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

Schwany wrote:

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.

you could of course only put the Camera under the cyclers and fire the Camera with hyper focal setting with the IR remote control.

Less dust in your eyes and more control over the right moment (seeing it coming from some feet distance)

On the 1/250 second I am not so sure if I would get sharp images - normally I follow the path of the moving object and then the bicycle might be just blurred because it moved while panning the camera - surely a nice effect - will have to test that as well.

Photographed in the past also moving motorcycles - that's also a really nice suet (old 300 f/2.8 rented)

joger wrote:

you could of course only put the Camera under the cyclers and fire the Camera with hyper focal setting with the IR remote control.

Might work with strobes on stands as well, but No way. A camera on course would just be a target to run down. Me, I'm too much of a lump to run down, and they'd just ruin their run if they hit me. ha

I'm not sure that the hyper focal idea with a stationary camera would work for what I'm trying to do considering how close they will be, and the fact that they all jump different heights and take different lines. I haven't seen anyone do it. I've seen some big strobes on course (hand held by assistants and on stands), but nobody putting their cameras on the ground in the line of fire, so to speak.

Less dust in your eyes and more control over the right moment (seeing it coming from some feet distance)

I'll be eating dust. I can usually tell they are coming by the reaction of the crowd, and I do try and position myself so I can see them coming ahead of time somewhere on the track. I can't see them just before the jump though, because I'm down too low. Makes for some excitement. I've nearly been hit a couple of times by riders about to crash.

On the 1/250 second I am not so sure if I would get sharp images - normally I follow the path of the moving object and then the bicycle might be just blurred because it moved while panning the camera - surely a nice effect - will have to test that as well.

Admittedly 1/250th is not real productive because of the unpredictability of dirt riding. 1/320th is a little better. It captures a little bit of wheel spin, and occasionally a nice sharp rider in the process. 1/250th and slower will get some background streaking in a side pan of downhill racers. I always attempt a few 1/60th shots as well, but they usually don't work for one reason or another. My technique fails me at the slower shutter speeds.

Photographed in the past also moving motorcycles - that's also a really nice suet (old 300 f/2.8 rented)

I've thrown away more motorcycle images than I've kept because of the shutter speeds I typically use. I do the same thing with them as with bicycles. I do get one that looks OK now and again though.

I'd like to have the MkII version of the 300f/2.8, but I'm going to tough it out with the older one.

Enjoy your MkII(s).

qianp2k wrote:

Nice shots! I do enjoy your photos from time to time.

As we have seen from numerous photos from 5D2 in various action areas from airshow to car sports, 5D2 center point with the help of 6 hidden points has no problem in snapping individual shots in AI-servo mode.   5D2’s center point is basically the same as in 7D and 60D.  Canon just crippled 5D2 in burst rate, buffer and mirror/shutter refresh speed.

thx

neither the 5D II nor the MK III are speed deamons - 4-6 fps are still far off when it comes to really fast action. I hope the 7D II will be a nice addition to the current (reasonable) budget FF Canons in autumn this year.

That said it is amazing (for me) how good a more then four year old rather cheap FF camera can get for action images. The 5D II was surely not designed with sports and action photography in mind. That time the 1D series was the answer to that question. Not to far in the future the 7D II might be on a reasonable budget the right answer for this kind of application.

The AI Servo accuracy is quite amazing too - I did some tests on bike racing with 4 fps until the buffer was filled. Every single image of the 15 images was sharp to the point.

Better then I'd have expected with all the bashing and claims of users in the various forums.

That's the reason why I always encourage everyone to get his/her own hands on the gear before believing the hype.

some good photos, thanks for sharing

the first two have nervous bokeh - the backdrop was tough

1d4 or 7d with 70-200 f2.8 II would be better for fps action imo  - and less expensive setup

if I could afford the great 300, which I can't, I wouldn't hold on to a 5dii

MAC wrote:

some good photos, thanks for sharing

the first two have nervous bokeh - the backdrop was tough

1d4 or 7d with 70-200 f2.8 II would be better for fps action imo  - and less expensive setup

if I could afford the great 300, which I can't, I wouldn't hold on to a 5dii

well - as you have recognized - the bokeh is a bit nervous since we still don't have "real spring time" as usual this time of the year. Green leaves in the background make it much more pleasant.

A 7D would need a 200 f/2.0 to get a similar bokeh as the 300 f/2.8 in FF - so the price is roughly the same.

If you would use a 7D with a 70-200 f/2.8 you would get at the same FOV much more depth of field and an even more nervous background.

Why would I buy a 7D or a MK III when it is imminent that a 7D II and a MK IV will be out sooner or later and what I really want

It happens rather seldom that you buy all equipment at the same time but once you have some gear it is key (IMHO) that you do smart decisions. Lenses are keepers - cameras are disposals - too less progress at Canon in the past four years for my taste (very personal opinion and backed up by most results I get)

I have high hopes for both cameras - very high hopes !!!!!

qianp2k wrote:

MAC wrote:

if I could afford the great 300, which I can't, I wouldn't hold on to a 5dii

Many times lenses are more important than bodies. 5D3 certainly will increase hit rate but will not dramatically improve IQ.  Most of his photos are not fast action shots anyway.

tried formula 1 with 5D II and 70-200 f/4.0 L IS USM and failed miserably due to many reasons

• not having the right position (paddock club is a nice lounge but no photo spot)
• not having a fast lens with range (f/4.0 is far too slow for my taste for this kind of sujet)
• not having trained it previously in a controlled environment
• not haveing the fastest possible USM lens - the 70-200 f/2.0 L IS USM is fast but not as fast as the 300 f/2.8 II

joger wrote:

But the really reason for that is surely point 1. I am planning to photograph race cars later this year with the new lens. Will probably post the results here. But if you are interested in fast action you might want to have a look at my greyhound images - those dogs are really really fast! It is much more critical to get a high frame rate here - that was the first time i recognized that everything below 8 or 10 fps is too slow. The keeper rate was significantly lower - most images have not the right composition. Too many feet on the ground and/or framing wrong and of course focus slightly off - but also here quite amazing results - I guess it is also getting used to that kind of action - something completely new to me. (many photograpphres with expensive gear at those events)

You can photograph road race cars with 3 frames per second. More is better, but 3 is enough. And you can look at it this way. You'll have far fewer frames to toss out if you are maxed out at 3 fps and have a little buffer like you have in the 5DMkII.

Something to think about: Cars are large. Depending on how far it is to the track surface and race line from where you are standing with a 300mm lens, they can go from being perfectly framed to being chopped off at both ends in an instant. I'd say they are fast. I think you'll find it completely new if you haven't already done it.

Pretty colors

Be careful of shooting at fast shutter speeds. The car above at 1/4000th would look like it was parked.