Getting the eyes in focus

I've read (and posted) about this topic before, and trying to get it down. What I don't get (among many things!) is how one is supposed to have the time to set an AF point on the eyes (if subject is off center & not using the recompose method) if you are shooting candid, unposed shots, like with a child who is moving around. Can anyone post some links to some good info about this subject? It's what I'm having the most trouble with. Thanks!

You should have an idea where the eyes will be as you are planning how you will be shooting. If the camera is vertical, the eyes will almost always be near the AF point that is at the top. So simply select that point before you begin.

If you're trying to take candid shots of things like a child moving around, I wouldn't try to get the camera to focus on the eyes. Rather, I'd make sure I had sufficient depth of field to get at least the whole face in focus and then focus on the face. Then the eyes should be in focus too.

Make sure to get some good use out of the AF control stick on the camera. A quick press in the direction of the AF point will help keeping off center and limit having to recompose.
Another aspect is a lens that will grab focus quicker. The less time you are waiting to achieve focus the more time you've got to get the shot. Neither the 50mm or the 75-300mm in your signature are anywhere near the quick end of AF speeds, in fact they are probably the slowest two lenses I've ever used in regards to AF.
I can't comment on the 10-22 as I have never used on for more than a quick couple of trial shots.

Chellyroo - since my 5 and 7 year old boys are the subject of an overwhelming % of my photographs, I completely understand!

I have to agree with ImRaptor, the 50mm f/1.8 lens while sharp is very slow to focus. I sold it and upgraded to the 50mm f/1.4 almost solely for the faster autofocus. It was worth the time to save and upgrade.

Th 10-22 has reasonably fast USM focusing. Depending on how you are using it though, it can be challenging to let auto select the AF points due to the field of view. I have pretty good luck with it, but I cannot say I use it for portraits very often.

When I am shooting the kids in anything under f/5.6, I rarely let the camera select the AF points. I preselect one based on the compositions I usually prefer (usually on the traditional Rule of Third lines) and the camera orientation (landscape or portrait). If I am using a f/2.8 or lower with the narrow DoF, I can be prone to practice the SprayAndPray technique with the kids. It may add time in post to delete excessive shots, but with fast moving subjects in a low DoF it can help get the shot.

I had a similar gripe this weekend taking pictures of children.

Given the fact that kids are really prone to movement , it pays to shoot on higher shutter speeds, especially when you want to get the eyes in focus.

Try to get yourself acquianted with pre-setting your AF focal point before the shot, you will probably be able to do this by visualizing the frame before you bring the camera up to eye level. Of course it doesn't work all the time but it sure beats have to fiddle around with the top wheel or the joystick.

But I still use the focus and recompose method, with a larger aperture like f2 it sometimes can be a hit or miss though.

JeffreyG wrote in post #8930215
You should have an idea where the eyes will be as you are planning how you will be shooting. If the camera is vertical, the eyes will almost always be near the AF point that is at the top. So simply select that point before you begin.

I SHOULD, shouldn't I?! Thank you for the tip on the AF point, I will try that.

spkerer wrote in post #8930233
If you're trying to take candid shots of things like a child moving around, I wouldn't try to get the camera to focus on the eyes. Rather, I'd make sure I had sufficient depth of field to get at least the whole face in focus and then focus on the face. Then the eyes should be in focus too.

Yeah, that seems to be the situation most of the time for me, the child is bouncing all over, which can make for some great shots until I really need the eyes focused! Thank you for your input.

I use the joystick thingy on my 40D to select the AF point. It takes some getting used to but it can be done. It's pretty easy to select the center AF point or the top/bottom/left/right AF points, but I have trouble selecting the other AF points (the ones on the image diagonals) at times. I might try using the rear control wheel to select the AF point but I'd be worried I'd accidentally change the exposure setting if the shutter had not been half-pressed recently.

On my XTi body, the cross button keys are a little easier to use for selecting the AF point, but you may have to press multiple buttons to select the AF point you want.

One reason not to use the "focus and recompose" method is that it precludes use of the AI Servo mode which is pretty useful for moving subjects.

I guess Canon's eye-controlled focus technology became unworkable when the number of AF points increased beyond 3.

ImRaptor wrote in post #8930244
Make sure to get some good use out of the AF control stick on the camera. A quick press in the direction of the AF point will help keeping off center and limit having to recompose.
Another aspect is a lens that will grab focus quicker. The less time you are waiting to achieve focus the more time you've got to get the shot. Neither the 50mm or the 75-300mm in your signature are anywhere near the quick end of AF speeds, in fact they are probably the slowest two lenses I've ever used in regards to AF.
I can't comment on the 10-22 as I have never used on for more than a quick couple of trial shots.

Darn! And I thought the 50mm 1.8 was pretty good...sigh..guess i need to start looking for the 1.4. I do have a new 17-55 that I used last week and seemed to do pretty well. Thanks for the help!

fortburns wrote in post #8939892
Chellyroo - since my 5 and 7 year old boys are the subject of an overwhelming % of my photographs, I completely understand!

I have to agree with ImRaptor, the 50mm f/1.8 lens while sharp is very slow to focus. I sold it and upgraded to the 50mm f/1.4 almost solely for the faster autofocus. It was worth the time to save and upgrade.

Th 10-22 has reasonably fast USM focusing. Depending on how you are using it though, it can be challenging to let auto select the AF points due to the field of view. I have pretty good luck with it, but I cannot say I use it for portraits very often.

When I am shooting the kids in anything under f/5.6, I rarely let the camera select the AF points. I preselect one based on the compositions I usually prefer (usually on the traditional Rule of Third lines) and the camera orientation (landscape or portrait). If I am using a f/2.8 or lower with the narrow DoF, I can be prone to practice the SprayAndPray technique with the kids. It may add time in post to delete excessive shots, but with fast moving subjects in a low DoF it can help get the shot.

Ok, I am officially on the lookout for a 50mm 1.4 now I have to admit I more often than not am in the SprayAndPray club! Works fine sometimes but is not building my skills. Thanks for your post!

ChristopherChen wrote in post #8945580
I had a similar gripe this weekend taking pictures of children.

Given the fact that kids are really prone to movement , it pays to shoot on higher shutter speeds, especially when you want to get the eyes in focus.

Try to get yourself acquianted with pre-setting your AF focal point before the shot, you will probably be able to do this by visualizing the frame before you bring the camera up to eye level. Of course it doesn't work all the time but it sure beats have to fiddle around with the top wheel or the joystick.

But I still use the focus and recompose method, with a larger aperture like f2 it sometimes can be a hit or miss though.

Thank you!

chellyroo wrote in post #8954362
Darn! And I thought the 50mm 1.8 was pretty good...sigh..guess i need to start looking for the 1.4. I do have a new 17-55 that I used last week and seemed to do pretty well. Thanks for the help!

I was pretty happy with my 50mm f1.8 as at the time the only other lenses I had were the 18-55mm and 75-300. Then I bought a 70-200L and things went down hill (for cash) from there as I realized just how difficult the 50mm could be at times.
I don't think I have touched the 50mm since I bought my Sigma 30mm and with an 85mm f1.8 on the way, it may never get used again.

ImRaptor wrote in post #8954552
....

I don't think I have touched the 50mm since I bought my Sigma 30mm and with an 85mm f1.8 on the way, it may never get used again.

I agree with that. I think Canon sells the 50mm f/1.8 as a gateway drug of sorts to get people interested in better and more expensive primes.