Focusing at long distances - 30D w/ EF-S 17-85mm

[vlad khavin]

So in another attempt at learning to pan with my setup, I decided to try a

different sort of subject. (Other than voltures. The birds seem to have caught

on and do not come out. Rat bastards they are.) I live a 5 minute walk from

little league baseball fields, so I went over there. Lots of moving targets to

point my lens at. The thing I noticed... even at a high shutter speed, a

subject that is far away comes out rather... soft. As they get closer, I get

good sharp detail, but far away, the camera does not seem to want to focus right

on them.

 

I'm including a picture with this post which is a diagram of what I was doing.

I was standing where the X is, focusing on the batter at home plate, and panning

with them as they ran to 1st. (And sometimes as they ran from 1st to 2nd). At

home plate, even though the camera was focused on the batter, he did not come

out sharp. Mind you, he was rather small in the view finder. (These are kids,

so not exactly large to begin with, and also, even at 85mm, I was standing

rather far away.) I had the f-stop set to 10 at the biggest, sometimes down to

16 or so. Shutter speed was roughly around 80 at least, but usually over 100.

IS was off. All focus points were selected, and the camera was set to AI Servo

mode.

 

Now... I figured that perhaps it was just me and my inexperience, and I was

getting something wrong. (Shooting at Player 1 at home plate.) So I aimed at

Player 2 at 1st base. No problem! Nice and sharp. So I took some shots of an

outfielder (Player 3 in the diagram), and he came out soft. Not blurry so much

(as in, he wasn't moving) but just... soft.

 

I've noticed this same sort of thing happening when I took pictures of hay

bales. They don't move. For those shots, IS was on, but the shutter speed was

around 30ish with ISO 400, 85mm, f/20. They came out soft too.

 

I don't have this problem with subjects that are within 10 or so yards, but it

seems that the further they are, the softer the image is. Now... either this is

normal and some sort of rule that I just don't know; that if the subject is

small in the view finder, AF will render them soft. (I am after all fairly new

to this.) It could be that my particular lens does this. Or it could be user

error.

 

Can someone shed some light on this for me?

 

Thanks in advance,

Vlad<div></div>

[m_barbu1]

I would not expect sharp photos at f/20 on any lens. Can you try again, but this time between f/8 and f/11? Also, were the subjects of your shots in the middle of the frame, or towards the edges? Finally, did you try with IS on?

[sidaths]

"For those shots, IS was on, but the shutter speed was around 30ish with ISO 400, 85mm, f/20."

 

At f/20 you'll run into diffraction problems which may or may not be exacerbated with increasing distances. I have the 17-85 too and don't see the problem you describe.

[yves_jalbert]

Anything above f/16 is pushing it a bit. I don't think you can expect to get much more sharpness after that. I'm also curious to find out why you are shooting at such slow speeds. Granted 85mm is not that long of a focal lenght, but considering the 1.6 times factor on the camera you are shooting with something close to 136mm.

 

Anways, what I'm saying is that with IS or not, a speed of 1/30 is incredibly slow especially for sports. The slighest move of the hand or vibration will create some softness at the least or a noticeable blur effect.

 

I would suggest you increase your speed to 1/125 or even 1/200 (are the games played during evenings?) if possible and see if that makes any difference. Tripod and monopod are always a photographer's best friends. If anything they will assist for more sharpness in your photographs.

[bobatkins]

f20 on a 30D will give you soft images due to diffraction as pointed out above.

 

You might want to read this http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/diffraction.html

[vlad khavin]

Wow! Thanks, guys. Bob, that article was great, learned quite a bit there.

 

Yves, to answer your questions, at the game, I was shooting at between 80 and 100+. Only when I was photographing a bale of hay, which was not at all moving, was I down to 1/30. Also, I was using f/10-16 at the game. They are usually played in the evenings. I was there at roughly 8pm, it was still light out, plus the field lights were on, but it was overcast, so I wouldn't say that it was exactly bright.

 

The subjects were in the middle of the frame, and yes, I can certainly try it again, opening the lens up a bit more. These games happen a couple of times a week, and are much more reliable than the birds I was trying to work with. Heh.

 

So yes, I will definitely try it again. From an ethical standpoint... would there be a problem with me posting images? I am not going around and getting model releases from folks since I am not using the photos past trying to learn my gear better. I've avoided posting any pictures that show this, for that reason.

[vlad khavin]

*coughs* In the above post, the "80" and "100+" are shutter speeds. Just wanted to clarify.

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>From an ethical standpoint... would there be a problem with me posting images?</i></p>You should probably be more concerned about the legal perspective. Maybe you could speak with the coaches of the teams and make some sort of agreement where you offer them the photos free of charge, if they agree to allow you to use them. Make sure you get it in writing.

[dcheung]

there is a definite freedom of information and privacy protection violation here in my country (Canada) if you posted those pictures without written consent from the parent.

 

However, if you posted the pictures to just SHOW US sharpness, then you can blurr their faces so that noone can tell who they are. In that case, you would not be violating the act.

[vlad khavin]

Weiyang, that's a definite thought. The truth of the matter is that I really don't intend to use those pictures from the ballpark for a portfolio or to promote myself, but just as an example of what I was talking about in my original post. But, I think I will, assuming they start coming out better than just shots of action blur, and backs with numbers on them, offer them to coaches in exchange for the right to use them. Just in case. Some folks seem to be lawsuit-happy here, and I really don't need that sort of headache with something so simple as approaching a coach of a local little league team.

[yves_jalbert]

Wow, this subject is suddenly taking a 90 degree turn. I'm not a lawyer and I certainly am not an expert in any way when it comes to this subject. However I'm very interested in this.

 

Are you saying that if I go to a public event, in an outside area, such as a public park, that has no staff, and no rules that prevent you from taking pictures, and that I bring my camera just like any parent, visitors, little league fans, and friends alike to take pictures of people that know they will get photographed ...that I can use these photographs as mine and that I cannot show them to anybody such as a forum for learning purposes (not making money out of them)?

 

Am I the only one surprised by this or are the previous posts correct?

[yves_jalbert]

I'm just curious to know what is Weiyang Liu's law background exactly to give these guidelines such as bluring faces of people so Vlad can participate in the forum with his photographs. These guidelines seem a bit if not hugely exaggerated. But like I said, I could be wrong.

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>I can use these photographs as mine and that I cannot show them to anybody such as a forum for learning purposes (not making money out of them)?</i></p>I think the issue at hand is not that you're showing them to other people, but that they are being posted on the Internet. It could be argued that doing so is akin to publishing them, and I believe there are laws against doing just that -- hence the existance of model releases, though IANAL.