300rd - how good is the AF in real world on 5D II?

Today was the first day in my area with > 20 °C (> 70 °F) and thus I went out a bit driving  and photographing.

Comments are welcome (metadata included)

5D II in servo AF plus 300 f/2.8 II wide open (to make it more difficult for the AF)

Hope you like some of them

(for a better view go to 'original size' and look at 100 % - posted them at 1600 pixels wide)

100 % crop of previous image (just for illustration - liked it)

keeper rate was surprisingly high - most images have been sorted out due to wrong framing and/or distracting background - AF hit rate was flawless - maybe some 15 % not spot on sharp

Hope you like them too - have a great week

Thanks for the post! Makes me feel better about not upgrading from my two 5DII right now. Impressive "keeper" rate.

I reallylike the 5DIII, but the image quality is virtually identical to the 5DII for the kind of stuff I shoot. Logically, I just don't need one right now. Maybe the 5DIV.

Nice. Do you utilize the hidden AF points?

..Don't take my comments wrong but, my 50D could match your results here..(ok, close)

With that available light and my 100-400mmIS, oh yes I can!

I can see myself shooting at 3200ISO and f/8,  searching for a shutter speed over 1/2000sec for starters! By the second pass, I would have my 50D set!

The real difficulty though is erratically moving subjects with low intrinsic contrast with overcast light. If they are going across the field of view you don't have quite the same difficulty as when they're coming towards you.

For some subjects there's no perfect answer..

yet..

mailman88 wrote:

..Don't take my comments wrong but, my 50D could match your results here..(ok, close)

With that available light and my 100-400mmIS, oh yes I can!

I can see myself shooting at 3200ISO and f/8,  searching for a shutter speed over 1/2000sec for starters! By the second pass, I would have my 50D set!

show them here so we all can learn - I'd be interested in 50D shots at ISO 3200 that match them

Timbukto wrote:

Nice. Do you utilize the hidden AF points?

all 63 of them

Very nice! On the off-center shots, did you use all AF points of a single peripheral point (I assume you didn't use the center point only, unless you just cropped in post ).

joger wrote:

Timbukto wrote:

Nice. Do you utilize the hidden AF points?

all 63 of them

I assume he meant the 6 AF Assist Points, which I have found helps AF tracking a lot.

click below link, 20D taking bike pics.

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=589&p=78

By the way, its your lens and skill, and not your camera. Your camera exceeds in low-light. Any DSLR with your lens and light, WILL match your pics.

Some of mine...50D and 100-400mmIS

3200ISO

6400ISO

3200ISO

1000ISO

last pic missing at 1000ISO

AOKH wrote:

Very nice! On the off-center shots, did you use all AF points of a single peripheral point (I assume you didn't use the center point only, unless you just cropped in post ).

He cropped I'd say. He's a centrepointman only. The old 5D2 is not famous for its peripheral focuspoints.

It's one way to do it, but it does waste pixels.

With a 1D4 you could do this..

Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee wrote:

He cropped I'd say. He's a centrepointman only. The old 5D2 is not famous for its peripheral focuspoints.

It's one way to do it, but it does waste pixels.

With a 1D4 you could do this.

Yes, as much as I like my 5D2, not being able to use the peripheral AF point with fast AF tracking is a problem at times. However, it'll have to do until the next generation of cameras come out (having spent too much on lens upgrades already!).

It was easy and I'm correct too. You have 300mm 2.8 lens and a 5DmkII tracking a BICYCLE IN GREAT LIGHT!

Any DSLR could match those pics with the same results.

QUESTION to OP....Why shoot wide open in great light?

mailman88 wrote:

It was easy and I'm correct too. You have 300mm 2.8 lens and a 5DmkII tracking a BICYCLE IN GREAT LIGHT!

Any DSLR could match those pics with the same results.

QUESTION to OP....Why shoot wide open in great light?

why shoot unnecessary far stopped down?

Is this a serious question? So let me elaborate on that. A bigger aperture gives you a shallow DOF. It isolates the subject from the background and best case it will give you a creamy buttery background that is less disturbing. Hope that explains the function of the faster aperture.

FF 300 mm is the same as some 190 mm on crop at a 50 D

50 D with 100-400 at some 190 mm and f/5.0 (wide open)

FF camera with 300 mm at f/2.8

So the FF has roughly 1/3 DOF - in other words 5 feet (1.7 m) while the 50 D has almost some 14 feet (4.8 m)

The crop's AF has a much easier task to fulfill. (remind me the 5D II and the 50 D share a similar AF module - right?)

Photography is for me about having options. The aperture plays for me the important role in composition. Using this option to have exactly spot on the important part in focus is precision craftsmanship. Photography is about craftsmanship - to a great deal IMHO.

BTW - which of your posted images are at ISO 3200 and how do they compare to mine with fast moving objects towards the camera?

(you did not include the metadata unfortunately)

BTW - I am sure every Canon DSLR would do great pics (in the right hands) with an excellent lenses - It all about the lenses and not about the camera - thx for confirming that - it is my claim for ages

Don Daugherty wrote:

and don't take my comments wrong, but why in the world did you feel compelled to measurebate your particular camera model in this thread?  I didn't see anything or anyone saying "no camera every created could possibly have captured these photos"...

that's it in a nutshell - who said a 20 D would not have done great shots with a 200 f/2.0 in this situation?

For me the gian in performance for new DSLRs has significantly slowed down over the past couple of years. We do see an increase on paper values but the majority of the images could be done with much less advanced equipment as long as the lenses are capable of supporting that.

We do see an improvement in high ISO values at the cost of color saturation and color gamut though.

just wanted to share some images and encourage all to go out and shoot and elaborate on the right lenses to have fun!

Someone went for a drive, took some photos, posted them here.  Cool.  Good stuff Joger (need to know more about that hip shot of the Porsche though).

D

Send me a PM  

joger wrote:

BTW - which of your posted images are at ISO 3200 and how do they compare to mine with fast moving objects towards the camera?

(you did not include the metadata unfortunately)

must have tomatoes on my eyes - sorry - overlooked the ISO values in the text - was looking for the metadata in the images

Nice images

The 5DII focuses well with a good lens on it. 300f/2.8L II is a pretty good lens.

I'm going to be doing about the same thing some time this week. Although I'm going to a organized bicycle race event on purpose, not driving by. I like photographing the downhill racers.

I've considered taking my 300f/2.8, but probably won't. I've got to walk up too many hills to make carrying it around very enjoyable. I might take the 300f/4 for some 300mm stuff. That's a big might though. I like the 70-200/f2.8 for bicycles. I can get in a little closer with the zoom.

This time around I'm going to try a 40mm pancake on a FF. Plan is to stick my head and camera under the bikes at the jumps. Kinda crazy, dirty and dusty, but should make for the occasional interesting photo. I may post some action photo results with that pancake on the 5DII. Then again, may not. They might all stink if it turns out to be too long a focal length for my delusions of grandeur.

Oops forgot. If you want a good auto focus and personal challenge for the 300mm lens and camera try doing the bicycles again, but at 1/250th. The bad part about that is you won't be able to shoot them wide open. You'll have to stop the lens down, and you may have to frame a little tighter to keep the background less focused like you can wide open.

Please excuse my going beyond nice images with the babble.