# Sports shooters: single or expanded AF points?



## pwp (Sep 17, 2017)

I've shot sports for years, and always used single point AF, moving the points around the frame as needed, or simple keeping the AF point on the action. Very occasionally I'll use Zone AF. 

Just for the hell of it I used expanded AF points with 1DX and 7DII at an athletics track and field meet yesterday. While I've got plenty of material to deliver to the client, I felt my keeper rate was well down on my usual hit-rate.

What are other sports shooters preferences?

-pw


----------



## awair (Sep 17, 2017)

I mostly use single/spot with 1DX (& briefly with 7D2), however at longer distances it can be difficult to maintain a target accurately, and possibly for the camera to "do it's magic".

I've occasionally tried expanded (both 4 & 8 surround points) and not found it helpful for the marginal cases, if anything it's been less accurate. And there's always the occasion (in swimming) where you nail the focus perfectly - on the splash, 6 inches in front of the swimmer.

The optimum solution would appear to be to get a longer lens!

There is one case where I switch away from single/spot - and I dedicate a (1DX) button to achieve this instantly: for swimming starts (either off the blocks, or backstroke), I switch the AF case and select Automatic point selection, as I can rarely predict where the movement is going or if another swimmer might get in the way.

Other than that, I think the choice of lens makes a huge difference in focus acquisition (my 70-200 seems marginally faster than the 400?), but filling the frame is definitely the easiest fix for all my focus failures.

Very happy with my choice of single/spot for athletics (except maybe high-jump), rugby, basketball, badminton and water polo, with swimming being the most challenging.

Not an expert, but hope this helps. Also keen to improve by finding a better way.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2017)

If the motion is predictable, I go single point..... if it is a bit more erratic I enable the helper points.....


----------



## pwp (Sep 18, 2017)

awair said:


> I mostly use single/spot with 1DX (& briefly with 7D2), however at longer distances it can be difficult to maintain a target accurately, and possibly for the camera to "do it's magic".
> 
> I've occasionally tried expanded (both 4 & 8 surround points) and not found it helpful for the marginal cases, if anything it's been less accurate. And there's always the occasion (in swimming) where you nail the focus perfectly - on the splash, 6 inches in front of the swimmer.



Yes I'll be back to single AF point at my next sports job. 

Swimming. Yes I've had the issues with perfectly focussed splashes just in front of the swimmer too. That's going to be related more to which AF Case you dial in.

-pw


----------



## Act444 (Sep 18, 2017)

I'd be interested to hear people's experiences here. I've personally ALWAYS used expansion-point AF (4 pts) to track ice skaters around a rink - hit rate has been mixed at best, with a 7D, 7DII and now 5DIV (which I find a little more consistent). Does switching to single point tracking really increase the hit rate noticeably? (Occasionally I've used Zone AF with pair and synchro skaters)


----------



## unfocused (Sep 18, 2017)

Interesting responses. I've struggled with this for the past several years and don't have any advice.

I can tell you that my decision varies by sport.

Volleyball -- shooting through the net to get the faces of the players -- almost always use single point, which does seem to help keep the focus on the player rather than the net. But, often have a problem with the autofocus picking the back of the players on the near side of the net, rather than the face of the players on the far said. 

Outdoor sports -- baseball, soccer, track etc., I often used the expanded points and pray that in the day there is enough depth of field to get the subject reasonably in focus. 

Basketball -- either single point or expanded, just depending on what seems to be working the best at the time. 

Swimming -- same challenge as others, especially because the swimming pool I shoot is poorly lit so often shooting wide open f2.8 with a 70-200. Use single point mostly. 

I think I have a better keeper rate with the 1DX II than the 7DII, but honestly I'm not totally convinced of that. The main reason I went to the 1DX II was the better high ISO performance inside. Outdoors, I actually find the wider spread and extra reach of the 7DII makes the difference between the two cameras about a tossup.

While using a longer lens can help some, in my experience it's not always the perfect solution. With a longer lens, you can get a sharper image when it's in focus, but following the action is a lot more difficult and when it's out of focus, it tends to be really out of focus and not usable. 

I'm in a somewhat unusual position because I shoot sports for a small college. That means that in most games, I only care about getting one team in focus. For example, in soccer, if the area of sharpest focus happens to be on an opposing team player, the image is useless to me, whereas someone shooting for a newspaper or other media, may not care as much which side's team has the sharpest focus, as they may be more interested in the overall action. 

Finally, a bit of a rant. Sites like DPReview take a lot of grief because they are consistently critical of Canon's autofocus system. Some people on this site say they just don't know how to use the Canon autofocus. Maybe, but then I guess I don't know either, because I have some of the same problems and clearly, the number of professional photographers using single points would indicate that a lot of people find Canon's autofocus less than perfect.

Someone needs to design an autofocus system that allows cameras to lock onto a subject using single point autofocus and then have that point follow the subject around the viewfinder.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 18, 2017)

Act444 said:


> I'd be interested to hear people's experiences here. I've personally ALWAYS used expansion-point AF (4 pts) to track ice skaters around a rink - hit rate has been mixed at best, with a 7D, 7DII and now 5DIV (which I find a little more consistent). Does switching to single point tracking really increase the hit rate noticeably? (Occasionally I've used Zone AF with pair and synchro skaters)


For fast action sports like rugby and soccer I always use zone AF. I have found with that single point and the expanded AF modes the focus point often locks onto the advertising or spectators on the far side of the field and my keeper rate goes down. With zone AF if there are any players within the zone then they will be in focus.
Incidentally I just use the basic zone AF - I find that the large zone AF is too large and will often focus on something in the foreground.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 19, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be interested to hear people's experiences here. I've personally ALWAYS used expansion-point AF (4 pts) to track ice skaters around a rink - hit rate has been mixed at best, with a 7D, 7DII and now 5DIV (which I find a little more consistent). Does switching to single point tracking really increase the hit rate noticeably? (Occasionally I've used Zone AF with pair and synchro skaters)
> ...



Yes, I have had that problem. Baseball the same way, it can focus on the outfield fence when a player moves. Unfortunately though, the zone AF will pick up any player, and if the opposing team has a player nearer the camera, it will focus on that person and not on the team you need in focus.


----------



## helpful (Sep 19, 2017)

I use four point expansion mostly. I try to develop a feel for what works best in each unique situation. Occasionally I'll use 9 point or just about every other mode. My advice is never do only one thing. Experiment and that's how you gain experience.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 19, 2017)

It's a waste just to use single AF on 1dx shooting sports


----------



## pwp (Sep 19, 2017)

Dylan777 said:


> It's a waste just to use single AF on 1dx shooting sports



Why?

-pw


----------



## awair (Sep 19, 2017)

pwp said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > It's a waste just to use single AF on 1dx shooting sports
> ...



I think Dylan is saying that the 1DX has been optimised for sports/intricate action with:
Multiple focus points
Alternative focussing zones
AF cases
...and other magic

and we end up using it like a 100D!

I both agree and disagree with the sentiment: whatever works for you, to get the shot.

Maybe the camera can't cope
Maybe the user doesn't understand
Maybe the 'wrong' lens is used
Maybe the manual doesn't explain it clearly enough...

It doesn't really matter, we just work around it.

Incidentally, I used the 100D for my first Baseball game last month (mostly with a 300/4L) - yes, I missed my 1DX, but the only feature I really noticed lacking (apart from fps) was the ability to move the focus point for better composition. I would have loved more focus points, quick switching of settings and quicker processing on the card, but they didn't matter as much as the basics of composing and capturing the shot.

In reality, we all want something slightly different from our camera. The end choice just happens to be the closest match to your needs.

If we were all asked individually to remove one feature from an existing camera, we'd probably end up with a thousand different models: if asked to add only one to the 5D4, there might be 10,000!


----------



## Viggo (Sep 19, 2017)

pwp said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > It's a waste just to use single AF on 1dx shooting sports
> ...



Perhaps no waste in general. But the AF Cases are often based on expansion or multiple points so using one point with Case 6 will ignore the Case in use.


----------



## lion rock (Sep 19, 2017)

I fully agree with *unfocused* that a better and fast autofocus system be developed.
The DR or pixel density matters little if the shot is out of focus in an action shot.
-r



unfocused said:


> _<snip>_
> Maybe, but then I guess I don't know either, because I have some of the same problems and clearly, the number of professional photographers using single points would indicate that a lot of people find Canon's autofocus less than perfect.
> 
> Someone needs to design an autofocus system that allows cameras to lock onto a subject using single point autofocus and then have that point follow the subject around the viewfinder.


----------



## Doug Brock (Sep 19, 2017)

I tend to experiment with different AF settings at various types of sports and I do get a lot of missed focus (and of course the home team is usually in white, so little contrast for the AF system to work with, lol). BTW, I use 5DIII, 5DIV, and had a 7DII for a while. I tend to use four expanded AF points, just because the single point can be so hard to hold on one person and my keeper rate seems better with the four extra points. With softball, I've lately been using the manual select: zone AF since I have fewer players in the frame. With track, tennis, wrestling, and golf, the AF points don't seem to really matter too much, as those are pretty easy AF situation. I do wish I could aim my camera at any sport and the camera get me perfect AF every time, but I really don't see how the camera can know for sure where I want the AF to be at any particular instant with complex, busy, rapidly-changing targets. With football or basketball or soccer, the number of bodies (and flailing arms) moving between my camera and the person I need to focus on (and of course who I need to focus on changes rapidly and unexpectedly as the ball is transferred) is crazy and I don't see how the camera could do much better than it already is. (I also believe that my expectations for "in focus" have grown more demanding over the years as I've gotten more pixels in the camera and more screen space on my computer monitor (currently a 27" 5k monitor)). Oh well, at least I don't get bored!


----------



## RunAndGun (Sep 19, 2017)

Maybe it's time for Canon to revisit Eye Control Focus from the EOS-3. With the advancements in technology since then, maybe it could actually work like we wanted it to in our heads. I can envision a system/case where you "set" the point with your eye and then the camera locks it on and tracks the subject across the frame.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 19, 2017)

Doug Brock said:


> I tend to experiment with different AF settings at various types of sports and I do get a lot of missed focus (and of course the home team is usually in white, so little contrast for the AF system to work with, lol). BTW, I use 5DIII, 5DIV, and had a 7DII for a while. I tend to use four expanded AF points, just because the single point can be so hard to hold on one person and my keeper rate seems better with the four extra points. With softball, I've lately been using the manual select: zone AF since I have fewer players in the frame. With track, tennis, wrestling, and golf, the AF points don't seem to really matter too much, as those are pretty easy AF situation. I do wish I could aim my camera at any sport and the camera get me perfect AF every time, but I really don't see how the camera can know for sure where I want the AF to be at any particular instant with complex, busy, rapidly-changing targets. With football or basketball or soccer, the number of bodies (and flailing arms) moving between my camera and the person I need to focus on (and of course who I need to focus on changes rapidly and unexpectedly as the ball is transferred) is crazy and I don't see how the camera could do much better than it already is. (I also believe that my expectations for "in focus" have grown more demanding over the years as I've gotten more pixels in the camera and more screen space on my computer monitor (currently a 27" 5k monitor)). Oh well, at least I don't get bored!


This is a good point. It is always worth trying different settings so you can choose the best option for each situation with confidence.
With this in mind I tried shooting one match using AF point expansion and the following week I used zone AF, just so I could see for myself how they differed. Zone AF worked far better because it tends to focus on whatever is closest to the camera within the zone. So as long as I was able to keep the zone positioned over the area where the action was taking place then it always focused on the players or the ball.
AF point expansion was fairly good, but later on in the match when the players were covered in mud and the light was starting to deteriorate it started focusing on the background quite a lot. I assume that this is because the AF point could not find sufficient contrast on the muddy players and if one of the helper AF points found some good contrast in the background it latched onto that instead.
Incidentally - for sports where the action happens in one place, and you want very precise focus (eg cricket - where I tend to focus on the stumps or the bat) then single point AF is a better option.
On a different topic, have you used both the 5D mk3 and the 5D mk 4 for sports? Going up from 6fps to 7fps doesn't seem much on paper but in practice I find that my 5D mk4 is a lot more responsive and I capture the decisive moment more often than I was able to do with my 5D mk3. Maybe it is because it focuses faster or maybe 7fps is a significant improvement after all. I would be interested in hearing whether you have noticed the same thing.


----------



## Doug Brock (Sep 19, 2017)

Yes, I've seen improved sports AF with the 5DIV, but then I'd consistently read that the 5DIV had significantly better AF than the 5DIII, so I was pleased but not really surprised. I don't take advantage of frame rates very often (I generally shoot one frame at a time, trying to time my shot with the action), but when I have held the shutter, the 5DIV did FEEL faster than the 1 fps improvement would have indicated. I recently bought Lexar 128GB 160 MB/S cards and they are pleasingly fast, too, in either body. With the 5DIV and these cards, even RAW files feel delightfully fast! In regards to differences with the 5DIII, at the same time that I moved to the 5DIV as my primary body, I also got a 100-400II and am using that as my primary lens and that makes specific differences harder to pinpoint. I miss the f/2.8 range of my 70-200 less than I thought I would, but the extra reach of the 100-400II is helping AF AND exposure. With the 70-200, I struggled more with very dark backgrounds in evening soccer and football when the players were on the far side of the field and I usually had to go to manually riding the ISO as players moved through dark and bright parts of the field. With the 100-400, I've noticed that the players are larger in the image and that has made the dark backgrounds a non-issue with exposure. Overall, I'm loving the 5DIV in particular, but also as a partner with the 100-400II.


----------



## ifp (Sep 19, 2017)

unfocused said:


> Someone needs to design an autofocus system that allows cameras to lock onto a subject using single point autofocus and then have that point follow the subject around the viewfinder.



This does exist. In AI Servo mode, if you use the all point setting, then you can select a single point to start tracking and it will track across all points from there. See page 34: http://cpn.canon-europe.com/files/product/cameras/eos_5d_mark_iii/EOS_5D_Mark_III_AF_setting_guidebook.pdf


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 19, 2017)

pwp said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > It's a waste just to use single AF on 1dx shooting sports
> ...



Unless you want to add more weight...what is your purpose of 1dx again???


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 20, 2017)

Doug Brock said:


> Yes, I've seen improved sports AF with the 5DIV, but then I'd consistently read that the 5DIV had significantly better AF than the 5DIII, so I was pleased but not really surprised. I don't take advantage of frame rates very often (I generally shoot one frame at a time, trying to time my shot with the action), but when I have held the shutter, the 5DIV did FEEL faster than the 1 fps improvement would have indicated. I recently bought Lexar 128GB 160 MB/S cards and they are pleasingly fast, too, in either body. With the 5DIV and these cards, even RAW files feel delightfully fast! In regards to differences with the 5DIII, at the same time that I moved to the 5DIV as my primary body, I also got a 100-400II and am using that as my primary lens and that makes specific differences harder to pinpoint. I miss the f/2.8 range of my 70-200 less than I thought I would, but the extra reach of the 100-400II is helping AF AND exposure. With the 70-200, I struggled more with very dark backgrounds in evening soccer and football when the players were on the far side of the field and I usually had to go to manually riding the ISO as players moved through dark and bright parts of the field. With the 100-400, I've noticed that the players are larger in the image and that has made the dark backgrounds a non-issue with exposure. Overall, I'm loving the 5DIV in particular, but also as a partner with the 100-400II.


The 5D mk 4 with the 100-400 ii is my favourite combination for sports as well. I find that 100-400ii is just the right focal length for rugby and football and it is not too heavy. I did rent a 200-400 F4 with the built in extender for one match but it is enormous and it really slowed me down, so I went back to the 100-400 ii.
It would be useful to have a few more frames per second on the 5D mk4 and I have thought about buying a 7D mk2 for sports. However, I am reasonably happy with what I have and I only miss a shot very occasionally.
Why not try switching to AI Servo for a while? You will discard a lot more shots but it is worth it to be sure of capturing every decisive moment in the match.


----------



## tpatana (Sep 20, 2017)

Interesting. I use 98%+ zone af. I'd use single point only on some special cases. People move too much, single point is not good.


----------



## awair (Sep 21, 2017)

It might be helpful if we include some screenshots (showing active AF points), to give a better illustration of hits & misses?

I know that added complications in my swimming scenarios include low light > wide open > shallow DOF.

This also tends to influence my choice of single/spot.

The attached image would (probably) have been OOF with either 4 or 8-point surround/assist points.


----------



## awair (Sep 21, 2017)

On this image, I believe the light/DOF saved me. I would have been better off using any other focussing point/group!


----------



## awair (Sep 21, 2017)

Whereas this one shows (with the wrong lens) why single point was probably better?


----------



## awair (Sep 21, 2017)

Last one, I promise: even with 'Automatic Selection' of AF points, didn't quite catch this. (Feedback & tips most welcome...)


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 21, 2017)

awair said:


> Last one, I promise: even with 'Automatic Selection' of AF points, didn't quite catch this. (Feedback & tips most welcome...)


Thank you for posting your illustrations. The pictures are excellent - especially the swimmer. In this situation where you want to focus precisely on one swimmer and their movement is predictable I agree - I would always use single point AF.
However, for team sports where the players are moving around quickly in all sorts of different directions and I really just want to capture the action around the ball I find that zone AF works best. It can keep up with the action far better than I ever could.
In the picture with the blue rugby player in the scrum cap, I cannot understand why it has focussed on his head. I would have expected it to find enough contrast between his left arm and the ball, or his arm and the shirt sleeve and focus there - which would have been perfect.
With the gymnast (or is it a diver) again I cannot understand why it has chosen a focus point on the thigh. I would have expected it to choose the point with good contrast that is closest to the camera - so either the hands or the area around the head.
Normally I delete any shots that are not in focus but I have a rugby match this Saturday and (at my own risk) I will photograph part of the match with single point AF, part with expanded and part with zone to see if it allows me to illustrate what I am saying. I am expecting more of the shots to be in focus when I use zone, but it will enable me to show what the camera does when I try to use single point AF for rugby.
Incidentally how to you save the pictures that show the AF points? This is probably really obvious but it is not something I have ever tried to do.


----------



## awair (Sep 21, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> Thank you for posting your illustrations. The pictures are excellent - especially the swimmer. In this situation where you want to focus precisely on one swimmer and their movement is predictable I agree - I would always use single point AF.


Thanks for the feedback Ian.



Ian_of_glos said:


> In the picture with the blue rugby player in the scrum cap, I cannot understand why it has focussed on his head. I would have expected it to find enough contrast between his left arm and the ball, or his arm and the shirt sleeve and focus there - which would have been perfect.


That was me, manual (Spot AF) selection using the top AF point - great when they're running, but didn't anticipate the way he was going to dive! (I was trying to illustrate the disadvantage of my 'usual way', and I was looking for good examples, rather than good images!)



Ian_of_glos said:


> With the gymnast (or is it a diver) again I cannot understand why it has chosen a focus point on the thigh. I would have expected it to choose the point with good contrast that is closest to the camera - so either the hands or the area around the head.


This one, I'm also not sure about either - possibly because it was Case 2 (instead of Case 6)? I have captured this shot successfully on other occasions, but there may have been a little more light then. (BTW It's the start of a swimming heat, off the blocks.)



Ian_of_glos said:


> Incidentally how to you save the pictures that show the AF points? This is probably really obvious but it is not something I have ever tried to do.


Using Canon's DPP software, displaying the AF points and taking a screenshot. Hence the lack of EXIF data.
Apple's Aperture app also does this well (however, a major failure that Lightroom cannot).


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 21, 2017)

@awair - thanks. I will post some examples after the match, probably on Sunday.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 21, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> @awair - thanks. I will post some examples after the match, probably on Sunday.



This is educational - thanks - and more please.

Jack


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 24, 2017)

Some pictures from yesterday's match. The results surprised me.
To start with I used single point AF, but after 15 minutes I was missing too many shots so I switched to expanded AF point.
These are a couple of the pictures taken using Single point AF. I was using AI Servo and high speed continuous so the photos were taken less than a second apart.
What surprised me is that in both cases the AF point was on the green player's leg. I was expecting the AF point to be on the advertising behind him in the out of focus shot.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 24, 2017)

Here is another example where I used Single Point AF. This time the focus point is on the blue player's hand which again surprised me. I was expecting to find that the AF point was on the advertising behind the players as this is clearly what is in focus. Is it possible that DPP is not displaying the AF point correctly?
Again I have included a shot that was taken less than a second later and this time the AF point has found the blue player's shorts, so the players are in focus


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 24, 2017)

After 15 minutes I switched to AF point expansion because too many shots were out of focus when I used single point AF. AF point expansion was a lot better - only one shot was out of focus even though I used this mode for over 25 minutes. 
This is the only shot that was out of focus when I was using AF point expansion and this time the AF point is clearly on the advertising. I am willing to accept that I was not quick enough when I tried to place the AF point over the green player who is about to catch the ball.
Before this experiment I was expecting AF point expansion to be just as bad as single point AF - because if the centre AF point was positioned over the advertising then I would expect it to find enough contrast and therefore not use any of the helper AF points. However, in practice it did a cracking job and this was the only shot I missed in 25 minutes of play.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 24, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> Here is another example where I used Single Point AF. This time the focus point is on the blue player's hand which again surprised me. I was expecting to find that the AF point was on the advertising behind the players as this is clearly what is in focus. Is it possible that DPP is not displaying the AF point correctly?
> Again I have included a shot that was taken less than a second later and this time the AF point has found the blue player's shorts, so the players are in focus



This is very much appreciated - taking the time to shoot and then post! 

I'm grappling with similar issues with BIF or almost flight. No, DPP is not wrong, it's the AF system being too slow to adjust. I have countless examples of this and even sent some to Canon. Keep in mind that the AF capability diminishes as you go away from one-shot dead center and is worst at the extreme edges even with the best cameras.

Jack


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 24, 2017)

During the second half of the match I only used zone AF. This is the mode I normally use so I was expecting a higher success rate, but I was surprised to find that there were more out of focus shots than with AF point expansion. There was a total of 6 out of focus shots when I was using zone AF, and I have included some examples below.
In the first example no part of the zone is positioned over a player - clearly my fault and nothing to do with the camera. I had been focussing on the tackle on the right hand side of the picture when the player offloaded the ball, and I ended up mid way between the player being tackled and the player he was passing to. 
In the second example - none of the AF points are illuminated - so I have no idea what happened. A split second later the AF seemed to catch up and so the next shot is in focus.
Finally, in the third example again I am confused. The blue player's arm is clearly within the AF zone but the camera has chosen to focus on the spectators behind him. I would have expected it to focus on the player as he is within the AF zone and closer to the camera. Can anyone suggest a reason why it has missed focus in this case?


----------



## awair (Sep 24, 2017)

Hi Ian,

Thanks for posting these. I had similar results with my 7D2, which went back to Canon twice with no improvement - on the third occasion I told them to keep it.

While I've had the occasional poor result with the 1DX, for the most part any errors have been mine, although I did have a couple (like your Single Point AF 2.jpg), where the focus point clearly identifies a point that is most definitely not focussed.

As Jack says, "it's the AF system being too slow": which AF case were you using, and have you made any customisations? I've used Case 2, 3 & 6 for this kind of scenario, with mixed results - I tend to fall back to Case 2.


----------



## awair (Sep 24, 2017)

With Case 2, it's my responsibility to keep tracking the subject & the camera takes care of brief interruptions. Errors normally occur when I can't maintain the subject accurately enough, due to lack of anticipation, excess distance or just too many people in the way.

With Case 3, the camera locks on quicker (more responsive), but with Single Point if you fail to track you will get a quick shift to the background!

Case 6 is me giving up (on over-thinking) and wishing for an improvement!

I feel like I have more control and responsibility with Case 2, but still not entirely sure that I have really got the hang of it.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 24, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> Ian_of_glos said:
> 
> 
> > Here is another example where I used Single Point AF. This time the focus point is on the blue player's hand which again surprised me. I was expecting to find that the AF point was on the advertising behind the players as this is clearly what is in focus. Is it possible that DPP is not displaying the AF point correctly?
> ...


Jack - thank you for your feedback.
So do you think that if I set AI Servo First Image Priority to Focus Priority then I would have a better success rate? At the moment it is set to Equal Priority because I am worried about there being too much of a delay between pressing the shutter release and the camera taking the first picture in the series. It is only a 5D mark 4 and not really a sports camera, so I understand that I have to make some allowances for that.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 24, 2017)

awair said:


> Hi Ian,
> 
> Thanks for posting these. I had similar results with my 7D2, which went back to Canon twice with no improvement - on the third occasion I told them to keep it.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your comments. 
I am using Case 2 unaltered. This is the best mode for rugby because people frequently run in front of the camera and I don't want the camera to focus on them. Most of the time the camera ignores them and remains focussed on the action. 
Rugby players tend to move in one direction and their movements is not really erratic so I don't think cases 5 or 6 would offer any improvement. 
When players are running towards the camera they maintain a fairly constant speed so I don't think case 4 is needed either.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 24, 2017)

> Jack - thank you for your feedback.
> So do you think that if I set AI Servo First Image Priority to Focus Priority then I would have a better success rate? At the moment it is set to Equal Priority because I am worried about there being too much of a delay between pressing the shutter release and the camera taking the first picture in the series. It is only a 5D mark 4 and not really a sports camera, so I understand that I have to make some allowances for that.



Unfortunately, I'm not even close to being an expert on this but I think the 1st 2nd priority issue may play into the overall performance of the AF in this case. I believe it was Grant Atkinson who delved into that topic and today with a bad headache I can't quite recall - maybe someone can help - I believe he had a series of videos and suggested not using cases at all rather just setting the 3 parameters that constitute the cases, via your personal menu. Seems only one parameter is of greatest importance.

What I can say with authority is that the AF system is not as fast as it needs to be to insure that when a AF point is over a subject, that subject is always going to be in focus. 

That's a completely unrealistic expectation especially when using less sensitive points and lenses that may not be the fastest in their drive characteristic. If you think of it, a brain has to analyze some smudgy area and decide what part of it should be in focus taking into account the movement of the camera and the movement of the smudge and then snap the lens into focus at that distance, which probably by now has changed slightly, and also determine when to let the shutter go. Ooooh, quite a task!

Jack


----------



## stevelee (Sep 24, 2017)

Would facial recognition focusing make sense for some of these situations or is that mode incompatible with some other setting you need?


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 25, 2017)

Jack Douglas said:


> > Jack - thank you for your feedback.
> > So do you think that if I set AI Servo First Image Priority to Focus Priority then I would have a better success rate? At the moment it is set to Equal Priority because I am worried about there being too much of a delay between pressing the shutter release and the camera taking the first picture in the series. It is only a 5D mark 4 and not really a sports camera, so I understand that I have to make some allowances for that.
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you for the tips. 
The lens used in all my shots was a Canon 100-400 F4.5-5.6L ii. This lens is great for sports and I find it always focusses very quickly - in the examples above you will see that it focussed on the background and then back onto the player without noticeably reducing the number of shots per second.
Next time I will try using focus priority to see if that makes a difference. Normally I discard all my out of focus shots so I would rather put up with a slight delay than capture an image that I am unable to use. Focus priority might be exactly what I need.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Sep 25, 2017)

stevelee said:


> Would facial recognition focusing make sense for some of these situations or is that mode incompatible with some other setting you need?


Well I never use live view for sports. Live view might be fine for landscapes where you have plenty of time to compose the shot, but for sports you really need to use the viewfinder. Also the phase detect AF points are designed to focus very quickly, which is what you need for fast action.
As you will have seen from the examples I posted yesterday, you don't often focus on a player's face. More commonly the AF system will pick up the ball or the good contrast between a player's shirt and his arm. Quite often the AF point settles on the back of a player so in this situation facial recognition would be of no use.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 25, 2017)

Ian_of_glos said:


> stevelee said:
> 
> 
> > Would facial recognition focusing make sense for some of these situations or is that mode incompatible with some other setting you need?
> ...



Face detection IS available with viewfinder focus on multiple Canon cameras.

And imo, it works very well quite often, but when it misses, it misses, and it will take a second to switch to a different AF-mode.


----------

