Monopod issue, me issue...something.

06/20/2005 02:11:15 PM · #26

Somehow, it makes me feel better that it's a camera/lens issue, and not me or the monopod.

tomlewis1980

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

06/20/2005 02:20:17 PM · #27

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by mavrik:
I think it may be that the cam couldn't focus in the low light

Am I right in thinking the 300D cannot take a pic unless the camera has focused?

Assuming you are in one shot mode the 10D is the same, unless the lens in set to manual focus that is. God knows I've done that a few times! LOL

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 14:21:43.

06/20/2005 02:41:54 PM · #28

Yea definetly looks like poor focus and not camera shake or motion blur.

When I was shooting my shot for the Darkness challenge I discovered my 10D still focused in almost pitch black conditions. But I've had trouble in the past especially when there's movement. Forgetaboutit!

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX APO RF HSM for Canon

06/20/2005 02:47:59 PM · #29

Mav, would you be able to post a full size pic or a 100% crop?

crabappl3

06/20/2005 05:11:36 PM · #30

I would be interested in seeing the full exif for the images posted here. It almost seems as though AF got turned off or something. I'm curious to look at the EXIF to see if it tells us more of what might have happened. I'm doing a largish wedding this Friday, and would like to prevent a similar issue.

-danny

gusto

Canon EOS-7D

06/20/2005 05:20:01 PM · #31

using the monopod thing is a matter of exposure time with it in hand.

I rememner the first time I used one. The Photographer I was working with insisted that I use a monopod, I resisted it and used it while he was around... soon as he left the area I twisted it off and went handheld. after about 20 minutes my arms were getting tired and shakey and a a result the quality of my shots dropped way down. Needless to say he came back and busted me without the monopod.... then scolded me like a child... I felt like a child too especially when I looked at the crap quality of my shots without the monopod. It just takes time and exposure using a monopod. after using one for a while youll feel you need it where its required... [...., :' ; ! 's] container for all my bad punctuation.

06/20/2005 05:23:42 PM · #32

A monopod comes in handy (especially for the second photographer who has a little more time and freedom) during night shoots/weddings and lowlight situations like in churches. Not that I've used them much since I usually don't have time .. but the most compliments I think I ever got from one single shot was when i was assisting at a night wedding. THe photog had the couple under a street light and I took a shot with a slow shutter on a monopod..very cool. Can be seen here:
my one and only monopod shot

They said they got more compliments on this one shot than any other in the lot. Always nice to hear. You can also flick through the shots and see the main photog's shots are nothing like this one so it adds dimension to their album.

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 17:26:06.

Prof_Fate

06/20/2005 05:38:35 PM · #33

THis is why wedding photogs get and use fast lenses...aids in focusing if nothing else.

This proves you can force the 300D to take an OOF shot...

It frustrated me that it didn't do better...i was smakcing that shutter button like a video game controller!

As to the recirpocal - 2 things. ONe, allow for the crop factor - a 50mm is really an 80, so 1/100th sec is about right. And remember that is under optimal conditions..add running about and stress and and you are not having optimal conditions. I can get 1/15sec on a tripod to be acceptable at 50mm..not great, but acceptable.

Mavrik - the posted pic - what is up with the red glare/flare/light/reflection nastiness?

You had inferred in your PM last week they they had another photog there - so they did get some pics then? So what would have been the results if you were the only photog, and what you have is all there is? Just asking...I need some practice before i charge for a wedding, but the temptation to advertise or seek a paying gig is getting strong...

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/20/2005 05:45:25 PM · #34

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

THis is why wedding photogs get and use fast lenses...aids in focusing if nothing else.

2.8 is the standard, really. I mean, there's 1.8 85mm and 50mm and such, but for zooms, the Tamron is purty good. :)

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

As to the recirpocalMavrik - the posted pic - what is up with the red glare/flare/light/reflection nastiness?

DJ lights, lots of nasties that went all OVER the room. To get good pix with his discoball going, we would have had to move the reception out of town. lol Like I said, completely horrible, unedited shot. Just to show the focus...

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

You had inferred in your PM last week they they had another photog there - so they did get some pics then?

Actually my fiancee shot too (and did purty well, though similar focus issues), plus they had TWO videographers. Between the 3 of us, we definitely got a LOT of coverage!

Originally posted by Prof_Fate:

So what would have been the results if you were the only photog, and what you have is all there is? Just asking...

I am happy with 75 to 80% of my take. I easily have enough good stuff for double their number of proofs and the album. If my fiancee didn't shoot and I was alone, I would have still done fine. The issue didn't kill me, it just made me upset last night and frustrated.

Crab - looking for the exif now.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

06/20/2005 05:48:11 PM · #35

I agree that this looks more like a low-light autofocus issue or the lens might have been set to manual focus. 1/50 is plenty fast for a monopod (most the images should have been OK). I routinely shoot handheld at slower speeds when necessary, but not every image is going to be sharp. My entry in Darkness was taken handheld at 1/10 with the same Tamron lens, so it CAN be done.

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 17:48:47.

06/20/2005 05:49:48 PM · #36

I'm not sure this helps - I don't see focus stuff? It appears this particular shot was 1/30 at 30mm. Perfect! lol

EXIF
Camera
Make Canon
Model Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL
Orientation upper left
X resolution 180
Y resolution 180
Resolution unit 2
Date/time 6/18/2005 8:40:55 PM
YCbCr positioning centered
Image
Exposure time 1/30 s
F-number 2.8
ISO speed ratings 800
Date/time original 6/18/2005 8:40:55 PM
Date/time digitized 6/18/2005 8:40:55 PM
Component config YCbCr
Compressed BPP 3
Shutter speed value 0.050000 s
Aperture value 2.970860
Exposure bias value -0.666667
Max. aperture value 2.970860
Metering mode Pattern
Flash Flash fired [on]
Focal length 30 mm
User comment
Colorspace sRGB
Pixel X dimension 3072
Pixel Y dimension 2048
Focal plane X res. 3443.950000
Focal plane Y res. 3442.020000
Focal plane res. unit inch
Sensing method One-chip color area sensor
Custom Rendered Normal process
Exposure mode Auto exposure
Scene capture type Standard
Miscellaneous
Exif version (30,32,32,31)

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 17:51:24.

06/20/2005 05:50:14 PM · #37

Originally posted by gusto:

after about 20 minutes my arms were getting tired and shakey

What were you shooting with?

crabappl3

06/20/2005 05:50:48 PM · #38

One other thought... On the D2X there is an option to shoot without focus lock, or not shoot until focus lock. Does the dREBEL have this same feature? Perhaps either using a continuous focus, or not allowing the camera to shoot until lock is aquired would be a viable solution for lighting situations that are less than optimal.

-danny

06/20/2005 05:52:33 PM · #39

Originally posted by crabappl3:

One other thought... not allowing the camera to shoot until lock is aquired would be a viable solution for lighting situations that are less than optimal.

The Rebel doesn't fire until focus is acquired, so how it shot this or WHAT it's focused on is beyond me.

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX APO RF HSM for Canon

06/20/2005 05:52:40 PM · #40

Originally posted by crabappl3:

without focus lock. Does the dREBEL have this same feature?

In most (if not all) modes, no.

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 17:53:00.

gusto

Canon EOS-7D

06/20/2005 05:54:44 PM · #41

(1D Mark II 70-200 2.8 L) dont know the total weight but keeping it to your eye the entire time and scoping for action becomes wearing... again shooting event photography where we must capture a specific amount per team so theres no time for a break, well except when the other photog arrives and gives you a break. Theres been times after an event that goes on for 2-3 days for 18 hrs a day where I felt like I was in a fight. Sore chest and armes for several days afterwards.

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 17:57:07.

06/20/2005 05:56:49 PM · #42

Originally posted by gusto:

Yep, event photography is hard work. Your kit weights roughly 6 lbs, incidentally (similar to my 1D + 70-200).

Olympus 50mm f/1.8 MF Normal Zuiko

06/20/2005 05:57:37 PM · #43

Actually, the Rebel does "focus lock" if you half press the shutter, however,

//www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=009pxy&unified_p=1

That post seems to say that focus lock and recomposition does NOT WORK on the DRebel if you are using flash. Period. Ouchie, I guess I don't use flash enough to know that!

M

emorgan49

Olympus E-5

06/20/2005 05:59:45 PM · #44

It looks like it was trying to focus on something ou the window - the blinds on the right look better than the people.

06/20/2005 06:02:19 PM · #45

Mav, don't want to burst your bubble, but what about shots like above where you didn't use a flash?

Having read through most of the thread it seemed like quite a contentious reason..

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 18:05:33.

06/20/2005 06:07:54 PM · #46

Originally posted by gusto:

(1D Mark II 70-200 2.8 L) dont know the total weight but keeping it to your eye the entire time and scoping for action becomes wearing... Sore chest and armes for several days afterwards.

THe first time I used that lens I shot for 1/2 an hour and got tired. But I shot a 10 hour wedding with it a few weeks ago and apparently all my working out has paid off cause it didn't bother me till the very end. Letmetellya, all the squats I do each week really helps, too. When I first started shooting weddings I'd get reallllly sore the next day, not anymore tho. I was also getting a little pudgy around the edges too. lol

Note to all: if shooting weddings or long events - start working out! :-)

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 18:08:47.

06/20/2005 06:09:24 PM · #47

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Mav, don't want to burst your bubble, but what about shots like above where you didn't use a flash?

Well, I always get some blurries...I had a LOT this time, but I used a LOT more flash than normal too cuz of the dingy lighting...I think maybe a combination of ALL these things:

1) Flash won't focus lock.
2) Low light focus troubles.
3) Dehydration, the "shakes."
4) Me being a monopod newbie.
5) Too slow shutter speed.

06/20/2005 06:12:22 PM · #48

Originally posted by mavrik:

Well, I always get some blurries...I had a LOT this time, but I used a LOT more flash than normal too cuz of the dingy lighting...I think maybe a combination of ALL these things:

I gotta say, not to push the subject/issue, but those are all normal things that shouldn't lead to lots of blurred images (except the slow shutter) when you know what you're doing. I can only speak for myself but I eat very little and drink little on long shoots, half the time I shoot in dark areas, don't have a locking flash focus and still don't get blurry shots. Out of a full day's shoot I might have 2 or 3.

P.S. not trying to imply you don't know what you're doing...just sayin'. These are all normal, everyday issues for photogs.

Message edited by author 2005-06-20 18:13:14.