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 EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Feb 2018 (Thursday) 16:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Basic 100-400mm questions

 
kat.hayes
Member
157 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2012
Post edited 4 months ago by kat.hayes. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 22, 2018 16:29 |  #1

I used a 5DM3 and a borrowed EF100-400mm IS II. I used this lens in a large gym while taking photos of kids doing gymnastics from a distance. The gym is lit overhead, though I needed to use an ISO of around 4000 while shooting at around 1/250 (I would have liked to increase the shutter, though I would need to boost my ISO, and at 4000 I saw noise). I do not know which focal length I was at though I was close to being zoomed in all the way, and I was using the widest aperture available at the focal length.

1. Why does the aperture amount that can be used with this lens change from 4.5 to 5.6 depending on the focal length being used?

2. Does this sized lens need more light then a smaller lens? The ISO needed seemed a bit high under the conditions.

3. Is this lens more prone to noise at an ISO of around 4000?

Thanks for any info.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
Post edited 4 months ago by ebiggs.
     
Feb 22, 2018 16:43 |  #2

kat.hayes wrote in post #18569978 (external link)
1. Why does the aperture amount that can be used with this lens change from 4.5 to 5.6 depending on the focal length being used?

2. Does this sized lens need more light then a smaller lens? The ISO needed seemed a bit high under the conditions.

3. Is this lens more prone to noise at an ISO of around 4000?

Thanks for any info.

1. It is a variable aperture lens. There are two types. Constant and variable. It is easier and cheaper to make a zoom with a variable aperture.
2. Lenses do not have noise if it is the type you see in high ISO shots. That is your cameras fault.
3. No, actually it is a very good lens. It probably is a poor choice for indoor sports though.

The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens is a much better choice. It has a fast constant aperture. Even if yo ucouple it to the 1.4x tel-con it is still a better choice at a constant f4.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
Post edited 4 months ago by ebiggs.
     
Feb 22, 2018 16:59 |  #3

When you shoot sports, of any kind really, the three most important things are location, location and location. Where you shoot from is by far the biggest aspect. For example if you have to shoot a football game from the bleachers, your shots are not going to be as good as the person on the sidelines. Even if you have the same gear.

If you were allowed to walk around the gym the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens is one of the best lens' you can use.
This shot was with a ef 24-70mm f2.8l II at 24mm and f4 ISO 3200.


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


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
Avatar
7,610 posts
Likes: 2561
Joined Oct 2015
     
Feb 22, 2018 17:09 |  #4

ebiggs wrote in post #18569991 (external link)
1. It is a variable aperture lens. There are two types. Constant and variable. It is easier and cheaper to make a zoom with a variable aperture.
2. Lenses do not have noise if it is the type you see in high ISO shots. That is your cameras fault.
3. No, actually it is a very good lens. It probably is a poor choice for indoor sports though.

The Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens is a much better choice. It has a fast constant aperture. Even if yo ucouple it to the 1.4x tel-con it is still a better choice at a constant f4.

Noise in final images results from three things. None is the cameras fault.

1.) Underexposure.
2.) Improper post-processing.
3.) Pixel peeping.

Printing 12"x18" from a 5D3 at ISO 4000 should result in very clean images. I could shoot my 6D at 12,800 and get clean images, from JPG files.


Tom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kat.hayes
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
157 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2012
     
Feb 22, 2018 17:32 |  #5

ebiggs wrote in post #18569997 (external link)
When you shoot sports, of any kind really, the three most important things are location, location and location. Where you shoot from is by far the biggest aspect. For example if you have to shoot a football game from the bleachers, your shots are not going to be as good as the person on the sidelines. Even if you have the same gear.

If you were allowed to walk around the gym the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens is one of the best lens' you can use.
This shot was with a ef 24-70mm f2.8l II at 24mm and f4 ISO 3200.
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by ebiggs in
./showthread.php?p=185​69997&i=i65676414
forum: Canon EF and EF-S Lenses

1. What is a good use for the EF100-400mm IS II?

2. I figured the 100-400mm would be a better choice for indoor sports because of the additional zoom over the 70-200mm.

3. What is the 1.4x tel-con you mentioned? Does this attach to the 70-200 to increase its zoom?

4. Why is the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM such a great lens for shooting indoor sports? Just because of the wide aperture, and that it can go to 200mm?

Thanks.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,187 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1294
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Feb 22, 2018 18:42 |  #6

kat.hayes wrote in post #18570013 (external link)
1. What is a good use for the EF100-400mm IS II?

2. I figured the 100-400mm would be a better choice for indoor sports because of the additional zoom over the 70-200mm.

3. What is the 1.4x tel-con you mentioned? Does this attach to the 70-200 to increase its zoom?

4. Why is the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM such a great lens for shooting indoor sports? Just because of the wide aperture, and that it can go to 200mm?

Thanks.

A lot of use it for outdoor pursuits, such as birds and wildlife. The thing that makes it less ideal for indoor pursuits is just as you've noted; the max aperture is too small to get as much light as you want when you're shooting under gym lights. Thus causing you to have to shoot higher ISOs to make up for it.

Yes, a 1.4 teleconverter is like a magnifying glass for a lens. It increases the maximum focal length of the lens it's attached to; the naming convention of the TC tells you by how much. A 1.4x TC magnifies gives you that much more focal lenghth, but at the cost of 1 stop of light. So, putting a 1.4TC on a 70-200mm f/2.8 gives you a 98-280mm f/4 lens.

The 70-200 is generally perfered for indoor sports for just those reasons, yes; plus, the MkII is just a stupidly sharp lens in general :p


All of that said, I wonder at your exposure if you're seeing notable noise at 4000 out of a 5D3. Are you boosting your exposure after the fact in processing? If you shoot a little brighter than normal and pull your highlights down instead, you should see less noise. But, overall, you are simply going to struggle at keeping your shutter speed up properly at f/5.6 in a gymnasium.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Choderboy
I Chimp, therefore I am
Avatar
4,863 posts
Gallery: 84 photos
Likes: 1746
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Feb 22, 2018 23:07 |  #7

This thread is now 511 pages of discussion and examples of photos
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Review WOW!
https://photography-on-the.net …read.php?t=1411​834&page=1
Reading is optional, looking at photos should answer a lot of questions:

Look for the 70-200 2.8 sample thread and you will see a lot of indoor sports photos.
With a 70-200 2.8, at ISO4000 you would have used a shutter speed (at f2.8) of 1/1000 sec for the same exposure you were using at f5.6, 1/250 sec.

Look for the 5D3 thread and you will see a lot of photo examples at ISO6400 and beyond.
Noise is subjective, but I'd estimate 9 or 10 out of 10 experienced indoor sports photographers would say ISO6400 is fine on a 5D3.
Many would say ISO12800 is fine too.


Dave
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/12185187@N00/
5D4, 1D4, 1DS2. Canon, Sigma lenses
Image editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Feb 26, 2018 12:52 as a reply to  @ Choderboy's post |  #8

"...I needed to use an ISO of around 4000 while shooting at around 1/250..."

Absolutely, the 5d3 should handel that easily.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Feb 26, 2018 13:00 |  #9

Bassat wrote in post #18570002 (external link)
Noise in final images results from three things. None is the cameras fault.

1.) Underexposure.
2.) Improper post-processing.
3.) Pixel peeping.

A simplistic abridged analysis. Of course it is the cameras fault, number 1, if its circuitry cannot handle the 'underexposed' requirements of the photographer. It is not the lens' fault. That is why manufacturers strive to increase the output of high ISO. If it were not all cameras would be set to ISO 100.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joeseph
"smells like turd"
Avatar
9,404 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1253
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
     
Feb 27, 2018 00:30 |  #10

ebiggs wrote in post #18572746 (external link)
A simplistic abridged analysis. Of course it is the cameras fault, number 1, if its circuitry cannot handle the 'underexposed' requirements of the photographer. It is not the lens' fault. That is why manufacturers strive to increase the output of high ISO. If it were not all cameras would be set to ISO 100.

I'm curious to ask if you've ever used high ASA film?


some fairly old canon camera stuff, canon lenses, Manfrotto "thingy", 1D MK II converted for IR, and now an M5
TF posting: here :-)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Feb 28, 2018 17:09 as a reply to  @ joeseph's post |  #11

Yes.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ebiggs
Senior Member
Avatar
638 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 70
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Spring Hill, KS
     
Feb 28, 2018 17:11 |  #12

joeseph wrote in post #18573291 (external link)
I'm curious to ask if you've ever used high ASA film?

I assume you are referring to the above replies. Remember film is not part of the camera. However, the sensor is.


G1x, EOS 1Dx, EOS 1D Mk IV, ef 8-15mm f4L,
ef 16-35mm f2.8L II, ef 24-70mm f2.8L II, ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II,
Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sport
*** PS 6, ACR 9.3, Lightroom 6.5 ***

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,282 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
     
Mar 05, 2018 10:21 |  #13

If you research ways to combat noise, you will reap the benefits two-fold. You will be able to shoot higher ISOs and clean up the results after to your satisfaction and you will be able to shoot at higher shutters.

Remember, the golden rule (for me anyways) for sports is "I would rather have a noisier result where the action is crisp vs a blurry noise-free image). You cannot fix action blur, but you can fix noise.


Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
7,699 posts
Gallery: 526 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1474
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Mar 05, 2018 19:05 |  #14

I would always say that you would be better off using a higher ISO in the camera, so that the resulting image was a little bright and you then had to reduce it a little in post, than to be a bit under exposed because of too low an ISO.

I'm not sure where the 5DIII sensor comes, it seems some of the latest sensors are not so bad with this, but I would also only ever shoot with the camera set to full stop ISO values. In general Canon cameras use analogue amplification steps to set the full stop ISO values, which is what you want. The 1/3 stop, and the expanded ISO values are created by digital manipulation after the values have been digitised.

For the 1/3 value above a full stop value it literally digitally boosts the exposure by 1/3rd stop, just about the worst thing you can do for noise. ISO 400 is in this category. The 1/3rd below is pulled back, which is kind of what you want, but unless you absolutely need to have JPEG files from the camera, such as for sending off the a publisher at half time in a match, I would be shooting in RAW anyway, to offer optimal post processing.

So I would most definitely be shooting at ISO 6400 not 4000, but with the same 1/250s ƒ/5.6 to ensure that I got an optimum exposure. At least it seems that you are not running into issues from gas discharge lighting, which also can screw with your exposure and apparent WB.

The real problem is that all of these indoor venues although seeming very bright to us, are actually as far as the camera is concerned very dim indeed. Coming from the days of ISO 400 HP5 and TriX black and white films, which were already pretty grainy, before you pushed them a stop, what we get now is actually pretty amazing.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
33,282 posts
Gallery: 72 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3543
Joined May 2002
Location: Northern Indiana
Post edited 3 months ago by TeamSpeed. (4 edits in all)
     
Mar 05, 2018 19:26 |  #15

That 1/3 ISO stops being worse or better is barely ever noticeable. Auto-ISO, which I use all the time, only works in 1/3 increments, and never do I see a problem at any of the intermediate ISOs. Sure the studies have shown the differences, but in real world shooting, it barely ever makes an impact on the results.

With proper technique, exposure, settings, etc, you should be able to run 12800 on the 5D3.

The NIK tools are still free, and there is a denoiser there. Noiseware from Imagenomic is what I use.
https://www.google.com​/nikcollection/product​s/dfine/ (external link)

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Sports-Events/Mad-Ants-2014-2015/i-4hbJSRB/0/d3f24e80/X3/5P1B6785-X3.jpg

This is 25600, and requires a bit of processing.

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Sports-Events/Mad-Ants-2014-2015/i-mSfBfjF/0/18400c11/X2/5P1B5474-X2.jpg

Past Equipment | My Gallery (external link)

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

1,746 views & 10 likes for this thread
Basic 100-400mm questions
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 brotherbear86
791 guests, 368 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.