Disappointed by Sports Mode (EOS 300D)

[billhercus]

I find my self v unhappy about sports mode quality. Yes, I normally shoot in RAW but forays into .jpg for static subjects are all right.

Is it all to do with the lack of pin sharp focus? I'm using a Sigma 100-300 EX with 1.4TC. It always seems to set f5.6 for max speed which at 420mm and 200metres target distance gives DOF from 560ft to 830ft (unless I've worked this out wrong?)

I haven't taken 1.6 crop factor which will make a difference, I suppose.

Appreciate comments from those using this mode with the Drebel!

[tommykjensen]

I think the quality of the lens has a lot to do with the results.

I have gotten pretty good results using sportsmode with 70-200 mmm f4L lens.

For example these:

http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/pdkr01.jpg
http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/pdkr03.jpg
http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/pdkr04.jpg
http://www.klein-jensen.dk/external/pdkr05.jpg

[billhercus]

There is nothing wrong with this lens. Here's an example which I think explains my criticism:

http://www.mayfieldghouse.freeserve.co.uk/ForumPics/DinghiesAug291760.JPG

[billhercus]

Forgot to add - you need to look at it at 100% of course!!

[timmyquest]

I disagree, i think thats the lens...

[tommykjensen]

I don't think that photo illustrates Your point. I don't see anything sharp on the photo so I would guess that the quility of the lens combined with the TC is not so good.

Is the TC a Canon or a different brand.

As for speed remember with a TC 1,4 You loos one stop. So if the max speed is f4 it will be 5.6 with the TC.

Do You have a sharp photo shot with just the lens.

[tofuboy]

What is the shutter speed that is being used? Are you shooting handheld or with a tripod? If you say the lense is fine in other situations, it could be camera shake, which would be more evident when zoomed in.

[billhercus]

Same lens, almost flat out ....

http://www.mayfieldghouse.freeserve.co.uk/ForumPics/ForresMay201275.jpg

[billhercus]

That's a fair point Tofuboy but this was shot at 1/2000 using a monopod. Although I'm new to the monopod, that speed should cover me for camera shake :?:

[tommykjensen]

That's a fair point Tofuboy but this was shot at 1/2000 using a monopod. Although I'm new to the monopod, that speed should cover me for camera shake :?:

Then I would say it is the TC that destroys the quality. Is it Canon or a different brand?

Or You may have a defect camera that needs service.

[Andy_T]

To me, it also looks as if the ISO has been pretty high...

I think that the other photograph is taken under very different (e.g. more favourable) lighting conditions.

As to the original question ... I would suppose sports mode means that the camera uses the largest aperture possible in order to get the photo as fast as possible.

Best regards,
Andy

[billhercus]

The TC is the Sigma TC. The point is that I'm very happy with the results I can get with this combination even at max mag in the other modes. However, each time I use the sports mode, and thus of course the servo mode, the results are very poor.

This would seem to narrow down the problem to a focus error but it seems to be more that that. Truth is I probably need to take a few hundred more shots in that mode to really nail this one or else get a now inexpensive 10D and do this in RAW.

Thanks for the input ...

[Andy_T]

What the heck .... ah, hack?

:wink:

I suppose it allows you to select AI servo mode even in the creative modes. Might be worth a try. But then, I'm not a DRebel owner, let alone expert.

BTW, you might want to replace the full size photos with 800 pixel versions and put the 100% versions in links.
The other way, it's murder on Pekka's bandwidth.

Best regards,
Andy

[tommykjensen]

To me, it also looks as if the ISO ha been pretty high...


I thought of that too but the sportsmode select ISO automatically and never higher than 400.

[billhercus]

Yes, Andthaler.

Know about bandwidth but felt I needed it for this problem. Could have cropped at 100% of course ...

So much to learn, so little time!!

[billhercus]

.. still more to learn!!

Where will it all end?? (No signature this time - every little helps :) )

[quickben]

Hi Bill, I take it from your website in your profile that you're from Forres ?

My profile might say I'm from Newcastle, but I'm in the RAF and based at Lossiemouth. I actually live in Elgin.

Do you know any good spots for wildlife photography (Birds of prey) I've been looking for a couple of weeks now and haven't really found decent places.

I suppose I'm not looking hard enough :oops:

Be good to hear from you.

Gary.

[Danny Boy]

billhercus,

I really like the detail of your picture. Can you give specifics on the picture? (shutter, f/s, iso)?

Dan

[leehal]

@tommykjensen

Great photos :wink:

[Mark Kemp]

To my eyes the sail is the sharpest thing in your picture. Look at the text, it is sharpest somewhere near the B or R I think. I suspect that AF has focussed on the sail and at only f5.6 with the subject so far away your DOF is extremely small so that pretty much everything else is out of focus. I am not sure about your DOF calculation, but I wouldnt expect anything like that much based on my experience. Are you sure that the range was really only 200m? It is pretty easy to get a visual estimate of distance wrong. I would have assumed the boat to be quite far from shore as you can see the whole sail and the hull is quite small in the frame.

Otherwise it looks about right for an overcast day action shot. There is just no way to get a small aperture and a fast shutter speed if there is no light. All you can do is turn up the ISO and live with the grain and probably still get a compromise on either DOF or motion blur.

[tommykjensen]

All you can do is turn up the ISO and live with the grain and probably still get a compromise on either DOF or motion blur.

Well that is the problem. In sportsmode it is not possible to bump the ISO, it is selected automatically and never higher than 400.

[Mark Kemp]

Well if the camera is too limiting for the type of picture you want to take I guess its time to have a serious look at how much it will get you if trade it in on a 20D.

[tommykjensen]

Well if the camera is too limiting for the type of picture you want to take I guess its time to have a serious look at how much it will get you if trade it in on a 20D.

Its not a problem for me, see the shots I posted as examples :wink: But I have signed up for a 20D :D

[RichardtheSane]

I don't think the camera would be too limiting for this kinf of shot.

Can you post the EXIF info too? That would make it easier to see what was happening.

[Mark Kemp]

Oh yeah I hadn't looked before - nice pics.

A bright sunny day really makes a difference too. Even so, you didn't get as much depth of field as billhercus was expecting and you must have been closer to the bikes than he was to the boat.

I will sign up for a 20D soon too I think. I'm now quite glad that 1D MK2s were in short supply. I would have had one of those last week but now I think the 20D is fine for my needs and much cheaper.

[Big_B]

I suspect that AF has focussed on the sail and at only f5.6 with the subject so far away your DOF is extremely small so that pretty much everything else is out of focus.

I'm no expert but I thought that, other things being equal, the DOF would increase with the distance to the subject?

[Mark Kemp]

You know what, you may be right, I just looked it up and I think I got it backwards :oops:

This where I looked it up in case anyone is interested

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

I still reckon that the sharpest point is the sail and my experience is that sharpness falls off quite quickly either side of the focus point when using a telephoto wide open. However according to the sums this apparently shouldn't happen so I am not sure what is going on now :?:

[Big_B]

You know what, you may be right, I just looked it up and I think I got it backwards :oops:

This where I looked it up in case anyone is interested

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

I still reckon that the sharpest point is the sail and my experience is that sharpness falls off quite quickly either side of the focus point when using a telephoto wide open. However according to the sums this apparently shouldn't happen so I am not sure what is going on now :?:


Thats ok, I'm always putting my right foot on my left shoe... or should that have been my left shoe on my right foot..... oh I give up. I'm going to the pub! :lol:

[tommykjensen]

I don't think the camera would be too limiting for this kinf of shot.


I think that too and more think it has to do with the lens and the used TC.

[billhercus]

Some good stuff here to think about. Picture at 1/2000 f5.6 ISO 400 and 420mm (i.e., 300 X 1.4TC) Yes, on reflection the distance was more than 200metres. Maybe as much as 300 - but that should mean a DOF that more than covers the subject - not just the sail - but I may have got my calcs wrong - anyone good at these?

The lens (Sigma 100-300 EX APO) is a well praised one and the combination with Sigma 1.4TC is capable of very good results.

It was quite overcast though, and that does make quite a difference, I suspect.

One thing is for sure - I'm going to do a bit more work in this mode and not give up on my Drebel yet

[RichardtheSane]

I've just owrked out your DOF and it should be about 45m with that combo, so if you focus on the sail then al of the subject should be sharp.

Having a look at the picture at 100% and also the other image you posted the quality is very poor. Is it only sports mode that produces this? They are both cropped aren't they? Have you done any other processing on them?

[billhercus]

Yes, they were both processed in PS or C1 and have been saved in .jpg more than once which doesn't help. The town shot is cropped
I didn't think the town shot was too bad for buildings about 1/2 to 3/4 mile away but I'm on a learning curve of considerable gradient at present :oops:

However, further investigation reveals some of the answer. Image size for full 300D image is 3072x2048 with file sizes 2 1/2 to 3MB approx for .jpg.

Guess what this time? Image size now 3600 X 2400 and file size about 855K which explains a lot when you look at it 100%. However, at present I have no idea how that happened during my crop.

Any ideas?

[Mark Kemp]

I don't think the camera would be too limiting for this kinf of shot.


I think that too and more think it has to do with the lens and the used TC.

By 'limiting' I meant that you can't get AI servo except using sports mode and you can't get over ISO400 in sports mode so the camera won't let you do some things that you want to do. In which case you may need to think about a camera upgrade. I didn't mean there was a problem with the image quality caused directly by the camera, only a limit on what the camera allows you to do.

I didn't realise that this was a crop, I thought it was the whole image. Cropping and stretching it back to 3600 * 2400 has interpolated a lot of detail and starting with something that was 'pushing it' in the first place has only added to the apparent loss of quality. By cropping you are only using about 3 of your 6 million pixels (guessing from the file size) and that will obviously reduce the amount of detail. Go back to the original and assess the whole image for quality, it really isn't a fair test to expect a crop to be as good as a whole frame. Also check the settings when you save your JPEG, try not to use too much compression as that also affects quality.

I was also thinking about the DOF. The circle of confusion that you use to calculate the DOF is a number that should be about right for say an A4 size print. This is a bit subjective anyway and I wonder if it is not so easy when you have a TC etc. In fact anything not exactly on the plane of focus is slightly distorted, DOF just gives you an area either side where the distortion is 'acceptable'. I assume that the calculation is for perfect distortion free glass, so with real lenses the actual DOF must be smaller and a TC should also make things even less than perfect.

Perhaps a little bit of 'acceptable' distortion, plus the TC adding some blurring, plus the noise, plus cropping etc etc is just adding up to a total effect that is a little bit less 'acceptable'.

By the way, with a 450mm lens on a monpod I would have tried 1/350 or 1/500 shutter speed and a smaller aperture.

[billhercus]

Take the point about the aperture and wholly agree but can't do anything in sports mode - it is pre determined in the 300D.

More care in the 'image size' dialogue would certainly help!!

[ron chappel]

Look at the waves in the image-the subject *is* in focus,there is certainly no focus problem :shock:
The focus can be easily seen fading in to the subject then fading out again behind

You have a lens problem/TC problem/movement problem
Allthough i too can't see 1/2000 + a monopod giving results that bad :?

[RichardtheSane]

I wouldn't be so hasty to say equipment faliure/problem until the issue with the image size has been resolved.

billhercus, you said that you processed in C1, have you still got the RAW file to re-process? If so output to a TIFF, then use Photoshop to crop the subject and post the 100% crop then.

[tommykjensen]

I wouldn't be so hasty to say equipment faliure/problem until the issue with the image size has been resolved.


True, my assumptions was also that it was the full image or at least a crop that was not enlarged.

[billhercus]

Yes,

I have misled you guys :oops: - no way you would know about the unacceptable crop - but a good lesson nonetheless and a few pointers which leave me not nearly so unhappy.

Thanks for the input - appreciated!! :)