finch13
Well-Known Member
email removed 
Last edited:
Little League Baseball
- Thread starter finch13
- Start date
hiddengamer7
Well-Known Member
you has message
finch13
Well-Known Member
That was actually quite a bit of money, thank you. Haha.
Wildman
Read the rules
haha, that catcher really doesn't want to get nailed in the nuts
I'll let you oogle mine if you give me any good tips on good photo op's
I think the pictures looks pretty good as far as exposure and overall IQ, but I
think you would have benefited from getting a bit closer to the action on most
of the shots. A shallower DOF wouldn't hurt either
finch13
Well-Known Member
/I'll let you oogle mine if you give me any good tips on good photo op's
I think the pictures looks pretty good as far as exposure and overall IQ, but I
think you would have benefited from getting a bit closer to the action on most
of the shots. A shallower DOF wouldn't hurt either
Trade CF card testing time on the 40D for 70-200/2.8L time on your 450D? DEAL!
I got as close as I could without physically sitting on the field. And a lof of the shots were shot at f/6.3 in aperture priority so I could benefit from the shallow(est) DOF possible, but I was having trouble keeping all the body parts in focus. I don't know if it was a DOF issue or shutter speed issue. I bumped up the ISO to 400 and then 800 as the light changed so I could use a smaller aperture to get the subjects completely in focus. This was where the lens started failing me, because the images are sharp, but for being auto "focused" at a shutter of over 1/500, they're not nearly as sharp as they could be.
I was reading up on this lens and it got very good reviews. It only falls short a tad from the Canon 75-300 in IQ, but for a 3rd party lens, it is the best option for such a broad focal range.
If we ever get together, maybe you can try shooting with it for a bit.... just so I can rule out camera/operator error and put all the blame solely on the lens.
The narrow max aperture is going to make it a little harder for the camera to
AF, but it still shouldn't have been a problem. If you were shooting at f/6.3
or higher then DOF should not have been an issue at all (at least for getting
1 player in the shot). At 200mm and 75ft away you should have had about
8-10ft of in focus area (depth).
Are you using the center AF point only? Did you notice the AF "hunting" at all?
AF, but it still shouldn't have been a problem. If you were shooting at f/6.3
or higher then DOF should not have been an issue at all (at least for getting
1 player in the shot). At 200mm and 75ft away you should have had about
8-10ft of in focus area (depth).
Are you using the center AF point only? Did you notice the AF "hunting" at all?
finch13
Well-Known Member
Some of the shots I used the center point (like the pitching ones, for example) the other running shots were shot with all 9 points on and AI servo. It was tracking fine, but it seems as if the camera stops focusing between the time you press the shutter and when the actual shutter opens, causing the subject to be a tad out of focus in the final image.
Still haven't decided if it is in fact motion blur at 1/640 and higher or the focusing issue. There are a few images that are tack sharp on the jersey, but the face or legs will be out of focus.
Do you think it could be possible back/front focusing on the body or lens? I feel like some tripod tests are in order with all my lenses.
Still haven't decided if it is in fact motion blur at 1/640 and higher or the focusing issue. There are a few images that are tack sharp on the jersey, but the face or legs will be out of focus.
Do you think it could be possible back/front focusing on the body or lens? I feel like some tripod tests are in order with all my lenses.
beardohio
Well-Known Member
You should see my farmer's tan
The 5 hours out of the day that the sun is out and I can be outside. . . I'm in a baseball uniform. Everyday. I also tape my wrists so I'm getting a tan line there hahaha.My mom takes some decent shots during our high school games, I was surprised.
