Girls LAX..figuring out the Sigma 70-200 OS

I've done all of the focus tests and still couldn't get my new Sigma 70-200 OS dialed in but during this game, I noticed something while chimping (calm down peanut gallery) and made some big adjustments. Things finally started coming in line! All shot with the 1DMkIII/Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS w/ Canon 1.4x TC (MkII). Comments always welcome!

1. BEFORE I figured out the needed MA...

Look good to me! And hey, I chimp all the time! LOL But, I do it during their breaks, or when nothing is going on. The other night it was starting to get darker, and I was snapping away. During a break, I started "chimping" and seeing what my photos were looking like. I realized the lastest ones were looking super blurry and awful, so I changed my settings. Lucky I looked, before I had a whole bunch that were awful! LOL

Too bad the blurry stick is in the way in the second to last one......

LaxMom wrote in post #14393562
Too bad the blurry stick is in the way in the second to last one......

yeah but the interesting part is how the settings worked on that one...there has been much debate over main vs continuous AF and the AF sensitivity. some of the debate has been rather "animated". I used main and moderate slow sensitivity. notice that the focus did not jump to the foreground object when it clearly entered my focus area? I have found main to be more consistent than continuous IF you use slow or moderate slow sensitivity. everyone has their own way of doing things but it might be worth playing with these settings as a starting point if anyone is having AF issues for team field sports.

Nice shots Scott.
I've tried a couple of games recently, and have not yet "nailed" it, either due to my stupidity, or not really dialing the lens with MA. I did encounter the AF sensitivity issues you talk about as well, and have tried to dial down the sensitivity (-1, -2) so it doesn't jmp around so much.
Keep up the nice work.

lugnut45 wrote in post #14394247
Nice shots Scott.
I've tried a couple of games recently, and have not yet "nailed" it, either due to my stupidity, or not really dialing the lens with MA. I did encounter the AF sensitivity issues you talk about as well, and have tried to dial down the sensitivity (-1, -2) so it doesn't jmp around so much.
Keep up the nice work.

thanks man! hope to see you around sometime!!

Dumb question : what is chimping? Thanks.

dandai wrote in post #14395658
Dumb question : what is chimping? Thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Chimping

Nice set of pics. How do you like that lens? I used a friends d700 and Sig 70-200 for a baskeball and it was quick and sharp.

namasste,
Thanks for the info.I've learned something new today.

Nice shots.

I also didn't know what "chimping" was. After reading it, I can't believe that some would think it is bad form or make a person a "lesser photographer" if you check your shots.

I can see how a person could do it excessively, but to not do it at all is just not using the tools available to you.

8612images wrote in post #14396320
Nice set of pics. How do you like that lens? I used a friends d700 and Sig 70-200 for a baskeball and it was quick and sharp.

Prim liking it more and more. The key was getting it micro adjusted correctly as it did require fair amount when used with the tc. The only place I am still it sure is if it's fast enough to catch fast approaching subjects. Seems like it struggles just a bit there (to be fair, not worse than my Canon non-IS or MkI IS). I have a game tomorrow night so I'll really be concentrating on those types of images to see how it does now that I am getting some time with it.

Nice shots. I'm really liking mine that Santa gave me at Christmas (ok it was my early present to myself). I'm not nearly as experienced as you, but from what I've shot with the lens so far for sports (some basketball & baseball), I've been VERY happy with it. I noticed you said you had a Canon 1.4 TC with it too. Does it still work pretty good with it? I read a couple of places that it wouldn't work real good with a Canon TC, but did fine with a Sigma.

Not bad captures...not a fan of the sigma 2.8 though. Photos look pretty noisy in the shadows not to mention the girls hair in #6 is strange....seems very noisy

Baseball Nut wrote in post #14400611
Nice shots. I'm really liking mine that Santa gave me at Christmas (ok it was my early present to myself). I'm not nearly as experienced as you, but from what I've shot with the lens so far for sports (some basketball & baseball), I've been VERY happy with it. I noticed you said you had a Canon 1.4 TC with it too. Does it still work pretty good with it? I read a couple of places that it wouldn't work real good with a Canon TC, but did fine with a Sigma.

Larry, it seems to be handling the Canon tc pretty well now that I have added -11 MA. I have never used a Sigma tc so really can't comment if it pairs better or not.

CSMFoto wrote in post #14401417
Not bad captures...not a fan of the sigma 2.8 though. Photos look pretty noisy in the shadows not to mention the girls hair in #6 is strange....seems very noisy

hmmm, I'll give this some thought. I don't see what I'd call extraordinary noise (there is some) for 640-800 ISO, certainly not enough that I'd be concerned for print. Could be something I am doing in post as I used high pass sharpening on most of these which can highlight noise easily. The girl in #6 (my daughter in this case) is a very heavy crop which is why you see more noise there. I wanted to see how the crop would look since a 70-200 (even with a tc) is really short for field sports so heavier cropping becomes a bit of a necessity at times even if you are only shooting half the field at any given point (I never shoot downfield,even with longer glass)