# What could I do better?



## tntwit (Mar 16, 2014)

Looking for constructive feedback.

These deer showed up this afternoon and this was about the best shot that I have.

Note: I didn't crop because I didn't want to marginalize the image quality.

This was processed in Lightroom 3 from a Raw and small jpeg. Standard Lightroom settings, export file size limit set to 6000K since without it the file size was 12 MB and too large for upload restrictions on CR.

Camera is a 60D with a 70-300 IS non L @ 300 mm.

1/1000, ISO 400, F8.0.

When I zoom in to 100%, the deer are soft and grainy.

No illusions, I know I am the weak link in my photos. When I went out to take the pictures, I was anxious because I knew the first crunch of snow would upset them. As soon as I opened the door they knew I was there, so I was in a hurry to make settings on the camera. The metering was flipping out because of the bright snow. I made the mistake of setting it on "one shot" thinking the deer wouldn't move, but when they ran off, I attempted multiple shots, all of which were out of focus. That was one lesson.

But, the shot I uploaded was of the deer not moving. The auto focus was on the center point. I believe I focused on the nose and re-composed, but I cannot remember for sure. 

What I want to know, is what could I have done better, and how much might be attributed to the lens and body as opposed to myself. 

I am thinking it might be out of focus, or is this as good as I can expect out of this lens or this body?

Would a 6D and or a 70-200L lens made a big difference? 

Ideally, I would have been on a tripod and manually focused, but I don't think the deer would have been patient enough. 8)


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 16, 2014)

You shouldn't crop in any case because the framing looks just great!

It's hard to interpret too much from a jpeg, but it seems like the focus is behind the deer, maybe even in the bushes. 
I forget how metering works on the 60D, but if you locked focus and exposure on the deer then it wouldn't have been underexposed in my opinion- so I think it was locked on the brighter shrubbery behind.


----------



## Albi86 (Mar 16, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> It's hard to interpret too much from a jpeg, but it seems like the focus is behind the deer, maybe even in the bushes.



+1

I thought the same before even reading your comment. 

Sure the AF was on One Shot?

With 1/1000s you don't really need a tripod. Much wildlife shooting, for the reason you mentioned, is off limits to tripods and other cumbersome accessories - not to mention manual focusing.


----------



## philmoz (Mar 16, 2014)

It doesn't look to bad to me - I think you can probably squeeze some more sharpness out of the deer. Experiment with the sharpening tools in LR. You might want to upgrade to LR 5 - there are some pretty significant improvements (you can download a 30 day trial).

To me the gray frame on the right is very distracting - it draws your eye because it is brighter than the deer.
Also the thing at the bottom left detracts from the image - again it draws you away from the main subject as you try to figure out what it is.
In my opinion it would be better to crop both of these out.

Next the white snow, being so bright, pulls you away from the deer. You will need to lighten the deer up quite a bit to compete with the snow. Darkening the snow may also help; but be careful not to make it look too drab.
Brightening the deer and adding a vignette around them might help draw the viewers focus better - again the tools in LR5 are much better for this (the radial filter tool is really useful).

Phil.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 17, 2014)

If you're going to look at images from that particular lens at 50 - 100% I would recommend using f11 when at 200-300mm, and even then it's only critically sharp in the very centre.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 17, 2014)

philmoz said:


> To me the gray frame on the right is very distracting - it draws your eye because it is brighter than the deer.
> Also the thing at the bottom left detracts from the image - again it draws you away from the main subject as you try to figure out what it is.
> In my opinion it would be better to crop both of these out.



True- I didn't notice these. Slight cropping is highly recommended.


----------



## IMG_0001 (Mar 17, 2014)

Hi,

I would say that is about the same level as I get with the same combo. I've long blamed myself for getting mushy images above 200mm, but since trying other long telephotos, I've realized it is the 70-300 which makes the images soft and the out of focus objects nervous. I have a hard time understanding all the good reviews of that lens.


----------



## Ewinter (Mar 17, 2014)

I hear the Tamron 70-300 VC stomps the canon, but that's just anecdotal


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 17, 2014)

Here is a picture I took with the [email protected], ISO 1600, f/5.6 1/250s on a 50D (100% crop).
No post processing, converted directly to jpeg from RAW.
IMO, the lens is capable of sharper images than you got.




Ewinter said:


> I hear the Tamron 70-300 VC stomps the canon, but that's just anecdotal



I had both, and while the Tammy is great for the silent motor and non-rotating front element, IQ is pretty similar on both. 'Stomp' is hardly what I'd use.


----------



## abcde12345 (Mar 17, 2014)

I definitely think that slight cropping to make the deers bigger will be better. Also, the colours seem dull. Some post-processing for that? Perhaps even raise the exposure of the deers slightly while reducing the surroundings.


----------



## pdirestajr (Mar 17, 2014)

I think the bigger problem is you were just unlucky with this opportunity. There is really nothing interesting about this image (besides it being a 2-headed deer), so it just reads as a "snapshot" type photo. I don't think it has anything to do with (1) you, (2) the camera or (3) the lens. The deer ran off before something worth shooting happened, and you couldn't direct them or pose them to your liking.

Sometimes there just isn't a shot.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 17, 2014)

I didn't crop the first posting because I was trying to maintain image integrity.

Here is a cropped version with some quick processing.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 17, 2014)

pdirestajr said:


> I think the bigger problem is you were just unlucky with this opportunity. There is really nothing interesting about this image (besides it being a 2-headed deer), so it just reads as a "snapshot" type photo. I don't think it has anything to do with (1) you, (2) the camera or (3) the lens. The deer ran off before something worth shooting happened, and you couldn't direct them or pose them to your liking.
> 
> Sometimes there just isn't a shot.



I won't disagree with that.

This wasn't intended to be impressive by any measure. It was more "Hey, cool, deer in the backyard. Let see what we can get picture wise because that's fun". 

It's always a good learning opportunity and in this case I was disappointed with the results sharpness wise and I wanted feedback as what areas to improve on. 

Some of the shots of the deer running off WOULD have been nice, but they were not in focus, so they weren't.

But again, just really playing with the camera and trying to learn and improve.



Ewinter said:


> I hear the Tamron 70-300 VC stomps the canon, but that's just anecdotal



I've certainly heard the same, however, I bought this from Canon refurbished for $282 with tax on one of their 50% off sales back at the end of December. I bought it to replace a 75-300 IS that I have read nothing good about (worst lens Canon ever made type of comments). I never really liked it because it was very slow to focus, hunted constantly (which was really bad combined with how slow it was) and it always seemed soft.

I haven't had much chance to play with this new one yet, but it definitely focuses faster, and the stabilizer is supposed to be a stop better. It still hunts and with this particular shot, I don't know if it is really any sharper.

But, I was able to sell of the old lens to KEH for $150, so the upgrade only cost $130, so I thought it was worth it for now.

Long run, the 70-200 F4 IS is on my list. Many have argued that the non IS is a better deal than the 70-300 IS non L (at it's regular price of $500-600) and it may be, but I don't thing I would be happy without IS on a long lens, particularly with the crop factor (minimum shutter speed of 1/320).


----------



## tntwit (Mar 17, 2014)

sagittariansrock said:


> Here is a picture I took with the [email protected], ISO 1600, f/5.6 1/250s on a 50D (100% crop).
> No post processing, converted directly to jpeg from RAW.
> IMO, the lens is capable of sharper images than you got.



Yes, I agree your shot looks sharper, particularly considering it is at ISO1600.

We'll see what I get on future opportunities.

I'm quite sure I'm part of the problem.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Mar 17, 2014)

I'll agree with everyone so far. All good feedback and advice. I think this is technically a good photo given the lens (70-300 which I used to own), the APS-C 60D (which I also own) and the circumstances. I think this is a normal photo to expect. If you want something more exceptional, it might take a better lens and definitely a better opportunity.

- Upgrade to LR 5, you'll be glad you did.
- Um, use the tripod for the landscapes. A shutter of 1/1000 more than compensates for a little camera shake, esp if the lens has IS, which it does.
- Don't sweat it. Just learn from it and move on. Remember, a good picture is a good picture regardless of pixel peeping and zooming in looking for sharpness. Concentrate on making a good picture and have fun!


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 17, 2014)

tntwit said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a picture I took with the [email protected], ISO 1600, f/5.6 1/250s on a 50D (100% crop).
> ...



Also, it is a 100% crop.
All I am trying to say is that the 70-300 is a pretty good tool, and no worse than Tamron in spite of the rumors (as far as IQ is concerned).
I didn't post those, but I have images from the same event as above, Federer and Nadal playing, and the AF was spot on in spite of not being ring USM.
Don't lose heart because of one missed opportunity when you hardly had time to act.
Keep this lens and you will be able to take many excellent images when you have the time to focus correctly 
Cheers


----------



## bholliman (Mar 17, 2014)

I realize the OP is asking about technique, not equipment recommendations. But, after just borrowing the EF-S 55-250 STM lens from a friend to use on my EOS-M over the weekend, I think the OP would enjoy a nice bump in IQ if he sold his 70-300 to fund the purchase of the newer, smaller/lighter and optically superior EF-S 55-250 IS STM. The 55-250 is especially sharper at mid frame and the corners.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=2&LensComp=856&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=1

Yes, you give up 50mm on the long end, but the 55-250 is only 375 grams vs 630 grams for the 70-300. From Canonpricewatch information, it appears you should be able to sell your 70-300 and buy the 55-250 with little, if any money out of pocket.


----------



## Hillsilly (Mar 17, 2014)

You're settings look fine to get a sharp, high quality image (1/1000, ISO 400, F8.0). But I'd still suggest trying to bump the shutter speed up. 

I've often thought that Canon cameras have trouble focusing on furry animals. (At least they do for me...a quick google search suggests that I might be the only one...). But, like you, I use lenses with smaller apertures and know that the camera's AF system is not at its peak - I suspect that is the reason I get more than the occasional improperly focused photo. Using AI Servo mode and taking a few shots helps with getting a higher number of keepers.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Mar 17, 2014)

You know when you ask 100 photographers for an opinion, you'll get 100 different ones. Right? 

I thought the first one was fine. I like the bars because it personalizes the image more because you KNOW it's in your backyard rather than some arbitrary image you took somewhere else. I think it's also more 'candid' looking too with the bars. But it depends on what you are going for. A personalized image or an image of deer.

Yes, focus looks to be on the bushes rather than the animals. Lightroom can help you fix that a bit. I've only used LR4 and above so can't tell you about LR3. I saw a special for snagging LR5 for about $70. Totally worth it. But to get it right the first time? AF isn't always going to nail it. You'll have to figure out which AF point selection will work for you. And that will change depending on what you're photographing.

I like the coloring you did in the second picture. Very tasteful. Often people go overboard with that.

The general rule is that to minimize blur for hand-holding a camera, your shutter speed needs to be 2x focal length. So if you are using a 100mm lens, you should be shooting at 1/200 sec at least for digital. In the film days, it used to be focal length = shutter speed. Even shooting at 300mm, 1/1000 should be plenty.

There are definitely wild life photographers that use tripods. Maybe not on the back of a jeep. But if they are watching animals from a distance: definitely. You see it all the time from those types of photographers. They'll be camouflaged out in the bush for hours waiting for that particular animal to come walking by or come out of their shelter. You bet your ass they'll have their camera on a tripod.


----------



## IMG_0001 (Mar 17, 2014)

For 282$ (-150 for the resale), the lens surely delivers. I bought mine whilw it was 650$ refurbished so I always felt I should have gone with the 70-200 f4 L instead, which was not that much expensive. 

As for the Tamron, my experience comparing a friends Tammy to my Canon showed quite similar results, but with the Tamron stabilization having a big jump on initialization as opposed to the Canon. Colors also had a different rendition with the Tamron. Pretty similar lenses in the end.

In general, I'd say that small aperture, good light and an object that is not to far are required for decent pictures with this lens. I've had a few good ones but in general, I don't like the way it renders out of focus weeds, bushes and other high details area particulaaly highlights).


----------



## pj1974 (Mar 17, 2014)

It’s good to read the helpful feedback, advice and thoughts in this thread. I’ll keep my input quite brief – though I could easily write pages about tele lenses, and my experiences.

At times there simply is no opportunity for a ‘Wow!’ or powerful photo, even with the best gear around. That’s when I aim to be satisfied with a photo as a ‘memory snap’. I think you had one of those opportunities… and interestingly I’ve had the same scenario with deer a few times when I lived in Europe (ie “cool some deer” – and taken a few photos before they ran off)– though never in my backyard!

My first telezoom lens with the Canon 100-300mm USM. No IS, soft and low contrast above about 180mm. Stopped down at 300mm with some careful post-processing I could coax decent image outcomes… but most time the lack of IQ (and lack of IS) was a real disadvantage. (Though to be fair I bought the lens new, on a good deal, and it is sharp & contrasty between 100mm – 180mm – and the USM motor was very quick and reliable). The 70-300mm IS nonL had just been released, but many copies were having the ‘portrait orientation issue’). Plus it was over double the cost, and I was on a limited budget back then (being an international charity worker).

Some years later (back in Australia) – I was looking at the Tamron 70-300mm VC USM or the Canon 70-300mm IS nonL to replace my Canon 100-300mm. I was leaning to the Tamron- though even its IQ is ‘decent’ (but not stellar) at 300mm from all the tests I show and reviews I’ve researched, IQ quite similar to the 70-300mm nonL’s. Right at that time, the 70-300mm L then was released – and I thought to myself ‘nah… too big, heavy & expensive’ – but I went into 2 shops with my 7D to try it anyway… and I was ‘sold’! The size / weight was a big consideration – it’s a very portable lens, with outstanding IQ – even at 300mm f/5.6. So I bought it – received a very good deal and a decent 67mm Hoya CPL to boot (every lens I have ever bought I have received some sort of discount / good deal).

If the 70-300mm L wouldn’t suit me, I would have bought either the Tamron 70-300mm or the Canon 70-300mm nonL. As I result of buying the L version, I sold my Canon 100-300mm (only lost about $150 for several years use) – and am very happy with my 70-300mm L. I like getting as close to wildlife as I can, and expect to keep using my 70-300mm L on high-end APS-C bodies for such sort of photography eg 7D and future 7Dmk__‘s It’s IQ, matched in a very portable body with USM and 4-stop IS make it a great set up for me.. which I can keep in my Lowepro shoulder bag – where it fits suitably with my 7D with 15-85mm USM IS. 

Here is an example photo of a kookaburra taken a week ago, in the wild. At a photo outing that I organised for a group of about 8 friends. (which I do a few times a year – mainly as an encouragement to get involved in photography, and learn their cameras, learn new skills and socialise). The photo is slightly cropped (though note, this is definitely not at 100% yet). I have received lots of views of this photo, many friends are impressed. Others took photos with their gear (including 4xNikons DSLRs, another Canon, Sony RX-100, even an iPhone) and lenses ranging from various Nikon 18-55mm and 55-200mm, to Canon 100-400mm L IS USM. I certainly don’t mean to be proud – but this photo was by far the best of the ones taken by the group on that day, probably because I have most experience, and the 70-300mm L was the best lens (though I expect the 100-400mm L could have produced a close image, but the person who had / used that lens was new to photography – it was on his Canon 700D body).

Perhaps the best ‘bang for the buck’ lens of today is Canon’s recently released EF-S 55-250mm STM IS. It is a great lens for the price, producing very good images (though note- it won’t work on FF). It might lack the build quality, full USM, bokeh quality, micro-contrast and speed of some higher lenses, but for it's price - it's image quality is more than great: particularly raw sharpness. The 18-135mm STM IS is also a great all purpose lens I often recommend. Actually Canon haven’t produced a bad STM lens yet, eg the 40mm STM, 22mm STM and 18-55mm STM! Good on Canon for setting the bar high with STM lenses thus far.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Mar 17, 2014)

I have the same lens/body combo and have tried to make similar shots... "Oh look, deer in the backyard!" but have not had good results. In my case it was overcast and dusk. I needed ISO 3200 to get anything close to usable shutter speed. As was said above, sometimes the shot just isn't there! Your shot looks really good compared to mine!

Noise/grain seems much higher than I would expect for 60D at ISO 400. Alternate software may get you better results. Shot does seem to be focused on weeds, not deer. 60D lacks AFMA, but you can do some testing to see if back focus is a consistent problem. Also it is easy to slip off the shutter just enough to release the focus lock when doing 'lock focus and recompose' with the 60D. The 70-300 non-L is older technology and likely doesn't have full closed-loop control over the focusing. (Some great articles by Rodger Cicala at LensRentals on the subject.) Try shooting short 'high' speed bursts - well 5.3 fps anyway. My experience is that the first shot is not as well focused if the lens has been idle for quite a while. I tend to use my 100-400L more so my 70-300 does sit for long periods.


----------



## hgraf (Mar 17, 2014)

tntwit said:


> Looking for constructive feedback.
> 
> Camera is a 60D with a 70-300 IS non L @ 300 mm.
> 
> ...



First look: the image is back focused. You can see it in the grass, the front limit of "in focus" appears to just be on the edge of the deer, it's clear to me that the central focus point was slightly behind the deer.

Note that this might NOT have anything to do with your technique, it could be that your lens on that body back focuses slightly. Of course, it's also possible that your camera focused on the shrubs behind the deer. When in a rush these things can happen.

As for the softness otherwise, I don't know that lens too well, so I don't know what it's typical sweet spot is at that focal length. I know with my 55-250IS it sharpens alot going from 5.6-8, and sharpens a little more at 11, so for my lens I try to shoot at 11 whenever I can. In your case I think you could have got away with shooting at 1/500 f11 and might have gotten a slightly sharper shot (ignoring focus issues).

I'd recommend putting your camera on a tripod and shooting something with good contrast at various apertures and focal lengths to find the sweet spot for your particular lens.

The grain/noise you see has to do with the ISO. Frankly, I'm surprised at ISO400 you get that much noise on a 60D? Did you pull the shadows up a bit? In any case, carefully apply some noise reduction in LR to clear it up, I don't think it'll impact the image too much.

TTYL


----------



## tntwit (Mar 17, 2014)

bholliman said:


> I realize the OP is asking about technique, not equipment recommendations. But, after just borrowing the EF-S 55-250 STM lens from a friend to use on my EOS-M over the weekend, I think the OP would enjoy a nice bump in IQ if he sold his 70-300 to fund the purchase of the newer, smaller/lighter and optically superior EF-S 55-250 IS STM. The 55-250 is especially sharper at mid frame and the corners.
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=2&LensComp=856&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=1
> 
> Yes, you give up 50mm on the long end, but the 55-250 is only 375 grams vs 630 grams for the 70-300. From Canonpricewatch information, it appears you should be able to sell your 70-300 and buy the 55-250 with little, if any money out of pocket.




Actually, when I bought the lens, I was initially directed to Canon's 50% off sale regarding the 55-25 non STM lens. Then I found the 70-300 also at 50% off. So, the 55-250 was $119 and the 70-300 was $259 (plus tax). I read reviews of both back and forth and the reviews tend to be mixed as to what is better, but in the end I opted for the 70-300 primarily because of FF compatibility. 

I realize you are referring to the STM version, and I don't know how that compares, but that wasn't on sale anyways and it's still not FF compatible.

This was intended to be a "for now" lens until I get a 70-200 F4 IS and it was a cheap upgrade, so no real complaints and I wasn't expected radical improvements over what I had.


----------



## TMSCanon (Mar 17, 2014)

Hi TNTWIT, great question. I'll try to address the two major questions you asked...

*1) Would a 6D and or a 70-200L lens made a big difference?* 
- Higher quality gear will always produce better images from the pixel-peeping perspective (considering focus and camera shake is controlled.) However, getting a better image with your current gear should be your concern at the moment. 
- A 6D with 70-200 lens would NOT have provided you with as much zoom as you currently obtained, which means you would have most likely had more window sil and door frame in the image, requiring more cropping and less available pixels. 

Gear-talk aside, I think you can improve your next deer encounter with these steps...

2) "... I was in a hurry to make settings on the camera."
- Set up the scene before disturbing it. Get your camera settings nailed, high speed shutter setting, focus point (maybe not center point if you anticipate them moving.)
- It appears you did focus on the brush. If you aimed for the nose, that's a tight spot to hit. Next time, try aiming for the rump/tail of the front deer (only because the back deer is blocking the brush too.)
- Once you open the door, start the rapid fire shooting.

Good luck!
~T


----------



## tntwit (Mar 17, 2014)

Hillsilly said:


> But I'd still suggest trying to bump the shutter speed up.



Interesting - have to try it.



Hillsilly said:


> I've often thought that Canon cameras have trouble focusing on furry animals. (At least they do for me...a quick google search suggests that I might be the only one...).



Good to know - but apparently you're not the only one! 8)



Hillsilly said:


> Using AI Servo mode and taking a few shots helps with getting a higher number of keepers.



I think this is good advice. My fear was that the thing would hunt around - but that might be a good thing if you fire of several shots that end up at slightly different focus points.



RustyTheGeek said:


> If you want something more exceptional, it might take a better lens and definitely a better opportunity.



Yes, this is what I am wondering. I might try renting the 70-200 F4 IS and see how it compares. It'll help motivate the process.



RustyTheGeek said:


> - Upgrade to LR 5, you'll be glad you did.



This advice has been put out a few times here, so I'll have to give it a shot. I've been pretty happy with LR3, so I wasn't previously motivated. My only concern is my computer struggles with LR3 as it is.



RGomezPhotos said:


> You know when you ask 100 photographers for an opinion, you'll get 100 different ones. Right?



Yes, but I really appreciate all of the feedback! 



RGomezPhotos said:


> I like the coloring you did in the second picture. Very tasteful. Often people go overboard with that.



Glad to hear since I really do it by eye. I really need to read through some tutorials on proper workflow (what steps to do first) and recommended settings. I never know if I am over doing it or not and suspect I do at times. I also think I am missing the boat on optimizing noise reduction. I left the settings at default on this on because I was afraid it would soften the image even more.



RGomezPhotos said:


> The general rule is that to minimize blur for hand-holding a camera, your shutter speed needs to be 2x focal length. So if you are using a 100mm lens, you should be shooting at 1/200 sec at least for digital. In the film days, it used to be focal length = shutter speed.



I knew of the 1 over the shutter speed rule and that you need to multiply by 1.6 for crop, but I have not heard of the 2X rule. Is that a short cut, rule of thumb, to compensate for the crop instead of multiplying be 1.6?


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

I'm late to the party and don't have much to add, but it looks like the white balance in the original capture is a bit cool and having used the 70-300 for a while, be careful of using it at 300mm, it tends to be a bit soft.

Otherwise, it's a nice shot and if you want to improve your work, keep practicing, and as you've done here, keep asking for advice. It takes a lot of practice to get good photos, and with wildlife, you have to throw in a healthy dose of luck. Knowing the best settings for your camera and having them set and ready when you see wildlife is the real secret, so keep practicing. Ask anyone here - the number of shots that we've missed due to poor focus or having the wrong settings is something we've all done many more times than we'd care to admit.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 17, 2014)

TMSCanon said:


> However, getting a better image with your current gear should be your concern at the moment.



It is, because my real fear is spending the bigger bucks on FF and L glass and having similar results! 

I know I have not optimized me!




TMSCanon said:


> 2) "... I was in a hurry to make settings on the camera."
> - Set up the scene before disturbing it. Get your camera settings nailed, high speed shutter setting, focus point (maybe not center point if you anticipate them moving.)
> - It appears you did focus on the brush. If you aimed for the nose, that's a tight spot to hit. Next time, try aiming for the rump/tail of the front deer (only because the back deer is blocking the brush too.)
> - Once you open the door, start the rapid fire shooting.



Both great points!

Thanks!



pj1974 said:


> I’ll keep my input quite brief – though I could easily write pages about tele lenses, and my experiences.



Your idea of 'brief' is as bad as mine! 8) However, I really appreciated the details about the process that led you to your decisions and what you learned along the way, so it's a good thing! Thanks, Again!



old-pr-pix said:


> In my case it was overcast and dusk. I needed ISO 3200 to get anything close to usable shutter speed.



This was an unusual occurrence. Typically, they show up around dusk and I experience what you did. I think I have my dog to thank as she was freaking out in the window when she saw them. 



old-pr-pix said:


> Also it is easy to slip off the shutter just enough to release the focus lock when doing 'lock focus and recompose' with the 60D. The 70-300 non-L is older technology and likely doesn't have full closed-loop control over the focusing. (Some great articles by Rodger Cicala at LensRentals on the subject.)



Interesting, didn't know that. I'll have to check them out. I like his articles and way of looking at things.



old-pr-pix said:


> Try shooting short 'high' speed bursts - well 5.3 fps anyway. My experience is that the first shot is not as well focused if the lens has been idle for quite a while.



Goes along with using AI Servo and giving yourself multiple attempts to get focus right. I try to not use such techniques normally, but for these situations it might be a better strategy.


----------



## IMG_0001 (Mar 17, 2014)

I looked back at the original picture from my desktop instead of my mobile and I realize that I might have exaggerated a bit in my original post. The lens should be capable of a bit more, and some PP should further improve the results. Here is an example of a muskox shot occupying a similar amout of the frame with some PP in lightroom 4 done. Basically levels, clarity, contrast and sharpening and exported to 70% jpegs at 120 dpi (file size limited to 6000kB) for screen output. I think there is a bit more details in there...

Edit: Uncropped image with a 60D and the 70-300 IS USM

Edit2: wrong picture (not 300mm) and I can't find the one I wanted. Sorry about that. I'll find another...


----------



## IMG_0001 (Mar 17, 2014)

Ok not a very good picture because of the cluttered foreground but still gives an idea of the nervous out of focus areas and of the resolution from the lens. Again, the subject is about the same size as yours in the frame and the lightroom post processing is like the other image and there was no cropping. From 60D with 70-300 IS usm.

Sorry again for the first image being at the wrong focal length.


----------



## filo64 (Mar 17, 2014)

If you plan to shoot before dusk and mainly in bright light, the 70-200 f4 L *non* IS is a cheap (ca. 550 Euros in Germany; 700$ in the US) and very good option, because it is fairly fast as in "light effective" and fast focussing, too. It is also more *precise *when it comes to focussing, so you don't have to stop it down to compensate for focus errors. Moreover, it should be sharper at f4 than the 70-300 non L at much smaller apertures. All in all, that means you can use lower ISO settings and faster shutter speeds, which partly compensates for the lack of IS.


----------



## anthonyd (Mar 17, 2014)

This site is primarily about gear, so I'm going to commit heresy: it's not the gear. It's not your technique either. It's everything else (which depending on the point of view could be charged on your technique).

Go to 500px.com and type "deer". All the pictures you'll get in the first page are nice because of one or more of the following reasons:
a) They have great subject separation. That's because they are shot with a narrow enough aperture and have a great distance to the background. In your case the bushes are right behind them. There is very little you could do about this, even if you had a much better lens.
b) They are shot at a time of the day that the light conditions are great. Again, you don't get to choose when deer show up in your back yard.
c) They are shot in a "magical" place. Sorry, your backyard is not magical. Maybe you front yard? 
d) The deer are doing something interesting, which means that they are not afraid of the photographer because they are probably not aware of the photographer's presence.

So here is my advice for better deer pictures: Burn down the bushes in your back yard, preferably while the deer are in front of them!  Ok, for real, a picture like yours is a snapshot that captures a nice memory, but it won't get much better by throwing more expensive equipment at it. More accurate focus wouldn't have changed things much either. If you don't believe me, download one of your favorite deer pictures from 500px and blur the deer a little bit. It will still be a very nice picture. The way to take better wildlife pictures (and the reason I said it can be charged on your technique) is to go to a national park, spend enough time to identify nice locations and stalk the animals for long enough until you get them to be in a nice location under nice light conditions. Planning and perseverance will get you much farther than better equipment.


----------



## hgraf (Mar 17, 2014)

tntwit said:


> Actually, when I bought the lens, I was initially directed to Canon's 50% off sale regarding the 55-25 non STM lens. Then I found the 70-300 also at 50% off. So, the 55-250 was $119 and the 70-300 was $259 (plus tax). I read reviews of both back and forth and the reviews tend to be mixed as to what is better, but in the end I opted for the 70-300 primarily because of FF compatibility.



Do you have a FF camera? If not, why does FF compatibility matter?

Is it because you MIGHT get FF eventually?

I see this opinion alot. People avoid EF-S lenses because they "might" go full frame one day. As a result, they are paying more for a lens that's heavier and bigger then it needs to be.

Lenses (ESPECIALLY Canon/Nikon lenses) simply don't depreciate in value very much (beyond the new-used transition).

Consider your case, you mention the 55-250 was $120, and the 70-300 was $260. Say you bought the 55-250 instead. Have you checked used prices for the 55-250? It's about $100-120. So, you could sell that lens today, and at worst be back $20-$30.

Yes, selling EF-S lenses when you buy a FF camera (if you ever do) might be a bit of a hassle, and if the future hassle is enough to warrant buying FF lenses so be it.

Personally, I don't see it. I buy the lens that's most appropriate for the body I have today. I don't buy something purely because I MIGHT get gear in the future that isn't compatible.

Note I'm NOT saying to AVOID FF glass. I owned the nifty 50 before I ever needed a full frame lens, mostly due to it's insane cheapest and it's wide aperture. If FF glass serves a need not available in the APS-C space (say a tilt shift lens) then by all mean go for a FF lens.

TTYL


----------



## sdsr (Mar 17, 2014)

If you want some idea of the difference switching to FF and a 70-200 might make, try the comparison tool at The Digital Picture. Here's a comparison of 60D + 70-300 IS vs 1DS III + 70-200 F4 IS:

http://tinyurl.com/nhtw2g5

plug in the 70-300 L too and compare that. There's the crop factor to figure in too, of course.

I've never owned a 60D, but I'm pretty sure the results I got with a 70-300 IS were sharper than you got here when I owned a Rebel. I wonder if you have a bad copy (given the range of reactions to this lens, there seems to be considerable variation among copies). You may want to take a few shots of various things at 300mm and see if any of them look sharper than this photo. The problem may have nothing to do with you at all. What's more, the whole image, viewed closely, looks mushy, though - is this typical of what you get at ISO 400 on your 60D (I would have guessed it was much higher than that)? Do images from your other lenses look like this at ISO 400? You may want to compare your 15-85 with your 70-300 where they overlap as well. If they look similarly mushy at ISO 400 maybe there's a problem with your 60D? (One processing tip - it would help a little if you removed the purple fringing along the border of the snow.)


----------



## striking_reflections (Mar 17, 2014)

I believe when all of us start off in photography we end up in these situations...biggest thing i would recommend is to change your focusing method to back button focusing. If you are not familiar with it there are a lot of great articles to read out there about it. It basically will allow you to shoot in servo mode 90% or more. My camera never leaves servo mode at all...it will help a lot with the not recomposing you were talking about. Let me know if you have any questions about it.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

anthonyd said:


> This site is primarily about gear, so I'm going to commit heresy: it's not the gear. It's not your technique either. It's everything else (which depending on the point of view could be charged on your technique).
> 
> Go to 500px.com and type "deer". All the pictures you'll get in the first page are nice because of one or more of the following reasons:
> a) They have great subject separation. That's because they are shot with a narrow enough aperture and have a great distance to the background. In your case the bushes are right behind them. There is very little you could do about this, even if you had a much better lens.
> ...



When I posted "What can I do better?", I was specifically referring to the sharpness of the image. I'm aware the picture itself is nothing special. I realize I may not have been clear on that point. However, your feedback is appreciated and valuable, so thank you!

Wildlife photos are more of a casual thing, as you can see. My kids are my primary subject these days. The next big thing for this lens will be my daughter's soccer games, which likely won't be award winning either. While I know it's not the ideal lens or body, I'm trying to take opportunities such as this to practice with the equipment to get the best I can out of it.




hgraf said:


> tntwit said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, when I bought the lens, I was initially directed to Canon's 50% off sale regarding the 55-25 non STM lens. Then I found the 70-300 also at 50% off. So, the 55-250 was $119 and the 70-300 was $259 (plus tax). I read reviews of both back and forth and the reviews tend to be mixed as to what is better, but in the end I opted for the 70-300 primarily because of FF compatibility.
> ...



This is why I bought the 15-85, but that is more important to me as it is more or less the walk around lens. I see some people buy one of the 24 to something's and I would never be happy with something that narrow on crop. I didn't see a huge advantage to the 55-250 in terms of cost savings and the weight doesn't bother me, so I still believe it was the better choice for this part of the focal range. And yes, I do plan on FF at some point. With this, I'll have at least 2 lenses to start instead of just the 50.

In practice I'll probably build more lenses first, but I'll stick to EF.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

sdsr said:


> If you want some idea of the difference switching to FF and a 70-200 might make, try the comparison tool at The Digital Picture. Here's a comparison of 60D + 70-300 IS vs 1DS III + 70-200 F4 IS:
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/nhtw2g5
> 
> ...



I've only had the camera a week and the lens came in while I was between the T3i and the 60d, so I'm new to both and haven't had that much time with either.

I'll have to look at some other shots and see how they compare. I'll also have to do some of the test you suggested.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

striking_reflections said:


> I believe when all of us start off in photography we end up in these situations...biggest thing i would recommend is to change your focusing method to back button focusing. If you are not familiar with it there are a lot of great articles to read out there about it. It basically will allow you to shoot in servo mode 90% or more. My camera never leaves servo mode at all...it will help a lot with the not recomposing you were talking about. Let me know if you have any questions about it.



I definitely want to look more into this. I am aware of it, but haven't yet tried it. Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## striking_reflections (Mar 18, 2014)

tntwit said:


> striking_reflections said:
> 
> 
> > I believe when all of us start off in photography we end up in these situations...biggest thing i would recommend is to change your focusing method to back button focusing. If you are not familiar with it there are a lot of great articles to read out there about it. It basically will allow you to shoot in servo mode 90% or more. My camera never leaves servo mode at all...it will help a lot with the not recomposing you were talking about. Let me know if you have any questions about it.
> ...



No problem...this is a great article even though the pics don't upload it definitely explains in detail why you should use back button focusing. https://www.clickinmoms.com/blog/how-to-use-back-button-focusing-tutorial/ take a look at it and let me know what you think


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 18, 2014)

Back button focus would have absolutely no impact on this image, as a technique I hate it, I do use back button AF off on occasions, so don't look at it as a panacea.

As for what could you do, well as has been pointed out the 70-300 is a bit limited with regards IQ, but the focus does seem a little off. I believe Magic Lantern has a Micro AF adjustment feature on the 60D so that might be worth looking into. But the other thing that might be worth testing is the IS, at 1/1000 shutter speed the IS might actually be hurting your IQ, certainly it has been tested on Nikon's and found to be counter productive, but I'd test the lens and body to see if it helps or not with your combo at those shutter speeds.


----------



## striking_reflections (Mar 18, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> Back button focus would have absolutely no impact on this image, as a technique I hate it, I do use back button AF off on occasions, so don't look at it as a panacea.
> 
> As for what could you do, well as has been pointed out the 70-300 is a bit limited with regards IQ, but the focus does seem a little off. I believe Magic Lantern has a Micro AF adjustment feature on the 60D so that might be worth looking into. But the other thing that might be worth testing is the IS, at 1/1000 shutter speed the IS might actually be hurting your IQ, certainly it has been tested on Nikon's and found to be counter productive, but I'd test the lens and body to see if it helps or not with your combo at those shutter speeds.



I agree as far as it not impacting overall image. You can't create sharpness you either have the focus locked in or don't. I was just saying it in reference to recomposing for the following shots that he missed because of being in one-shot drive. With him using back button focusing the servo mode would have helped especially with being able to just hold the back button to constantly focus on target and get the image sharp even with the animals moving. As far as him liking the method it is just a matter of preference at that point however i believe going through the learning curve is worth it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 18, 2014)

I agree, try everything once or twice. I just find the advice and enthusiasm for BBF to be very heavy handed often times, as I said, I actively don't like it but the enthusiasm for it makes me think people sometimes try to push square pegs into round holes. I believe most people would actually rather be committed to one button press for AF and exposure rather than two (though CR posters are not atypical) this is probably why it is like that out of the box, there is nothing more frustrating than thinking you have a good sequence only to realise you never actually activated the AF.

I also got a little frustrated at the lack of actual practical advice when that was all tntwit actually asked about, he didn't ask for the endless critiques he ended up getting, just info on why, specifically, his subjects were not as sharp as he expected.


----------



## fatmanmedi (Mar 18, 2014)

from my viewing of the image, the camera has focused on the background rather than the deer, i would set your camera to point focus, focus on the deer's eyes and recompose and take the shoot.

i would also suggest a monopod it will give you a hell of a lot of stability for not much outlay.

Fats


----------



## Lurker (Mar 18, 2014)

If you have a chance, setup the camera prior to stepping out the door. Even if you can't see the deer through a window if you can see an area with the same lighting that will work.

Due to circumstances similar to what you had, with varying amounts of snow (or water, or deep shade, or . . .) I tend to use spot metering and meter a known tone. In this case I would have tried to meter off the snow or the white tail. The meter will under expose this situation so I'll add 1-2/3 to 2 stops. Again, you could test this through a window. Verify exposure with your histogram, expose to the right without clipping anything on the right side of the graph.

It looks like this was close to mid day based on the shadows but there is some back lighting. This means the side of the deer your seeing is in shadow so set the white balance to shade or cloudy. In LR take the white balance and run it around some of the whites that aren't over exposed. Most of the whites will have a blue cast (higher % then the other 2 colors). 

How far away were the deer? I'm guessing about 60 feet. Check out the depth of field chart:
http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html
At this distance and f/8 your depth of field would be about 3 feet. Which nose did you focus on? If you selected the right deer then the left deer would have to be within 1.5 feet of depth to be in focus. So trade shutter speed for more aperture. With IS you may be able drop as low as 1/80 second and still not have motion blur. This depends on your stability and skill which will come with practice.

If you focus and recompose you have to keep the shutter release pressed half way which can be hard to do and even harder to realize if you slipped and re-focused. I +1 the back button focus idea. Also the Servo mode, even for stationary subjects. With narrow depths of field our natural front-to-back swaying can impact the in focus area. IS will take care of side to side motion or up and down motion but it can't correct for front to back sway. I don't think any swaying would explain the focus shift from the deer to the bushes behind them, the camera just missed somehow. In this case, if you're trying to get both faces in focus I'd focus on the shoulder or ribs of the right hand deer. It looks like that is about 1/2 way between the 2 faces. f you need to pick one to be in focus I'd usually make the front deer unless there is something more compelling about the one in back.

Not sure if these are country deer or city deer. City deer are more used to people being around. Country deer are more used to being shot at by people. I'm in the city and I've found that I can get really close to the deer. Move slowly and look away from the deer, act like you're not interested in them. I also tend to talk as I'm moving around, predators are usually very quiet while hunting. Sitting down in plain view can also help them relax.

I think the grainy look you mentioned is noise due to the 400 ISO, shade on the deer, and under exposure. It is pretty easy to deal with post processing and there are lots of tutorials about this. One tool I'm trying to learn to control noise is to use Canon DPP to read the RAW file and convert it to a TIF file. DPP does a better job of processing the RAW file and produces finer noise which is easier to correct. LR can import and work with the TIF files.

Don't worry about hardware, what you have is able to make wonderful images. The only way hardware would have helped in this case is if the lens is actually back focusing. With some cameras you can do micro focus adjustments but the 60D doesn't let you do that.

You can also setup exposure bracketing. This will take 3 photos each time with varying exposures, you set the amount of variance for each image. If you're not sure about the correct exposure this is a good way to "try it" and learn which one worked best.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Mar 18, 2014)

TMSCanon said:


> Hi TNTWIT, great question. I'll try to address the two major questions you asked...
> 
> *1) Would a 6D and or a 70-200L lens made a big difference?*
> - Higher quality gear will always produce better images from the pixel-peeping perspective (considering focus and camera shake is controlled.) However, getting a better image with your current gear should be your concern at the moment.
> ...



+1
I agree that pre-planning may have help you. Also consider single point AF rather than the auto (multizone) AF, since it will very likely focus on something else instead of your subject. Strech your options by shooting in the highest burst in Servo Mode.
Your high end gear will help in better IQ but it will not solve the wrong focus issue.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

striking_reflections said:


> No problem...this is a great article even though the pics don't upload it definitely explains in detail why you should use back button focusing. https://www.clickinmoms.com/blog/how-to-use-back-button-focusing-tutorial/ take a look at it and let me know what you think



This was a great article, thank you. It is late, so I will have to try it out tomorrow with active children. 

There was a debate in the comments that didn't get resolved/responded to, however. 

They (Richard) argued that in AI Servo (whether continuous shot mode or single shot) the camera would continue to focus even when the shutter button was fully depressed, negating the advantage of BBF. 

I thought once the shutter button was fully depressed the camera would NOT continue to focus, thus the advantage of BBF where it WOULD continuously focus.

If Richard is correct, then maybe I missed the advantage.

The Canon manual isn't clear, but it says if you use AI Servo the continuous shoot speed may be "slightly slower" depending on the lens and subject. This would seem to indicate that the camera is continuing to focus.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> I believe Magic Lantern has a Micro AF adjustment feature on the 60D so that might be worth looking into.



I'll have to check, though I have some reservations about messing with firmware. It makes me a bit uneasy, at least on a camera I just bought.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

fatmanmedi said:


> from my viewing of the image, the camera has focused on the background rather than the deer, i would set your camera to point focus, focus on the deer's eyes and recompose and take the shoot.
> 
> i would also suggest a monopod it will give you a hell of a lot of stability for not much outlay.
> 
> Fats



The camera was set to center point focus. I believe I focused on the nose and recomposed, but I cannot recall whether I focused and recomposed. I know I did on some of the shots, but I took a ton of photos and I don't know if on this particular shot that was the method used.

I tried to use Canon Zoom Browser to figure it out, as it will show the focus point(s), but I realized that it will show the point(s), but it doesn't know if you recomposed or not.

This is why I think AI Servo mode would have been better as has been suggested by many posters and I think something closer to F11 (as was suggested) along with focusing on the deer body instead of the nose (because the nose is too small - this was also suggested) all would contribute to better results.

The monopod is great tool. I do have one and do not use it enough. I tend to either use a tripod or go handheld, but the monopod gives a lot of the benefit with very little hassle or set up. We have one at work and I don't use it enough there either, but I find it useful there as well when I do (we make large (up to 60 feet long) industrial furnaces and I take photos in our production facility mostly for the instruction manuals but sometimes for Marketing when they don't bring in a pro). It seems to be produce a higher hit rate at slow shutter speeds as compared to just hand holding with IS. I used it with IS still on, but now that I think about it, I'm not sure I should have. But the results did seem better - more keepers in terms of sharp photos.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 18, 2014)

Lurker said:


> If you have a chance, setup the camera prior to stepping out the door. Even if you can't see the deer through a window if you can see an area with the same lighting that will work.
> 
> Due to circumstances similar to what you had, with varying amounts of snow (or water, or deep shade, or . . .) I tend to use spot metering and meter a known tone. In this case I would have tried to meter off the snow or the white tail. The meter will under expose this situation so I'll add 1-2/3 to 2 stops. Again, you could test this through a window. Verify exposure with your histogram, expose to the right without clipping anything on the right side of the graph.



The camera was set to spot meter - but the metering was still going nuts. This is still great advice. I was just in to much of a nervous/hurry up state to slow down a bit and take a bit more time to set up.



Lurker said:


> How far away were the deer? I'm guessing about 60 feet. Check out the depth of field chart:
> http://www.dofmaster.com/doftable.html



Good eye - 60 feet is just about right. Thanks for the link!



Lurker said:


> If you focus and recompose you have to keep the shutter release pressed half way which can be hard to do and even harder to realize if you slipped and re-focused.



I think you're right - we tend to move around more than we realize and where the AI Servo may be the better answer.



Lurker said:


> Not sure if these are country deer or city deer. City deer are more used to people being around. Country deer are more used to being shot at by people. I'm in the city and I've found that I can get really close to the deer. Move slowly and look away from the deer, act like you're not interested in them. I also tend to talk as I'm moving around, predators are usually very quiet while hunting. Sitting down in plain view can also help them relax.



We have hunting in and around this area so they are nervous. But your advice is interesting none the less.




Lurker said:


> I think the grainy look you mentioned is noise due to the 400 ISO, shade on the deer, and under exposure. It is pretty easy to deal with post processing and there are lots of tutorials about this. One tool I'm trying to learn to control noise is to use Canon DPP to read the RAW file and convert it to a TIF file. DPP does a better job of processing the RAW file and produces finer noise which is easier to correct. LR can import and work with the TIF files.



Good to know, thanks!



Lurker said:


> Don't worry about hardware, what you have is able to make wonderful images.



Yes, I definitely can improve my part of the equation more. Thanks for all your great advice!


----------



## FTb-n (Mar 18, 2014)

I have the 60D and the 70-300 non-L. I upgraded to the 70-200 f2.8L II a couple years ago and it is considerably sharper. I feared that I would miss the extra reach of the 300, but I did some testing by shooting the 70-300 at 300 and then shooting 70-200 at 200 and cropping to get the same field of view as the 300. In my findings, the cropped 70-200 is still sharper than the 70-300.

Note that focusing the 70-200 may be more accurate because it can better leverage the 60D's center focus point which is more sensitive with 2.8 lenses.

I also highly recommend back-button-focusing. 

Regarding AI Servo, it helps to understand that this is a predictive focusing mode. The camera tracks the subject's movement and predicts where the subject will be when the shutter is actually released. Part of this is to keep the subject in focus during its movement while shooting at max burst mode. With the 70-300, this may not be a big deal because the smaller aperture and the larger DOF gives you a greater margin of error. But, with the 2.8 lens, the small DOF, and a fast moving subject; the subject could move out of focus during that very short window between firing the shutter button and releasing the shutter or during burst shots.

Because AI Servo is predictive, focusing is more accurate if you give the camera a second to record the subject movement before firing the shutter. Try to press the focus button a second or so before you anticipate firing the shutter.

Also, note that AI Servo is more accurate while subject movement is in the same direction. If the subject suddenly changes direction, AI Servo can take a second to detect and track the change. I've learned this first hand with figure skating. This is where the 7D is great asset because it has a processor dedication to focusing and it responds much quicker to erratic movement. With the 60D, it helps to get in the habit of momentarily lifting your finger off the focus button when the subject changes direction. This forces the system to start tracking all over and ignore the data from the subject's previous movement.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 18, 2014)

FTb-n said:


> I have the 60D and the 70-300 non-L. I upgraded to the 70-200 f2.8L II a couple years ago and it is considerably sharper. I feared that I would miss the extra reach of the 300, but I did some testing by shooting the 70-300 at 300 and then shooting 70-200 at 200 and cropping to get the same field of view as the 300. In my findings, the cropped 70-200 is still sharper than the 70-300.


I upgraded to the 70-200 f/4 IS + 1.4x extender - here's why. I eventually got the 70-200 2.8 IS II, but that combo served me well for many years.

Also, +1 on learning to use back button AF. Once you get the hang of it, you'll never go back.


----------



## Lurker (Mar 18, 2014)

As to the back button focus questions . . .

Once BBF is setup the focus is not connected to the shutter release at all.

If you press the focus button the focus will engage according to the rules for the focus mode selected. If you release the focus button the focus will not change, not in any of the focus modes.

So, in a situation like yours you would BBF and release, recompose, press the shutter release. This is essentially the same as single shot mode but you don't have to hold the shutter release half way down while recomposing.

If you hold the focus button then the camera will continue to refocus. This is where some confusion comes in. What I've read, but the author stated that canon would not confirm or deny, is that the camera will continue to track focus even while the shutter button is pressed. With the focus and shutter on the same button focus tracking stops when the shutter is activated. This is a small differance but it has some important implications when working with narrow depth of field or fast moving objects. We are all naturally unstable and we sway. Holding the focus button in AI Servo allows the camera to continuously adjust focus to compensate for our movements, even while taking pictures. Again, based on your results, BBF and AI Servo would not have solved the focus issue you had. It's hard (impossilbe) to say exactly what happened and why the focus was on the bushes.

In your situation, where you wanted to recompose, holding the focus button would not work. The focus would be reset as you recomposed. In order to use BBF continuously, in AI Servo mode, you'd have to select a different focus point and put that point where you wanted to focus. In this situation you were shooting in full sun so you'd be fine using any of the focus points. The additional capability of the center point really comes into play in low light/low contrast situations. 

Also know, it is 100% ok to shoot a bullseye shot and then crop it to give the desired composition. I used to think all those other photogs were so lucky or so skilled they always ended up in exactly the right place and time to get that perfect photo. Now I know better. Not that there isn't a lot of skill, knowledge, time, and hard work involved but there are also a lot of setup and post processing "tricks" to help capture those perfect shots.


----------



## Ripley (Mar 18, 2014)

I don't have time to read through this whole thread right now but I did see a few things you said relative to your skill level influencing the quality of that picture. I just want to encourage you that if your photography interest continues to grow, so will your skills - and so should your equipment. Don't underestimate the difference between pro gear and consumer gear. Check out this link as food for thought... it's the difference between a crop sensor camera and the 70-300, and a full frame sensor camera and the 70-300L:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=1

BTW, awesome photo! I'm sure you'll be a little better prepared next time...


----------



## tntwit (Mar 19, 2014)

Lurker said:


> If you hold the focus button then the camera will continue to refocus. This is where some confusion comes in. What I've read, but the author stated that canon would not confirm or deny, is that the camera will continue to track focus even while the shutter button is pressed.



This may be why it doesn't seem clear in the manual, it just says that it may slow down (continuous shooting speed).




Lurker said:


> It's hard (impossilbe) to say exactly what happened and why the focus was on the bushes.



I think trying to focus on the nose at 60 feet away was probably unrealistic. I think either I moved or there was just enough error in where it focuses to miss the deer and either way it focused on what does appear to be the bushes.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 19, 2014)

Ripley said:


> I don't have time to read through this whole thread right now but I did see a few things you said relative to your skill level influencing the quality of that picture. I just want to encourage you that if your photography interest continues to grow, so will your skills - and so should your equipment. Don't underestimate the difference between pro gear and consumer gear. Check out this link as food for thought... it's the difference between a crop sensor camera and the 70-300, and a full frame sensor camera and the 70-300L:
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=358&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=1&LensComp=738&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=1
> 
> BTW, awesome photo! I'm sure you'll be a little better prepared next time...



I've played around with that site before. What I would like to see is what a 6D looks like with the 70-200 f4 IS. I wasn't able to find that, just the 1D and I don't know if that would be anything like a 6D. 

However, I could pit the 70-300 non L mounted on a 60D against the 70-200 F4 IS mounted to both a 60D and the 1D. Either way the L glass was cleaner at 200, but the 1D seemed to make a much bigger difference, which is why I am curious how the 6D would compare since the 1D is way too expensive for a hobby.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 19, 2014)

tntwit said:


> I've played around with that site before. What I would like to see is what a 6D looks like with the 70-200 f4 IS. I wasn't able to find that, just the 1D and I don't know if that would be anything like a 6D.
> 
> However, I could pit the 70-300 non L mounted on a 60D against the 70-200 F4 IS mounted to both a 60D and the 1D. Either way the L glass was cleaner at 200, but the 1D seemed to make a much bigger difference, which is why I am curious how the 6D would compare since the 1D is way too expensive for a hobby.


The 6D & 1D results should match up fairly well, particularly in terms of full frame vs. crop, but these test crops can be a bit deceiving because the size doesn't match. The jump in sharpness and overall image quality from crop to FF sensor is noticeable, but the benefits of FF are mostly in high ISO shots and the ability to use lenses at their native focal lengths. Lens quality is typically more important and if you really want to get into wildlife photography, your money is best spent on the Canon 70-300L or the Tamron 150-600 vs. upgrading your 60D. Both of those lenses are considerably sharper than the 70-300 non-L is at 300mm and will make the most difference. I think the Tamron is a steal and unless you are really good at getting close to wildlife, the 600mm (960mm on a crop sensor) would make a massive difference in the type of photos you can take.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 19, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Lens quality is typically more important and if you really want to get into wildlife photography, your money is best spent on the Canon 70-300L or the Tamron 150-600 vs. upgrading your 60D. Both of those lenses are considerably sharper than the 70-300 non-L is at 300mm and will make the most difference. I think the Tamron is a steal and unless you are really good at getting close to wildlife, the 600mm (960mm on a crop sensor) would make a massive difference in the type of photos you can take.



Wildlife is more of a secondary interest...kids, soccer games, indoor school events where low light is an issue (and why I eventually want FF) are more typical at this point. 

I have been targeting the 70-200 F4 IS as a purchase, but I was wondering about the 70-300L as it gets many positive comments here and now I was curious as to what the minimum F stop is at 200 mm. If it is F4 (probably not) it would give up nothing to the 70-200 F4 IS in terms of performance.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 19, 2014)

tntwit said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Lens quality is typically more important and if you really want to get into wildlife photography, your money is best spent on the Canon 70-300L or the Tamron 150-600 vs. upgrading your 60D. Both of those lenses are considerably sharper than the 70-300 non-L is at 300mm and will make the most difference. I think the Tamron is a steal and unless you are really good at getting close to wildlife, the 600mm (960mm on a crop sensor) would make a massive difference in the type of photos you can take.
> ...


If that's the case, the 70-200 f/4 IS or 70-300L should both work well, and according to table in The Digital Picture Review it's at f/5 from 155-228mm. 

I had and loved the 70-200 f/4 IS for years, but have never tried the 70-300L, but I hear great things about it. The decision is going to come down to the extra 100mm vs. the faster speed, but remember you can always add an extender to get to 280. With a crop sensor, 200mm is likely enough for most of the purposes you describe above, short of shooting from the opposite end of the field or back of the auditorium. Remember that f/4 won't be enough (without a FF body at least) to shoot fast moving subjects in low light without reaching to ISO 3200 or above.


----------



## tntwit (Mar 19, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Remember that f/4 won't be enough (without a FF body at least) to shoot fast moving subjects in low light without reaching to ISO 3200 or above.



Yes, I'm aware, but ultimately I want to pair it (or the 70-300 L) to the 6D which should be a nice combination that would be roughly 2 stops ahead of what I have now at 200. And on the 60D (the 70-200) it'll still be 2/3 faster at 200 along with all the other benefits of the L.


----------

