Nikon 5: Olympus 0

[gssoh]

Espion - you take beautiful pictures and flying shots as well. Could see from your gallery. Set to S-AF, track the subject and wait for that split second. Dragonflies may have erratic path but they do "pause" during flight too, don't they?

NMSS_2 - Don't quarrel with your tools. Understand the subject well. I like the way Espion described his observation -

"But there seems to be some leaves she repeatedly visit and after some time I am able to point instinctively and accurately at these locations and acquire focus when the butterfly returns to them. And on one of this anticipated return I got its approach."

Good luck on your next try.

And to Blu - "Happy Trying", I couldn't let my 40-150mm go. Cheap and good. :lovegrin:

 

[NMSS_2]

NMSS_2 - Don't quarrel with your tools. Understand the subject well. I like the way Espion described his observation -

looks like i am not going to have any flying bugs or birds in my gallery unless i change camera brand or oly change their focusing control or myself! :bsmilie:

technique can be easily trained but not patience. :sweat:

 

[cjtune]

looks like i am not going to have any flying bugs or birds in my gallery unless i change camera brand or oly change their focusing control or myself! :bsmilie:

technique can be easily trained but not patience. :sweat:

LOL... you could also 'trap' the insects or birds into an environment that makes it easier for you to photograph them? A dab of honey somewhere where there's a lot of bees (don't get any on you!!), or a plate of nuts and wriggly mealworms?

But, I too rather have more AF-points. Here's a recent example to spur that wish (off-centre composition of subject that's coming fast towards you):

 

[OlyFlyer]

LOL... you could also 'trap' the insects or birds into an environment that makes it easier for you to photograph them? A dab of honey somewhere where there's a lot of bees (don't get any on you!!), or a plate of nuts and wriggly mealworms?

But, I too rather have more AF-points. Here's a recent example to spur that wish (off-centre composition of subject that's coming fast towards you):

I don't want to argue but in my opinion the guy is a bit out of focus while the water drops in the center are in focus. There is no way my or any other camera can find out where I want to put the focus. The only way to do that is is center is knife edge sharp and then aim, compose (move the camera to position) and shoot. In your example, I guess movements of the guy are not random, so there is time for composition. How would a camera know if you want to focus on the guy or on the water? If you are not sitting in the boat, both the guy and the water around him has about the same speed of motion. If you are sitting in the same boat, then the guy has a much slower relative motion than the water, since you and the guy are travelling at the same speed (assuming a straight line) while the water is falling behind. Altho it seems as if the guy is hanging on a dragon glider, judging from the rope angle, so on a second thought, you are on the shore.

Still, I wander how could a camera know where to focus? :dunno:

 

[cjtune]

I don't want to argue but in my opinion the guy is a bit out of focus while the water drops in the center are in focus. There is no way my or any other camera can find out where I want to put the focus. The only way to do that is is center is knife edge sharp and then aim, compose (move the camera to position) and shoot. In your example, I guess movements of the guy are not random, so there is time for composition. How would a camera know if you want to focus on the guy or on the water? If you are not sitting in the boat, both the guy and the water around him has about the same speed of motion. If you are sitting in the same boat, then the guy has a much slower relative motion than the water, since you and the guy are travelling at the same speed (assuming a straight line) while the water is falling behind. Altho it seems as if the guy is hanging on a dragon glider, judging from the rope angle, so on a second thought, you are on the shore.

Still, I wander how could a camera know where to focus? :dunno:

Hi Olyflyer, off-centre focussing was what I did and in the time taken by me to move the focus off of the guy to a bit to the right (subjects in the centre are boring..), he has moved fast enough to be out of the DOF, appearing blurring.
In this case, time is not on my side. Also, if not on the guy, where to pre-focus?

So, I'm thinking if I had more multi-AF points, I could select to use one that is more towards one side in potrait orientation and need not have that time lag in moving the focus point from the subject to the centre of the composition. Heck, I may be even able to do continuous servo mode focussing.

 

[microcosm]

We can only see what Olympus has up their sleeves with the new P-1 camera.

 

[Blu-By-U]

One way is the C-AF or use the side points. Then multi exposure. You get 3 shots per sec.

 

[espion]

Hi Olyflyer, off-centre focussing was what I did and in the time taken by me to move the focus off of the guy to a bit to the right (subjects in the centre are boring..), he has moved fast enough to be out of the DOF, appearing blurring.
In this case, time is not on my side. Also, if not on the guy, where to pre-focus?

One technique I have used is C-AF with a higher f number but then my target was a human running which is slower than the water skier.

Alternative is to pre focus on some "ambush" point and focus lock. I suppose I use the latter when, for example, taking racing F1 cars headon, taking some reference on the track side.

I can't see how else you can acquire fast moving targets in-situ and in real time, for there will always be a lag in focus acquisition, a lag long enough for the target to move out of focus.

 

[espion]

Set to S-AF, track the subject and wait for that split second. Dragonflies may have erratic path but they do "pause" during flight too, don't they?

OK they do pause. You just have to be pointing in their pause space and reacquire aim and focus when they come in view, which is rather difficult if you are at the long end of a tele.

It is all a question of increasing your chances of a good frozen in-flight capture, and to do it consistently, in contrast to a one off fluke shot.

This is what I can think:

1. observe the target, and it matters most if it periodically returns to a spot, eg dragonfly hover, F1 racing, etc.

2. some reference object near that spot, to prefocus the camera to minimise focus hunt.

3. wait for target to return to "ambush space" - and this can be most taxing. Many a kitkat moments occur when you change your ambush space thinking that you have picked a lemon.

4. accurately and rapidly aim and reacquire focus - if necessary - and release shutter.
​

But all these will not work if the total time delay for aiming, focus reacquisition - be it manual or auto - and shutter release is "too long", unless the target remains in the DOF within this lag. Some tracking is possible in this time and space.

(Use manual focus here if your hand-eye coordination is faster and more accurate than the auto focus algorithm and the view in viewfinder is useable.)

If target does not return to a spot periodically, then use tracking technique, which is a far lower probability technique than waiting for an "ambush".

The difficulties here are:

1. maintaining track, especially if target does not move in a predictable path

2. constant focus acquisition - I have no idea how the auto focus algorithm compute focus range for changing scene. My guess is that it samples the scene at the time you hit the focus button, and computes the range for the maximal contrast within the selected focus area. (But I suspect there is resampling going on too.) The moving target will still be in focus if it remains within this range and within the DOF. If not the focus is off.
​

To increase chances:

1. observe and have knowledge, and track during predictable movement phase

2. have as much DOF as possible

3. accurate constant aiming, this is not unlike panning skills, except, when using tele, it is trying to pan with a straw-tube view of the world, and when tracking insects, on a high manoeuvrable and unpredictable target.​

I have not got any successful shot with the tracking technique yet. Only the ambush have worked for me.

 

[cjtune]

I can't see how else you can acquire fast moving targets in-situ and in real time, for there will always be a lag in focus acquisition, a lag long enough for the target to move out of focus.

Agreed. But the lag time for AF lock on for a small differential change in position is probably much quicker than having to move the focus point from the off-centre pre-focus position to the centre of composition.

 

[OlyFlyer]

...Also, if not on the guy, where to pre-focus?...

You could also try MF Bracketing. This is from the E-500 manual, page 74.

The camera shoots multiple frames, changing the focal point slightly for each frame.

The frames are saved on the card in the following order: the frame with the manually set focal point, the frame with the focal point shifted backward, and the frame with the focal point shifted forward.


1 Menu[Tools 1][MF BKT]

2 Use the control dial to set.

[OFF] / [5F 1STEP] / [5F 2STEP] / [7F 1STEP] / [7F 2 STEP]

EV step : 1STEP, 2STEP

Number of frames

2 frames taken with the focal point shifted forward from the one you set manually and 2 frames with the focal point shifted backward: Total 5 frames.

3 frames taken with the focal point shifted forward from the one you set manually and 3 frames with the focal point shifted backward: Total 7 frames.

3 Press the i button.

4 Use MF to adjust the focus, then press the shutter button to take the picture.

• When the shutter button is pressed all the way, the camera shoots frames sequentially; the frame with the manually set focal point, the frame with the focal point shifted backward, and the frame with the focal point shifted forward.

• The number of frames with the focal point shifted back or forward from the manually set focal point may differ depending on the lens and shooting conditions.

• If the subject is not in the center of the frame or has lower contrast than its surroundings, an excessive number of frames may be shot with the focal point shifted backward or forward.

• To use MF BKT, stabilize the camera on a tripod or similar device, etc.

Maybe you know all that, I never tested it but IMO it should work. As on where to focus: the water. Water skiers do use predictable tracks so it should not be impossible to prefocus.

 

[cjtune]

You could also try MF Bracketing. This is from the E-500 manual, page 74.

Maybe you know all that, I never tested it but IMO it should work. As on where to focus: the water. Water skiers do use predictable tracks so it should not be impossible to prefocus.

Bracketing is another word for trial and error shots, and 'not impossible' is basically the upper limit of 'very difficult' (at least to me). I did get a few clear shots of that guy in the end. Trial and error. So, that's why I think it'd be easier if maybe there were extra AF points places further off-centre to help me out.

 

[OlyFlyer]

Bracketing is another word for trial and error shots, and 'not impossible' is basically the upper limit of 'very difficult' (at least to me). I did get a few clear shots of that guy in the end. Trial and error. So, that's why I think it'd be easier if maybe there were extra AF points places further off-centre to help me out.

Yes, I agree. The only thing is that maybe automatic trial and error is faster than manual.

I think multiple focus points are difficult to handle if they are not equally sensitive to both horizontal and vertical patterns. On the Oly, only the center point is good for all kind of patterns. If multiple points are implemented right, in my opinion there should also be a kind of setup for what they should act on. Like movement tracking or not, pattern, contrast and I don't know what else. I don't know if any cameras on the market are doing any tracking at all today, but I think that is the key to the solution. In most cases when AF is a problem it is due to moving objects. If the AF points would shift automatically with the moving object that would solve the problem. As it is now, if focus gets locked on any of the three AF points it stays there, and if you use C-AF it is only that point that is taken into account. That is one reason why I find C-AF useless. I am doing better with my finger vibrating on the shutter to halfpress to gain focus and track the object. It works well if the object is kept in the center. Of course, small aperture helps also, so when critical I use f8 - f11 if possible. Usually that increases DOF enough even if the tracked object leaves the center.