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

 
Picturesports
Senior Member
Avatar
569 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Grantham, Lincolnshire
     
Sep 25, 2013 12:37 |  #16

330cic - F22 ?? not required.

Start with 1/320 of a second and adjust the ISO so that you get something between F5.6 and F10 (point the camera at the track and take a reading)

At 1/320 you will get wheel blur and a sharp car.

How low you need to go to get the pan effect is a question of how far away the car is, how long a lens you are using and the state of the background you are trying to blur..

If you are using a 70-200 and Tv mode then 1/80 will give you a good blur. 1/60 and you will start to get parallax error unless the centre of the car is directly square to the sensor when the shutter closes.

As the shutter speed gets lower the more accurate you need to be to get the whole car in focus, but why bother? The objective of the pan is blur background. If it is blurred then - Cool never mind going lower.

All the guys who talk 1/20 or 1/10 of a second and show you a crisp pan shot will have taken hundreds and kept one (trust me on this!!)

The shot below was taken at 600mm, F13 and 1/160 of a second. The background blurred & car sharp.

IMAGE: http://www.picturesports.co.uk/img/s10/v110/p1884040367-5.jpg

In the next one you can see parallax error creeping in (nose and tail of the car) 1/60 @ F11 focal length 120mm, however the background is "diirty" and so a greater level of blur is required.

IMAGE: http://www.picturesports.co.uk/img/s9/v96/p2013488496-5.jpg


The objective is the shot you want not the numbers - except F22 is the wrong number. F14 tops - F8 even better. The side of the car is flat, so you don't need massive depth of field, in fact if the background is OOF then all the better - it blurs better :-)

www.picturesports.co.u​k (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
TustinMike
figment of our collective imaginations
Avatar
5,520 posts
Gallery: 532 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 5581
Joined Feb 2011
     
Sep 25, 2013 13:10 |  #17

Lots of good info here, I agree with most of it (except the 1/500 SS, that will just "freeze" the action and the car may as well be parked. Does not make for a captivating photo.

One thing I'd point out is that to my eye, on my monitor, the AF system seems to be focused on the horizontal fence cables - the number is fairly sharp but those cables are razor sharp :-). So yes, I think probably the XTi's system is keeping you down a bit, I'd bet with the 7D you could lock onto the car and not the cables.


I'm mainly here for the snacks

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drewl
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2005
     
Sep 25, 2013 15:21 as a reply to  @ TustinMike's post |  #18

i don't pan at faster than 1/100 for side shots. faster just looks boring to me. i try to keep it slower than 1/60, but it depends on the situation. i use ND filters A LOT.

between 1/400 and 1/200 for cars coming at me, so i get wheel blur but not "coming at me" blur. in that situation i WANT the car to be frozen, but not the wheels.

i don't think the results of panning are unpredictable at all if you have enough skill and experience. you just have to account for the angle, distance, speed, and light. and practice practice practice. once you're really good at it, it's definitely predictable and repeatable.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 25, 2013 15:56 |  #19

Great info everyone, I really appreciate it. I learn more here in these forums than in any book.

This is really an art - trying to find the right combination of parameters to get the shot I want. Picturesports, your cars are spot-on what I am trying to achieve - razor sharp vehicles, nice blur in the background.

My approach was to set the shutter speed (1/60 or so) then ISO up high enough so the picture doesnt look like nighttime (the XTi goes to 1600 but I think it looks noisy which is why I only went up to ISO 800). That is how the camera chose f22 for me.

I will be back at the track next month for vintage racing and will take everything I'm learning here with me. Will also find a spot without the fence.


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 25, 2013 16:00 |  #20

drewl wrote in post #16325068 (external link)
i don't pan at faster than 1/100 for side shots. faster just looks boring to me. i try to keep it slower than 1/60, but it depends on the situation. i use ND filters A LOT.

between 1/400 and 1/200 for cars coming at me, so i get wheel blur but not "coming at me" blur. in that situation i WANT the car to be frozen, but not the wheels.

i don't think the results of panning are unpredictable at all if you have enough skill and experience. you just have to account for the angle, distance, speed, and light. and practice practice practice. once you're really good at it, it's definitely predictable and repeatable.

I haven't gotten up the nerve yet to dig into the world of filters :-)

I use 1/320 or faster when I'm just trying to get a clear shot of the car and not panning. I am getting better at panning - first time at the track I think I only had 2 or 3 shots where anything was clear. This time I had maybe 20% or so that I was happy with. I am getting much better at using my whole torso rather than just turning my head and that makes a huge difference.


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
drewl
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2005
     
Sep 25, 2013 16:12 as a reply to  @ 330cic's post |  #21

filters are nothing scary. ND filters enable you to use longer shutter speeds in bright sunlight without bottoming-out the aperture.

sure, f/22 will help get more things in focus, but it won't be as sharp as f/8 and it'll show a ton more sensor dust.


and once you get really nuts and start shooting under 1/25, f/22 wouldn't make it dark enough for bright sunlight anyway. and some lenses only go to f/16 too.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 25, 2013 20:55 |  #22

drewl wrote in post #16325179 (external link)
filters are nothing scary. ND filters enable you to use longer shutter speeds in bright sunlight without bottoming-out the aperture.

sure, f/22 will help get more things in focus, but it won't be as sharp as f/8 and it'll show a ton more sensor dust.


and once you get really nuts and start shooting under 1/25, f/22 wouldn't make it dark enough for bright sunlight anyway. and some lenses only go to f/16 too.

Ooh - sounds like something I need to have for Formula 1 when I really want the good shots!


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 25, 2013 21:17 as a reply to  @ 330cic's post |  #23

just think of ND filters like this..... it is a dimmer switch for the sun. nothing more nothing less, you are just reducing the amount of sun.


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

  
  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 23:42 |  #24

330cic wrote in post #16325718 (external link)
Ooh - sounds like something I need to have for Formula 1 when I really want the good shots!

Huh...Why do you need ND filters to get really good F1 shots?


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
drewl
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2005
     
Sep 26, 2013 00:35 as a reply to  @ philwillmedia's post |  #25

cuz you know, if it's not F1 it's not worth trying your hardest.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
330cic
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
208 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Sep 26, 2013 10:42 |  #26

philwillmedia wrote in post #16326005 (external link)
Huh...Why do you need ND filters to get really good F1 shots?

I need any improvement I can get as I'm a huge F1 fan.


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 26, 2013 10:43 |  #27

drewl wrote in post #16326068 (external link)
cuz you know, if it's not F1 it's not worth trying your hardest.

Actually to be true to F1, I should spend $25K to get a 1% improvement in my shots :-)


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
philwillmedia
Cream of the Crop
5,253 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Nov 2008
Location: "...just south of the 23rd Paralell..."
     
Sep 26, 2013 15:28 |  #28

330cic wrote in post #16326889 (external link)
Actually to be true to F1, I should spend $25K to get a 1% improvement in my shots :-)

Shooting F1 isn't really any harder than any other form of motorsport.
Improving your technique is going to do a lot more than your gear.
In the right hands, an XTi is more than capable of producing decent motorsport images - even F1.

If you think you're only going to 1% improvement by throwing a truck load of money at better gear, I'd save the money.


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
sandpiper
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,171 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 50
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Merseyside, England
     
Sep 26, 2013 15:35 |  #29

philwillmedia wrote in post #16327552 (external link)
Shooting F1 isn't really any harder than any other form of motorsport.
Improving your technique is going to do a lot more than your gear.
In the right hands, an XTi is more than capable of producing decent motorsport images - even F1.

If you think you're only going to 1% improvement by throwing a truck load of money at better gear, I'd save the money.

Well, he said "to be true to F1", so I read it as a comment on the way they spend huge sums of money to get tiny performance increases with the cars. I don't think it was meant as a serious comment about him improving his work by only 1% :D




  
  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 26, 2013 19:29 |  #30

sandpiper wrote in post #16327561 (external link)
Well, he said "to be true to F1", so I read it as a comment on the way they spend huge sums of money to get tiny performance increases with the cars. I don't think it was meant as a serious comment about him improving his work by only 1% :D

Ahh...I missed the subtlety of that.


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

7,864 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 ibflyin
815 guests, 189 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.