Would have shot at 100, but the clamp on my tripod head had not been changed in so long it was jammed and I didn't have pliers handy. The 50D is fast and smooth in operation.
No lockups or problems with good glass. I'm wondering if the 18-55 is our chief culprit.
I did a bunch of test shots with my EF-S 18-55 IS and the shots are pretty good in the 20-40mm range. Not as sharp at the extreme ends, of course. Also, tried the EF 135mm F2 and those shots are super sharp and clear.
In short - think the AF accuracy is about the same, but seems to get there faster... also - with target coming FAST towards me, on my 30D and 40D the focus point would drift back during continuous shooting on AI Servo - less so on the 40D than the 30D. As if the AF couldn't keep up... W/ the 50D, the point drifts back for a shot or two, then jumps ahead, then drifts back onto the image.
I guess I like this better as it gives a chance at getting the subject in focus again.
Yeah, I know about LR 2.1 RC, but I'm leary of using it; don't know why. I did shoot some of my son's football in RAW this afternoon. Perhaps I'll give it a go.
RAMcG wrote:
Yeah, I know about LR 2.1 RC, but I'm leary of using it; don't know why. I did shoot some of my son's football in RAW this afternoon. Perhaps I'll give it a go.
Yeah, I downloaded the RC and ran the football pictures through it. It worked fine. I was using my 70-200 F2.8 plus a 1.4 converter. It never gives stellar results. I've done a little work trying to dial it in using MA (thanks for the tutorial, btw), and it is better than it was on my 20D, but still not as good as the plain lens, even factoring in the additional crop you have to do to get the same screen view.
. I was getting maybe a 20% keeper rate on my sports shots (kids' football). Now, I'd put it at more than 40%.
Is the AF system really improved over the 20D? From what I've read, the 50D really hasn't improved the AF system, and still uses just 9 points.
One of my frustrations with the 20d has always been the focusing. The center point is fairly reliable (unless they are on the swing, etc), but for sports, I can rely less on the outer points. That means a lot of shots w/ the action framed in the middle, and cropping. I've been hoping Canon would put more focus points on a camera.
That leads me to a general question... how much of a difference would more focus points make? I have to say I'm tempted by the Nikon D300 and its 51 points. Are there any good articles on Canon's focus system and its pros/cons vs the new D300? I have a lot of Canon lenses, and I'd hate to switch, but I'd also love to worry less about focusing at little league and soccer, and more about great shots. Funny, no problems for me focusing on the Blue Angels or F-22, but kids swinging and soccer matches kill me .
Hornblower: I'm not the technical guy to explain the finer points of the various focusing systems. From what I've read, the difference between the 20D and the 50D (and 40D) is that in the newer cameras, all 9 of the focus points are "cross type"; with the 20D, only the center point was cross type. And, with the 50D, the center point is even more sensitive (don't understand why). That, combined with a faster chip makes the 50D focus better than the 20D.
As to the difference between the 9 focus points of the 50D and the 51 of the D300, I'll leave that to smarter folks than I.
But, in taking your shots, are you setting it on the center point and AI Servo?
One of my frustrations with the 20d has always been the focusing. The center point is fairly reliable (unless they are on the swing, etc), but for sports, I can rely less on the outer points. That means a lot of shots w/ the action framed in the middle, and cropping. I've been hoping Canon would put more focus points on a camera.
That leads me to a general question... how much of a difference would more focus points make? ............ Funny, no problems for me focusing on the Blue Angels .......
You are missing the point (or points ) on AF. With either just the center point or all focus points on a jet plane, the plane is the only thing the camera has to focus on. There is nothing else in a clear sky for the camera to focus on. In a soccer game, if you have all focus points selected, what do you think the camera will select? It does not have the brains to focus what you want it to focus on, it chooses the object with the most vertical contrast and the subject that is usually the closest.
Don't blame the camera. More focus points just gives the camera more options to confuse it.
Hornblower wrote:
Funny, no problems for me focusing on the Blue Angels or F-22, but kids swinging and soccer matches kill me .
Hornblower - one thing to keep in mind when comparing subjects that you are tracking is how much change in distance from camera to subject is happening per second in each scenario. With aircraft that are flying across your path, you may be panning with, but the distance remains pretty close to the same... If the airplanes are flying towards you, they are prob at least 1/4 of a mile away and their change in distance isn't huge and they are moving in a relatively straight path. Soccer matches have lots of potentially erratic behavior of the players - quick moves left to right and the relative distance away is a lot closer.
Also consider contrast - airplane in the sky has lots of contrast between the airplane and the sky - when shooting a soccer game has a wider variety of colors, textures and so on... so the camera needs to work a lot harder to pick the "right" thing to focus on. So - if you are using center point only - that will help some, I would think.
Another option - rather than changing to Nikon - consider a used Canon 1D Mk II s... can get them used for $1500 - $1800 or so. One of the best sports oriented focusing systems out there... not high frame rate, but should be great for shooting sports...
One other thing to consider - compare the quality of an image w/out the TC that you would need to crop to match the quality of a non cropped image using the TC. If the IQ is that much better w/out the TC - perhaps you can get away w/out the TC.
Question: How are you guys getting clear, noise-free photos from your 50D's? I have taken about 170 pix now, and not one is as clean and clear as from my 40D. They all seem noisy. I took them all at ISO200 (as I do with my 40D most of the time), but they come out looking more like ISO400. Any ideas?
How are you shooting? RAW? JPG? If RAW - how are you converting? Do you still have your 40D and can you do comparisons of the same shot w/ the same lens w/ the same settings to ensure that it is "real" noise, and not "perceived" noise (please take no offese to that last question - I'm just a huge fan of comparing apples to apples )
David Tognazzi wrote:
Question: How are you guys getting clear, noise-free photos from your 50D's? I have taken about 170 pix now, and not one is as clean and clear as from my 40D. They all seem noisy. I took them all at ISO200 (as I do with my 40D most of the time), but they come out looking more like ISO400. Any ideas?
thanks
Proper exposure control is always important in limiting noise even in an ISO200 shot. I have turned off all NR, ALO, and HTP on my 50D and the noise comparison with my 40D puts the 50D slightly better up to ISO3200. After that it is not worth it to me to process the shot because fine detail starts to break down.
I took a bunch of shots at a club last night with co-workers. Did that same thing with my 40D a few minths ago, and the 40D shots were nice and clean. The 50D shots are very noisy and grainy. Strange. Same club. Same lighting and flash. Only difference was the body. I will try Jim Victory's suggestion and turn off all the extras and see how it goes. Thanks.
Don't blame the camera. More focus points just gives the camera more options to confuse it
Thanks for the answers. The more I thought about it, soccer is usually okay. I think my biggest frustrations w/ the 20d has been the non-center focus points. Even when they flash (to show focus), and everything appears in focus, the shots don't come out well. The center focus point on the 20d just performs much better, while I've grown not to trust the outside focal points nearly as much. In a lot of cases, I'm trying to focus with the lens fairly open so its tougher to get a subject in focus as well. I'm not sure what else I can do beyond put a non-center point on a good contrasty spot, focus, and shoot. It seems I get far to many slightly missed focus shots.
Hornblower wrote:
Is the AF system really improved over the 20D? From what I've read, the 50D really hasn't improved the AF system, and still uses just 9 points.
One of my frustrations with the 20d has always been the focusing. The center point is fairly reliable (unless they are on the swing, etc), but for sports, I can rely less on the outer points. That means a lot of shots w/ the action framed in the middle, and cropping. I've been hoping Canon would put more focus points on a camera.
That leads me to a general question... how much of a difference would more focus points make? I have to say I'm tempted by the Nikon D300 and its 51 points. Are there any good articles on Canon's focus system and its pros/cons vs the new D300? I have a lot of Canon lenses, and I'd hate to switch, but I'd also love to worry less about focusing at little league and soccer, and more about great shots. Funny, no problems for me focusing on the Blue Angels or F-22, but kids swinging and soccer matches kill me .
One of the latest reviews state..."Canon has improved the AF algorithm on the 50D and you only have to use it in fast action environments to realise it’ll easily handle most situations."
This is from the www.cameralabs.com review. This is the same thing I see in my 50D performance vs. my 40D. The 50D seems to be a little better.
. 
) on AF. With either just the center point or all focus points on a jet plane, the plane is the only thing the camera has to focus on. There is nothing else in a clear sky for the camera to focus on. In a soccer game, if you have all focus points selected, what do you think the camera will select? It does not have the brains to focus what you want it to focus on, it chooses the object with the most vertical contrast and the subject that is usually the closest.
)