rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
pulper11 wrote:
Thanks for the reply with all those examples!
With the first example image, if it had been a more significant play, would you have sent the image to your client with the background distorted like that (forget about the scoreboard - I'm more thinking about the leaning goal posts)?
If it was a completion facing the camera and able to see more of the player's front/face, yes I would have sent it because the client is not a news organization and will decide how to hide/minimize anything obviously problematic for their final usage.
Unfortunately, rolling shutter is one of those things that once you've seen it, it's hard (at least for me) not to see it. Based on your statements here, the R6ii will not be the answer for me if it is something that bothers me too much. It's either learning to live with it or getting an R3.
I figured while doing the calculations that I would get 12 EFCS shots and 20 (R6) or 40 (R6ii) shots while doing a game. Therefore, I might screw up some shots with the rolling shutter (if I can't live with it) but I'd also end up with more shots of the same sequence which might not have rolling shutter. Have you found this to be the case?...Show more →
Yes, the reason I've transitioned to 40fps for football is for as much choice as possible from potentially very brief moments during sequences where there are usable images. If a star RB is having a bad game, 40fps still nets me 2x more images than 20fps for the fraction of a second he's visible through a seam in the line, and almost 4x more than EFCS. For example from that game, Dolphins QB Tua Tagovailoa has a very quick release and at 40fps it's in the range of 9-12 images between the moment he starts to lift his arm to the ball leaving his hand. At 12fps that would be whittled down to around 3 images. But it really depends on what you need. If you just need one good shot and you can time it, then 1 fps is fine too.  With the mirrorless cameras I still haven't gotten the timing down and am not sure I'll ever get it back like with the 1DX series cameras, so to compensate in these situations I rely more on high fps and volume. I'm not ashamed to admit it.  Yes, a lot more images to go through but because they're usually all in focus, it's possible to just scan the thumbnails for the better ones. But I don't shoot everything at 40fps and sometimes I'll use EFCS due to e-shutter banding problems in facilities with poor lighting systems.
If you're sticking with the R6, definitely try e-shutter at your next football game. I think it will be fine the vast majority of times. If anything, hockey should be faster action than football and uses sticks that would be more prone to showing rolling shutter distortion. But your images look good. You'd probably see more rolling shutter effects in the background if you were near center ice and panning more with plays rather than them coming towards you in the corner where there's less side to side camera movement.
Unfortunately, I don't have any slapshots from the game. Here are a few wrist shots that show an amazing bend to the stick, albeit probably not too out of line with realism.
The e-shutter 'scan' is from the top of the image to the bottom. If anything, rolling shutter may have slightly 'unbent' the bend of the stick in those examples (because the blade end of the stick was captured/scanned slightly later than the upper part of the stick and therefore moved more to the right than where it was when the top of the stick was captured).
|
