-= 1D MkIII Owners discuss =- and Post Your Pics

I wish to shoot in the Premiere League even once, is it possible? hehehe

Tareq wrote in post #13425269
Nice shots, not bad, but i feel they are not what i really think want to have, they are not so sharp as mine, i think those are cropped, if so then same as mine, if not then mine is way better uncropped.

Which lenses you were using here? 300 f2.8 and sigma 120-300?

They're cropped. For newspaper. ISO was up at 3200 and 2500 mostly because of the poor light which wasn't helped by the persistent rain. A lot of the noise is actually raindrops so I'm not too worried on that score.
Lens used was the 120-300. Not just as fast and sharp as the Canon, but more versatile when sitting along the side of the pitch.

Tareq wrote in post #13425274
I have one more question:

If the floodlight is good enough that you can use minimum shutter speed 1/500, will you prefer to use ISO 1600-3200 with Shutter speed 1/640-1/1000 f2.8-3.2? or you just keep ISO 800-1250 and shutter speed say at 1/500 up to 1/800 and f2.8 only? The floodlight in our club i can use ISO 3200 with speed 1/800 or even 1/1000 and f3.2 or 2.8, will you go with this settings? one friend from the newspaper told me he will not go above ISO 800 or 1000 with mk2 and mkIII and he fixed his shutter speed at 1/640 [not sure if he is using 1/800 sometimes] and f2.8, what will you do if you are in same condition?

Its a balancing act. When using AV setting I try as far as possible to keep the shutter speed above 1/500 whilst keeping the ISO as low as possible. Big problem yesterday was the light from the floodlights was inconsistent/patchy across the pitch. Sometimes if its like that I switch to TV mode and set the shutter speed at 1/500 or 1/640 and let aperture work automatically. ISO 2500 or 3200 noise seems reasonable on the mkiii especially for newspaper print.
These shots were taken tethered to laptop in pouring rain, cropped, sharpened and emailed to the office as they happened. Not the best working conditions, but its all about speed for the newspapers.

Tareq wrote in post #13425278
I wish to shoot in the Premiere League even once, is it possible? hehehe

Irish Premier League no problem. English or Scottish Leagues.......wouldn't we all? I'm hoping to give it a go for a match at the end of the season if someone nice can sort me with a media pass for the day.

Red Dog wrote in post #13425298
They're cropped. For newspaper. ISO was up at 3200 and 2500 mostly because of the poor light which wasn't helped by the persistent rain. A lot of the noise is actually raindrops so I'm not too worried on that score.
Lens used was the 120-300. Not just as fast and sharp as the Canon, but more versatile when sitting along the side of the pitch.

Well, few times my photos can be used in the newspaper, and the ISO noise doesn't show much there as they print small size, maximum 5x7" if so, but mostly my photos can go to the sports club website, and they go with small web sizes, but i am only afraid that one day they will ask some photos of the game to print larger to hang them on the walls there or if they will print a billboard for ads purposes.

Red Dog wrote in post #13425306
Its a balancing act. When using AV setting I try as far as possible to keep the shutter speed above 1/500 whilst keeping the ISO as low as possible. Big problem yesterday was the light from the floodlights was inconsistent/patchy across the pitch. Sometimes if its like that I switch to TV mode and set the shutter speed at 1/500 or 1/640 and let aperture work automatically. ISO 2500 or 3200 noise seems reasonable on the mkiii especially for newspaper print.
These shots were taken tethered to laptop in pouring rain, cropped, sharpened and emailed to the office as they happened. Not the best working conditions, but its all about speed for the newspapers.

So you say that ISO2000-3200 are good usable? I feel fine and happy with ISO2000 up to 3200, but i just try to be lower because maybe others will be bothered of the noise, but it seems my photos are not used most of the time and at small sizes no one will matter about the noise, next time i will crank ISO up to 3200, but doesn't you see that using higher ISO will reduce the sharpness details?

Red Dog wrote in post #13425309
Irish Premier League no problem. English or Scottish Leagues.......wouldn't we all? I'm hoping to give it a go for a match at the end of the season if someone nice can sort me with a media pass for the day.

I will be very very happy to shoot in that Irish Premiere League or even the Scottish, not necessary i want to shoot the English one, Ireland is also beautiful nice as the English, the action games doesn't matter much for me, the color temp in your region of the world is amazing, Ireland is not less than some Western European teams anyway, in fact i will be happy to shoot anywhere in East/West Europe for the leagues, but i am not sure if it is possible for me to move to Europe and get a job into photography anyway.

4 more:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Last 4 more:

Great photos Tareq. Nothing wrong with the quality there.

Red Dog wrote in post #13426168
Great photos Tareq. Nothing wrong with the quality there.

They look nice or great at those web size, but if i go larger than 1200px or if i check the 100% of the original size then all of them are not sharp, that last shot of the player drinking is a but blurry from the original size, resized it and add sharpness it looks sharp.

Tareq wrote in post #13426213
They look nice or great at those web size, but if i go larger than 1200px or if i check the 100% of the original size then all of them are not sharp, that last shot of the player drinking is a but blurry from the original size, resized it and add sharpness it looks sharp.

I haven't had a Canon camera yet that delivers a sharp image straight from the camera. You always have to do some post-processing with them. Canon say they actually design their cameras with that in mind so I wouldn't be too worried unless its obviously OOF.
For a 1500px wide crop I normally sharpen at 200% and radius 0.8 and for an A4 size print I'd go 300% at radius 0.8.

What is the native resolution for your monitor(s)? On my Dell 2407WFP monitors it is 1920 x 1200 (16:10 ratio). What size monitor are you using and what is its native resolution?

Tareq wrote in post #13426213
They look nice or great at those web size, but if i go larger than 1200px or if i check the 100% of the original size then all of them are not sharp, that last shot of the player drinking is a but blurry from the original size, resized it and add sharpness it looks sharp.

Red Dog wrote in post #13426504
I haven't had a Canon camera yet that delivers a sharp image straight from the camera. You always have to do some post-processing with them. Canon say they actually design their cameras with that in mind so I wouldn't be too worried unless its obviously OOF.
For a 1500px wide crop I normally sharpen at 200% and radius 0.8 and for an A4 size print I'd go 300% at radius 0.8.

I see, sure, but honestly speaking, i get sharp results from my 1DsIII shooting with One Shot mode and not continuous, with most lenses, so i always compare to my 1D3 sports/action shots and feel disappointed, maybe i have to live with that.

PixelMagic wrote in post #13426710
What is the native resolution for your monitor(s)? On my Dell 2407WFP monitors it is 1920 x 1200 (16:10 ratio). What size monitor are you using and what is its native resolution?

I use Apple Cinema Display 30", and i think you know what is the native resolution of this monitor, i also have Eizo 22" but i don't use that monitor, maybe when i will buy a Mac Pro, i will use Eizo monitor, but i love 30" size