Even a pro with a pro camera doesn't always get it right

PDL · 06-21-2018, 01:43 PM - **2 Likes**

<Snark>
Was she on a bicycle?
</Snark>

**clackers** · 06-21-2018, 05:00 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

For this a Sony with eye finder af is the future.

It bounces around unsatisfactorily in the videos I've seen ... very erratic on anything moving.

normhead · 06-21-2018, 06:34 PM

The key to determining that this is motion blur would be that the whole images is out of focus, if we are talking camera shake, or everything that is moving is blurred if we are talking the subject moving. For missed focus it's helpful to ind cause by finding where the focal plane falls and is info's, looking at the whole image. I'm not clear that everyone is even talking about the same type of blur. I'd need to see the whole image to be able to come to any conclusion.

The whole 1/250 being the problem is a questionable an explanation if we are talking about camera motion with a lack of shake reduction. Personally I doubt that a model on a catwalk would move enough for 1/250s not to be fast enough.

A picture of tripper.

(uncropped, trip trotting towards me taken with the 18-135 at 135m. 1/250s

1/250s is no excuse for subject motion blur when the subject is a human, unless its a world class sprinter. And unless you're using an unstabilized lens on your Canon, it's also unlikely to be blur caused by camera motion.

I've heard somewhere in my dark past that both Canon and Nikon AF can from time to time while fast be hit and miss. And even then , what is done is done. There are no chances for retakes. I don't think you should be paying for the image however. It's not like she can submit it with her portfolio.

Given that it was a 200mm lens @ƒ4, with the DoF being quite narrow, the most logical cause would be missed focus by the camera's AF system, Next after that, I'd go with an unstabilized system and too slow a shutter speed (does Canon have TAV?). After that camera shake on a stabilized system, and after that subject motion blur.

Those are the possible culprits in terms of shrinking odds, first most likely, last least likely. Poor performance at high ISO could also be a factor.

DSims · 06-21-2018, 08:00 PM - **1 Like**

For action sports 1/400s is the minimum you can (sometimes) get away with, while 1/800s is preferable. Even if the catwalk is less demanding, I think his ISO 500 setting was far too low.

About 3 years ago I was shooting an indoor high school dance competition while Crewl1 DJ'd. Next to me was a Canon shooter with some nice equipment (L glass on a 5D Mk II or III, I believe). Even though he had some experience at these competitions, he refused to raise his ISO to a level that would give him adequate shutter speeds. I think all the negative industry press coverage at the time (of Canon's inferior sensor noise performance) had gotten to him, and he couldn't keep it in proper perspective.

I got some nice keepers from the event. Of course I had the normal challenges with composition and Pentax AF speeds. But the noise from the ISO limit of ~5000-10,000 I typically use on my K5 IIs didn't ruin any of my shots, whereas setting the ISO around the 400-800 I think he was using would have ruined most of them!

Perhaps this Pro still hasn't gotten over Canon's historic ISO weakness, despite the fact that he was using the excellent 5D Mk. IV!

Last edited by DSims; 06-21-2018 at 08:12 PM.

Dan Rentea · 06-24-2018, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by Wasp

We got a couple of pictures out of it for a few dollars. They were sent as JPEG files. Upon opening the first one something seemed odd. I zoomed in and sure enough, the eyes were out of focus! The hands and detail on dress was OK but the eyes were definitely on the soft side. The other picture was perfect, so I can't complain too much. I just wish that a bit of QA was done on IQ before releasing the pictures...

If you say that there were details on the dress, then the photographer didn't get the focus right on this image. Sounds like user error or too much confidence in his camera.

Originally posted by Wasp

The EXIF data shows that a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV with a 200mm lens was used. The exposure was 1/250 sec. f/4.0 at ISO 500. Not much depth of field to work with, especially when shooting a model walking towards you on a cat walk.

The shutter speed may be a little long at 1/250 and 200mm but choosing the right settings for this particular shooting session depends on a lot of things (the available light, if the lens has image stabilisation or not, how fast the models are walking on the scene, etc.). The DOF at 200mm and f4 should not be a problem if you know what you are doing. Imagine that other photographers are shooting at f2.8 with 300mm lenses or with 400mm lenses in much more difficult scenarious.

Originally posted by Wasp

I am not sure which model lens was used. I think it was a Canon 70-200mm f/4 L, but it might have been the f/2.8 L. I believe that autofocus was in use. That is probably where things went south. The camera's predictive autofocus algorithm doesn't always nail it.

Either way, if the lens doesn't have image stabilisation, a little more work has to be done to get sharp images at low shutter speeds (althrough 1/250s is somewhere in the middle when you shoot at 200mm - not too fast, not too slow).

As a 5D Mark IV user, I can tell you that the af is quite complex and you have to work a little with the camera in order to learn how to tweak all 6 Af cases to get the best results. Even if everything is set correctly, sometimes you may miss focus on moving subject. It happens on Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc. Yes, it happens even with Sony Eye Af.

Originally posted by Wasp

How would the best and brightest here have handled a shoot like this? Smaller aperture, more depth of field, yes. But how much smaller? Would f/5.6 be enough or would f/8.0 be needed? That would mean a slower speed. Would the image stabilization keep thing sharp at 1/125 or 1/60 sec? Or crank up the ISO, but how much more is OK before noise gets noticeable? Or just do what this guy did - shoot lots of pics and at least one will make the grade?

It is hard to tell without beeing there and see the conditions. For this type of shooting, getting the model in focus is not enough. You also need to get the best results when comes to:
- angle of shooting
- position of the model's legs
- position of the model's hands
- expression of the model

Personally, I would shoot 2 short bursts for each model (3-4 images on each burst) and I would use af-c (Ai Servo on Canon) with some adjustments on Tracking sensitivity and Acceleration/deceleration Tracking. I wouldn't use manual focus because it's hard to get the model in perfect position (hands, legs, expression) by focusing on a spot and shooting when the model passes on that spot. She may have the eyes closed or a bad position of the body and you will end up with a bad image.

rawr · 06-24-2018, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by Wasp

As for flash, it was not used.

Would have solved a lot of problems, inc. with motion blur, if it had been.

micromacro · 06-25-2018, 09:40 AM

I don't understand, if the pro got perfectly sharp and great pictures like in your case, why also to offer not that good blurry images for sale as well? Is not something what goes straight to trash bin while selecting images? I'm asking because I know one pro who does that as well, he just uploads on preview all images to show, bad and good. It seems not really good idea for reputation to make money with, but I may be wrong on it.

Dan Rentea · 06-25-2018, 10:19 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by micromacro

I don't understand, if the pro got perfectly sharp and great pictures like in your case, why also to offer not that good blurry images for sale as well? Is not something what goes straight to trash bin while selecting images? I'm asking because I know one pro who does that as well, he just uploads on preview all images to show, bad and good. It seems not really good idea for reputation to make money with, but I may be wrong on it.

Why would I give to a client a blurry image if that image wasn't taken specifically with a slow shutter speed in order to get a certain look or a certain impact?

Anyway, each photographer knows what is best for him and his business. As far as I'm concerned, I make sure to deliver only what I consider to be the best images after I select and retouch each image individually. If it's a portrait session in studio or on location, then I do like my clients to see each image in real time on a laptop screen because by doing that it is easier to tell the client what I want from him and how to pose or I can tell him which smile is forced and which is natural. But in studio it's almost impossible to miss focus.

For corporate events for example I make sure to select and deliver the best images and as soon as possible because my clients wants the images after a few hours in order to post newsletters on social media. I can't deliver blurred images or images that are underexposed or overexposed, or images that are not straighten, etc.

micromacro · 06-25-2018, 11:20 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Dan Rentea

Why would I give to a client a blurry image if that image wasn't taken specifically with a slow shutter speed in order to get a certain look or a certain impact?

But someone obviously does that.

I tried carefully to ask the guy why he offers ALL the images of the event for sale. He told because you never know what image the customers may like. Well... I don't know anybody who will order a blurry print...

Dan Rentea · 06-25-2018, 12:42 PM

Originally posted by micromacro

But someone obviously does that.

I tried carefully to ask the guy why he offers ALL the images of the event for sale. He told because you never know what image the customers may like. Well... I don't know anybody who will order a blurry print...

The customers (my customers) like the images I provide.

After all, they hired me to deliver the kind of images that they can see in my printed portfolio. I don't talk with my clients about a minimum number of images delivered. I talk about the speakers of the event, I talk about the important guests, etc. For a corporate event I may take 300 or 400 images in 2-4 hours but I deliver no more than 60 images (the number of images depends on the type of event; it can be less than 60 images). Even if my clients want to see more images (this doesn't happen often), I make sure to delete all the images that I consider not good enough to be shown.

DSims · 06-25-2018, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by DSims

For action sports 1/400s is the minimum you can (sometimes) get away with, while 1/800s is preferable. Even if the catwalk is less demanding, I think his ISO 500 setting was far too low.

Perhaps this Pro still hasn't gotten over Canon's historic ISO weakness, despite the fact that he was using the excellent 5D Mk. IV!

I’d like to add to my earlier comments. I attended a series of photography lectures this weekend. I had two separate professionals convince me that 1/1600-1/4000s is safer for action. One was a nature photographer, and the other a pet photographer (mostly dogs). Interestingly, they both use older, cropped Canon bodies - a 7D and the last 1.3x crop body Canon made. Neither one was overly concerned about noise (granted, they largely shoot outdoors in daylight).

This got me thinking. While I will continue to use 1/400-1/800s when necessary in low light, I’m going to bias my action shooting towards 1/1600-1/2500s, even when I need to increase the ISO. I’m also less anxious to upgrade my K-5 IIs, although AF performance upgrades are quite welcome.

The nature shooter had great shots. Her recent shooting was in the Badlands. Even though most of her shots appear like posed stills, she said “you never know when a bird is going to take flight.” Therefore she’s always prepared by keeping her camera on action settings. She especially likes using the 500/4 (and sometimes the 300/2.8) on the nearly-nine-year-old 1.3x crop 1D Mk IV.

06-21-2018, 06:34 PM	#18
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	The key to determining that this is motion blur would be that the whole images is out of focus, if we are talking camera shake, or everything that is moving is blurred if we are talking the subject moving. For missed focus it's helpful to ind cause by finding where the focal plane falls and is info's, looking at the whole image. I'm not clear that everyone is even talking about the same type of blur. I'd need to see the whole image to be able to come to any conclusion. The whole 1/250 being the problem is a questionable an explanation if we are talking about camera motion with a lack of shake reduction. Personally I doubt that a model on a catwalk would move enough for 1/250s not to be fast enough. A picture of tripper. (uncropped, trip trotting towards me taken with the 18-135 at 135m. 1/250s 1/250s is no excuse for subject motion blur when the subject is a human, unless its a world class sprinter. And unless you're using an unstabilized lens on your Canon, it's also unlikely to be blur caused by camera motion. I've heard somewhere in my dark past that both Canon and Nikon AF can from time to time while fast be hit and miss. And even then , what is done is done. There are no chances for retakes. I don't think you should be paying for the image however. It's not like she can submit it with her portfolio. Given that it was a 200mm lens @ƒ4, with the DoF being quite narrow, the most logical cause would be missed focus by the camera's AF system, Next after that, I'd go with an unstabilized system and too slow a shutter speed (does Canon have TAV?). After that camera shake on a stabilized system, and after that subject motion blur. Those are the possible culprits in terms of shrinking odds, first most likely, last least likely. Poor performance at high ISO could also be a factor. Last edited by normhead; 06-21-2018 at 06:52 PM.

06-24-2018, 10:07 AM	#20
Dan Rentea Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Bucharest Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by Wasp We got a couple of pictures out of it for a few dollars. They were sent as JPEG files. Upon opening the first one something seemed odd. I zoomed in and sure enough, the eyes were out of focus! The hands and detail on dress was OK but the eyes were definitely on the soft side. The other picture was perfect, so I can't complain too much. I just wish that a bit of QA was done on IQ before releasing the pictures... If you say that there were details on the dress, then the photographer didn't get the focus right on this image. Sounds like user error or too much confidence in his camera. Originally posted by Wasp The EXIF data shows that a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV with a 200mm lens was used. The exposure was 1/250 sec. f/4.0 at ISO 500. Not much depth of field to work with, especially when shooting a model walking towards you on a cat walk. The shutter speed may be a little long at 1/250 and 200mm but choosing the right settings for this particular shooting session depends on a lot of things (the available light, if the lens has image stabilisation or not, how fast the models are walking on the scene, etc.). The DOF at 200mm and f4 should not be a problem if you know what you are doing. Imagine that other photographers are shooting at f2.8 with 300mm lenses or with 400mm lenses in much more difficult scenarious. Originally posted by Wasp I am not sure which model lens was used. I think it was a Canon 70-200mm f/4 L, but it might have been the f/2.8 L. I believe that autofocus was in use. That is probably where things went south. The camera's predictive autofocus algorithm doesn't always nail it. Either way, if the lens doesn't have image stabilisation, a little more work has to be done to get sharp images at low shutter speeds (althrough 1/250s is somewhere in the middle when you shoot at 200mm - not too fast, not too slow). As a 5D Mark IV user, I can tell you that the af is quite complex and you have to work a little with the camera in order to learn how to tweak all 6 Af cases to get the best results. Even if everything is set correctly, sometimes you may miss focus on moving subject. It happens on Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc. Yes, it happens even with Sony Eye Af. Originally posted by Wasp How would the best and brightest here have handled a shoot like this? Smaller aperture, more depth of field, yes. But how much smaller? Would f/5.6 be enough or would f/8.0 be needed? That would mean a slower speed. Would the image stabilization keep thing sharp at 1/125 or 1/60 sec? Or crank up the ISO, but how much more is OK before noise gets noticeable? Or just do what this guy did - shoot lots of pics and at least one will make the grade? It is hard to tell without beeing there and see the conditions. For this type of shooting, getting the model in focus is not enough. You also need to get the best results when comes to: - angle of shooting - position of the model's legs - position of the model's hands - expression of the model Personally, I would shoot 2 short bursts for each model (3-4 images on each burst) and I would use af-c (Ai Servo on Canon) with some adjustments on Tracking sensitivity and Acceleration/deceleration Tracking. I wouldn't use manual focus because it's hard to get the model in perfect position (hands, legs, expression) by focusing on a spot and shooting when the model passes on that spot. She may have the eyes closed or a bad position of the body and you will end up with a bad image. Last edited by Dan Rentea; 06-24-2018 at 01:18 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Those pesky rubber hoods....are not always round or even concentric to the lens	Kevin B123	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	27	06-09-2018 02:47 PM
Landscape Always One Who Doesn't Conform	Kerrowdown	Post Your Photos!	16	09-06-2017 12:26 PM
K-x Video Problem - SR Always on - Even when it shows as being off	gregplo	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	06-04-2012 05:38 AM
My new K-5, mode dial doesn't always lock...	nater	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	06-12-2011 09:08 AM
How does my camera always have the right date/time?	nixcamic	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	11-07-2010 08:16 AM

06-21-2018, 01:43 PM - 2 Likes	#16
PDL Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: PNW USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,127	<Snark> Was she on a bicycle? </Snark>

06-21-2018, 05:00 PM - 1 Like	#17
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 For this a Sony with eye finder af is the future. It bounces around unsatisfactorily in the videos I've seen ... very erratic on anything moving.

06-21-2018, 08:00 PM - 1 Like	#19
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	For action sports 1/400s is the minimum you can (sometimes) get away with, while 1/800s is preferable. Even if the catwalk is less demanding, I think his ISO 500 setting was far too low. About 3 years ago I was shooting an indoor high school dance competition while Crewl1 DJ'd. Next to me was a Canon shooter with some nice equipment (L glass on a 5D Mk II or III, I believe). Even though he had some experience at these competitions, he refused to raise his ISO to a level that would give him adequate shutter speeds. I think all the negative industry press coverage at the time (of Canon's inferior sensor noise performance) had gotten to him, and he couldn't keep it in proper perspective. I got some nice keepers from the event. Of course I had the normal challenges with composition and Pentax AF speeds. But the noise from the ISO limit of ~5000-10,000 I typically use on my K5 IIs didn't ruin any of my shots, whereas setting the ISO around the 400-800 I think he was using would have ruined most of them! Perhaps this Pro still hasn't gotten over Canon's historic ISO weakness, despite the fact that he was using the excellent 5D Mk. IV! Last edited by DSims; 06-21-2018 at 08:12 PM.

06-24-2018, 04:33 PM	#21
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Wasp As for flash, it was not used. Would have solved a lot of problems, inc. with motion blur, if it had been.

06-25-2018, 09:40 AM	#22
micromacro Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,722	I don't understand, if the pro got perfectly sharp and great pictures like in your case, why also to offer not that good blurry images for sale as well? Is not something what goes straight to trash bin while selecting images? I'm asking because I know one pro who does that as well, he just uploads on preview all images to show, bad and good. It seems not really good idea for reputation to make money with, but I may be wrong on it.

06-25-2018, 10:19 AM - 1 Like	#23
Dan Rentea Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Bucharest Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by micromacro I don't understand, if the pro got perfectly sharp and great pictures like in your case, why also to offer not that good blurry images for sale as well? Is not something what goes straight to trash bin while selecting images? I'm asking because I know one pro who does that as well, he just uploads on preview all images to show, bad and good. It seems not really good idea for reputation to make money with, but I may be wrong on it. Why would I give to a client a blurry image if that image wasn't taken specifically with a slow shutter speed in order to get a certain look or a certain impact? Anyway, each photographer knows what is best for him and his business. As far as I'm concerned, I make sure to deliver only what I consider to be the best images after I select and retouch each image individually. If it's a portrait session in studio or on location, then I do like my clients to see each image in real time on a laptop screen because by doing that it is easier to tell the client what I want from him and how to pose or I can tell him which smile is forced and which is natural. But in studio it's almost impossible to miss focus. For corporate events for example I make sure to select and deliver the best images and as soon as possible because my clients wants the images after a few hours in order to post newsletters on social media. I can't deliver blurred images or images that are underexposed or overexposed, or images that are not straighten, etc.

06-25-2018, 11:20 AM - 1 Like	#24
micromacro Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,722	Originally posted by Dan Rentea Why would I give to a client a blurry image if that image wasn't taken specifically with a slow shutter speed in order to get a certain look or a certain impact? But someone obviously does that. I tried carefully to ask the guy why he offers ALL the images of the event for sale. He told because you never know what image the customers may like. Well... I don't know anybody who will order a blurry print...

06-25-2018, 12:42 PM	#25
Dan Rentea Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Bucharest Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by micromacro But someone obviously does that. I tried carefully to ask the guy why he offers ALL the images of the event for sale. He told because you never know what image the customers may like. Well... I don't know anybody who will order a blurry print... The customers (my customers) like the images I provide. After all, they hired me to deliver the kind of images that they can see in my printed portfolio. I don't talk with my clients about a minimum number of images delivered. I talk about the speakers of the event, I talk about the important guests, etc. For a corporate event I may take 300 or 400 images in 2-4 hours but I deliver no more than 60 images (the number of images depends on the type of event; it can be less than 60 images). Even if my clients want to see more images (this doesn't happen often), I make sure to delete all the images that I consider not good enough to be shown.

06-25-2018, 03:56 PM	#26
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by DSims For action sports 1/400s is the minimum you can (sometimes) get away with, while 1/800s is preferable. Even if the catwalk is less demanding, I think his ISO 500 setting was far too low. Perhaps this Pro still hasn't gotten over Canon's historic ISO weakness, despite the fact that he was using the excellent 5D Mk. IV! I’d like to add to my earlier comments. I attended a series of photography lectures this weekend. I had two separate professionals convince me that 1/1600-1/4000s is safer for action. One was a nature photographer, and the other a pet photographer (mostly dogs). Interestingly, they both use older, cropped Canon bodies - a 7D and the last 1.3x crop body Canon made. Neither one was overly concerned about noise (granted, they largely shoot outdoors in daylight). This got me thinking. While I will continue to use 1/400-1/800s when necessary in low light, I’m going to bias my action shooting towards 1/1600-1/2500s, even when I need to increase the ISO. I’m also less anxious to upgrade my K-5 IIs, although AF performance upgrades are quite welcome. The nature shooter had great shots. Her recent shooting was in the Badlands. Even though most of her shots appear like posed stills, she said “you never know when a bird is going to take flight.” Therefore she’s always prepared by keeping her camera on action settings. She especially likes using the 500/4 (and sometimes the 300/2.8) on the nearly-nine-year-old 1.3x crop 1D Mk IV.