keithreeder wrote:
Oh, you've got to be kidding, right?
It's not really that difficult. If a duck is flying straight at you, it's not moving horiztonally in the frame, or vertically.
I'm not going to compare it to an athlete taking up the entire frame, but I don't see how a duck flying at you could be viewed as challenging. You barely have to move the camera!
And if the target is getting larger in the frame by the second, it means that fuzzy background suddenly becomes less of a target for the AF system. Get your initial lock, and presto!
garyvot wrote:
One should NOT have to use single-point AF exclusively in AI-Servo shooting to obtain consistent results. There are legitimate reasons to use area-AF when focus tracking, but the camera must produce consistent, predictable behavior.
Multiple focus points WILL produce consistent, predictable behavior . . . but ONLY WHEN used in certain conditions.
At other times, the only thing consistent about the results of using multiple focus points is that it will be unpredictable.
It's up to the photographer to know when (and when not) to use multiple focus points, regardless of what Canon advertisement may (seem to) suggest.
Tom_W wrote:
taking a pre-production demo camera whose settings are totally unknown and trying to use it to define a possible issue is just silly.
+1
A pre-production demo camera with unknown settings, an unknown firmware, with a demo lens, that may or may not have been dropped.....
It's impossible to do any serious testing and be able to apply those results to a production body.
This is precisely why Canon is being so 4n4L with letting people review or post photos from pre-production units.
DavidP wrote:
Multiple focus points WILL produce consistent, predictable behavior . . . but ONLY WHEN used in certain conditions.
At other times, the only thing consistent about the results of using multiple focus points is that it will be unpredictable.
It's up to the photographer to know when (and when not) to use multiple focus points, regardless of what Canon advertisement may (seem to) suggest.
+1.
I was just processing my Blue Angels shots from fleet week. I had a whole sequence of shots that were OOF (1DMK2). I did a check and the camera was in Ring of fire mode. Damn. Stupid me.
Sahid Limon wrote:
I tested ONE pre-production body from the 3 they had at the show, and did not get the results I wanted. Is that my fault? Could be? Is that the cameras fault? Could be as well.
It became so interesting, and from what I have read, I believe it's your fault to use RING OF FIRE setting to shoot AI SERVO test in such a situation, no doubt about it....
p.4 #10 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Exactly...especially when it's gliding towards you at a near constant speed. Those are actually the easiest things to track.
I know the water is supposed to be the "busy background", but still, I don't see it was a huge challenge or enough of one to dismiss the athlete running towards the camera.
Adam L wrote:
It's not really that difficult. If a duck is flying straight at you, it's not moving horiztonally in the frame, or vertically.
I'm not going to compare it to an athlete taking up the entire frame, but I don't see how a duck flying at you could be viewed as challenging. You barely have to move the camera!
And if the target is getting larger in the frame by the second, it means that fuzzy background suddenly becomes less of a target for the AF system. Get your initial lock, and presto!
p.4 #11 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Sounds more exciting than going to my local park and staring at ducks all day long...sounds like there's a lot more "action" in the tub. PetKal wrote:
Yeah, while sitting in your tub and blowing soap bubbles.
p.4 #12 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Nick Nishizaka wrote:
What's ironic about your post is that the subject was indeed moving and you missed that part.
You can take that 2 bobs of advice and...well you know the rest champ.
According to the 30d manual AI servo is used for moving subjects when the focusing distance keeps changing...so people are wrong here since AI servo works the same in all canon DSLRs even had to look in my eos3 manual yep pretty much the same...still AI servo isnt what is recommended with the above shots no matter your opinions read the manuals kids...thanks
p.4 #13 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
In the OP's photos, the subject was clearly moving (look at the changing background) and I think it's pretty safe to assume the focusing distance was changing. However, there's no reason why AI servo should not work for static subjects...
The OP's problem was that he used automatic AF point selection, leaving the camera to make the decision as to where to focus in the frame.
p.4 #14 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Nick Nishizaka wrote: Exactly...especially when it's gliding towards you at a near constant speed. Those are actually the easiest things to track.
I know the water is supposed to be the "busy background", but still, I don't see it was a huge challenge or enough of one to dismiss the athlete running towards the camera.
We need to look at this empirically a bit. And I'll try to be gentle.
Nick, I estimate I have shot flights like that, some easier, some more difficult, at least ten thousand times more than you have, in all kinds of camera-lens combinations. I must have also posted several hundreds of those shots on this board in the past year alone. Now, based on the shots I've seen you post, my judgement is that your photography experience is limited even with simple stationary birds like a seagull on a rail.
Now, you are telling us that the target type I consider difficult is in fact "the easiest thing to track" ? Hmm.....by golly, what have I been doing wrong all these years
p.4 #18 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
abam wrote:
if you people would get up in arms about something that mattered (health care reform in america, british politicians using taxpayer money to purchase second homes, gaza, etc.), what couldn't be done in the world.
p.4 #19 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
Nick Nishizaka wrote:
In the OP's photos, the subject was clearly moving (look at the changing background) and I think it's pretty safe to assume the focusing distance was changing. However, there's no reason why AI servo should not work for static subjects...
The OP's problem was that he used automatic AF point selection, leaving the camera to make the decision as to where to focus in the frame.
moving side to side isnt the same as "distance of subject refering to near and far" using AI servo for static non high speed movement is ridiculous.
just like focusing charts..
p.4 #20 · Pre-production 1Dmk4 tests with Ai-servo
I also played with the Mark IV at the Photoplus, but wasn't able to draw any definitive conclusions about the AF (either way). I do have to say I wasn't as wowed as I thought I would be by the camera, but 30 minutes at a camera expo isn't long enough to form a real judgement.
