ALMS at Mosport 2010 with HS10

[Jayell]

Hi everyone!

I skipped off work on Friday and went to Mosport to watch the American Le Mans Series cars. It was a beautifully sunny and warm day, a couple of good friends, some refreshments, and awesome racing cars!

I wound up taking almost 750 photos, about twice as many as I had thought I had. I've put together a slide show of a few of 'em here: http://www.lugnutsracing.com

Here are some samples:





















I took plenty of shots in the pits, as well, but am more interested in showing the on track photos to illustrate the capabilities of the HS10.

While the HS10 is able to produce some nice shots, it's hopeless for capturing any sort of unexpected action. The usual and known issues apply: slow to focus, slow to write. Considerable shutter lag, terrible EVF. I fully expected this behavior, so I'm not disappointed.

The mighty zoom of the HS10 sure comes in handy at the track, especially for slobs like me without a photo pass, confined to the spectator area. However, we ought to be careful of what we wish for: it's no easy task keeping a hurtling race car in the viewfinder at full zoom.

As with my old S5200, I found it's near impossible to get good panning shot, with the background blurred and the subject sharp. I simply can't get a slow enough shutter speed. Perhaps an ND filter is the answer?

These photos are very static and therefore a bit boring to my eye. I'll mess with slower shutter speeds next time.

I thought some earlier photos looked a little flat, so these were done at ⅓ under, all shutter priority. Post editing was limited to a little sharpening in FastStone.

I hope you like them, but if not, lemme have it!

[Mark1616]

Unfortunately there is no exif so can't see your settings, but in daylight and ISO 100 using f11 you should get about 1/200s which is fine for getting motion blur.

I'm shooting out so won't comment more but they are some cool cars, and well worth getting off work for!!!

[Jayell]

Bah! The program I use to apply the batch watermark wipes out the EXIF.

I forgot to mention above, all shots at 100 ISO.

Here's the EXIF for the following shot, for example:

Camera Maker: FUJIFILM
Camera Model: FinePix HS10 HS11
Image Date: 2010:08:27 15:02:24
Focal Length: 19.6mm
Aperture: f/7.1
Exposure Time: 0.0031 s (1/320)
ISO equiv: 100
Exposure Bias: -0.33 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Color Space: sRGB




Thanks for the reply!

[shoturtle]

Nice shots, those La Mans races are pretty crazy. Mixing the prototypes and GT together. They just make the 430's and GT3's look like they are crawling by when they just blow pass them.

[Tullio]

Those are real nice shots. I've been following some HS10 threads on different forums and the (negative) comments you made about the camera seem to be greatly shared by the Fuji community. It's discouraging in may respects. If this was a $150 camera, it would be one thing but having to deal with all those limitations after spending $400+ is something totally different. I'm still very much interested in getting myself one just for that reach (and the manual zoom, which I really like) if nothing else. So, here's a question...out of the 750+ shots you took, how many would you consider excellent vs. not excellent but keepers vs. trash? Thanks.

[shoturtle]

Tullio,

That is a very good question on the keeper. The static shots are very good. But given the cost of a similar system that would have dealt with those issues. The HS has some respectable results. If 15% of the 750 were keepers and were in burst mode. That would be a excellent return form the HS10. Especially given the subject matter.

[Jayell]

Originally Posted by Tullio

So, here's a question...out of the 750+ shots you took, how many would you consider excellent vs. not excellent but keepers vs. trash? Thanks.

For web use, I'd say about 15%, which is okay with me. For photos that I might want to print, say 8x10, perhaps 5%.

I had a pretty good idea what I was getting into with the HS10, so I'm not surprised at the results. For me, it's a good alternative to a DSLR. I'm no longer interested in lugging around all the gear.

Thanks for your remarks.

[Tullio]

Wow, that's pretty a low number of keepers. I think 15% for the web is very low considering the low resolution it requires. Thanks for the answer!

[Jayell]

Originally Posted by Tullio

Wow, that's pretty a low number of keepers. I think 15% for the web is very low considering the low resolution it requires. Thanks for the answer!

Okay, I'm at home so I can accurately look at the numbers. Of the 750 or so shots, 430 were on track shots, the rest static shots taken in the paddock. Of the 430, I posted 133 on my own web site. That works out to 31%. So, almost one third. Not bad.

Still, the number of shots suitable for printing would remain very low.

Thanks again.

[shoturtle]

That was better then I thought. 31% giving the AF limitation with the contrast system is better then I would have expected.