photographing surfing from the beach

[terri1]

I took a few pics of surfers yesterday and found I really enjoyed

it. I don't have the $$ to buy an expensive long lens right now, but

if anyone can give me some tips to maximize getting the best shots I

can with what I have I'd appreciate it.

 

I'm using a Rebel XT, and my longest lens is the 70-300 IS. I shot

yesterday w/ AI Servo on, but am not too sure about the IS. I took

some shots w/ mode 1 and some with mode 2; shutter speeds were

between 1/1000 and 1/2000. CAmera was hand-held. None were tack-

sharp but the surfers were waaaay out there , some were acceptable

for a first try. I know there are some beaches where I can get

closer to the surf, though. Forgive me if these are basic

questions, but I've only had my camera a short time. Any

pointers/or tips would be appreciated.

[gluteal cleft]

If your lens was wide-open, try stopping down.

[j.kivekas]

It would be interesting - and usefull - to know what is the response frequency spectrum of the IS-systems and are all the IS-lenses tuned similarly or are longer ones tunes to higher frequencies due to typically faster exposures.<p>

 

I used to have the 75-300IS and I loved it although it was quite soft at the long end. It wasn't optically the best lense, but in practise, due to the IS, it utiilsed what it got to the optimum. The MTF-curves weren't very impressive at the long end.<p>

By the sea there is obviosuly a lot of humidity in the air and this eats both contrast and sharpness.

[mark u]

The 70-300 IS USM lens (not DO) is notorious for giving soft images when used in portrait orientation at longer focal lengths, due to sag in the lens barrel - my bet is that your copy suffers badly from this. At the moment, there is no real solution from Canon in terms of a fix or obvious redesign, although some more recent purchasers report an improved performance. Some persistent users have persuaded Canon to give them a refund, regardless of retail exchange/refund limitations having expired. You might also try to exchange for a better copy, although there is no real guarantee that it will continue to avoid the problem with use. You will find discussion and user experience at the DPReview Canon SLR Lens Talk forum:

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/search.asp?query=70+300+portrait&page=1&forum=1029

[2yellowdogs]

Teri,<br>

A couple of suggestions - first, put your camera on continuous autofocus (not sure of the exact Canon name for this). Second, get yourself a monopod. These are cheap ($30-$40) and will reduce camera blur, even when using IS. Third, consider renting a 300mm or 400mm lens for a day. You can probably do this for around $50-$60 and it will improve your reach (with the 400) and image quality. </p>

 

Also, please post some of the images you took. We'd all love to see them.

[jbq]

It sounds to me like you have plenty of margin to move to slower shutter speeds - 1/250s or 1/500s should do fine, and that will allow you to stop down the lens a bit (somewhere around f/9 or f/10 should do fine), which in turn will give you sharper images and a better depth of field.

 

In conditions where there are enough waves to surf on, there can also be quite a lot of atmospheric turbulence and quite some spray in the air, which might reduce the image quality somewhat.

[terri1]

Thank you all for the responses and suggestions! I will definitely try stopping down a bit and getting a monopod. None of the images I shot were in portrait orientation, so that hasn't been an issue so far. Dan, I have 3 of the images in my portfolio here under 'Life on the Coast' (sorry, not sure how to post a link directly to). The Surfer I & II shots were cropped quite a bit due to being so far away.

 

I appreciate the help all & I'll try again next weekend stopped down & (hopefully ) w/ monopod.

[mark u]

According to this review:

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm

 

the lens is pretty much as sharp wide open as it is at f/8 (and by f/11 you are starting to lose resolution to diffraction). I see no point in stopping down at all - very high shutter speeds are highly desirable when shooting surfers to freeze the spray from the waves (and IS offers very little to no benefit when shooting at 1/2000th). Focus can be tricky - make sure you at least start by using the centre focus point when you start focus by shutter half press (or * if you have CF 4 set) and keep it on the surfer for a good half second or more to lock focus before recomposing if necessary (pan gently) and only then fire the shutter - and then shoot in small bursts. My suspicions remain with the lens being used in portrait orientation.

[gluteal cleft]

<p><i>According to this review:

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70300_456is/index.htm

 

the lens is pretty much as sharp wide open as it is at f/8 (and by f/11 you are starting to lose resolution to diffraction).</i></p>

 

<p>Sometimes numbers don't tell the whole story. According to their numbers, this lens is virtually an equal to a 70-200 f/2.8L, which simply isn't the case. The reviews I've seen which are based on looking at actual pictures, and not just test charts, do show that it softens noticeably beyond 200mm, with 300mm definitely being the softest.</p>

[jim mucklin]

What Dan said!

[j.kivekas]

Just a note:<br>Wide open contrast/resolution/MTF-figures should not be compared between lenses unless the widest aperture is the same in both. A first class f/2.8 is going to have hard job beating an average f/5.6.<br>

f/8-figures tell the quality of the optics and these figures can pretty much be compared between lenses.

[kin_lau]

I shot surfing for a little fun while in Hawaii with a Sigma 170-500 & 300D. Not the fastest focusing lense, but not bad. At 300mm and f8, you should be okay with AI Servo.

 

The biggest problem would probably be the wind, salt-spray that'll have some effect, so it's hard to be "tack-sharp" from far away.

 

If you get closer, just keep in mind that the bigger the waves, the more likely you get one suddenly come _way_ up on the beach. I had a few waves come above my knees even tho I was 20 to 30 feet away from the waters edge.

[terri1]

Thanks all! After my initial disappointment, I reviewed all the shots I'd taken again. The more dramatic photos (with lots of spray, etc) were generally less sharp, but as I looked at the 'boring' ones , some of them were actually quite sharp. I do think the monopod's a great idea & I'll stop down a little bit too. Maybe that & more practice will give me results I like. I'm excited to have found this forum - because it doesn't show in the on the fly-out menu of the forum tab, I never realized there WAS a sports section.