Soft sports shots

[bcap]

Hi guys.

I am relatively new to photograph (well, at least compared to the majority of you guys on here). I have always loved photography, but got my first DSLR about 3 months ago and have been going hog wild with it ever since. I do have experience with DSLRs, as I used to work as a photographer for a photography company doing action shots for Gymnastics.

I am very comfortable with it now and feel that I have learned so much, and still have much more to learn.

Now, the problem, I was out the other day taking some action shots of a friend's lacrosse game. It was nice and sunny out, great lighting, the whole bit. I was shooting between ISO 100 and 200. When I was taking the pictures they looked pretty decent on my Rebel's LCD screen, but I noticed I was having a hard time keeping the subject right on the center AF point as i pressed the shutter - the result, some of the photos turned out blurred. How do you guys overcome this?

Second part - the photos that DID turn out, look good at full resolution, but when zoomed in, they seem REALLY REALLY soft, and the whites all seem to have a glow to them. I have posted a sample below:

Full resolution:

http://www.memoriesinmotionnf.ca/photos/full.jpg

Zoomed in:

http://www.memoriesinmotionnf.ca/photos/zoomed.jpg

Anyone have any tips/advice/insight?

I was using my Rebel XT, Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO DG lens, ISo was between 100-200, 2.8 - 4.5 aperture (going between the 2), shutter speed was usually around 1/1000. I was shooting in Av and M mode. This shot specifically was 1/1250, 2.8 ISO 200 with FL at 200mm.

Thanks in advance guys.

Bryan

[Gary_Evans]

Hey Brian, good to see your event work is taking off.

With regards to the photo it looks like a bit of movement combined with slight oof to me. It looks the point of focus is the bottom of the red on the shirt.

I dont know the Canon Rebel that well, but can the focussing be set to AI Servo? as this will constantly refocus as your subject moves.

I would up the iso to 400 and have a faster shutter. Not everyone does this, but I prefer to. I also shoot with multifocus points active instead of just the centre one.

I dont think that the burnt out whites distract too much, so long as the skin is correct most people wont notice let alone care.

And without wanting to spend your money, (personal opinion coming up :cool: )I think that Canon lens are superior to Sigma ones.

[bcap]

Hi Gary,

Thanks for the response. I forgot to mention the fact that i was using AI Servo - so that solves the 1st solution. I'm going to skip right ahead to the 3rd solution - Canon vs Sigma. At the time when I bought my camera, I decided to go with the Sigma instead of the equivalent Canon because it was an extra $500 and I just couldn't justify it. After lots of research, I discovered that the difference would be slim to none. Bad decision? Maybe, but there is not much I can do about it now, unfortunately. I am stuck with the Sigma lens - not that it is a bad thing, as I really do love the lens.

Now, can you explain what you meant by multi-focus points? Do you use the Automatic AF point selector?

I do think that maybe the faster shutter speed would make a difference - but I have read that to freeze motion, anything faster than 1/300 will do the job. This is 1/1250! You think there is still slight motion blur?

Thanks again,

Bryan

[Florida Cracker]

Hi, I have the same lens......not real pleased with it either.....Check out this months POPPHOTO testing of this lens, also check out the MTG chart. I have learned to look at it before purchasing new lenses. Also check out www.luminous-lanscape.com for some helpful suggestions. As for the len, it is very soft at 200mm, better at 135 but best at 70... Personally I wished I had saved the dollars and went with a Canon to begin with..........

[Florida Cracker]

oopsssssss.......that should have been MTF....

[bcap]

Hi thanks for the help. Wierd though, I have had nothing but positive results from this lens. I will see if it is still possible to upgrade. What is MTF though? Soryr, I am a bit confused lol.

Bryan

[bcap]

Also, it seems as if your link is broken.

[Gary_Evans]

This could be a case where we use different (the proper?? :cool: ) words to mean the same thing with regards to multi focus points.

You can set your camera so that a square in the middle of the viewfinder lights up in red and the camera focuses on that point. You can move this red point to different areas of the viewfinder.

Or you can set all the points active to achieve focus with any of them. Camera normally focuses on which ever focus point achieves focus on what is nearest the camera. eg 2 sprinters - camera would focus on the one nearest the camera. Think I explained that OK, but let me know if I didnt

[bcap]

Thanks Gary,

That is what I thought you were talking about. I'm not sure though, I'm not a fan of automatic things on the camera, I like to have full control over all settings.

Does anyone else ever use the Automatic AF Point Selector?

Thanks,

Bryan

[Croasdail]

Na... the lens is very capable of doing what your asking of it. I can show literally thousands of shots made with that lens the would pass even the most harsh test. It could be your particular lens, or it could be your camera body. Both have the ability to be calibrated and if both or either is at the edge of it's tolerances, you would see results like this. Also remember when zooming in to peek at pixels, a vidio pixel is not equal to what a printing pixel is... they are not even remotely the same and one is not an indicator of how the other will look in final format. Lastly freezing motion... it really depends on which motion you are talking about. 1/300 might work barely from motion if it is moving towards you at some distance, but it is hardly a reliable number. I have shots of baseball pitchers where there is still finger blur at 1/2000. If you happened to have camera shake at the same time as tracking the player who was moving across the screen, yes, you can still get motion blur. I use a monopod when shooting long to get a stable platform to shoot from. You don't need a monopod if you can keep your arms in tight and use good breathing techique. But to end this long winded ramble... it is still way too hard to determine what is going on. This image is very salvagable for small prints and screen presentation. Shooting tighter will help reduce the chances of missed focus, and if you are shooting wide open, you can stop down just a tad to increase your DOF and still get nice backgrounds. I wouldn't hit the pannic button, and don't trade your lens in. Cheers.

[bcap]

Thanks Mark,

Where/how could I see if my camera/lens needs to be callibrated?

Bryan

[Croasdail]

You can take it to a local authorized sevice center... or back to the manufactures. It's not a bad idea to occasionally have your stuff checked out. It bites to have to have this done, but just like a car or a home, often there are some fine adjustments needed in the first little bit to get everything tuned right. If you read the lens forum, you'll even see plenty of "l" lenses that needed to go back for a calilbration. Good luck with it.... !

[bcap]

Thanks Croasdail.

Any idea (maybe a range) as to how long it takes for them to callibrate it usually?

Bryan

[snapzz]

Hi Bryan
Just read through your post and some of the replies. Heres a few points I feel are worth mentioning.

Firstly the lens used is not optically as good as the Canon 70-200 2.8L (in my oppinion).Also zoom lenses are very good these days but still have a high and low point throughout the range.

Secondly Canon (by their own admission) will tell you that using AIServo you will find a percentage of oof's or slightly soft images.One service centre told me "upto 2 from 6 can be slightly off!" So always take plenty of shots.

Thirdly I only use the centre square for focusing as I believe most sports togs do.This stops the focus from jumping of a low contrast subject if it finds a better contrast to lock onto. If you are using the shutter button to lock focus try setting the custom function to use the * button instead (if your camera supports this). This is a popular option for many sports photographers but does take a bit of getting use too. Personally its a techneque I could never master.

Lastly in your example the area of crop is a very small pecentage of the original image. By selecting a small section like this to crop you will find the image will loose some sharpness and I think your example is tyical of this.

Hope this helps