you wish

[Pete]

Just to compare your pictures against mine. You took you had to drop down to ISO400t f/2.8 at 1/640 shutter speed (at least according to the EXIF information).

My pictures were at ISO100 with a shutter priority of 1/160. The lens was perfectly comfortable, setting the aperture at f/7.

Just seems really odd that your track pictures don't look particulalry zoomed in....

[jaymes]

kinda understand that now

so this 70-300 stuff - what are these about? guessing the more the top end is that the more it zooms but whats the bottom one about the 70?

the lens 70-200 is that a good 'size' lense for photoing track action of motor racing with a low f?

[jaymes]

Just to compare your pictures against mine. You took you had to drop down to ISO400t f/2.8 at 1/640 shutter speed (at least according to the EXIF information).

My pictures were at ISO100 with a shutter priority of 1/160. The lens was perfectly comfortable, setting the aperture at f/7.

Just seems really odd that your track pictures don't look particulalry zoomed in....

i dunno how to set up my camera - what setting to take them on etc

i just took them on sport mode - dunno what all my settings are

[Pete]

I'm learning too, mate...

Sports mode assumes that you want to "freeze" any action you're taking pictures of. However, taking pictures of cars in motion with this will just look as though they're parked on the track (picture below was taken at 1/1000)

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a294/peteghia/Ford%20Fair%202006/_MG_1268.jpg

See how undynamic it looks? Setting the camera to shutter priority and selecting a speed between 1/125 and 1/200 (depending on the effect you want and the speed of the cars) will give some blur to the wheels, at the expense of the risk of motion blur from camera shake.

This picture was taken at 1/160. See how the wheels are in motion. Also the background is blurred, giving the impression the car's actually moving.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a294/peteghia/Ford%20Fair%202006/_MG_1256.jpg

Keep plugging away at it, and you'll get some great results. I had to chuck away loads of shots from sunday, but the keepers made me really happy...

[jaymes]

so what setting did you use?

i have like AV TV A-DEP etc on mine - dunno which one will be best

[Pete]

I used the TV (Time Value = shutter speed priority) setting and set the shutter speed to 1/160, ISO set to 100 for optimum image quality, zoomed in as tight as I could and took the pictures. Since you couldn't use the autofocus, it made sense for you to manually focus one something close to where you expect the cars to be (which you did a great job of by the way). If you see the aperture indicator in the viewfinder flashing at you, it means you don't have enough light available for the shutter speed. When that happens, bump the ISO up until it stops complaining.

Keep taking pictures, that's the main thing.

[jaymes]

will set mine up for that ready for the next time i go

hopefully i will have a lense for my next trip

[Jimages]

Jaymes.

The 70-300mm in the descritpion of your lens is it's depth of zoom.
As Pete said the f number describes it's aperture. The aperture controls depth of field, but is also very handy for controling exposure.

Read in your manual for a explantion of apeture and depth of field, it will be much better illustrated, than what I could explain.

I don't know the specs of your lens, but I'm guessing it might have a aperture of f3-6.3 or something similar. This means that at it's widest angle (ie 70mm) it's maximum aperture is f3, and at it's narrow angle (ie 300mm) it's maximum aperture is f6.3.

Now Petes lens a 70-200mm f2.8 L is able to shoot at the same maximum aperture through it's range of zoom. Generally only the more expensive lenses can do this. The "L" in the title simply indicates that the lens has Canon's L spec glass.

In motorsport photography the larger maxium apeture you have (i.e the lower the f number is) then the more versatiile your lens is. Because the conditions are forever changing. The light changes all the time. The limitation your lens gives you is that, to get the cars large in your frame, you're going to be at full zoom most of the time, especaially at tracks like Silverstone which has larger run offs, meaning that you are furither away from your subject. But shooting at your maximun zoom level also means you are not able to shoot at your larger apertures, and thus have a lower scope for depth of field, and letting light into your lens.

[jaymes]

the lense i had was borrowed from a mate - so probs wont use that one again - i dunnno what the F number was on the lense

thanks for all your help - i am trying to learn but its more complicated than expected but am sure i will get there - bet you wish you never started to help me now lol

[gtietch]

THE lense jaymes was useing is the sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6
apo macro super af. I don`t think it`s the wright lense for the 350d