skiing: motion blur at 1/1600th?

how is it possible that shooting at 1/1600th of second exposure i was still getting blurry subjects?


http://img214.imagesha​ck.us/img214/2771/img8​375tc9.jpg
sigma 50-500 at 500mm, iso 200, f8, 1/1000th, tripod


http://img515.imagesha​ck.us/img515/8610/img8​364vx5.jpg
sigma 50-500 at 500mm, iso 200, f6.3, 1/1600th, tripod

Drinking too much Toddy?

Giddy with Anticipation?

Actually, this has happened to me in AI Servo before. The camera will fire without AF confirmation.

Nice lens, BTW.

i didn't understand any of that, these were pre-focused, the snow around the skier looks to be in focus to me.. so why is the skier blurry? they're going fast but not that fast..

I think it is because they are going so fast....I haven't double checked the math but I think at 70 mph the skier travels about 0.8 of an inch in 1/1600 sec.

The slight blur does give the impression of speed which helps the feeling of the shot, so the small amount of blur in these two shots doesn't hurt the shot at all.

matthew blake wrote in post #4954411
i didn't understand any of that, these were pre-focused, the snow around the skier looks to be in focus to me.. so why is the skier blurry? they're going fast but not that fast..

My theory is all wet if they were focused manually. Perhaps panning next time (if you didn't on these).

The shots look good though. Nice, clean composition, and the slight blur doesn't bother me at all.

sorry i mixed those up, the first link is at 1/1600th, the second is at 1/1000th. panning definitely wasn't an option at 500mm and the speeds they were going, that would take some serious skill. i was also surprised at how hard it was to get the skier between the two gates even with 5fps, those were the only two that worked out from about ten skiers that i shot from that position. i have a couple shots taken more head on and they're not nearly as blurry. in any case now i know why things like 10fps bodies and 500mm f4 lenses exist. i regret not trying at 1/3200 iso 400.

Without knowing anything about skiing..

If the snow around them is in focus, then obviously they ARE going "that fast" haha. Turn up your shutter speed.

IIRC, the lens you are using isn't HSM (like canon's USM). If it isn't ultrasonic motor, it won't be able to focus fast enough - won't even have a chance. If not USM, then what you have to do is prefocus on a spot and shoot when the skier gets there.

If you have done all that, then it is speed. I would say that 1/1600s is bare min for speed anyhow. Go faster if you can. However, i suspect it is the USM issue.

I shoot a fair amount of skiing, and there are others here that are way into it (Primoz, for example). It is a tough application and one that Canon specifically talks about in their documentation as being difficult due to speed.

Looks like Super-G to me, so they won't be going 70mph (average), but they are going fast (50's or so).

Which body are you using? 20D, 30D are going to have AF difficulties with this. 40D is going to do better, but 1DMk2 or Mk3 is probably the ticket.

J.

JohnJ80 wrote in post #4958356
IIRC, the lens you are using isn't HSM (like canon's USM). If it isn't ultrasonic motor, it won't be able to focus fast enough - won't even have a chance. If not USM, then what you have to do is prefocus on a spot and shoot when the skier gets there.

If you have done all that, then it is speed. I would say that 1/1600s is bare min for speed anyhow. Go faster if you can. However, i suspect it is the USM issue.

I shoot a fair amount of skiing, and there are others here that are way into it (Primoz, for example). It is a tough application and one that Canon specifically talks about in their documentation as being difficult due to speed.

Looks like Super-G to me, so they won't be going 70mph (average), but they are going fast (50's or so).

Which body are you using? 20D, 30D are going to have AF difficulties with this. 40D is going to do better, but 1DMk2 or Mk3 is probably the ticket.

J.

its downhill, using a 30d and like i said in another post i used a tripod and prefocused and waited. i guess it just never occured to me that you could get motion blur at 1/1600th of a second, how fast would i have had to go?

Most of the best skiing shots I've seen are usually taken looking up the hill...

Try not shooting perpendicular to the action:
http://www.myplanet.ne​t/csharp/TEDWINTERPARK​4X6.jpg

Like said above ^^^, try not to shoot perpendicular to the skiier.

Also, search for Primoz, here on this forum. He is the best ski photo around. He has given a ton of advice on situations like yours.
Tom

matthew blake wrote in post #4958599
its downhill, using a 30d and like i said in another post i used a tripod and prefocused and waited. i guess it just never occured to me that you could get motion blur at 1/1600th of a second, how fast would i have had to go?

Well then it is motion blur.

Probably go as fast as your camera can.

J.

If this is current Whistler, then it's downhill. If it's downhill then yes they are fast. Normal speed on downhill is above 100km/h, and it can easily reach up to 130 or 140km/h. Based on skiers position and snow from under the skis, they are at least at 100km/h. Ok now it's a bit late, but if I calculated right, they move for about 5cm at 1/1000sec. So when going across frame, 5cm is enough for motion blur.
As someone suggested already, go with panning. It's not panning in real meaning of word, but you still follow skier and compensate for those few centimeters. And such thing can be easily done with 500mm lens

You would be surprised to know I would shoot your photo with single frame and way bellow 1/2000sec As I wrote before... tracking skier is way to go, and you are fine with 1/800 or even slower. As far as high fps goes. It still doesn't help This is what 8.5fps does. And it's way too slow for perfect timing. So it's not about camera and high fps, but photographer

i guess panning is the answer, i don't know how you can pan a tight shot like that with someone going 100kph, definitely a skill i don't possess

do you have any examples of this?

primoz wrote in post #4958945
So it's not about camera and high fps, but photographer

And after looking at this guys photo's... Holy F. I would listen to him.