AF issue. Lens or body?

The23rdman

The23rdman

Messages
13,582
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
Had a job t'other day and ended up with a lot of issues with my D7000 and 80-200 f/2.8 struggling to focus. The job was in a school hall shooting dancers in low-key style.

I was shooting at f/5.6 simply to have enough power from my doubled up YN-560's so focus accuracy was important. Many times on the day the camera refused utterly to look onto the girls faces so I ended up focus/recomposing more than I ever want to.

The background was quite dark, but the girls were reasonably lit. Is this camera shake? Seems odd I'd shake consistently on some girls, but not at all on others. I also had no problem getting sharp shots of the girls jumping with pre-focus??

5959899725_c8d435e9ac_o.jpg


Whaddayathink?
 
Last edited:
Looks like focus is on elbow, rather than eyes.
Have you tried setting focus to centre point only?
 
1/200th seems a bit low for dancers moving?
 
aeronic said:
Looks like focus is on elbow, rather than eyes.
Have you tried setting focus to centre point only?
Click to expand...

I said I resorted to that, but it was still inconsistent. This shot is a 100% crop of a full body shot.

admirable said:
1/200th seems a bit low for dancers moving?
Click to expand...

Static poses and speedlights. The jump shots are generally sharper. ;)
 
were you using one shot focus or tracking?
 
I tried tracking with the moving shots but it wasn't effective. These are all one shot single focus point.
 
I'm not a Nikon person but can your software tell where the focus point was?
 
Not entirely sure. Still, if I put the focus point on the face and it misses we have a problem, don't we?
 
What focal length? There is a documented focus issue with the 80-200 at 200mm.
 
Mate, not an expert on Nikons system, but since trying the Servo focusing on the 1Dmk4 without great success, I did a bit of reading, apparently for best results you need to focus and allow the camera to track the subject for half a second or even a full second before pressing the shutter. Dunno if you did that mind, but since reading that I'm having much more success.
 
Ste, the issues where not really with servo, but with single shot.
 
The23rdman said:
Ste, the issues where not really with servo, but with single shot.
Click to expand...

Aye, I just mention it as you said you'd tried servo and it didn't work for you. I had similar issue till I read that.

How many times did this happen while in single shot mode? Was it often, or just a few times? Looking at all the shots from the first shoot, it didn't look like you had any focus issues then? (I loved those shots by the way bud, excellent work (y))
 
The first shoot was with a 5DII and 70-200 2.8 is. The irony of the fact this was with the supposedly superior AF of a D7000 isn't lost on me.

It happened consistently with some girls over others. Many just about in focus, more than I'd like needed immense pp work.
 
Not knowing the conditions you were shooting in, but as it did it with some of the girls and not others, I'm wondering if there might not have been enough contrast for the camera to focus correctly? I dunno, just seems strange the camera could focus on some of them ok and not others, all other variables being equal :shrug:
 
It is odd, yes. The conditions were okay as I left the lights on in the hall and overpowered them.
 
Mildly amusing, but ultimately not particularly helpful, old chap. ;)
 
Were you taking a lot of shots in quick succession and/or did you get an error message at any time? the reason I ask is that there's a documented problem with the 80-200 having mounting issues on later Nikon bodies (d80 era on) which can cause the camera to have problems reading the data from the lens. Dismounting/remounting seems to be the only way to cure it.
 
No, not really. Shot was setup then focus checked. If it failed I shot it again.

Edit: no error messages.
 
The23rdman said:
No, not really. Shot was setup then focus checked. If it failed I shot it again.

Edit: no error messages.
Click to expand...

In that case I can only think it's down to, as Ste mentioned earlier, there not being enough of a contrast for the af to lock onto :shrug:
 
I guess I just expect better performance. Especially as I had zero trouble with the supposedly inferior 5DII... although I was shooting that day at f/11 and focus recomposing so it's not a fair comparison really. couldn't do that on this job as I was using speedlights to freeze action and didn't have the power.
 
Does the 'Nikon', said that word again, one shot focus on the nearest object? Perhaps the camera was fooled somehow?
 
TBH, Jim, I don't know how it works. It looks more like a back focus miss on most shots though. :confused:
 
Flash In The Pan said:
In that case I can only think it's down to, as Ste mentioned earlier, there not being enough of a contrast for the af to lock onto :shrug:
Click to expand...

Had this exact problem the other day whilst shooting Julia. It was a bit dark in the room and I couldn't get the 24-70 to 'lock on' at all. I popped a light on and things didn't really improve. After a short cursing session Julia went to get changed into her jim jams.

Carrying on from where I'd left things I suddenly found the 1Dmk4 locking on every time easily with all the hunting from the previous try gone. The only difference was the clothes she had been wearing were different. I was focusing on her eyes both times. You wouldn't think her clothes would make much difference then, but it did, or seemed to anyway. Maybe her lighter top was throwing a tiny bit more light up onto her face where I was focusing? I dunno if this is true but it sure felt that way.

The point is AF isn't perfect, even on my £3500 camera or £1000 L lens, sometimes conditions will fool it and the very subtlest of changes can make all the difference. I've no proof of my theory above and it sounds far fetched and a bit odd but what else could it have been?
 
The focus looks out rather than camera blur mate.

Dont wanna try and teach you to suck eggs bud, but there are easier ways to pre focus. Even moving back and using the 200mm would have resulted in deeper dof, and her face would probably be in focus in this case
 
Danny, I wasn't pre focusing on these mate. That was the action shots. I was backed up against the wall at 80mm as it was.

I don't use zooms often, but is it possible to zoom in, get a lock and zoom out?
 
The23rdman said:
Danny, I wasn't pre focusing on these mate. That was the action shots. I was backed up against the wall at 80mm as it was.

I don't use zooms often, but is it possible to zoom in, get a lock and zoom out?
Click to expand...

Ah ok fella fair play, not an ideal scenario. My 17-55 would have been perfect for you ;) lol.

As far as I'm aware on modern zooms, no you can't
 
Dean, single shot is 100% absolutly no good at all for any subject which moves at all, you need to treat these subjects exactly like i would treat shooting Rugby and set the camera accordingly.
 
Gary, these girls are not moving. They're posing positions and holding them perfectly still. :)

Danny, I'm still not convinced by any zoom lens. ;)
 
Dean am I correct that you have the camera set to 'S Single Servo' on the focus selector switch?

If so it could be either you, or the subject moving slightly after the camera has locked focus.

I would use 'C Continuous Servo' so that if either you or the subject move slightly the camera will adjust focus.
 
The23rdman said:
Gary, these girls are not moving. They're posing positions and holding them perfectly still. :)

Danny, I'm still not convinced by any zoom lens. ;)
Click to expand...

Impossible.

Just sell up Dean and go back to Canon, you obviously do not get on with Nikon.
 
Martyn... said:
Dean am I correct that you have the camera set to 'S Single Servo' on the focus selector switch?

If so it could be either you, or the subject moving slightly after the camera has locked focus.

I would use 'C Continuous Servo' so that if either you or the subject move slightly the camera will adjust focus.
Click to expand...

This doesn't explain why it worked fine for some girls and completely not for others.

EDIT: Maybe it does. I'll look at the ones I missed and see if they're the less talented dancers...
 
Last edited:
fracster said:
Impossible.

Just sell up Dean and go back to Canon, you obviously do not get on with Nikon.
Click to expand...

Perfectly may not be the best word, but still enough at f/5.6 not to cause this kind of softness... especially if I got some jump shots sharper.

If I hadn't just made a sizeable investment in new Nikon gear I may have done. As it is I'm stuck with it.
 
The23rdman said:
Perfectly may not be the best word, but still enough at f/5.6 not to cause this kind of softness... especially if I got some jump shots sharper.

If I hadn't just made a sizeable investment in new Nikon gear I may have done. As it is I'm stuck with it.
Click to expand...

I ca appreciate that Dean. I just get the distinct impression that you do not like it nor get on with it. If it is your profession, then maybe revert to something that works better for you?
 
fracster said:
I ca appreciate that Dean. I just get the distinct impression that you do not like it nor get on with it. If it is your profession, then maybe revert to something that works better for you?
Click to expand...

No, I've been very happy with the D7000 and 35 f/1.8 (the best lens for the money I've ever used) for my usual work. They're stunning. I accept this may be user error, but it did surprise me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top