Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Motorsports 
Thread started 23 Sep 2013 (Monday) 20:36
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Panning/focus question

 
330cic
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 23, 2013 20:36 |  #1

I trying sooo hard to get better at panning but I think maybe I am at the point where I can blame the equipment :D

I have the Canon XTi and this was taken with the 70-300 kit lens.

This shot was ISO 800, 95mm, f/22, 1/50 sec.

The car number (55) is in focus but the rest of the car doesn't seem to be as sharp. Is this because of the # of autofocus points that my camera has? I usually rent a 100-400L for races but this time I didn't.

Looking to upgrade to the 6D at some point (soon?). That of course is full frame and has many more AF points. Will that make a difference? Or is this just technique that I need to work on?


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


SteveH
Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20, Canon 50 f1.8, Canon 18-135 IS, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, Sigma 150-500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
seducksauce
Member
Avatar
114 posts
Joined May 2012
Location: Birmingham, AL
     
Sep 23, 2013 21:10 |  #2

Well, taken at 95mm, you must have been arcing fairly well through that turn to get that shot. The most probable reason the rest of the car isn't in focus is due to the relative angle to the sensor throughout the exposure.

As the exposure captures the car, you're focused on the middle of it, keeping that portion that appears sharp in relatively the same position throughout the entire exposure, but the front and rear of the car rotate around it (granted we're talking very tiny amounts, but it adds up on a longer exposure) creating motion during the exposure, keeping them from being sharp.

Additional AF points likely wouldn't have helped a whole lot here, as the camera picked a good spot (the car itself rather than say the fence or something), and due to the physics previously mentioned, the rest of the car couldn't have been in focus anyway. Perhaps if you know you're going to frame a shot like that, manually set the focus point to the front of the car, or wherever you prefer to have sharpness, and accept that other portions will be less sharp due to the movement relative to the sensor.

I hope that made sense...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SteveJa
Goldmember
2,137 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Nebraska
     
Sep 23, 2013 22:35 as a reply to  @ seducksauce's post |  #3

I also think the F22 and ISO 800 settings might be hurting the shot a little. Drop the ISO a little and bring the Fstop down some.

Also if you do a alot of this type of shooting, you would not want to get a 6D... look at a 7D or a 1D IV


Zenfolio (external link)
Flickr (external link)
FineArtAmerica (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drewl
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2005
     
Sep 23, 2013 23:52 as a reply to  @ SteveJa's post |  #4

i think most people only use on AF point at a time. having more points just gives you more options on which ONE to use.


seducksauce is right. unless the car's motion is parallel to the sensor the whole car can't be sharp at panning shutter speeds.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 24, 2013 12:31 |  #5

SteveJa wrote in post #16320232 (external link)
I also think the F22 and ISO 800 settings might be hurting the shot a little. Drop the ISO a little and bring the Fstop down some.

Also if you do a alot of this type of shooting, you would not want to get a 6D... look at a 7D or a 1D IV

Interesting. Why would I not want fullframe?


SteveH
Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20, Canon 50 f1.8, Canon 18-135 IS, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, Sigma 150-500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 24, 2013 12:33 |  #6

SteveJa wrote in post #16320232 (external link)
I also think the F22 and ISO 800 settings might be hurting the shot a little. Drop the ISO a little and bring the Fstop down some.

Also if you do a alot of this type of shooting, you would not want to get a 6D... look at a 7D or a 1D IV

I was using Tv and trying to keep the exposure time at 1/50 and the camera picked the aperture for me. ISO was set so that it wouldn't be too dark. I should have used manual so I could also adjust the f stop I guess?

I'm still learning...


SteveH
Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20, Canon 50 f1.8, Canon 18-135 IS, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, Sigma 150-500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 24, 2013 12:37 |  #7

seducksauce wrote in post #16320007 (external link)
Well, taken at 95mm, you must have been arcing fairly well through that turn to get that shot. The most probable reason the rest of the car isn't in focus is due to the relative angle to the sensor throughout the exposure.

As the exposure captures the car, you're focused on the middle of it, keeping that portion that appears sharp in relatively the same position throughout the entire exposure, but the front and rear of the car rotate around it (granted we're talking very tiny amounts, but it adds up on a longer exposure) creating motion during the exposure, keeping them from being sharp.

Additional AF points likely wouldn't have helped a whole lot here, as the camera picked a good spot (the car itself rather than say the fence or something), and due to the physics previously mentioned, the rest of the car couldn't have been in focus anyway. Perhaps if you know you're going to frame a shot like that, manually set the focus point to the front of the car, or wherever you prefer to have sharpness, and accept that other portions will be less sharp due to the movement relative to the sensor.

I hope that made sense...

Thanks! Yes, it actually does make sense.

I kinda don't mind the shot as it does convey motion (and it was raining as well as shooting thru the fence). I'm just comparing with some of the razor-sharp panning shots I've seen elsewhere on this board and trying to see what I can do to improve.


SteveH
Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20, Canon 50 f1.8, Canon 18-135 IS, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, Sigma 150-500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SteveJa
Goldmember
2,137 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Nebraska
     
Sep 24, 2013 19:04 |  #8

330cic wrote in post #16321643 (external link)
Interesting. Why would I not want fullframe?

Not that you would not want fullframe, just that the 6D does not have the best focuss system. Yes you could get it done with a 6D, and I am sure many do... but a 5d3 / 1dIV or 7D would have a better focuss system then a 6D. I do a lot of the smaller version of racing (remote control cars) and let me tell you, it puts my 7D on the edge.... focuss and iso are the things that I wish were better on the 7D..... with the 6D you would get better iso for sure.... focuss? not so sure.


Zenfolio (external link)
Flickr (external link)
FineArtAmerica (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SteveJa
Goldmember
2,137 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Nebraska
     
Sep 24, 2013 19:11 |  #9

330cic wrote in post #16321653 (external link)
I was using Tv and trying to keep the exposure time at 1/50 and the camera picked the aperture for me. ISO was set so that it wouldn't be too dark. I should have used manual so I could also adjust the f stop I guess?

I'm still learning...

I can only speak from what I read, so here it goes... People have said that when you go up to F22 you lose some quality... I have never tested. Also I know that on my 7D 1600 ISO is getting up there.... So I am sure that 800 on your XTI is getting up there... and if you drop the ISO and Fstop you will still be able to expose correctly. 200 ISO @ F11 would be the same as 800 ISO @ F22


Zenfolio (external link)
Flickr (external link)
FineArtAmerica (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,881 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2005
     
Sep 24, 2013 20:49 |  #10

330cic wrote in post #16319928 (external link)
I trying sooo hard to get better at panning but I think maybe I am at the point where I can blame the equipment :D

I have the Canon XTi and this was taken with the 70-300 kit lens.

This shot was ISO 800, 95mm, f/22, 1/50 sec.

The car number (55) is in focus but the rest of the car doesn't seem to be as sharp. Is this because of the # of autofocus points that my camera has? I usually rent a 100-400L for races but this time I didn't.

Looking to upgrade to the 6D at some point (soon?). That of course is full frame and has many more AF points. Will that make a difference? Or is this just technique that I need to work on?


As always, it has absolutely nothing to do with autofocus or the size of the imaging surface or the type of lens or the aperture used or model of camera.

There is nothing wrong with the image or technique or equipment.

To re-emphasize from earlier in the thread, the slow shutter speed panning technique produces unpredictable results in each frame. There is absolutely nothing unusual about having one portion of a subject in a panned image appear to be sharp while another portion is unsharp. Along with other factors, whenever any moving subject is captured with a panning motion, there's a small difference in the relative lateral speed across the frame of the front of the subject, the rear of the subject and the center. This difference is masked at faster shutter speeds that freeze the action.

Again, there is absolutely no problem with the image or the equipment or the results.
If you want an image that appears to have every portion of a moving subject seem to be sharp, you will need to use a much faster shutter speed, but you will also have a subject that appears to be stationary, with no motion blur.

The results from the slow shutter speed "panning" technique are not controllable and not predictable. The OP's image is typical of what will result from the technique. No matter what equipment you use or settings you employ, the results are always surprising. If you want different results, you need to use different techniques. The slow shutter speed technique is all about art and coincidences and not about predictable industrial production.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
philwillmedia
Cream of the Crop
5,253 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Nov 2008
Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..."
     
Sep 25, 2013 06:35 |  #11

^^^
Yep, DC Fan is right. You can't fight physics.
The phenomenon he is describing has a name.
It's called the Parallax Effect and is caused by different parts of the car moving around the film/sensor plane at different rates during the exposure time, similar to a pivot point.
Here's an extreme version for you.
40D, 1/5sec, f32, ISO 100, 300mm

IMAGE: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4064/4580193039_50ec6ae39a_o.jpg

Regards, Phil
2019 South Australian Country Press Assoc Sports Photo of the Year - Runner Up
2018 South Australian Country Press Assoc Sports Photo of the Year
2018 CAMS (now Motorsport Australia) Gold Accredited Photographer
Finallist - 2014 NT Media Awards
"A bad day at the race track is better than a good day in the office"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 25, 2013 09:13 |  #12

Thanks y'all. That makes sense to this guy who got a B- in physics :-)


SteveH
Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20, Canon 50 f1.8, Canon 18-135 IS, Sigma 70-200 f2.8, Sigma 150-500

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Sep 25, 2013 09:26 as a reply to  @ 330cic's post |  #13

I'd select a much higher shutter speed, so that you are not turning as much through the exposure. 1/500s or higher. To get this I'd let the f/22 or f/32 come down to around f/5.6 or f/8 and raise the ISO a little.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
magoosmc
Senior Member
Avatar
980 posts
Gallery: 80 photos
Likes: 489
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Keuka Lake NY
     
Sep 25, 2013 09:35 |  #14

Lot's of good info has been posted here.
You were shooting through the catch fence, were working with less than optimum light, using a lens that is considered to be somewhat soft, high ISO and 1/50... Add all of that up and this is actually a pretty good shot under the circumstances.

With a little PP work this image can be greatly enhanced. A little output sharpening with NIK Sharpener, adjust the vibrance/saturation and do a little burning/dodging and you'll have a keeper.


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/22055591@N05/a​lbums (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Echo63
Goldmember
Avatar
2,868 posts
Likes: 167
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Perth - Western Australia - Earth
     
Sep 25, 2013 10:19 |  #15

Lowner wrote in post #16324116 (external link)
I'd select a much higher shutter speed, so that you are not turning as much through the exposure. 1/500s or higher. To get this I'd let the f/22 or f/32 come down to around f/5.6 or f/8 and raise the ISO a little.

1/500th will negate the effect of the panning - at those speeds the car will look like its parked on the track


My Best Imageswww.echo63.deviantart.​com (external link)
Gear listhttps://photography-on-the.net …p?p=2463426&pos​tcount=385

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,832 views & 0 likes for this thread
Panning/focus question
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Motorsports 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is kurbronj
911 guests, 265 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.