85 1.8 result

[gramps]

Here is what the new 85 1.8 did tonight. The gym had about 3 or 4 different types of lights in it so the colors are a nightmare.

http://www.pbase.com/sjh/image/39305975.jpg

[blinking8s]

and ur settings were?

[gramps]

and ur settings were?
jpg small
1.8 ~1/400
ISO 1600

when I walked into the gym it looked bright.................about 3/4 thru the game I looked up and saw the different types of light. I guess sh*&*&*& happens when you get to much in a rush and forget to pay attention. I'm going to chalk it off as a "learning experience".

[mr.photoguy]

Why didn't you prefer to shoot in Raw?

Nice Shot.

[Scottes]

Great shot Gramps. Great shot.

And the lens looks stunning. I want one, but it's second on my list.

[HKFEVER]

jpg small
1.8 ~1/400
ISO 1600

when I walked into the gym it looked bright.................about 3/4 thru the game I looked up and saw the different types of light. I guess sh*&*&*& happens when you get to much in a rush and forget to pay attention. I'm going to chalk it off as a "learning experience".

Did you turn on the noise reduction?

[cmM]

looks good to me. If you can get sideline, I think it's a great lens for such sports as basketball. Large aperture and quick focusing is great! Something the 85 1.2 cannot do (that's how I consolate myself :-P)

[gramps]

Why didn't you prefer to shoot in Raw?

Nice Shot.
That is what I am going to start doing. I have been using jpg so I can fit more on the CF card. The last couple of games I shot about 400 pictures per game. It's time to go for more quality and not so much quantity.

[stckciv]

I think I may have to go buy this lens now! I have been wanting it for awhile now, just havent takin the jump.

Did you get yours at a local shop? Just curious which one, I live in Utah as well.

Nice shot!

[gramps]

I was in Southen Cailfornia last weekend and got it at Samy's. The store sold it to me for the internet price +$10.00 but at least there was no shipping so it worked out about even. I haven't found a store in Utah that will compete with Samy's or B & H price wise.

[gramps]

Here you can see the problem with the different lighting. The wall in the top back of the photo is the same white color but where the different types of light hit it the color of the wall "change". There were different types of lights over the court.

http://www.pbase.com/sjh/image/39307844.jpg

[HKFEVER]

Here you can see the problem with the different lighting. The wall in the top back of the photo is the same white color but where the different types of light hit it the color of the wall "change". There were different types of lights over the court.



What is the size of the JPG and the dpi?
Can you show a 100% corp of the focus point area?
Did you have your noise reduction on?

[Ballen Photo]

Looks like your 85 came through with the goods. Nice catches. :D
-Bruce

[Redbird_xo]

The two shots look very nice to my eyes. With available light and inexpensive equipment, I would be happy to have shots like these. How come the thread starter thinks otherwise!? Is it just me???

[gramps]

The two shots look very nice to my eyes. With available light and inexpensive equipment, I would be happy to have shots like these. How come the thread starter thinks otherwise!? Is it just me???

Thank you! Maybe it's just me. I'm not happy with the colors but like you said "available light"...............

the noise reduction is on and the jpg's are 72dpi

[22littlereasons]

Oh darn, now I have another lens to buy. *s*

I use a 70-200 f2.8 and find it's too close if I roam under the basket. And every now and then use I a 28-75 f2.8 right under the basket. Either way, I can adjust the frame since I am using a telephoto. Is there any sense of frustration in using a prime when missing the framing capabilities of a telephoto? Or is this just a trade-off you can live with considering the addition headroom of the f1.8 and the clear images it produces! *s*

[mr.photoguy]

That is what I am going to start doing. I have been using jpg so I can fit more on the CF card. The last couple of games I shot about 400 pictures per game. It's time to go for more quality and not so much quantity.

yeah when you shoot Raw, you can adjust the white balance temperature. Pull sharpness, and contrast. Adjust the exposure a bit.

I have to admit that it has helped me to save the day a bit.

Man I need to pull my camera out. I have been so busy lately... I haven't gotten the chance to shoot anything, or anyone.

[gramps]

Oh darn, now I have another lens to buy. *s*

I use a 70-200 f2.8 and find it's too close if I roam under the basket. And every now and then use I a 28-75 f2.8 right under the basket. Either way, I can adjust the frame since I am using a telephoto. Is there any sense of frustration in using a prime when missing the framing capabilities of a telephoto? Or is this just a trade-off you can live with considering the addition headroom of the f1.8 and the clear images it produces! *s*

For me the 70 - 200 is just too long for the baseline, so is the 85.............you need to be back about 10 - 15 feet from the line. The 85 is perfect for shots from the corner. I'll use my 24 - 70 if I get right under the basket or I'm tight on the baseline.

[3oh6]

nice work gramps pics look real good. that second one showing the *GREAT* light is hilarious. everything gramps has stated about the 85 is 100%. it is too long for right under the bucket unless your looking for a half body cropped extreme facial shot. otherwise creepin around 3-4 feet off the baseline at the 3 point line and wider will get you full bodies with rim, the uber quick focusing of the 85 and f/1.8 with some good timing will get you frozen ball action at 1600 in even the most cavernous of dungeons. once again, good job on the pics and i will be waiting to see some more from that lense.

[drisley]

Great shots imho. The colour and sharpness looks great!

Did you have your noise reduction on?

There is no such thing.
The 20D has long exposure noise reduction, but that only affects exposures of 1 sec or longer.

[blinking8s]

drisley - the SI profile says to have this setting ON in the custom functions...any clue why?

[drisley]

Just in case you ever take an exposure longer than 1 second I guess.
It doesnt affect any exposure shorter than that.
And to be honest, it should be called "long exposure hot pixel reduction" as it doesn't really affect noise at all, it removes hot pixels from long exposures (the 20d already takes amazingly low noise images, even at 30sec exposures).