Reading mode: Light Dark

1D IV Basketball high ISO

Go to last post
K

kgirls

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
390
Reaction score
0
Location
AK, US
Got to do a few BB games with my 1D Mk IV. Just 2 cents with new cam. Pics shot in Manual, RAW, PP with Aperture, 1/640 shutter, ambient, hand-held f/2.8 Canon 70-200mm IS (IS turned off) and Auto ISO (2500-5000). No NN (noise ninja) used on these.

Coming from 1D3 I was really just interested in ISO 4,000 shooting BB (1D3 jumps from 3200 to 6400 and no 4,000 or 5,000 ISO). My normal 1D3 setup is Manual, 1/640 shutter, f/2.0 85mm lens, ISO 2000 for most gyms. I was really looking forward to the using my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens for basketball. Going from f/2.0 to 2.8 would force me to jump to ISO 4000 keeping 1/640 shutter. Now my 2 cents:

1. Absolutely love Auto ISO in Manual mode! A lot of BB courts (and football) have different lighting mid-court/ field then on the edges and end zones. Auto ISO now solves this for me.

2. Erasing images with the Check-marking system and Set button is a god-send. Did not know this feature ever existing on any Canon cameras.

3. AF is great but my 1D3 was great. One always needs to clarify AF with lens used (200mm f/2.0 AF is no comparison to a 85mm f/1.8). I shot a game last week with with my 85mm (basketball lens) on the 1D4 and the AF seemed the same on 1D3. The 85mm sometimes just can't keep up with a 1D body. I really never used the 70-200 on my 1D3 for basketball so can't compare. What I did notice with the 1D4 is once the AF is locked on it is locked on.

4. Used a Sandisk Extreme IV 32gb 90mb/s CF and never had the buffer fill up. A formatted card says 1090 RAW files available to record.

5. My custom functions. Set C.Fn III-2 set to "Slow" Set C.Fn III-4 to "Continuous AF track priority" and C.Fn III-8 to "Surrounding AF points" just like my 1D3. Of note, my first BB game last week had C.Fn III-8 set to "All 45 points" but noticed when players were body to body (jersey to jersey) coming down the court it would lock on both players and when they drifted apart it sometimes went with the player I did not want. Going back to "Surrounding AF points" kept me on one player.

6. One thing I did notice with 1D4 AF set to "Continuous AF track priority" is that the predictive AF is very, very good. I had a game where the refs were just a PIA (no room in gym) and he would come into the frame a lot and pass between me and the player and filled the frame of the picture. Looking at the burst sequence (10-12 shots) of a player I was locked on the ref would come between me and the player for 2-3 frames and the frame after the ref moved out the AF was locked dead on the player I had been focusing on. This seemed significantly improved over the 1D3.

7. There was more noise than I expected at ISO 4000 when viewed FULL screen on my 24" iMac monitor. I guess I was expecting miraculous noise free ISO 4000. I was always comfortable up to ISO 2000 on the 1D3 for almost no noise. The 1D4 to me seems 2/3 to 1-full stop better than the 1D3. The images do clean up nice with NN.

8. There a lots of pixels to crop into! Using the 70-200 and the extra pixels to crop into I can now shoot the entire BB court. With the 85mm you were limited to around the 3-point line and closer to you on the baseline.

9. No learning curve from the 1D3 to 1D4. Layout, buttons, etc.. seem the same. Really like both cameras.

Now for a couple photos from last night. All processed like I always do in Aperture (no noise reduction) The full game with EXIF data is here: http://www.geistphotography.net/photos/basketball011610.html

1. ISO 3200



2. ISO 4000



3. ISO 4000



4. ISO 5000



5. ISO 5000



6. ISO 2500



7. ISO 5000 with a very significant crop from far down the court



--
kgirls
http://www.geistphotography.net
 
Thanks very much for the detailed "real-world" review of the mkIV. I will be upgrading from the mkIII as soon as one becomes available and was happy to read that the A/F locks on solidly and the noise is 2/3 - 1 stop better on the new camera. I was happy to buy it if the high ISO was the same as the mkIII and the A/F as good as a "good" mkIII. The auto ISO in manual and the ability to set separate focuas points for horizontal/vertical shooting was enough for me. I don't shoot sports, but do a lot of birds-in-flight. If the A/F stays locked on despite occasional forground objects and "busy" backgrounds, that is all I need. My mkIII is mostly good in these situations, but does have it's "moments" ;-)
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '
 
It's hard to tell at these sizes, but the focus appears a bit soft. Sometimes, it seems a bit front focused, focusing on the ball rather than the face. Is this a function of where you've focused in the frame?
 
well if he is shooting at F2 and is focused on the jersey, the ball, or anything other than the face....the face wont be sharp.

Not the camera's fault, simply a matter of shooting at F2. In poor lighting, the camera will usually grab onto the jersey number to focus. There isn't a lot of contrast in a face and even if he did have the AF on the face, he said that he uses AF expansion points so it would still jump to a higher contrast point.

--
Peter Buehner
http://www.lingeringlight.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/killingbuddha
Maine, USA
 
Yep, focus was on the jersey numbers. Not much else to lock on to with white uniforms (shot for white team). Hard to lock on to just the eyes on the other end of a BB court. Would love to see if that could be done!

--
kgirls
http://www.geistphotography.net
 
killingbuddha said:
well if he is shooting at F2 and is focused on the jersey, the ball, or anything other than the face....the face wont be sharp.

Not the camera's fault, simply a matter of shooting at F2. In poor lighting, the camera will usually grab onto the jersey number to focus. There isn't a lot of contrast in a face and even if he did have the AF on the face, he said that he uses AF expansion points so it would still jump to a higher contrast point.

--
Peter Buehner
http://www.lingeringlight.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/killingbuddha
Maine, USA
Click to expand...
Was not the images shot with the 70-200/2.8 IS zoom?
 
kgirls said:
1. ISO 4000



2. ISO 5000



3. ISO 4000



4. ISO 2500



5. ISO 3200



6. ISO 4000



--
kgirls
http://www.geistphotography.net
Click to expand...
The focusing in these images are fine. They are typically what you would expect in a dimly lit arena when shooting wide open.

What would be more telling would be seeing a 'sequence' or frame burst. Say 8 or 9 successive images. This would enable us to see how well the AF tracked the subject.

But one thing is clear from looking at these pics, the IQ isn't that wonderful. Are you sure the low light performance is in the region of 2/3 - 1 stop better than the 1d mk 3?
 
Is it my monitor or..?

Most of the photo's seems to have a magenta tinge...
What where your parameters?

Ruut
 
The "digital look" as some has said appears to be over saturation added. The blue pads on the wall look way too blue and skin tones look too over cranked up.
 
killingbuddha said:
Not the camera's fault, simply a matter of shooting at F2. In poor lighting, the camera will usually grab onto the jersey number to focus. There isn't a lot of contrast in a face and even if he did have the AF on the face, he said that he uses AF expansion points so it would still jump to a higher contrast point.
Click to expand...
And if he had tried to put a focus point on their faces instead of their jerseys he would have gotten a hundred shots of the contrasty backgrounds. This is just a fact of shooting on dimmer (EV7) courts. You can't expect NBA quality results unless you use strobes.
 
are unbelievable...The OP is obviously a pro and he gives us his real life experience with the new camera, and you are bickering about " little blue here", "over sharpened there", "too much noise", "the girl's face is a bit OOF"!

Come on!

The photos are perfectly saleable and can be easily published in the local magazine or news paper. That's what matters.
 
I agree with you, and I should say that I really like very much isolated player shots : they render very good dynamics, move and compo.
But I'm not shure that was the topic ...
--
Regards,
Marc
 
jhal said:
are unbelievable...The OP is obviously a pro and he gives us his real life experience with the new camera, and you are bickering about " little blue here", "over sharpened there", "too much noise", "the girl's face is a bit OOF"!
Click to expand...
You forgot to mention the "digital look". Gosh, we can't have that when we look at photographs taken by a digital camera on our computer screens! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top