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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 12 Nov 2014 (Wednesday) 14:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7D Mark II - Focus Discussions

 
steve75
Senior Member
Avatar
535 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Clevedon, UK
     
Aug 26, 2015 16:58 |  #3271

rndman wrote in post #17681720 (external link)
You may already know this, but there is better way.
You can set "AF-ON" and "*" buttons separately for 4 different parameters. One of which is the AF mode.
I have set "AF-ON" to OneShot and "*" to AI-Servo.

Edit : And of course no AF with shutter button. (Using BBF all the time)

That sounds great..... I guess the custom functions/setting have stepped it up a notch since my 7d (mk1)


Current gear: EOS 7D w/ BG-E7
300mm f4L IS, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, 24-70mm f2.8L, 85mm f1.8, 1.4x mkII tc, 430ex.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
bidkev
Goldmember
Avatar
4,847 posts
Gallery: 2123 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 12792
Joined Jul 2013
Location: From Blackpool UK to Brisbane Australia 20 yrs ago
Post edited over 4 years ago by bidkev.
     
Aug 27, 2015 22:28 |  #3272

Your diagnosis here please. I took 32 shots this morning and all went to the bin.

Mode 1 focus priority and all came out like this? Camera shake with IS on and 1/200sec exposure? I've taken sharper pictures with this combo at 1/20 sec and the lens has been pin sharp wide open, even with extender. BTW, this is the best of the bunch. Some were 10x worse? It's performed admirably until now. SOOC. Am I having a bad hair day? :lol:

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/693/20752739518_ced7f671dd_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/xBRd​rL  (external link) Focus Problem? (external link) by Kevin Dickinson (external link), on Flickr

See my fishy photography here: https://kevindickinson​fineartphot.smugmug.co​m/Tropical-Fish-2/ (external link)
Olympus PenF | Olympus OM-D E-M5 mkll x 2 gripped | Olympus OM-D E-M10 mkll gripped | Olympus 12-40 2.8 pro | 14 -150 | 17mm 1.8 | 9mm BCL | Panasonic 12-32 | 25mm 1.7 | Panasonic Leica 8-18 | Panasonic Leica 100-400 | Godox TT685O speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 27, 2015 22:43 |  #3273

bidkev wrote in post #17685800 (external link)
Your diagnosis here please. I took 32 shots this morning and all went to the bin.

Mode 1 focus priority and all came out like this? Camera shake with IS on and 1/200sec exposure? I've taken sharper pictures with this combo at 1/20 sec and the lens has been pin sharp wide open, even with extender. BTW, this is the best of the bunch. Some were 10x worse? It's performed admirably until now. SOOC. Am I having a bad hair day? :lol:

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/xBRd​rL  (external link) Focus Problem? (external link) by Kevin Dickinson (external link), on Flickr

Taking 32 shots and having nothing or little to show for it is normal for me.

But still... IMO there is motion blurring here. Nothing is really tack sharp. You have room to increase the ISO and therefore the shutter speed. It is worth a try.

f/16 is too small and incurs diffraction softening ... not sure if that explains anything.

Also I would get rid of the 1.4x for this type of subject and approach a bit closer instead.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bidkev
Goldmember
Avatar
4,847 posts
Gallery: 2123 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 12792
Joined Jul 2013
Location: From Blackpool UK to Brisbane Australia 20 yrs ago
Post edited over 4 years ago by bidkev.
     
Aug 27, 2015 22:49 |  #3274

Archibald wrote in post #17685811 (external link)
Taking 32 shots and having nothing or little to show for it is normal for me.

But still... IMO there is motion blurring here. Nothing is really tack sharp. You have room to increase the ISO and therefore the shutter speed. It is worth a try.

f/16 is too small and incurs diffraction softening ... not sure if that explains anything.

Also I would get rid of the 1.4x for this type of subject and approach a bit closer instead.


Thanks for that, and it does. I just didn't think about diffraction at the time, although I think I'm overthinking :rolleyes::lol:

I wanted to try for the wing detail in focus hence the f stop and iso. I thought any noise reduction PP would negate the wing detail

Now all I need is another dragon fly to put your suggestion to the test :-)


See my fishy photography here: https://kevindickinson​fineartphot.smugmug.co​m/Tropical-Fish-2/ (external link)
Olympus PenF | Olympus OM-D E-M5 mkll x 2 gripped | Olympus OM-D E-M10 mkll gripped | Olympus 12-40 2.8 pro | 14 -150 | 17mm 1.8 | 9mm BCL | Panasonic 12-32 | 25mm 1.7 | Panasonic Leica 8-18 | Panasonic Leica 100-400 | Godox TT685O speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gschlact
Senior Member
1,318 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 487
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chicago 'burbs
     
Aug 27, 2015 22:55 |  #3275

bidkev wrote in post #17685800 (external link)
Your diagnosis here please. I took 32 shots this morning and all went to the bin.

Mode 1 focus priority and all came out like this? Camera shake with IS on and 1/200sec exposure? I've taken sharper pictures with this combo at 1/20 sec and the lens has been pin sharp wide open, even with extender. BTW, this is the best of the bunch. Some were 10x worse? It's performed admirably until now. SOOC. Am I having a bad hair day? :lol:

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/xBRd​rL  (external link) Focus Problem? (external link) by Kevin Dickinson (external link), on Flickr

I don't think you have camera shake showing here. My guess is a sliver deep depth of field. . Use the online dof calculator for 560mm f16 and estimated distance (maybe <2meters)? It looks like you had <5mm total dof. Around the 3rd leg.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 27, 2015 22:57 |  #3276

bidkev wrote in post #17685818 (external link)
Thanks for that, and it does. I just didn't think about diffraction at the time, although I think I'm overthinking :rolleyes::lol:

I wanted to try for the wing detail in focus hence the f stop and iso. I thought any noise reduction PP would negate the wing detail

Now all I need is another dragon fly to put your suggestion to the test :-)

Yeah, it looks like best focus fell roughly on the thorax. The pose is great, but the DOF isn't up to getting everything important in focus.

The slight blurriness could be a combination of factors, so I would just work on the focus plane, aperture, and shutter speed and see what happens. Sometimes I get away with marginal settings, but at other times I don't, so if it's not working, you gotta tighten things up.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bidkev
Goldmember
Avatar
4,847 posts
Gallery: 2123 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 12792
Joined Jul 2013
Location: From Blackpool UK to Brisbane Australia 20 yrs ago
     
Aug 27, 2015 23:10 |  #3277

gschlact wrote in post #17685822 (external link)
I don't think you have camera shake showing here. My guess is a sliver deep depth of field. . Use the online dof calculator for 560mm f16 and estimated distance (maybe <2meters)? It looks like you had <5mm total dof. Around the 3rd leg.

Thanks and yes, you're right. Too close I guess. Just outside minimum focusing distance, a little over a metre away


See my fishy photography here: https://kevindickinson​fineartphot.smugmug.co​m/Tropical-Fish-2/ (external link)
Olympus PenF | Olympus OM-D E-M5 mkll x 2 gripped | Olympus OM-D E-M10 mkll gripped | Olympus 12-40 2.8 pro | 14 -150 | 17mm 1.8 | 9mm BCL | Panasonic 12-32 | 25mm 1.7 | Panasonic Leica 8-18 | Panasonic Leica 100-400 | Godox TT685O speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bidkev
Goldmember
Avatar
4,847 posts
Gallery: 2123 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 12792
Joined Jul 2013
Location: From Blackpool UK to Brisbane Australia 20 yrs ago
     
Aug 27, 2015 23:12 |  #3278

Archibald wrote in post #17685824 (external link)
Yeah, it looks like best focus fell roughly on the thorax. The pose is great, but the DOF isn't up to getting everything important in focus.

The slight blurriness could be a combination of factors, so I would just work on the focus plane, aperture, and shutter speed and see what happens. Sometimes I get away with marginal settings, but at other times I don't, so if it's not working, you gotta tighten things up.


I'll have to get used to this longer lens. It does seem a combination of factors and I guess I wasn't thinking things through and expecting a greater DOF as I'm generally used to working with much shorter lengths.


See my fishy photography here: https://kevindickinson​fineartphot.smugmug.co​m/Tropical-Fish-2/ (external link)
Olympus PenF | Olympus OM-D E-M5 mkll x 2 gripped | Olympus OM-D E-M10 mkll gripped | Olympus 12-40 2.8 pro | 14 -150 | 17mm 1.8 | 9mm BCL | Panasonic 12-32 | 25mm 1.7 | Panasonic Leica 8-18 | Panasonic Leica 100-400 | Godox TT685O speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 27, 2015 23:14 |  #3279

bidkev wrote in post #17685845 (external link)
I'll have to get used to this longer lens. It does seem a combination of factors and I guess I wasn't thinking things through and expecting a greater DOF as I'm generally used to working with much shorter lengths.

Shooting distance does not affect DOF. Only aperture does (for a given magnification of the subject on the sensor, and camera format).


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,822 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6520
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
Post edited over 4 years ago by CyberDyneSystems. (2 edits in all)
     
Aug 27, 2015 23:27 |  #3280

Archibald wrote in post #17685848 (external link)
Shooting distance does not affect DOF. Only aperture does (for a given magnification of the subject on the sensor, and camera format).

Shooting distance very much does effect DOF.
As you move farther away the DOF increases.

Depth of field is determined by three factors:
- the focal length of the lens,
- the aperture of the lens,
- the camera-to-subject distance.

https://en.wikipedia.o​rg …_affecting_dept​h_of_field (external link)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 27, 2015 23:27 |  #3281

bidkev wrote in post #17685845 (external link)
I'll have to get used to this longer lens. It does seem a combination of factors and I guess I wasn't thinking things through and expecting a greater DOF as I'm generally used to working with much shorter lengths.

I don't know about damselflies in Australia, but I can approach ours here pretty closely with a 100mm lens, and am guessing you could do the same. If you can shorten the focal length, that should help get a sharper shot.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 27, 2015 23:29 |  #3282

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17685861 (external link)
Shooting distance very much does effect DOF.
As you move farther away the DOF increases.

Sure it does... but then the magnification changes.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
absplastic
Goldmember
Avatar
1,643 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 528
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Bay Area, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by absplastic. (4 edits in all)
     
Aug 28, 2015 00:18 |  #3283

Archibald wrote in post #17685811 (external link)
f/16 is too small and incurs diffraction softening ... not sure if that explains anything.

It sure does, it's the entire problem with that photo**. There is no motion blur there at all, and perfect textbook diffraction blurring. With the 7D mk II, the effects of diffraction show up at a larger apertures than on almost all other Canon DSLRs except for the T6i/s . Sharpness is going to peak with most lenses on the 7D2 at f/5.6 of f/6.7. Above this, things go slowly but steadily downhill. By f/16, it's pretty bad. I found that that shooting with my 60D and 70-300L combo that f/6.7 was the sharpest, f/11 was the limit of what I could make acceptable with sharpening, and photos beyond this were just too noticeably soft to fix.

**Or nearly so. Seeing that it was shot towards the long end, and with a 1.4x TC, that is going to contribute a little too. Extension tubes would be the preferred means of getting closer for a higher magnification.


5DSR, 6D, 16-35/4L IS, 85L II, 100L macro, Sigma 150-600C
SL1, 10-18 STM, 18-55 STM, 40 STM, 50 STM
My (mostly) Fashion and Portraiture Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link) (NSFW)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
Post edited over 4 years ago by Archibald.
     
Aug 28, 2015 00:29 |  #3284

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17685861 (external link)
Shooting distance very much does effect DOF.
As you move farther away the DOF increases.

Depth of field is determined by three factors:
- the focal length of the lens,
- the aperture of the lens,
- the camera-to-subject distance.

https://en.wikipedia.o​rg …_affecting_dept​h_of_field (external link)

DOF is affected by lots of things, and it is possible to select parameters to calculate it soas to illustrate things that are useful.

If you increase the distance, the DOF increases as you said. But now the image is smaller. Usually we don't want to lose image size. So we change to a longer focal length to get the image back to the desired size. But the longer FL has reduced the DOF. One effect cancels out the other, and overall we have gained no DOF.

The rule is that DOF is only affected by aperture provided one keeps magnification and sensor size constant.

Here is an example.

FocalLength -- Aperture --- Image-subj dist ---- Magn ---- TotDOF
100mm ----------- 11 --------- 0.563 meter ----- 0.30 ---- 9.17mm
400mm ----------- 11 --------- 2.25 meter ------ 0.30 ---- 9.17mm


The point of this is to let photographers know that changing lenses to a wider FL won't help them increase DOF (assuming the stated premises).


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,882 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18743
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 28, 2015 00:52 |  #3285

absplastic wrote in post #17685906 (external link)
It sure does, it's the entire problem with that photo**. There is no motion blur there at all, and perfect textbook diffraction blurring. With the 7D mk II, the effects of diffraction show up at a larger apertures than on almost all other Canon DSLRs except for the T6i/s . Sharpness is going to peak with most lenses on the 7D2 at f/5.6 of f/6.7. Above this, things go slowly but steadily downhill. By f/16, it's pretty bad. I found that that shooting with my 60D and 70-300L combo that f/6.7 was the sharpest, f/11 was the limit of what I could make acceptable with sharpening, and photos beyond this were just too noticeably soft to fix.

**Or nearly so. Seeing that it was shot towards the long end, and with a 1.4x TC, that is going to contribute a little too. Extension tubes would be the preferred means of getting closer for a higher magnification.

Overstated, I think. I couldn't find an example of f/16 in my files, but here is one at f/13. It is sharp enough for me.


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


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

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

1,392,119 views & 2,732 likes for this thread
7D Mark II - Focus Discussions
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
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 CoryM
850 guests, 277 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.