Outdoor sports action photography

I love taking pictures of drag racing cars. I want to be able to get more control of depth but want to use the repeat shutter setting. How can I get the depth of field and make the car the main focus of the picture in an action shot?

I haven't shot the drags since the days of manual focus lenses & film so it's going to be much easier to learn now. Your goal is very similar to what I do shoot these days & I have an article on line that should be a good start and then combine that info with my motorsports comments in a thread here. You may need to buy a lens (depending on what you already have) & if so I recommend either the 70-200 f4 L or the 70-300 IS as good choices.
On line article is here
http://www.rccanada.ca/rccforum/showthread.php?t=147971
Motorsports comments are here
http://forums.usa.canon.com/t5/Lenses/Canon-EF400mm-f5-6-versus-Canon-EF100-400mm-f4-5-f5-6/td-p/300...
Learning good panning technique will take a while, but it's the trick to getting the right result when combined with the right shutter speed.
"A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought."

Similar Messages

  • Which is the better lens for wildlife, sport action canon 70-200 is usm ii series L or Canon 100-400

    Which would be a better for wildlife and sport action Canon 70-200  mm is usm ii serie L f/2.8 or Canon 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6?

    On what camera? It makes a big difference depending upon whether you are using full frame or a crop camera.
    Also depends upon the particular sports and type of wildlife most commonly involved, how much reach you might need.  Outdoor, daytime sports vs indoor and nightime sports is another key factor.
    On a crop camera a 70-200 is generally a lot more usable than it is on full frame, for sports and wildlife. An f2.8 lens and 70-200 might be ideal for indoor sports even with a crop camera. It also might be plenty for large game that can be pretty closely approacted. But for small and more shy wildlife, sports on a  larger playing field, you'll more likely need the 100-400. But as an f4.5-5.6 lens that's going to be more of a daytime-only lens.
    The 100-400mm is unusual in that it's a push/pull zoom. This can be particularly fast to use and makes the lens popular among photograhers shooting fast moving subjects such as birds in flight and air shows.
    If you give serious consideration to the 70-200/2.8 IS II in combination with teleconverter EF 2X III, I'd suggest renting and trying them toghether first. The reason is that a stronger 2X teleconverter has more effect on image quality than a weaker TC. The specific combination of the 70-200 Mark II lens and the 2X Mark III TC is pretty darned good.... better than the combo earlier versions of each item.  But whether or not it's up to your expectastions is a judgment call only you can make. So it might be wise to rent before you buy, just to be sure. 
    If instead you start to take a hard look at the 100-400mm, once again you might want to rent it and give it a try. Some people really like the push/pull zoom design. Some don't. (I'm one of the latter...  but to be fair this is largely an old  prejudice from trying to use that type of zoom in the past, long before IS. I always found push-pull zooms hard to get a steady shot with.... But the 100-400's IS goes a long way toward solving that problem.)
    And those two really aren't your only choices.
    Personally I use a pair of crop cameras (7D), most of the time one fitted with a 70-200, and the other fitted with a 300/4 IS, sometimes in combination with an EF 1.4X II teleconverter. Or, when I don't need to be mobile and can set up a tripod, I'll use a 300/2.8 IS, both by itself and with EF 1.4X II or 2X II teleconverters.
    Another possibility is two lower cost lenses... such as a 70-200/4 IS in combination with a third party lens such as the Sigma 120-400 OS or 150-500 OS. Those lenses are considerably less expensive than the 70-200/2.8 II and the 100-400, respectively. You might be able to afford both and still find they meet your needs very well.
    I use the 70-200/4 IS, as well as a copy of the first version of the 70-200/2.8 IS, and they are excellent lenses too. No doubt about it, the 70-200/2.8 IS Mark II is top of the heap and exceptionally good... but rest assured those other 70-200s are no slouches.
    If using a full frame camera, for large field sports and more distant, smaller wildlife.... better start saving up. You're going to need one or two of the super telephotos, such as the new EF 200-400/4L IS 1.4X that I'm saving up for!  
    p.s. By the way, if not already doing so you might want to try Back Button Focusing. It's a very popular technique among sports/action and wildlife photographers. I've been using it for years for virtually everything I shoot, and can't imagine using any other method now.
    Alan Myers
    San Jose, Calif., USA
    "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
    GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
    FLICKR & PRINTROOM 

  • Good Camera for sports & action

    I am  a photographer for  a independent wrestling company and looking to invest in a new camera that matches the quality I need to take  quite a few  Action shots and  fast speed photos I need advice with what would be a good camera  for   sports or  alot of action  I  need something that will be capable of taking photos when there is alot of movement and not blurr the picture. also that will be  good with  keeping battery power that wont need to be charged as often  or have batteries replaced frequently because  these shows can  be 1-3 hours long and I dont have time to rotate batteries or worry if the photo is blurred out. if someone can suggest or guide me to  a camera that might be affordable  or fit the description I will greatly appreciate it  I would use this camera often so its got to be something that will    be reliable with   the job I have

    +1 for the D90. Or if a Canon interests you, Canon's T1i is about the same class as the Nikon D90. You'll need to handle both to see which one appeals to you. Or if you are thinking of semi-pro/pro class bodies, look for a used Nikon D300 (can be found used for around $1100) or a new Canon 50D ($1300 @ BB). The 50D kinda falls between the D90 and D300. The 50D and D300 will be bigger than the T1i and D90 physically so if you have smaller hands these may be easier.
    Lenses. Since wrestling events I've been too (yes I'll admit I've gone to a WWE event a couple times) the rings are pretty well lit. You may get away with a straight f/4.
    Canon has a nice 17-40 ($840) but that may be a bit wide IMO. Maybe start with a 24-105 f/4 IS USM($1250). Only experience I've had with Canon lenses is when I play with friends Canons.
    Nikon really doesnt have much for a straight f/4 lens in a range like Canon does (which irks me since theres times I dont need a f/2.8 nor in a shoot where the lense could get damaged). Also Nikon lenses arent exactly cheap and are a bit more $$$ than its Canons counterparts. But the glass IS extremely high quality. For fast action I wouldnt use 3rd party lenses for a Nikon. Nikons AF-S (focus motors are built in the lens) snaps instantly into focus. A screw drive lense (Nikon AF-D) uses the focus motor in the body and is slightly slower. Even my Nikon AF-S 600mm f/4 literally snaps into focus on 550mph jets at airshows. I have a few 3rd party lenses and even though the IQ of the lens is near Nikon quality, focus speed isnt as fast (even Sigma's HSM lenses dont focus as fast as AF-S in my experience).
    Which ever brand you get, Canon or Nikon, they are both high quality equipment. I always recommend only these two brands of cameras for DSLR's. These are the two top dogs.
    King of the World...

  • Canon camera for action and sports photography?that holds auto focus and more than 7 shots burst

    I have been using  the Rebel T4i.   I've learned that I like action photography.  The T4i sometimes misses the frame in burst mode that I would most like to capture..I shoot RAW so can usually get 7 shots a sec...also sometimes my best efforts are still in a soft focus, not crisp...Does anyone have some ideas for an up grade for me...

    Just to verify something you may understand but have said incorrectly. The FPS for the 7D mark II is 10 but the BURST rate is listed at 31 RAW or 19 RAW + JPG. I'm just guessing here but I suspect it will also require very fast write speed memory cards to help keep things moving from the buffer to the card quickly enough to be ready for a second or 3rd burst when there's lots of action.
    I shoot a lot of action (with a 1D4 but used to use a 7D) and you'd be surprised at just how quickly you can fill a buffer when things get busy.
    "A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought."

  • Best camera for low light and sports

    have the sx200is
    looking for a newer camera for sports and low light shots

    The challenge with sports is that you are REALLY pushing the camera gear to it's limits.  Fast action requires fast shutter speeds.  But fast shutter speeds demand a lot of light and only outdoor games played during the daytime have that.  Indoor games or games played under field lighting at night generally do not have the kind of lighting needed to shoot with fast shutter speeds -- not the kind of shutter speeds needed to freeze action.  So this ends up demanding a camera with excellent ISO performance and lenses with very low focal ratios so they can collect a LOT more light when the shutter is open.  This gear is expensive.
    You will want to consider a reasonable budget depending on what you can afford and the needs of the specific sports.  
    Are these indoor or outdoor sports? If outdoors, are these played during the day or are they night games?
    The "best" camera for sports and low light is the EOS-1D X.  It has phenominal low-light performance, has an amazing focus system,  and can shoot at 12 frames per second.  But it's about $6800 for the "body only" and then you still need lenses.  I'm guessing this is probably not what you had in mind.  But if money were not a constraint... this would be the one to go for.
    The 5D III is another amazing camera for low light performance and and also has an amazing focusing system (largely the same as the 1D X) can shoot at 6 frames per second, and only costs $3500... again, that's the "body only".  Still probably not what you had in mind.
    The 70D has an extremely good focus system (though not as good as the 5D III and 1D X), not quite as good as low light (but pretty good and much better than a point & shoot camera) and shoots at 7 frames per second (1 fps faster than  5D III) and it only costs $1200 for the body only.
    The T5i will be noticeably less expensive than the 70D... a good (but not extremely good) focusing system and 5 frames per second, but the body and 1 kit lens combined is about $850 but that wont a lens suitable for use shooting sports so you'll still need to invest in more appropriate lenses.
    When shooting action photography in low light, what you _really_ want is a lens that can collect a lot more light than the average lens for that very brief moment when the shutter is open.  Such a lens can allow you to use a faster shutter speed to help freeze those action shots.  But *which* lens you use depends on the sport.  
    For low-light sports, these would ideally be f/2.8 zoom lenses... but f/2.8 zoom lenses are not cheap.  Canon's EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM (ideal for most indoor sports and outdoor sports IF the action is happening close to you) is about $2500.  Sigma's lens is about half that price.  But if you're covering action on a large athletic field and the players are far away, they'll still be small.  Sigma makes a 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom for sports... for the low low price of only $3600.
    Scott Kelby does a video to talk about sports photography and he discusses the equipment used and why... and basically says if you want the gear for shooting sports, you basically need a suitcase full of money.
    Tim Campbell
    5D II, 5D III, 60Da

  • Capturing Action

    Capturing Action Photos
    Anyone that knows me can tell you that, outside of photography and family, the thing I love most in life is baseball. Living in Minneapolis, I go watch our baseball team on a regular basis, and of course bring my DSLR with me to try and capture the action. I’ve had varying degrees of success, and have a new found respect for sports photographers.
    When things are moving fast it can be challenging to avoid missing the perfect photo. The first suggestion I would give you is to take as many images as possible, and if your camera has a Burst mode use it. Burst mode should allow you to capture multiple images per second; more images equals more chances you got that perfect photograph. Make sure to get a number of high capacity memory cards to store all these images on.
    With a DSLRs and Compact System Cameras (CSC) make sure the camera is set to Shutter priority. Set the shutter to as fast a shutter speed as the camera will allow, while still maintaining proper exposure.
    Many DSLRs have what’s called focus tracking; if your camera has this feature make sure to use it. Focus tracking continually changes focus to track your subject as it moves through the frame.
    Use a telephoto lens. Unless you’re on the field with the athletes you won’t get close enough to fill the frame with your subject using a normal focal length lens. I suggest a 300mm focal length, and the wider the aperture it has the better.
    Telephoto lenses can be large, heavy, and exaggerate camera shake. I would suggest mounting the camera to a monopod to steady the camera when using a telephoto lens.
    If you want to capture the action on video I would strongly suggest using a DSLR or an Action Camcorder. With a DSLR use a tripod with a panning head to record your video.
    Action photography is one of the most challenging there is. Don’t get discouraged if you don’t succeed at first. Like most things in life, practice makes perfect.
    Allan|Senior Social Media Specialist | Best Buy® Corporate
     Private Message

    Hi,
    Try using a change listener like the following, which updates pages when the user changes the tab.
    tabbedPanel.addChangeListener (new PageChanged());
    class PageChanged implements ChangeListener
    public void stateChanged (ChangeEvent event)
    java.lang.Object object = event.getSource();
    if (object == tabbedPanel)
    DialogPage page = (DialogPage)tabbedPanel.getSelectedComponent();
    page.refresh();
    good luck,
    Terry

  • The 50D has a sports mode. What is the same mode on the 7D

    I shot sports on my 50D using the sports mode.  What mode do you shoot sports on usint the 7D?

    Shooting in Sports mode is a convenient way to avoid learning how to do it right. It just uses a built in program that assumes some variables will always be similar so it sets the camera to capture action using that program & light meter readings. Unfortunately different sports require different settings to capture them properly, which is why more advanced cameras ignore those modes. Let me explain that plus I'll direct you to an article I wrote which should help you get a handle on the settings.
    Sports & Action are one in the same when it comes to the camera settings but the shutter speeds used need to match what's considered a good photos of that activity. In motorsports we want to freeze the car or bike etc, blur the background & more importantly the wheel & tire to show speed. Freeze all of that & it looks like the car or bike etc is just parked on the track. The same for shooting prop planes, they need prop blur if they are flying through the air. The reverse is true for poeople playing sports (in general) so you use a faster shutter speed & freeze everything in the frame. Each activity is different so it's important to learn what looks correct & then set the camera to get that result PLUS learn how to pan SMOOTHLY.
      http://www.rccanada.ca/rccforum/showthread.php?t=147971&highlight=Aviation+photography+101
    "A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought."

  • Trying to find the right camera

    I have a Kodak EasyShare Z740.  It has 5 megapixels and 10X optical zoom.  It's good outdoors if it's sunny, or indoors with decent lighting (and it takes very good sports/fast action photos).  Unfortunately, I can't seem to take photos if I'm outdoors at night.  If I have the "sports" setting on, the picture comes out dark, even if I have the flash on.  If I have the "night" setting on, the pictures tend to come out blurry.
    My parents were supposedly trying to look for a camera for me for Christmas, but they've given up, cuz the prices are higher than they're willing to spend (my family has a tight budget this year, as do a lot of people).  I don't know how much my parents really bothered to look at cameras and whether or not they bothered to ask for a salesman's opinion.
    I just explained to my parents that I've been getting extremely frustrated because I go to a lot outdoor sporting events (i.e. baseball games) where I take pictures, but once the sun starts setting and the stadium lights turn on, I can't seem to take good pictures.  Yet I see pictures that people upload, so it feels like I'm alone.  My parents seem to think this is nothing and my camera is fine, but they barely know how to use their camera.
    I assume I really need a camera with more than 5 megapixels.  Anyone know of any make/models that won't break the bank?

    Hi fowkeska,
    Your described shooting condition of sports photography at night and outdoors is one of the most challenging photographic situations, and would be a challenge no matter what camera you have. The challenge really lies with availability of light. Even thought the human eye might see a scene as illuminated adequately at night, a camera does not. To capture an image at night using the available light you will need to set your camera's ISO to 800, which can only be done when the picture quality is set to good. Even at ISO 800 your pictures might turn out blurry, which usually means the camera is setting the shutter speed too slow. You could think about using the flash, but according to your manual when you are shooting a wide-angle shot the flash will only reach to 16 feet at ISO 168, and to 12 feet when set to telephoto. If you’re on a budget there is really is not camera that would do any better than what you have. More megapixels will not make an image that is incorrectly exposed look any better, but if an image is correctly exposed it will have better resolution if the camera has more megapixels. For this photographic situation I would look into getting a DSLR, which should allow you to set much higher ISO settings and allow you to use a much more powerful flash. I hope this helps!
    Thanks for posting,
    Allan
    Community Connector
    Best Buy® Corporate
    Allan|Senior Social Media Specialist | Best Buy® Corporate
     Private Message

  • Canon EOS rebel T3i. Zoom lens

    My partner has a new camera. She Is a beginner she wants. Zoom lens. What do you. Suggest.?

    Canon makes quite a range of zooms.
    There are a few general purpose zooms -- no extravagent features that drive up the price tag -- and these usually have ranges up to about 200 or 300mm focal length.  They tend to not be too expensive (e.g. $300 give or take.)
    But there are some uses for which these general-purpose zooms are not ideal and I'd like to make sure that's not what she needs.
    While most people tend to use zoom lenses outdoors...  will this lens be used for either (a) indoor sports games (e.g. basketball) or (b) outdoor games played at night under lights?
    Action photography either indoors or under artificial lighting (e.g. sports games that are not playing during the day) struggle with (a) having enough light to use shutter speeds adequate to freeze action and (b) performance of the auto-focus motors which may not keep up.
    A general purpose zoom will have a variable focal ratio ranging from f/4 to f/5.6 (when zoomed all the way in, it's almost always f/5.6).  A high-end zoom will be able to provide a constant focal ratio of f/2.8 -- that literally collects FOUR times more light when an f/5.6 lens... so if a consumer grade zoom is trying to shoot... say an indoor basketball game and struggling with the light to use any shutter speed faster than 1/250th sec (not fast enough to freeze action)... the f/2.8 zoom in that same lighting would let you take that shot at 1/1000th sec (easily fast enough to freeze action).  
    With this in mind, I'll toss out a few options:
    1)  Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM and note that I bolded the letters "STM".  The STM lens is a redesign and refinement of Canon's previous EF-S 55-250mm lens which did not have the STM stepper-motor technology.  The stepper-motors are virtually silent, but they are much faster than the regular focusing motors.  Also, the optics of the lens have been refined and the STM version of the lens scores noticeably better for contrast and resolution (ability to resolve fine amounts of detail).  This lens lists for about $350.  It's a great general-purpose zoom.  It would do fine with outdoor daytime shooting. 
    2)  Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM and note that I bolded the number "70".  Canon makes a 75-300mm zoom.  That lens receives perhaps the most mediocre reviews of any lens Canon makes and is probably the least recommended lens in the lineup.  The 70-300mm, on the other hand, is a MUCH better lens both optically and performance-wise.
    3)  Canon makes several different white "L" series lenses with the 70-200mm zoom range.  The lens cames in either f/2.8 focal ratio versions (much more expensive) or in the f/4 version (less expensive) and there are versions with IS (image stabilization) and without.  The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II is the best of the lot by far... but also costs over $2k.  Going to the f/4 version (only collects half as much light as an f/2.8 lens, but twice as much as an f/5.6 lens -- so you're in the middle) drops the price, and getting the version that does not have image stabilization drops the price even more.  Also, f/2.8 lenses are heavy -- so you reduce weight with an f/4 lens.   The EF 70-200mm f/4L USM (note there's no "IS" on this version) lists for about $700.
    4)  Going back to the economically priced lenses... the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II is the least expensive lens I would suggest.  It lists for $300 (all these prices are list -- shop around).  This is similar to the first lens I mentioned, except it doesn't have STM motors.  Focus will be slower.  Most of the time that's not an issue, but if shooting action photography where the focus distance is changing rapidly... it would be an issue (e.g. sports games where the athlete is running toward you, for example.)  Also, the optics on this lens are not as refined as the optics on the STM version.  And then there is one feature which you might think is a nit, but it drives me nuts... I tend to use a polarizing filter when shooting outdoors to cut reflections and enhance color.  This version of the lens rotates as it focuses (the others do not).  That means that each time the focus changes, the polarizer would rotate and I'd have to reach forward and re-tune the polarizer (polarizing filters are rotated to tune them.)    This lens is about $50 less than the STM version...  I personally think having internal focus (focusing element is at the rear, not the front), a much faster focusing motor, and refined optics are all easily worth the $50 extra.
    There is an EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 lens (not that it's "75-300" and not "70-300") which does not get very flattering reviews but is only $200.  
    If you win the lottery, you want the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x... at only $11,799!  If you do win the lottery, buy 2 and send one to me!  ;-)
    Tim Campbell
    5D II, 5D III, 60Da

  • Time to upgrade to Full Frame

    Team,  I currenlty own a 70D and a T3i with a bunch of EF-s lenses. My question is wether to upgrade to a couple of L lenses or upgrade to a full frame camera.  Ideally I love to have a Mark III but a 6D is more realistic.   My budget is about $3500 I do real estate photography with some portrait side gigs on the side, no weddings or big projects.  Will it make sense to keep my 70D with some prime lenses for portrait photograpy?  or go full frame is there much of a difference if i used a 70-200 2.8L lens on a 70D then a 6D?  your help and expertise is greatly appreciated.  

    Unless you want to get into really high end real estate photography, I'd suggest you stick with your 70D for now and start gradually changing your lens line-up, with a goal to build a system that will eventually allow you to add a full frame camera to use alongside the crop sensor camera. There are advantages and limitations with both sensor formats. I use both crop sensor and full frame cameras (a pair of 7D and a 5DII in my case, right now). I prefer the crop camera for sports/action and anything requiring longer telephoto lenses. And I like the full frame for landscape, architecture, portraiture and sometimes for macro work. One of the reasons I choose the full frame for portraiture is control over depth of field. Now, DoF is governed by lens focal length, working distance and lens aperture.... it doesn't actually change due to different sensor formats. However, in order to frame a subject the same way with a full frame camera, it's either necessary to use a longer focal length or move closer to the subject, or a little of both. Changing either distance or focal length will tend to render shallower depth of field. Conversely, full frame cameras can use smaller apertures before diffraction becomes an issue, so a FF also has some advantage for macro work or for landscape/architecture where great DoF is often wanted.  In generaly, there's a bit less lens selection for FF, though it's still quite extensive in the Canon system. This is because a FF camera can only use EF lenses, while your crop sensor 70D and my 7Ds can use both EF-S/crop-only and EF/full-frame-capable lenses. Also in general lenses for FF cameras will be larger, heavier and more expensive. It's most noticeable with telephotos, of course, but to some extent is true even with wide angle. IMO, on 70D a 70-200mm is a bit long for a lot of portraiture work. My most prefered lenses for portraits with a crop sensor camera are 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 24-70/2.8. On full frame, my most frequently used portrait lenses are 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-200/4 and 70-200/2.8. Sure, there are times that wider and longer lenses can be useful for certain types of portraits. But these are what I use most often and feel are the most basic or "traditional" focal lengths for the purpose. Short telephotos generally render the most ideal perspective for portraits. Also, I mostly shoot candid portraits, not posed. Because that often means working with less than desirable backgrounds, I prefer larger aperture lenses that allow me the option to blur down distractions behind (and sometimes in front of) the subject. If shooting in studio or more posed at a planned location, with more control over the background and other elements, it would be different and large aperture lenses would be less necessary. Real estate photography work often calls for a wide angle and a lot of depth of field. With your crop camera, the EF-S 10-18mm you've got probably sees a lot of use. If you were shooting full frame, you'd probably want EF 16-35/2.8 or EF 16-35/4... or EF 11-24/2.8 (but that would use up most of your budget and not leave room to buy a camera to use it on).  Tilt shift lenses such as the TS-E 17/4 and TS-E 24/3.5 II are also top choices for architectural photography. Compare size, weight and prices. Also, if you use filters a lot, some require larger (16-35/2.8 II uses 82mm) and the TS-E 17/4 and EF 11-24/2.8 both have stongly convex front elements that won't allow standard screw-in filters to be used at all. There aren't many truly wide lenses for crop cameras that are also FF compatible. The EF 11-24/2.8 is one of very few. The EF 14/2.8 II is another. So, to use the crop camera for wide angle shots, you'll probably want to keep at least one or two EF-S/crop only lenses. The EF-S 10-22mm is an older lens than the EF-S 10-18mm, but is a little better built and with more edge-to-edge image sharpness... it's one of the best ultrawides made by anyone... but costs about 2X as much. If it were me, I'd prefer the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM over the Sigma 17-70... but once again this is a "crop only" lens. For dual format purpose, one of the 16-35mm or the EF 17-40/4 might replace it better and be able to serve on both camera formats. I use a little longer 24-70 and 28-135 as my "walk around" or mid-range zooms.    6D is a nice camera and, compared to 70D, would be desirable for very large prints or for low light/high ISO shooting situations. That's because full frame images need less magnification for enlargement and use bigger pixel sites that capture more fine detail, both of which allow for bigger prints. Not that you'd notice much difference with 13x19 or smaller prints. And certainly you wouldn't be able to tell any difference at Internet resolutions if a lot of your stuff ends up on websites. Because the FF camera's 20MP sensor is so much less crowded than the 20MP crop sensor, there is less heat and less cross talk, making for cleaning or less noise in very high ISO images. The difference would be most noticealbe at ISO 1600 and above.   The 70D has a more sophisticated and versatile AF system, except that the 6D's can still manage to focus in one or two stops lower light (center point only). 70D has 19-point AF that's similar to original 7D, active matrix focus screen, and zone focus in addition to the all points/auto and single point/manual focus patterns offered by all Canon DSLRs. The 6D only offers the last to focus patterns, doesn't have zone, and it has a fixed (but interchangeable with a few types) focus screen. 70D's active matrix focus screen makes possible the camera's  "grid on demand" feature that can be turned on or off via the menu, and which can be quite handy when shooting architecture inside or out. With 6D you can get similar grid in the viewfinder, but to do so would need need to swap out with a separately sold, accessory "D" type focus screen. In 70D all nineteen AF points are the more sensitive dual axis/cross type, with the center one enhanced for f2.8 and faster lenses. 6D's eleven AF points have only one dual axis/cross type... the center point... while all the others are single axis type. Either camera's AF system is probably more than adequate for what you say you shoot primarily. If you were shooting sports/action/wildlife/birds, the 70D's AF system would likely be more ideal, though... so I'd rate it as more versatile. The 6D's would be a better choice for low light work, though. 70D also has articulated LCD screen and built-in flash, while 6D has neither of those features. The 70D and 6D share batteries, chargers, memory and have mostly similar control layouts, always nice when using two different cameras interchangeably for various purposes. So, if it were me, I'd probably keep shooting with the 70D and work on lens upgrades first, then add the FF camera later. But that's just me. Your needs might be different and call for another approach. ***********
    Alan Myers
    San Jose, Calif., USA
    "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
    GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
    FLICKR & EXPOSUREMANAGER   

  • Deleting photo's in iPhoto didn't really delete them from hard drive

    I do a lot of photography, mostly sports/action etc. I just noticed that when I delete a photo in iPhoto, it is removed from my view, but it does not go into the trash can. I can use Finder on the pic's left in the same event folder and then peek around and still see the photo's I thought I had deleted. When I tell iPhoto to delete a photo, I want it to delete both copies (original and modified) - I'm afraid that I may have literally 1000's of photo's left over, sucking up hard drive space that I thought were deleted.

    with the managed photo library, iPhoto own's the pics.
    It doesn't.
    I have to make a copy of each photo to Picasa and then export to the web.
    You don't.
    There are many, many ways to access your files in iPhoto:
    *For Users of 10.5 and later*
    You can use any Open / Attach / Browse dialogue. On the left there's a Media heading, your pics can be accessed there. Command-Click for selecting multiple pics.
    Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!
    (Note the above illustration is not a Finder Window. It's the dialogue you get when you go File -> Open)
    You can access the Library from the New Message Window in Mail:
    Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!
    *For users of 10.4 and later* ...
    Many internet sites such as Flickr and SmugMug have plug-ins for accessing the iPhoto Library. If the site you want to use doesn’t then some, one or any of these will also work:
    If you use a Cocoa-based Browser such as Safari, you can drag the pics from the iPhoto Window to the Attach window in the browser.
    *If you want to access the files with iPhoto not running*:
    For users of 10.6 and later:
    You can download a free Services component from MacOSXAutomation which will give you access to the iPhoto Library from your Services Menu. Using the Services Preference Pane you can even create a keyboard shortcut for it.
    For Users of 10.4 and later:
    Create a Media Browser using Automator (takes about 10 seconds) or use this free utility Karelia iMedia Browser
    Other options include:
    1. *Drag and Drop*: Drag a photo from the iPhoto Window to the desktop, there iPhoto will make a full-sized copy of the pic.
    2. *File -> Export*: Select the files in the iPhoto Window and go File -> Export. The dialogue will give you various options, including altering the format, naming the files and changing the size. Again, producing a copy.
    3. *Reveal in Finder* - File -> Reveal in Finder will bring you to the Origina or Modified version, depending on which you choose.
    *To use iPhoto with an External Editor*
    You can set Photoshop (or any image editor) as an external editor in iPhoto. (Preferences -> General -> Edit Photo: Choose from the Drop Down Menu.) This way, when you double click a pic to edit in iPhoto it will open automatically in Photoshop or your Image Editor, and when you save it it's sent back to iPhoto automatically. This is the only way that edits made in another application will be displayed in iPhoto.
    Note that iPhoto sends a copy+ of the file to Photoshop, so when you save be sure to use the Save command, not Save As... If you use Save As then you're creating a new file and iPhoto has no way of knowing about this new file. iPhoto is preserving your original anyway.
    For the sake of completeness:
    *How to do it:*
    Simply go to iPhoto Menu -> Preferences -> Advanced and uncheck 'Copy Files to the iPhoto Library on Import'.
    *What Happens:*
    Now iPhoto will not copy the files, but rather simply reference them on your HD. To do this it will create an alias in the Originals Folder that points to your file. It will still create a thumbnail and, if you modify the pics, a Modified version within the iPhoto Library Folder.
    *Some things to consider:*
    1. Importing and deleting pics are more complex procedures. You have to to put the files where they will be stored before importing them. When you delete them you'll need to remove the files from the HD yourself.
    2. You cannot move or rename the files on your system or iPhoto will lose track of them on systems prior to 10.5 and iPhoto 08. Even with the later versions issues can still arise if you move the referenced files to new volumes or between volumes.
    3. Most importantly, migrating to a new disk or computer can be much more complex.
    4. Because iPhoto has no tools for managing Referenced Files, if, for some reason, the path to the photos changes then you could find yourself resolving aliases for +each photo in the Library+ one by one.
    My own opinion:
    I've yet to see a good reason to run iPhoto in referenced mode unless you're using two photo organiser
    If disk space is an issue, you can run an entire iPhoto Library from an external disk:
    1. Quit iPhoto
    2. Copy the iPhoto Library as an entity from your Pictures Folder to the External Disk.
    3. Hold down the option (or alt) key while launching iPhoto. From the resulting menu select 'Choose Library' and navigate to the new location. From that point on this will be the default location of your library.
    4. Test the library and when you're sure all is well, trash the one on your internal HD to free up space.
    Regards
    TD

  • Is there one better than D90?

    I have stared doing youth sports photography and up until this point I have chosen outdoor sports as my old reliable camera could handle it.  Starting this year I am taking on indoor sports and some awards ceremonies that are notorious for the low light conditions and bad pictures due to this.  I am looking for a camera with a high shutter speed but I also want it to be able to take great pictures in low light conditions of objects that are moving.  I have found iti s next to impossible to have a child stand still in low light even for just a snapshot of them!  I was reading the reviews for the D90 and there were some comments that it takes great low light pictures as long as there is no movement.  Can anyone suggest a good camera with an auto setting that takes great lowlight pictures of things that ARE moving.   Thanks!!

    Well you are going to have to invest in faster lenses. I'm assuming you still have the 'kit' lenses. Maybe try a Nikon 17-55mm F2.8, Nikon 24-80 F2.8 or  Nikon 70-200 F2.8 (or their 3rd party equivelents). Raise the ISO up has high as you can without getting too much noise.
    King of the World...

  • Aspiring photographer.

    Looking to buy a camera for my trip to Europe this summer and I've narrowed my options to the EOS 6D, 7D Mark II, 7D, 70 D, and 60 Da. Which one is the best suit, please provide your reasoning behind your choice.

    Hopefully you've permanently scratched the 60Da off your list.  The "a" stands for "astrophotography" and it's a special-purpose camera with a modified IR cut filter to allow vastly more reds (specially they're going after the Hydrogen alpha band at about 656nm).  While the camera can still attach normal lenses and be used like any other camera, you'd notice ever image is is very strong in reds.
    The 6D and 7D II are VERY different cameras. 
    The 7D II is an APS-C sensor camera, but in every other respect it's a pro body.  It's very durable.  It's heavily optimized for action photography.  It also has a very sophisticated auto-focus system which is not necessarily intuitive.  Anyone buying such a camera really sould plan to sit down and go through it's features and especially spend some time understanding the focus system.  I do know of at least one person who owns a 5D III (which has nearly the same focus system) and was surprised to learn they pretty much found a way to get the camera to use a single center point and have never changed modes... ever.  They admitted it's because they don't understand the focus system.  I pointed them to the docs & videos on it (Canon has a special document on just the focus system.) 
    I think I'd love a 7D II... but if you're looking for a camera that can be used by a casual user... the 7D II might be a bit much.
    And then there's the 6D.
    The 6D has extremely good ISO performance and a focus system that can focus down to -3 EV.  It's an outstanding camera if you have to shoot in low light.  The focus system is relatively simple... it has an 11 point system which very strongly resembles the system you'd find on the Rebel bodies.  The focus system is friendlier toward casual shooting and this is considered an "entry" full-frame body (but "entry" for full frame is still very high end).  
    But it is also a "full frame" camera so you can't use the EF-S  lenses (those only work on crop-frame sensor bodies).  This means every lens you use will have a wider angle of view as compared to an APS-C crop-frame sensor body (like a 7D II).  It's also able to generate stronger background blur (full frame cameras naturally have a narrower depth of field.)  
    This makes the 6D a better camera for things like (a) low light, (b) portraiture, (c) landscape, (d) architecture (especially interiors).  But it would be a worse camera for sports & wildlife (action photography).
    Tim Campbell
    5D II, 5D III, 60Da

  • Best camera choice for shooting basketball and football.

    We are comparing the 7D, 60d and rebel T4i.  We are novices but are willing to learn and realize we will need to invest in lenses.  Any opinions would be appreciated.

    Unless the basketball is played in VERY good light the 7D is the only option in that list. It has a far better AF system than the others when it comes to action. The 7D rivals earlier pro bodies designed & used to cover sports & fast paced action, and from using both I can verify it was up to the task most of the time. (I didn't get to use the newest firmware update before selling my 7D).
    Lens choices will be highly influenced by the lighting, and faster lenses will rule in low light. Football is normally an outdoor sport so lens choice is a bit less demanding re a wide aperture.
    "A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought."

  • Focus point grouping for 6D with firmware change possible?

    Does anyone know if it is possible with a firmware update to create an option to use just the center 9 focus points?  This would make it similar to the 7D center group.  I think this would be useful for some action shots.  This might be one feature that may help me commit to Canon for my next camera.  I am currently looking to upgrade to fullframe, but Canon seems to have taken out one feature too many in the 6D and leaves me stuck in the middle.  I don't know whether to jump ship and  and hassle with selling my beautiful 70-200 II zoom and the rest of the gear.  As a consumer, I still like the option of a flash in certain bright background situations.  Thanks.

    I'm afraid you'll have to go to 7D or 5DIII to get Zone Focus or Expansion Points such as you want to use. 6D doesn't have it and I really doubt it ever will... that would be a pretty radical change to try to do via firmware... might not even be possible. But, hey, I'm no expert on writing firmware and some people manage to do some interesting camera hacks (search for Magic Lantern, for example).
    But frankly, I shoot subjects like you want to shoot with just a Single Point most of the time with my 7Ds. Before that I did pretty much the same with 50D, 30D, and 10D. It takes some practice, but is the best way to insure focus is right where you want it as consistently as possible. Some days I take a couple thousand images and, with 7D and it's very quick AF, typically 97 or 98 percent are correctly focused, and I figure most of the missed focus shots are my fault, not the camera's. I had a few more missed focus with 50D and earlier, but still managed upward of 90 percent most of the time (when I was in practice).  
    I only use the Zone and Expansion modes occasionally on 7D. Mostly when the subject is large or is against a plain or very distant background. Otherwise the camera still might choose to focus using the wrong point.
    The 5D Mark II has a form of expansion points, but it's done with 6 "hidden" Assist Points that aren'tt shown in the viewfinder, are clustered right around the center point, and only work in AI Servo mode. It's sort of as if the entire Spot Metering circle is one bid AF point. Unfortunately, this only moderately helps the 5DII with AI Servo/moving subjects. Tracking moving subjects just isn't the 5DII's forté. Only three of it's AF points  are the "better" dual axis type (the visible center one and two of the hidden ones). The rest (8 visible and four more hidden ones) are single axis... some horizontal, some vertical. Heck, all nine of your 50D's AF points are dual axis type, so to some extent it has a better sports/action focus system than the 5DII. I'm not knocking the 5DII, it's a great camera for other things.... just not so much for sports/action shooting.
    On 7D, 5DIII the difference between Zone Focus and Expansion is that in Zone any of the points or even multiple points can be the "starting point" for focusing. In other words, it's like one large focusing point that will pick up on whatever object covered by any of the points is closest (like a smaller version of All Points/Auto Selection). In Expansion you choose a single "starting point", but the camera can switch to using one of the adjacent points if you don't keep the starting point on the subject.
    I'd recommend 7D... there are some other advantages to using a crop camera for sports, as well. It's sort of like having a "free" 1.6X teleconverter and, since a lot of sports photography is done with telephoto lenses, a cropper helps leverage your longer lenses for all they're worth. For example, I use a 300/4 IS on 7D a lot for sports, easily handheld. If I were using any of the full frame models, to fill the viewfinder the same way I'd have to get out the 500/4 iS and a solid tripod to put it on (or at least a monopod).
    Yes, it's got higher frame rate, too... Though to be honest I try to avoid using it too much... 8fps fills up memory cards and hard drives fast... and can mean a lot more time spent sitting at a computer editing the results. I found 7D an excellent upgrade from 50D. The 7D has very fast AF, ideal for AI Servo work... It's got a discrete chip handling AF, much like the 1D series have. AFAIK, 6D and 5DIII don't have that.
    Alan Myers
    San Jose, Calif., USA
    "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
    GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
    FLICKR & PRINTROOM 

Maybe you are looking for