Bad technique or technical problem?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Using an EOS 10D with Canon 70-200f2.8 shooting dancers on a school stage
with no additional lighting, I find at least 50% of shots are badly out of
focus. Using Tv at 90/s I typically get at least 3 red boxes on the
subject. Shots come out well exposed but blurred - and I don't mean motion
blur, I mean not in focus.

Tried using sports mode, still get the same problem. However, shooting in
better light gives better results - almost all in focus. So, I understand
that the autofocus likes as much light as it can get, but, if I am getting a
minimum of three red boxes on the subject and a well-lit image, why am I
getting out-of-focus images? What part of the technique/technology is
missing?

TIA

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I'll try that, but in the cases I described, I am holding the camera in
"portrait" mode and the three boxes are aligned vertically on the subject -
and the subject is vertical on the stage - yet none of the subject is in
focus........

But I will try that - thanks!

"Randall Ainsworth" <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote in message
news:190620050657018741%rag@nospam.techline.com...
> In article <42b56c5e$1@duster.adelaide.on.net>, Gremlin
> <not-here@all.mate> wrote:
>
>> Using an EOS 10D with Canon 70-200f2.8 shooting dancers on a school stage
>> with no additional lighting, I find at least 50% of shots are badly out
>> of
>> focus. Using Tv at 90/s I typically get at least 3 red boxes on the
>> subject. Shots come out well exposed but blurred - and I don't mean
>> motion
>> blur, I mean not in focus.
>
> Change it so that it's only using one focus point.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sunday 19 June 2005 06:00, Gremlin wrote:

> Using an EOS 10D with Canon 70-200f2.8 shooting dancers on a school
> stage with no additional lighting, I find at least 50% of shots are
> badly out of
> focus. Using Tv at 90/s I typically get at least 3 red boxes on the
> subject. Shots come out well exposed but blurred - and I don't mean
> motion blur, I mean not in focus.
>
> Tried using sports mode, still get the same problem. However,
> shooting in
> better light gives better results - almost all in focus. So, I
> understand that the autofocus likes as much light as it can get, but,
> if I am getting a minimum of three red boxes on the subject and a
> well-lit image, why am I
> getting out-of-focus images? What part of the technique/technology is
> missing?

Autofocus requires light (and sometimes good contrast) to work. That's
why many cameras have focus assist lights, either visible or IR. The
less light available and/or the lower the scene contrast, the longer it
takes to focus, if it works at all. If you're shooting in marginal
lighting conditions and need fast, accurate focusing, do it manually.


--
Stefan Patric
NoLife Polymath Group
tootek2@yahoo.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thanks to all

I expect that I am trying to operate at the minima of the camera/lens
combination, no flash, poor lighting and a dancer moving across the stage.
I have tried manual focus but, as they move so quickly, that isn't an option
(my lack of skill I expect!)

So, it seems that I need to get them in the best pool of light that I can
and then hope for the best.

Thanks once again.


"Gremlin" <not-here@all.mate> wrote in message
news:42b56c5e$1@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> Using an EOS 10D with Canon 70-200f2.8 shooting dancers on a school stage
> with no additional lighting, I find at least 50% of shots are badly out of
> focus. Using Tv at 90/s I typically get at least 3 red boxes on the
> subject. Shots come out well exposed but blurred - and I don't mean
> motion blur, I mean not in focus.
>
> Tried using sports mode, still get the same problem. However, shooting in
> better light gives better results - almost all in focus. So, I understand
> that the autofocus likes as much light as it can get, but, if I am getting
> a minimum of three red boxes on the subject and a well-lit image, why am I
> getting out-of-focus images? What part of the technique/technology is
> missing?
>
> TIA
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Gremlin wrote:
> Thanks to all
>
> I expect that I am trying to operate at the minima of the
> camera/lens
> combination, no flash, poor lighting and a dancer moving across the
> stage. I have tried manual focus but, as they move so quickly, that
> isn't an option (my lack of skill I expect!)
>
> So, it seems that I need to get them in the best pool of light that
> I
> can and then hope for the best.
>
> Thanks once again.
>
>
> "Gremlin" <not-here@all.mate> wrote in message
> news:42b56c5e$1@duster.adelaide.on.net...
>> Using an EOS 10D with Canon 70-200f2.8 shooting dancers on a school
>> stage with no additional lighting, I find at least 50% of shots are
>> badly out of focus. Using Tv at 90/s I typically get at least 3
>> red
>> boxes on the subject. Shots come out well exposed but blurred -
>> and
>> I don't mean motion blur, I mean not in focus.
>>
>> Tried using sports mode, still get the same problem. However,
>> shooting in better light gives better results - almost all in
>> focus.
>> So, I understand that the autofocus likes as much light as it can
>> get, but, if I am getting a minimum of three red boxes on the
>> subject and a well-lit image, why am I getting out-of-focus images?
>> What part of the technique/technology is missing?
>>
>> TIA

Here's my experience from last Friday at a Middle School promotion
ceremony:
http://www.fototime.com/inv/A381069ED2940F4

It seemed to me my first and most effective weapon was IS on the Canon
70-200 2.8L lens. Figuring the one-over f/l thumb-rule and gaining
two, maybe three stops advantage, I settled on 1/125 as the best
compromise, actually the maximum length of exposure I'd count on for
pretty good stability.

I took several test shots at stage hands and the assembly on stage. My
early arrangement here was Tv set at 1/125 and let the aperture find
itself. It turned out f/2.8 worked mostly, so I went manual there,
with the occasional stop-down for undoing full-light washout, and
ended up in full manual at 1/125 @ f/2.8 ISO 800 for nearly all of the
action. Reason being, stage lighting was full-on on the seated
scholars on stage, but two or more stops darker on the speaker's
location, and that was where the action took place. Pattern metering
gave pretty good exposure to the folks in the action area, and washed
out the remainder in full light. I made "panorama-ready" shots of the
usually washed-out students at smaller apertures, still at 1/125, and
they look good. On the big files, there is a lot to enjoy, looking at
the kids interplay and all.

As the ceremony concluded and the kids filed out, I took a single
flash picture. Now I wonder if I should have tried more, facing the
action. It also seems to me there is evidence that something in the
neighborhood of 1/125 @ f/2.8, ISO 800 with the built-in flash should
make pretty good exposures on the 20D. My early arrangement here was
Tv set at 1/125 and let the aperture find itself/ It turned out f/2.8
worked mostly, so I went manual there, with the occasional stop-down
for undoing full-light washout.


Things have changed since I left Middle (Junior High) School a while
back. 'Way back. This ceremony was advertised at beginning at 9:30 am.
It actually went off at 9:27, according to my camera. The graduating
class of about 300 (about 80 in mine) meant there were two tickets per
kid, and fifty people who had tickets didn't get seats. I arrived at
8:07, claimed one of about 10% of all chairs not occupied by
people-butts or some sign of intended occupation.

Amazing Paparazzi-like elbowing among camera-toting parents, et al. I
had made a point of sitting at the edge of an aisle, where
theoretically no one should insert their body between me and the
action. One minute before the actual start, they were six deep in the
aisle. Before I had to wreak any devastation, the Principal said every
one should sit or be along the back wall. "There will be NO STANDING
OR SITTING IN THE AISLES !" And so it came to be. I didn't have to
stand up, no one (well, one one) stood in front of me.

Anyway, I took about 250 raw + JPEG shots, a score of which I erased
on first computer view. The remainder are much, much better than the
parents with P&S cameras could get from out there, and will print
pretty good at 4x6 inches. The images are much, much better than I
expected, what with a heavy camera poised on fading arms for an hour
and a half, and a general sense of "can't lose, so why not" about the
entire enterprise.

I reckon these photos will be of use to anyone interested in the
event, and a trip to the eventual display URL will be much more
economical than the DVD to be sold by the school: the entire thing is
recorded and to be published and distributed during the summer.

During the post-ceremony leave-taking and excited-chatter session I
noted a dozen dSLRs; all but one were silver Canon Rebel XTs with the
lesser kit lens. The other was my 20D/70-200. Weapon of choice for
most was the video camera in several declensions. Quite a few modern
P&Ss, and a surprising number of those little misshapen, colorful
efforts.

Things _have_ changed.

--
Frank ess

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Gremlin" <not-here@all.mate> wrote in message
news:42b56c5e$1@duster.adelaide.on.net...
> Using an EOS 10D with Canon 70-200f2.8 shooting dancers on a school stage
> with no additional lighting, I find at least 50% of shots are badly out of
> focus. Using Tv at 90/s I typically get at least 3 red boxes on the
> subject. Shots come out well exposed but blurred - and I don't mean
> motion blur, I mean not in focus.
>
> Tried using sports mode, still get the same problem. However, shooting in
> better light gives better results - almost all in focus. So, I understand
> that the autofocus likes as much light as it can get, but, if I am getting
> a minimum of three red boxes on the subject and a well-lit image, why am I
> getting out-of-focus images? What part of the technique/technology is
> missing?
>


So I asked my wife, who is not a professional but has shot high school
theatrical performances for the past 3 years or so, your very question and
her answer with a smile was, "You see this is your problem, you guys over
analyze everything... Just pick up the camera and shoot." ;-) From there
she tells me that she shoots everything on manual with lens wide open. If
there's enough light she'll use the AF with the center point only.
Otherwise that's done manually as well. She shoots 800 and sometimes even
1600 ASA film. The film results are of course grainy especially with the
1600 ASA but the pic are clear and in focus.

When she shoots a show she shoots every performance, usually 3. The best
shots come on the last night because by then she's memorized the play and
light queues so she's ready for the shots as they come up. Also, when
possible she shoots the final dress rehearsal with a flash. Of course she
has to get the directors permission for this but I've been there on occasion
and this is the ideal shooting situation. The performance starts and stops
scenes are run over multiple time and she doesn't need to worry about being
in the audiences way when shooting. It's also the perfect time to get the
complete cast and crew pictures.

HTH

--

Rob