| Author | Message | ||
     Bads1 |
I got a new camera about a month ago and well still playing with it and learning how and when to use certain settings. Fun though. Now what I did is get a new lense. Bought a new Canon Ultrasonic EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 . Would like to do more motorsport type photography and think this will really help out. What do the people of BadWeb use?? Heres a couple shots that I took of my Boerboel in his yard about 75 or so feet from him. Going to do some drag racing photography this weekend can't wait.     | ||
| Eboos |
Here is a good book if you want to learn more about photography. The Basic Book of Photography by Tom and Michele Grimm. I use a Nikon F5 and a wide assortment of lenses and flashes. | ||
| Firebolteric_ma |
That is a good looking pup there. | ||
| 99buellx1 |
Dana- Not a bad choice at all. As I mentioned, I also have this lens. It does have a couple limitations, but is a great step up product because of it's bargain price. Do you know the settings you are gonna use for races? Depending on the amount of light (is it daytime races or night?) you may need to increase your ISO a bit to get the shutter speed up to keep fast moving objects from blurring. Did you hear about this? Just announced: New Canon 400D Rebel XTi  | ||
| Blublak |
Hey Dana.. It will of course depend on what and where and other factors but.. First off I shoot Nikon, so my lenses are a little different from the Cannon - but you'll get the idea. Usually, (like when I have a media pass) when I'm shooting races I take my 18-70mm f/3.5 my 70-210mm f/2.8 and my 300-500mm f/4 .. With those three, I can cover pretty much everything I need too from the paddock to the track action. If you want, drop me or one of the shutter bugs a note for more detail regarding technique, since it can get pretty involved. | ||
| Mdm |
Dude, i think you lens has focus problems. Only one of the four pictures is in proper focus. You should test it out. MDM | ||
| Mdm |
Just checking out the new stuff, holy cow when did this come out ! http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-300mm-f-3.5-5.6-L-IS-USM- Lens-Review.aspx  | ||
| Court |
My current favorite . . .  | ||
| Eboos |
That's about a $2000 lens. Even the non-VR one is expensive enough. I use a Tokina 80-200 2.8 lens that I picked up for about $700. | ||
| 99buellx1 |
I dont think there is a focus problem. First: It looks like the picture was cropped and the focus is most likely on the subjects hind quarters (bullox?). Second: Focus looks good. Third: I believe the same thing applies as with the first. (focus on the rear, instead of the eyes.) Fourth: I think the problem is not with the focus, but the movement of the subject. I think a higher shutter speed might have done the trick, and the use of AF Servo mode for focus tracking. Which brings up an interesting point for setting use when shooting moving subjects (like at the drag races) Change your Auto Focus mode from 'One Shot' to 'Servo' mode. In servo mode, the focus does not lock and stay with that focus point, it tracks and continues to re-adjust the focus point as the subject moves closer/further from the camera. (I cant remember if the auto modes, like the sports mode, automatically turn this setting on, but I believe that it does. I will check tonight.) An object that is moving rappidly towards you is hard to get the focus correct. A shot of Bell the super Beagle:  | ||
| Bads1 |
Your correct Craig. But yeah the shutter speed could have been increased when Raleigh was running towards me. Like I said I'm new to this it doesn't come to you all at once but I'll get better. | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
You want to get close. You gotta go long. This is a nice little lens for the job. The redoubtable Nikon 1000mm f6.3.  Yes, that little thing on the back of the lens is a Nikon F | ||
| Bads1 |
Jon I know you were a photographer as well by that big poster you sent Erik of your bike that he had on his desk.  | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
 | ||
| Bdabuell |
you could also try prefocusing...by this I mean framing up your shot in advance, manually focusing on the spot you expect your subject to be in and selecting your aperture/shutter speed combination to determine depth of field (and therefore the area in focus) Once your subject is at your predetermined spot, all you need to do is release the shutter i'm simplifying this a bit, but for situations where you can safely predict where your subject will be (such as a motorcyclist following a race line) it can be very useful | ||
| 99buellx1 |
No, no...... You need the Canon 1200mm f5.6  | ||
| Bads1 |
Holy shit whats that for??? Sexing ants from a distance?? | ||
| Eboos |
There was a Nikon lens like that in the B&M store in NYC. Better clear out some room in your camera bag for that one. Price? About as much as a small car. | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
The 1200 is a nice lens. I feel it is just a bit unwieldy, as I rarely take more than one bearer in the field any more, what with the price of food and fuel. It is really more of a show piece than a commercial product. Canon made just a few of them which they lend to photographers for special projects. The lens is not in their catalogue. If you lose it, they would like to be reimbursed to the tune of $40,000 or so. The Nikon 1000mm from my collection wasn't really very useful either. Made in 1959, it was one of fifty. I recently sold that one for $22,000 to a European collector at Christies Auction House in London. What I actually do use, is the Canon 400 F5.6  This is an L lens, very sharp, and very light, much more suitable for shooting fast moving objects like motorcycles or wildlife. Here is a shot I took with it hand held at a 1/25th of a second, wide open. The kind of shot you usually don't get a second chance at.  I was seated in my car, about 25 feet from the deer standing at the edge of the road. I dropped the passenger side window electrically, and squeezed off the shot. Note the hairs over the right eye. The deer and I departed promptly. | ||
| Court |
That's AWESOME ! I recently, sitting here near 17th Street the "Center of the Photography World" had the chance to learn the difference between "good" glass and "GREAT" glass. I was looking at a couple different Nikon telephotos. One was like $250, another like $500 and then there's this $1,800 rig. I start reading about the "ED" glass. You can't really appreciate what "sharp" means until you see a picture like the one you have there. Well done. I'm getting better, but I'm a heck of a long way from that level. I get immersed daily in the midst of too many greta photos ops not to be "carrying and learning" daily. P.S. - I found out Tuesday that the same principle applies to musical instruments. . . there is a difference between "good" and "GREAT".  | ||
| Jayvee |
Hey Court, that difference is what I felt like when I sold my old Yamaha XV920R to buy my M2 last Christmas ! I'm still looking for couple lenses for my Nikon D70, the Nikon brand is noticably more than some others. I don't want to make an expensive mistake, so still reading and looking... | ||
| Pammy |
Now THAT"S the proper way to shoot a deer! | ||
| Bdabuell |
a sharp lens is obviously a great thing...but don't forget, you want a fast lens too that's a huge chunk of the cost...as focal lengths get bigger, getting enough light in to allow for an aperture like 2.8, gets very expensive... (Message edited by BDABuell on August 25, 2006) | ||
| Eboos |
"Now THAT"S the proper way to shoot a deer!" Right between the eyes. | ||
| Court |
>>>>>I don't want to make an expensive mistake With Nikon, getting the more expensive lens is one way to avoid a mistake. You see 3 similar lens and one cost 10X what the cheapest is. . . well, it's for a darn good reason. I've got a new wide angle f1.4 14mm in my gunsights now after shooting a jazz gig the other night with f2.4 35-80mm. | ||
| Xgecko |
Nikon Glass is for the most part good though there are a few that fall into the crappy kit lens category (that number is falling though). If Nikon is out of your budget look at Sigma their glass is almost as good (and sometimes better) as nikon/canon at a lower price. My dad just picked up the Sigma 17-70mm and it's considerably better than my Nikon 18-70mm | ||
| Eboos |
I have a Sigma 15mm fisheye 2.8. It is a great lens at a great price. The only 2 Nikkor lenses that I have are my 35-70 2.8 and my 20mm 2.8. | ||
| Ebear |
Great lens Court! Though I use Canon gear I've allways been a Nikon Fan!Their digitals shoot amazingly fast in multiple and the Nikkor lens was the best consumer lens availiable for the longest time.And though they seemed to drag their feet at the beginning of the "Digital Revolution"they are now catching up and no doubt will pass Canon in "High End" equipment eventually.The most popular Pro Digital nowadays is the Canon 1D MarkIIs at 16.7 MP but as sure as the sky is blue(well,most places anyways)they will come up with more MP's in short order.At 7 grand its just a wee bit pricey for most of us anyways.Not yet availiable is the Canon 400d , 10.1 MP and at $699.00 will be the most popular SLR worlwide for a while I predict.I use a 20D and was shopping for a 5D(12+ MP)but now I expect their price to come down quickly with this new camera so cheap!As for lenses I use a 100-400 4.5 L series IS (Image Stabilization) and a 300mm 2.8 L IS with a drop in polarizer for most sports and action stuff.I make use of a 1.4 Teleconvertor occasionally although it knocks off 1-2 f stops depending on lens.The 300 is an incredible lens and as a prime lens it is pinpoint sharp , but quite heavy too.I've rented the 600 4.0 on a few occasions and want one REAL bad but is SOOOO heavy and limited in use at most motorsports events , but a must for surfing and such. Theres a 400mm DO lens (Diffractive Optics) thats alot lighter but slower.I'd like to add a 200 2.8 to my bag as a prime , but will acquire another Body first.As most of you shutterbugs have realized by now , this hobby is just as bad or WORSE than our Motorcycle Habit!!!!!!Well , I better shut up now , cause I can talk Photography for days!(like you couldn't tell already!)Heres a few pics just grabbed of my equipment....       | ||
| Bads1 |
Ebear you are making me so Jealous. Although some of that stuff is so out of my league as of now. But who knows where the future will take me. | ||
| Court |
The Canon is, by most accounts a better camera in the high end digital spectrum. I looked at both when I bought the D100. The consensus was that Canon was the only outfit making their own CCD sensors. I went with the Nikon because I am in New York City, arguably the capital of the photography universe \-2(look at all those ads in the back of any photo magazine and you'll find out that all but one, Camerta, are within 3 blocks of my office)} and you can get a Nikon serviced here at 9:30PM on a Sunday night. I can also rent any Nikon equipment 1/2 block from my office at Alkit, the place that serves the movie industry, which is also headquartered in New York City. I was waiting in line the other day while a fellow was putting down a 77,000 deposit for a rental. Yikes! The Canon stuff produces incredible results. My next "addition" is going to be some formal training at NYU. Between guitars (I fell victim to a custom Martin last week), motorcycles and cameras...I gotta work more! Look forward to seeing you again. . . I always learn something about photography anytime I talk to you or Jim Corso. All the best, Court |
