[Kguru]

Just wondering, how fast AF how many fps does it need to do this shot?
(note the guy in mid-air) :-))

From a news website; credit to the photographer but I have no name!

Attached Images

 

[little laker]

How about this.
My K100D did this.







While shooting with a manual focus lens, and shooting in Manual.

[stewart_photo]

Just wondering, how fast AF how many fps does it need to do this shot? (note the guy in mid-air) :-)) (snip)

One. I see just one image of the incident, so the answer to how many fps is just one during this particular moment.

Actually, there are two common ways to get this image. One is to simply wait until something interesting happens (the guy flying through the air) and capture that one precise moment. The other is to start shooting a series of images from the start to the end of the incident. Since incidents like this take place over several seconds, a camera capable of 3-fps (such as the K10D) could easily capture a dozen or more images during the entire incident. Any one of those images could have been this one (the one you show).

stewart

[Kguru]

One. I see just one image of the incident, so the answer to how many fps is just one during this particular moment.

Actually, there are two common ways to get this image. One is to simply wait until something interesting happens (the guy flying through the air) and capture that one precise moment. The other is to start shooting a series of images from the start to the end of the incident. Since incidents like this take place over several seconds, a camera capable of 3-fps (such as the K10D) could easily capture a dozen or more images during the entire incident. Any one of those images could have been this one (the one you show).

stewart

Thanks Stewart for your comment, but I beg to differ:

1) Having recently shot at the Air race with the aeroplanes being so fast, I know from when my brain says click to when the click actually occurs that 1/10sec time lapse is enough to miss the precise action. It should be done with a burst.

2) I'd say that guy flew in mid-air for less than half a second. If shot at 3 fps theoretically you may get a shot when he was starting to come off the bike and the next shot he landed already. Higher fps increases your chance of getting one frame at the right moment.

---

Last edited by Kguru; 12-19-2007 at 08:08 PM.

[Jodokast96]

But it still doesn't mean that's what you need to get the shot. You could do it with the camera with the slowest FPS out there, but if you nailed the timing of hitting the shutter, you'll get the shot. High FPS makes it easier for people to machine gun, but it's not a necessity and doesn't guarantee anything.

[jeffkrol]

did they use a videocam and then just frame pick?

[Kguru]

But it still doesn't mean that's what you need to get the shot. You could do it with the camera with the slowest FPS out there, but if you nailed the timing of hitting the shutter, you'll get the shot. High FPS makes it easier for people to machine gun, but it's not a necessity and doesn't guarantee anything.

If you look again at the horse-riding sequence above you see what I mean:
One frame she's still "with" the horse, next frame she's already on the ground. It's not as dramatic as the guy upside down in mid-air. And you say Little Laker could have nailed the timing better? I'd rather rely on a fast machine-gun burst.

[Kguru]

did they use a videocam and then just frame pick?

Very possible.
But that reiterates what I thought about fast fps.

[Jodokast96]

I didn't say it didn't make things easier, but that wasn't what your original question was. You asked how many fps is needed. Perfect timing with 1fps would still get the shot. Maybe not as easily, but still possible.

[Peter Zack]

It is possible and we're discussing RAW frame rates. First I agree with Stewart that you can do this if you want to shoot RAW and are set up and prepared for the moment. Second If I were doing this with a K10D, I'd shoot in Jpeg. The quality is fine and equal if not better than the example you posted. In Jpeg you can fire away until the battery dies.

[stewart_photo]

Thanks Stewart for your comment, but I beg to differ:

1) Having recently shot at the Air race with the aeroplanes being so fast, I know from when my brain says click to when the click actually occurs that 1/10sec time lapse is enough to miss the precise action. It should be done with a burst.

So, if you consistently miss the action when your brain says to shoot, how is the AF.C mode going to change that? The initial delay is the same with either focusing mode (AF.S and AF.C). In other words, if you don't or can't anticipate the action sufficiently, AF.C really isn't going to help you all that much.

2) I'd say that guy flew in mid-air for less than half a second. If shot at 3 fps theoretically you may get a shot when he was starting to come off the bike and the next shot he landed already. Higher fps increases your chance of getting one frame at the right moment.

Perhaps I didn't explain the first method well enough. I rarely do photography by continuously blasting away at everything in the hopes of accidently capturing something interesting. Instead, I wait for something interesting to happen and capture that moment. Again, anticipating the action is the key to success. In this case, anyone falling off a bike was obviously going to fly some distance. If I wanted to capture that, I would have pressed the shutter release just as the rider left the bike, squeezing off one, two, or perhaps three images as he traveled through the air (using whichever mode, AF.S or AF.C, best fit the situation). A higher fps rate might have given me more images, but I doubt any better than a single carefully anticipated image.

stewart

[SpecialK]

But it still doesn't mean that's what you need to get the shot. You could do it with the camera with the slowest FPS out there, but if you nailed the timing of hitting the shutter, you'll get the shot. High FPS makes it easier for people to machine gun, but it's not a necessity and doesn't guarantee anything.

(Sound of hammer hitting nail on the head).

A trained monkey can squeeze off a burst and maybe get a good shot. Where's the fun in that?

[m8o]

kguru, little laker's pics are a lot sharper then what you posted in the OP (great series there; manual too, nice!). ...so what's the answer you're looking for then? If you can't realize that if little laker had started the series a tiny fraction of a second later, the one where she's falling she would have been off the horse more, which you would have felt was more dramatic, then there. Me, I understand that that is "timing" ; if you don't, well, what else can we say. Consider this too. Imagine if there were 20 other photographers with the same camera shooting @ the same time. I'll bet big money that few if any others would have that exact picture with the guy in the air.

[hinman]

I love the manual focus shots from Little Laker. I am not trying to say that AF.C is less powerful but I did run into two days of shooting with once using AF.C with panning on flying birds with DA 50-200, I didn't save any shots as all are just badly done. My skills didn't match up with the birds in matting season dancing kind of erratic in the mid air.

And there is another occasion where I only have a M42 mounted zoom lens and out of the cloudy sky and lagoon outside a restaurant, someone toss some bread crumbs into sky and my next 10 minutes are all high in adrenaline in panning, pre-focus, stop-down metering, and shoot and shoot again wanting to get some lucky shots and the slippery focusing ring in my Prakticar 28-70 surprises me for my 1st shooting on flying seagulls in manual focus. Some shots are shown here before, please excuse if you see these before, apology on repeated shots but those are my pride

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5


Thanks,
Hin

[stewart_photo]

Very nice images, Hin. However, they rather eerily remind me of Alfred Hitchcock's movie "The Birds." Now all we need are images of blackbirds to complete the impression.

stewart