Messages

61

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Tips on shooting hockey?

« on: October 31, 2012, 02:03:05 PM »

I shoot a lot of figure skating in hockey rinks with a 7D and a 70-200 f2.8L II.  Several random tips:

1. Shoot RAW or JPG, but not RAW+JPG.  The latter will burn your buffer.

2. If shooting JPG (I often do), use custom white balance.  Try taking your WB shot off the white boards.  In some rinks, setting WB to white fluorescent will also work.  Don't rely on AWB.

3. Set ISO from 3200 to 6400.  Your 5DIII can handle this with greater ease than my 7D.  Go for shutter speeds above 1/500, closer 1/1000.   A little noise is better than motion blur.

4. If you have noise to deal with, use NoiseNinja to clean it up.

5. Set your 70-200 IS to pan mode 2 and use a mono-pod with the lens' collar mount.  I once believed I didn't need the IS or added support with fast shutter speeds, but every little bit helps.  Plus, the 5DII/70-200 2.8L is heavy.  Fatigue will set in when hand-holding for a while.  The mono-pod takes the weight for you and makes it far easier change focus points or other camera settings on the fly.  I shoot a lot of sports without a mono-pod, but with figure skating, I find it invaluable particularly for the fatigue factor.

6. I assume that the 5DIII has focus point expansion, use it.  With the 7D, it helps with tracking.  Use AI Servo mode.

7. Don't be afraid of f2.8 with your 70-200 II.  It's very sharp.  But, you may want to move the focus point around so it's at face level.  Just keep it on something with contrast (and not solid color jerseys).  Be aware that 2.8 isn't very forgiving on out-of-focus shots.

8.  Shoot in manual and find an ISO/shutter speed/f-stop combination that works.  Lighting is likely to be somewhat consistent throughout the rink.  You may end up bumping the shutter speed up and down a bit as players move in and out of dark spots.  Trust your eye and periodically check the preview.  But, don't rely on an auto exposure mode.

9. Avoid shooting through the Plexiglas.  Since shooting from the players box means the players are skating away from you, this likely means shooting from the top of the stands.

10. Practice.  Practice.  Practice.

62

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Anybody Tweaking Picture Styles in a 7D?

« on: October 29, 2012, 01:27:05 AM »

Does anyone tweak the Picture Style settings in your 7D?

I shoot primarily sports and candids -- people pics of one sort or another.  Sometimes I'm looking for a little more saturation and detail, a little extra "pop".  My most used lens is the 70-200 f2.8L II with the 17-55 2.8 for close quarters.  These lenses are sharp and shooting wide open certainly adds pop, but things can sometimes be a little flat.

I know that shooting RAW eliminates the need to rely on Picture Style, but I'm not always shooting RAW and, RAW or not, prefer to minimize the need for post work.

So, I'm curious to see what others have learned with tweaking in-camera Picture Styles.  Do you prefer Canon's default settings or have you found ways to improve them?

63

Lenses / Re: Your technique for switching lenses in the field?

« on: October 26, 2012, 06:11:59 PM »

I use ThinkTank holsters deep enough to hold body and lens with hood in shooting position.  I generally don't use front caps on my 70-200 2.8L II and my 17-55 2.8.  The hoods always stay in the shooting position.

Granted, if I need both lenses, I carry two bodies and avoid changing.  But, on occasion, I'll carry just the 7D with 70-200 and a 35 2.0 for wide shots (ok, normal shots on crop).  I would carry a single holster with side pocket for the 35.  It helps to have one pocket or bag dedicated to each lens so you don't have to swap them out.  When I change lenses, camera strap is around the neck, body is tilted down to avoid dust.  The mounted lens is removed and straight to the holster or side pocket, hood first.   Second lens rear cap removed and transferred to first, second lens then mounted to body.

Things were a little easier with the old FD lenses.  One could use the thumb to flip the rear cap off into the camera bag, then mount to the body one handed while still holding the first lens in the other hand.

Oh, for smaller lenses where I do use front caps, I use Tamron caps.  They are similar to Nikon and much easier to remove than Canon caps.  (There's no way I'm putting a Nikon cap on my Canon...just can't do it.)

64

Lenses / Re: Canon EF 40 f2.8 vs. EF 35 f2.0 on crop body

« on: October 24, 2012, 12:47:14 AM »

This all helps!! Thanks to each of you!

I did a lot of comparison research on DPP before geting the 35 and was impressed with its sharpness for a crop body (where the soft edges are cropped out).  But, I hadn't realized how much sharper midframe is at 2.8:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=736&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=122&Sample=0&CameraComp=736&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

This certainly helps alleviate my concern for losing that stop.  Must admit, the much cheaper 40 is impressively sharp even at the corners.  (I just wish DPP did some tests with a crop body.)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=810&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

The 40 is now on my Christmas list.

65

Lenses / Canon EF 40 f2.8 vs. EF 35 f2.0 on crop body

« on: October 22, 2012, 06:46:21 PM »

For shooting candids at events or sightseeing, I often carry a 7D/70-200 2.8L II and a 60D/17-55 f2.8.  But, there I times when I wish to travel a bit lighter and swap out the 17-55 for a 35 f2.0 -- or carry one body and the 35.  I know the 35 is soft in the corners on a full frame body, but it's quite sharp for my crop bodies.

I must admit, it is hard to do without the 17-55 when I need to cover an event.  But, when I'm shooting only for me, if I'm going to limit myself to a prime, I like the 30-40 range for grab shots.

Now, I'm intrigued by the pancake 40.  It's half the size of my 35, but one stop slower.   But, I'm having trouble justifying the loss of a stop for the savings of about 0.8" in camera/lens depth.  On a 60D or a 7D, does the pancake make that much of a difference over the 35 in the convenience department?

66

Lenses / Re: Lens Kit Set : One (EF-S18-135) or Two (EF-S18-55mm & EF-S 55-250mm)

« on: October 22, 2012, 01:08:48 AM »

Here's another vote for the 18-135.  I have the older, yet still pretty "young" version without STM.  It's a decent lens and good walk-around lens.  The 55-250 would be tempting if you're primary need was sports or wildlife.  But, for every day use, travel, and portraits, the 18-135 encompasses the focal range that you will likely find most useful.

With a single body and the 18-55 and 50-250 kit, you may well find yourself needing to change lenses a lot.  This is a pain and increases the risk of getting dust on the sensor.  I've been there.  My first two lenses were the 17-85 and 70-300.  Both good lenses, but I often found myself switching.  The 18-135 was more versatile for me when I wasn't shooting sports.

The best advice given to me was never buy a lens until you have already established a need for it -- avoid the temptation to anticipate every scenario.  The 18-135 is a good range to start with.  As you develop (no pun intended) your art, you'll get a better idea what focal length fits your needs. 

If you find a need for faster lenses or shallower depth of field, there are some great primes to consider for crop bodies such as the 35 f2.0, the 50 f1.8, the 85 f1.8 and the 100 f2.0.  But, hold off on these until you find the focal length that you like.  You may find your interest in photography taking different avenue and wish to explore lenses longer than 135.

67

Software & Accessories / Re: Canon Protective Filter Question

« on: October 16, 2012, 11:30:09 PM »

Sadly, Canon doesn't make filters to compliment and preserve the IQ of their lenses -- maybe because they don't make their own filters.  I have a Canon UV filter and found it quite disappointing.

B+W has a great reputation, but I don't have any and can't comment.

I do have several Hoya's.  Hoya HMC doesn't seem to work as well on digital as it did with film.  Hoya Pro1 is good and doesn't appear to adversely affect the IQ.   Hoya HD is their best filter for image quality, shatter resistance, and ease of cleaning.  The Hoya HD is the only Hoya that I recommend and I do so highly.

68

Lenses / Re: I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

« on: October 14, 2012, 08:11:23 PM »

With skating, timing is everything.  I don't rely on burst either.  Burst without timing is a good way to get a bunch of shots of a skater's backside during a spin.

Regarding the OP's focus question, try the Bob Atkins focus test.  If you have access to a second body, try it with both bodies.  If there is a focus issue, two bodies will help determine whether it's the lens or the body.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_testing.html

69

Lenses / Re: I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

« on: October 14, 2012, 04:29:58 PM »

Yes, my 70-300 is non-L and maybe closer to the image quality of the OP's 55-250.

I also shoot ISO 2000-3200 for most indoor sports with the 70-200 MkII.  For skating, One Shot isn't enough.  AI Servo is a definate plus.  Noise Ninja does wonders for high ISO noise.  I've been happy with the dynamic range, but then I moved up from an XT.

70

Lenses / Re: I'm not impressed with my 70-200mm f/2.8L USM... so is it me or the lens?

« on: October 14, 2012, 03:55:11 PM »

I had a 70-300 f4-5.6 IS USM for many years before getting my 70-200 f2.8L IS MkII.  When I got the MkII, I took many comparison shots and, without a doubt, the 70-200 is sharper.  One thing I wanted to know is whether I should continue to carry the 70-300 for the extra reach.  But, cropping shots taken with the 70-200 at 200mm is still sharper than the 70-300 at 300mm.

I have also shot figure skating events with the MkII on a 60D and learned that the 60D is a bit lacking in the focus tracking department.  Roughly 20% of my shots were OOF.  With the 7D, less than 5% are OOF.

First tip for shooting sports with the 60D/70-200 MkII, make sure you're shooting with center focus point only.  This will prevent another subject from grabbing focus from a different focus point.  Also, the center focus point on the 60D can take advantage of the 2.8 (even if you're shooting at smaller apertures).

Second, use AI Servo mode.  Be aware that AI Servo mode is predictive focusing and not exactly real time.  It tries to predict where the subject will be when the shutter is actually tripped.  To do so, it keeps track of the movement of the subject.

This works great when the subject moves in a straight line, but if the subject takes a sudden turn, the predictive focusing can be thrown off.  This is where I ran into trouble with skating.  That first shot or two just after the skater turned were more likely to be OOF.  One work around is to get in the habit of momentarily lifting your finger off the shutter button when you subject changes direction.  This forces the AI Servo mode to start over.

Third, look into "back button focusing" (google it).  This is one of those things that you'll either love or hate.

Fourth, make sure your lens is in IS mode 2 for panning.  Then, keep your elbows in, turn at the waist, and continue panning through the shots.  (I don't agree that IS doesn't matter at high shutter speed action shots.  Faster speeds may mitigate some of the benefits of IS, but I think every thing you can do to eliminate camera movement helps.)

Fifth, don't be afraid of ISO 3200 for action (noise Ninja helps a bunch).

When I first used the 70-200 on the 60D for skating, it did seem that I lost more shots to OOF.  But, it then occurred to me that OOF was more obvious at f2.8 than using the 70-300 at 5.6.  One solution was to shoot the 70-200 at 5.6, but I really needed the 2.8 for low light rinks.

The 70-200 f2.8L II is a great lens, but it may not live up to its full potential as a sport lens on a 60D.  It's a fantastic sport lens on a 7D.

71

Lenses / Re: Canon fd lenses

« on: October 12, 2012, 02:33:13 PM »

+1 on the FD 50 1.4.

72

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SOFT BOXES - BRACKETS - STANDS - MUST BUY! (say it 3 times)

« on: October 12, 2012, 01:14:18 AM »

I use Photoflex stands, I think they're 8'.  Mine are at least ten years old and have gone up in price quite a bit (from $45 to maybe $80).  They do work well and handle the umbrella quite nicely.  I certainly recomend the Photoflex stands, but there may be cheaper alternatives.

Maybe it's not a surprise that the Photoflex stands can handle their umbrellas.  These stands may be a little on the heavy side -- which is probably a good thing.

One note, I've only used these indoors.  I don't know what it would take to keep the 60" umbrellas grounded outdoors -- or what to use for kite string.

73

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: SOFT BOXES - BRACKETS - STANDS - MUST BUY! (say it 3 times)

« on: October 11, 2012, 09:35:54 PM »

I have several Photoflex umbrellas and highly recommend them.  Top quality and affordable.  I recently started using the 60" White Convertible (RUT60) without the black backing as a shoot-through.  It's very soft.  I used to think 60" was too big, not I wish I had started with this umbrella.

For radio triggers, I like the CowboyStudio NPT-04.  For $23 on Amazon, they're cheap and reliable.

Photoflex makes a good multi-bracket (AC-BSWCP).  SP Studio and Impact have near identical version that are cheaper and of similar quality. 

A nifty adapter for using up to three flash units on that 60" umbrella is the Interfit Tri Shoe Adapter. 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/742155-REG/Interfit_STR141_Tri_Shoe_Adapter.html

Lastly, the Yongnuo YN-460-ii is a great manual, off-camera flash for about $45.

74

Lenses / Re: Need quick advice Please and thanks! Choir photoshoot!

« on: October 10, 2012, 02:49:52 AM »

If you're stuck indoors, maybe rent or borrow a couple more flash units and umbrellas.  I shot large groups for my kids' school last year and used two silver umbrellas each with four Yongnuo 460ii about 15-20 feet back.  Google "photograph large groups" and you will get a bunch of ideas.

Maybe the two 580's direct with no diffusion will give enough light.  With your 5DII, you can afford to up the ISO a bit.  If you're new to shooting large groups, like I was (and still am) the biggest thing that impressed me from my shoot was the real affect of the inverse square law with light (see the Adorama video below).  With a few rows of people, you need to move the light back a bit to make sure the lighting on all three rows is relatively even.  If the light is too close, the front row will likely be much brighter than the back rows.  And when you move the light back for large groups, you lose a lot of light in a hurry (especially if the walls and ceilings aren't white).  Check out the video and the others on Adorama about inverse square law.

http://www.adorama.com/alc/article/13036

Another tip, bring your laptop and shoot tethered with DPP and the EOS Utility.  It is a big help to see the affects right away and be able to experiment with lighting.  Of course, this helps with patient subjects.  Maybe ask them to practice singing while you get the lighting right.

Of course, if you can find something outside, then ... nevermind.

Good luck and please update us on how it went.

75

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Rumors Surface [CR1]

« on: October 09, 2012, 12:30:24 AM »

Neuro, it took me a while to figure out your point of contention.  I have always understood that  "separate AF processor" to be the second Digic 4.  This view was reinforced by the fact that the 1D-X  has dual Digic 5+ processors plus "An all-new, 61-Point High-Density Reticular AF and 100,000-pixel RGB Metering Sensor that uses a dedicated DIGIC 4 Image Processor".  With respect to the 7D, that dedicated AF processor is never named, so it seemed logical that it was the second Digic 4.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_1d_x

But, I stand corrected.  It does appear that the 7D has a third processor (in addition to the two Digic 4's) dedicated to auto-focus.  (I now understand it has a fourth for A/D conversion.)

It's curious that the 1D-X uses two Digic 5+ and one Digic 4 to achieve it's phenomenal performance.  It's also curious that the 5DIII has a single Digic 5+.  I can't find documentation suggesting an additional processor in the 5DIII dedicated to focus.  Given that the 5DIII doesn't offer the burst capability of the 7D and, according some users on this forum, the 5DIII also doesn't match the 7D for sports shooting*, it would seem that a single Digic 5+ won't be enough for the 7DII to top the 7D in IQ, burst mode, and focus tracking.  Hence, my guess is that two processors will be needed.  Maybe not dual Digic 5+, maybe a single Digic 5+ and the same, unnamed processor that the 7D uses for focusing.  Or, maybe a Digic 5+ and a Digic 4 for focusing like with the 1D-X.

Hey, if Canon can improve on the 7D in all areas with a single powerhouse chip, then I'm wrong.  But, I don't expect them to do so.  My guess is that Canon will continue to dedicate a chip (maybe not a Digic) to focusing.  Parallel processing is easier with multiple chips.

*I understand "sports shooting" to mean focus tracking, since this is often more valuable than burst mode.  But, I concede, that "complaints" about the 5DIII for sports could be limited to its slower FPS.