Rookie with Rebel XT

[briceb]

I just bought the Rebel XT and tried it for the first time this weekend! Kept my eyes open and fingers crossed and I think I got a couple of goods shots! I am hooked!

More pics at http://www.briceblackwell.com/peewee

[JohnG]

I'm glad you are enjoying your new toy! Thanks for sharing your photos and the link to your gallery. I think there are a number of things we can do to get you some better results next time out, but we need to know a bit more information.

What lens were you using?

What shooting mode?

What was the EXIF for the photo below?

What were the lighting conditions at the game?

Do you have an unprocessed version of the photo below? Or any of the photos on your site?

One thing that jumps out is it appears as if some very heavy noise reduction was applied to these photos - there's a pretty big loss of detail in most of them.

If you can give the rest of us the info above I think we can help you out.

[briceb]

Thank you for responding to my posting... I will answer what I can. Ireally appreciate your feedback!!!!

What lens were you using? It was a 300mm with a 2X adapter. Most of these shots were taken from 20-40+ yards away. I don't know if it is a Canon lense or a clone. The FG shot was at least 75 yards away (at the other end of the field). Next game I am going right up to the action!

What shooting mode? Sports @ ISO1600

What was the EXIF for the photo below? What is EXIF?

What were the lighting conditions at the game? Sunny but it got a little overcast

Do you have an unprocessed version of the photo below? Or any of the photos on your site? I shot them all inthe RAW format.

One thing that jumps out is it appears as if some very heavy noise reduction was applied to these photos - there's a pretty big loss of detail in most of them. I am a hack with PS and I use PaintShopPro primarily. Should I try adding noise to the pictures? When I zoom into the RAW images, the detail is great at +/-20MB per pic!

[JohnG]

Some additional questions:

briceb wrote:

Thank you for responding to my posting... I will answer what I can. Ireally appreciate your feedback!!!!

What lens were you using? It was a 300mm with a 2X adapter. Most of these shots were taken from 20-40+ yards away. I don't know if it is a Canon lense or a clone.

Ummm - whose camera equipment were you using? And will you be using it again? I just find it a bit odd that you don't know what the equipment is. That is going to make a HUGE, HUGE difference. What camera body was it? And find out what lens - i.e. if it's a 300mm 2.8 prime lens then it will take a 2x TC fairly wellif it's a cheap 70-300mm zoom then it most definitely won't take a TC well which might explain why the pictures are not sharp.

The FG shot was at least 75 yards away (at the other end of the field). Next game I am going right up to the action!

What shooting mode? Sports @ ISO1600

What camera? If it was a bright day, why were you at ISO 1600?

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666"

What was the EXIF for the phot8o below? What is EXIF?

EXIF is imbedded information in each photo - among other things it contains the ISO, shutter speed and aperture values, focus mode and shooting modethat were in affect when the photo was taken. Although I believe PaintshopPro removes EXIF info - at least the older version I have did so.

What were the lighting conditions at the game? Sunny but it got a little overcast

Do you have an unprocessed version of the photo below? Or any of the photos on your site? I shot them all inthe RAW format.

OK, just do a simple conversion to JPEG of one photo with NO noise reduction appied, no levels no nothing - just a strait conversion from RAW to JPEG.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #666666"

One thing that jumps out is it appears as if some very heavy noise reduction was applied to these photos - there's a pretty big loss of detail in most of them. I am a hack with PS and I use PaintShopPro primarily. Should I try adding noise to the pictures? When I zoom into the RAW images, the detail is great at +/-20MB per pic!

You don't want to add noise - but either the optical quality of the lens you were using was very poor or whatever RAW conversion or post processing you applied removed a lot of image detail. That's why I want to see an unprocessed image - it will help me determine (along with you telling me what camera/lens you used) whether the loss of quality was a camera/lens problem or a post processing problem.

[bluesman graham]

Hi briceb, i totally agree with JohnG's assessments, correct me if i'm wrong but it appears to me that you have set a very high iso "1600" (nothing compared to JohnG's 3200, excellent sir,")to compensate for the loss of light on adding a "doubler" to a 300mm lens which i am guessing already has a maximum f stop of F4.5 or F5.6 thus shooting around a revisedF5.6 giving a shutter speed around a5ooth to 1000th this along with theadding noise that goes with these settingshas resulted in some very "noisy" shots!!. i'm sure your football pics can be improved before your next game!! if you let the likes of a good football photographer like JohnGsee the unedited pics!!

[briceb]

Thank you so much for the assistance. My lense is a Quantaray Tech-10 CN AF 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 I took off my old Rebel film camera.

The raw image is too large to post here but this is a link to a copy of the raw image: http://briceblackwell.com/peewee/html/rawimage.html.

Below is the RAW image data from the EOS Utility software:

File Name
IMG_0260.JPG
Camera Model
Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
Shooting Date/Time
9/30/2006 2:29:32 PM
Shooting Mode
Sports
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/500
Av( Aperture Value )
4.5
Metering Mode
Evaluative Metering
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
400
Lens
70.0 - 300.0 mm
Focal Length
127.0 mm
Image Size
3456x2304
Image Quality
Fine
Flash
Off
White Balance Mode
Auto
AF Mode
AI Servo AF
Sharpness
+1
Contrast
+1
Saturation
+1
Color tone
0
Color Space
sRGB
Noise Reduction
Off
File Size
3644 KB
Custom Function
C.Fn:01-0
C.Fn:02-0
C.Fn:03-0
C.Fn:04-0
C.Fn:05-0
C.Fn:06-0
C.Fn:07-0
C.Fn:08-0
C.Fn:09-0
Drive Mode
Continuous shooting
Owner's Name
unknown
Camera Body No.
1920732955


Thank you!

[JohnG]

Well, I'm confused!

I'm not sure how EXIF data should look with some third party teleconverters - Because with a 2x TCC on a 70-300mm lens, the minimum focal distance should be 140mm (your exif shows 127) and the best aperture value of that lens is f4 (at it's widest) so with a 2x tc it would be f8. So, the exif info isn't too useful I'm afraid.

But, I can tell you a couple things:

1. That lens is not going to have the optical quality required to use a 2x TC. That most likely explains the poor detail in your photos. So, if you're going to use that lens, take off the TC - it's hurting your shots more than it's helping.

2. You're going to have to get closer. Without the TC, you need to be no longer than 40 yards away. In fact, with that lens I would say you want to stay within 30 yards of your subject. Of course this means you have to work much harder to stay that close to the action. One of the hardest things to do when shooting sports is to realize and accept that some action will occur beyond the range of your equipment to capture. It's just one of those tough things you need to accept - trying to get a quality image of a play 70 yards away just isn't possible with that (or most) equipment.

I think that's the best place to start - with those two pointers.

Also, I will point something out - you were in sports mode which has an ISO of 400. So, I'm not sure what led you to believe you were at ISO 1600.

Give those two pointers a try - you should see an immediate improvement.

[briceb]

Thanx very much for the input! Actually up until last week I was one of the coaches on the team I was photographing so getting closer to the action is exactly what I want to do and will do at our game this Saturday! I now have to do the research on how to operate the camera correctly to be inline with my instincts for where the action is - that is the exciting part "the hunt for the great shot!" I had one this weekend in my sights but my inexperience missed it!

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"I will remove the 2X this weekend andI will continue shoot in Sports Mode. Should I try to increase the ISO to 1600? Any suggestions on the setting is greatly appreciated!

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"I am sorry asking so many questions but the anticipation of getting some killer shots is very exciting!

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Thanx again!

[JohnG]

Sports mode defaults to ISO 400 and you cannot change it - that is the drawback to the mode.

If you want to take the 'next step', I would suggest the following:

1. Put your camera in AV mode (aperture priority)

2. Set aperture to wide opeen (i.e. smallest f-stop) - the manual will tell you how to do this.

3. Put the camera in AI-Servo focus mode - again t he manual will tell you how to select focus mode (sports mode automatically uses this focus mode).

4. Set camera to continuous shot (as opposed to single shot).

5. Set ISO to 400

6. Start taking your shots. If you are consistantly getting 1/500 shutter speeds but not exceeding the shutter speed limit (I think it's 1/4000 on the XT) then keep going.

6a. If your shutter speeds are below 1/500 then increase ISO until you get to 1/500 or better

6b. If your shutter speeds are hitting the max shutter speed (1/4000 or 1/8000 - I know the 20d is 1/8000 but I seem to recall the XT is 1/4000) then reduce the ISO to 200 or 100.

That's it - shooting in AV mode will allow you to change the ISO values, you just need to manually set the camera to AI-SERVO, Conitinuous shot and you need to dial in your lowest aperture. Pretty simple really.

That's the next step. Beyond that, it gets a little complicated - mostly because the camera won't really meter the way you want it to (in any auto mode - whether AV or SPorts mode you'll run into this). There are ways to correct that but that's for another day.