Outdoor Dogs

[Joe-1957]

Last weekend I took pictures at an outdoor agility trial in Helena. I sure like taking pictures outside, lots less difficult than indoors. I have a Canon 70-200 f 2.8L at my house, hopefully it'll work okay in a dark barn.



Joe

[JohnG]

Joe,

Timing of the shot is great!

Unfortunately it looks as if the focus is off here. Even if the image were un-cropped I would say you were too far away for reliable focus / sharp results.

Here's a general rule of thumb - make sure your subject is filling at least 2/3 of the frame when you take the snap. If it isn't then you're too far away or not zoomed in enough.

Even with good light, you need to use the correct focal lenght and correct positioning to get the shot.

[Wintershooter]

^ well put, the shot would be much better if it was cropped much tighter.

To clarify - not CROPPED tighter but FRAMED tighter. You can't frame loosely then crop down later and get sharp results - especially in action photography.

You need to frame tightly in-camera to get the best results.Cropping should be done to adjust composition, NOT to compensate for framing loosely to begin with. Try both approaches and see thedifference

[JohnG]

my appologies Wintershooter. I mistakenly edited your post. I'm very sorry - it was not my intent. I hit the wrong button to begin with. Sorry about that.

[Wintershooter]

No problem I should have been more clear in my response. That is good to point out that cropping won't make up loose composition. This is something I am still learning so the more feedback you give me and others is always appreciated.



Thanks,

Steve

[Joe-1957]

It's not cropped. I took your advice JohnG, and pretty much stopped cropping to fill the frame. I try to get as close as I can, but there's usually a 10ft limit or so. I can't get inside the ring, that's the closest that I can get. It'll have to do. I agree, I'd like to frame tighter, but $5,500 or so isn't in the budget for a 300mm f 2.8 (Even if it were in the budget, I saw a guy with that lens last weekend. I don't want to have to haul that horse around!)

Next time, I'll be using my new 70-200 f 2.8L. It might focus faster than my Sigma. I try to prefocus at the exact spot, but I'll just have to practice more.
Thanks for the feedback!
Joe

JohnG wrote:

Joe,

Timing of the shot is great!

Unfortunately it looks as if the focus is off here. Even if the image were un-cropped I would say you were too far away for reliable focus / sharp results.

Here's a general rule of thumb - make sure your subject is filling at least 2/3 of the frame when you take the snap. If it isn't then you're too far away or not zoomed in enough.

Even with good light, you need to use the correct focal lenght and correct positioning to get the shot.

[JohnG]

Joe-1957 wrote:

I can't get inside the ring, that's the closest that I can get. It'll have to do. I agree, I'd like to frame tighter, but $5,500 or so isn't in the budget for a 300mm f 2.8

Not sure I understand. This was outdoors. There's no need for 300mm 2.8

300mm 5.6 would do just fine. The problem with the photo was you were too far away for 200mm in the posted shot. I wouldn't expect much better results from the Canon lens. You needed more focal length for the distance. If you've got outdoor dog shows, a Canon 70-300 would give better results at this distance and at half the cost of the 70-200 2.8

[Joe-1957]

You're absolutely right. It was outdoors, there's no need for such a fast lens as a 2.8. It's just that I'm used to thinking indoors, since that's where the majority of trials happen.
I was at an indoor trial this weekend, I took most of the shots with my new Canon 70-200 f2.8 L. There was enough light, but the hardest part for me was getting the shot in focus, the dogs move so damn fast! That, and the shallow depth of field with the wide aperture that's necessitated to stop action.
I did a lot of prefocusing, for instance if I knew a dog was going to go over a certain jump, I'd prefocus on the jump bar and wait for the dog.

I haven't had a chance to look at the pictures. I may post a few next week.

Joe

JohnG wrote:

Joe-1957 wrote:

Not sure I understand. This was outdoors. There's no need for 300mm 2.8

300mm 5.6 would do just fine. The problem with the photo was you were too far away for 200mm in the posted shot. I wouldn't expect much better results from the Canon lens. You needed more focal length for the distance. If you've got outdoor dog shows, a Canon 70-300 would give better results at this distance and at half the cost of the 70-200 2.8