Thruxton - first time

F

Fordsabroad

Messages
921
Name
Gordon
Edit My Images
Yes
Thanks for the advice given to me prior to my first visit to Thruxton. I did heed the suggestions and tried to vary the positions and shots. I was a little dissapointed with the overall standard of my shots, far far less keepers than i would have hoped for. I had far more out of focus than I would have liked. I would like to blame the Sigma 150 - 600 but I think it was me not the lens. The shutter speed varied between 800 - 2000 so I don't think it was movement. I wish I had taken my 300 F2.8 as well for a comparison. One of the professionals there told me of a good spot but said it was a difficult shot as you had to lean over a low wire fence and shoot through a high one. I thought I had cracked it but on returning home there seems to be some sort of diffraction degrading most of the images - oh well lesson learned, The 300mm 2.8 wide open may have helped.
Here are some of the better ones, comments and constructive criticism would be welcome and appreciated.


488A5567.jpg 488A4137.jpg 488A5174.jpg 488A5898.jpg 488A5862.jpg Thank you for the advice
 
Last edited:
I do like the last two very much.(y)
 
I find it hard to believe the first three are 1/800 or better... but if they are, I would guess the most likely issue is a short panning swing. But it is also quite possible that the lens needs some AFMA.

The 4th is real close, maybe focused a bit in front. But in the 5th the AF didn't keep up w/ the subject and the focus is between the two bikes.
 
Sk66

Thank you for your response. I am sorry I didn't phrase my original post very well. The static shots are between 800 - 2000th second, the panning shots are around 100 -125. Please explain AFMA. Is this to do with the sigma dock or adjustment in the camera? and I would appreciated a steer as to how I can do this.

Thanks
Fordsabroad
 
Fordsabroad said:
Sk66
the panning shots are around 100 -125. Please explain AFMA. Is this to do with the sigma dock or adjustment in the camera? and I would appreciated a steer as to how I can do this.
Click to expand...
That's much more like it... 1/100 is tough as there tends to be a lot of motion that panning can't help with, i.e. body shifts, bumps in the track, and any irregularity in the panning motion (although that looks good). 1/250 is "safer."
If you have the Sigma dock for the lens, then that is what I would use to fine tune the AF... *if needed.* But I must caution you about AFMA... I think more people tend to mess it up, or at least generate no real improvement. And it's only good/ideal for one situation/distance... it can adversely affect AF accuracy in other situations/distances. Before you mess with it, do some controlled/accurate tests first.
 
Fordsabroad said:
I would like to blame the Sigma 150 - 600 but I think it was me not the lens.
Click to expand...

It's good that you've recognised this, sometimes it can be quite difficult to get that through to people! There are so many variables with motorsport photography it's extremely difficult to pin down the exact issue with a shot, but it's more often than not the technique of the fleshy bit behind the plastic and glass, rather than the glass itself.

I would check your lens against a static object just to be sure that's fine. Assuming it is in that respect, it's just going to require a bit more practice to get a feel for what works. The first 3 panning shots look suspiciously like technique rather than a fault with the lens or diffraction etc. The static shots are very nearly there, particularly the first one. I've shot at f32 with some fairly shonky glass and still come away with clean sharp shots so I very much doubt diffraction is an issue as these look more OOF/panning technique than the capability of the lens itself.
 
SK66 and ukaskew
Once again thank you for your comments. The photographs posted were some of the better ones!
The ones I believe could have been affected by diffraction were the ones that I shot through the wire fence. I could not get right up close to it and the aperture would have been around f6.3. I have attached two shots from this set to show what I mean. Once again if anyone can offer advice I would be grateful.
Early on in the day I tested the lens on a static subject and that seems to be fine (also attached) so I really do believe (and hope) that it is my technique. I do own a canon 300 F2.8 lens and really wish that I had taken that with me to compare with the sigma 150 - 600 but the siggy gets such good reviews that I though all would be fine.
I am out this weekend with another photographer who is really into BIF so I will take both lenses and see how it goes.
I am keen to get this right and do not take constructive criticism personally (please don' suggest I sell my gear and take up fishing) so all advice is welcome and appreciated.
488A4035.jpg 488A4476.jpg 488A4673.jpg
 
I wouldn't worry about the shots through the fence. There are a lot of factors that affect how well it might work (lighting/contrast/distance/DOF/panning/etc). I just don't think it worked that well in this case and the fence is causing a "soft focus" haze type effect.

One thing many don't realize is that longer FL's are *much* more demanding... It's high magnification and in a lot of ways it's similar to macro work. It requires better technique, better stability, higher SS's, etc. And if you're cropping it will show everything, good and bad. Plus, you have less to work with. For instance if you compare a 600/5.6 to a 300/2.8, the 600 has 2x the magnification/half the FOV... that's why you're using it, and that's demanding enough alone. But it also has 1/4 the light transmission and 1/2 the DOF compared to the 300/2.8 (@ 5.6/2.8).

I would suggest that you start with a stopped down aperture (~ f/11-16) and a higher SS (min 2x FL), abuse ISO if necessary. And once you're getting good results from that, then start loosening things up for creative intent (shallower DOF/motion blur/etc).
 
SK66 Thanks for your swift response. That sounds like good advice and I will follow it and see how it goes.
 
SK66
I am having another go at photographing the superbikes at the practice day at Brands Hatch next Friday. I have taken on board your advice and will see if I can produce a better set of pictures.
 
Hi Gordon, just don't lose heart. I went to Silverstone a couple of years ago with my DSLR for the firsttime, hired a good long lens for the weekend and thought it would all be good. Trust me, out of the 1000 or so images I took, I'd have been thrilled to get anywhere near the mages you have here. I learnt quickly and very hard it's far less about having all the gear ;-)

Went again this year and the keep rate is much better including a few that I'm really pleased with. You'll see much better than mine on here, but each time I go out I learn from it and the results are better the next time. Maybe next year I'll be pleased enough to post a few here!

fwiw I found a lot of really useful information watching some of the blind photo critiques on http://kelbytv.com/thegrid , not many of them are focussed on motor sports photography but the general advise on compostion and techniques was really interesting.
 
SK66 Thanks for the like and Shanks thank you for the encouragement. I don't get too disheartened as long as I learn from my mistakes and by taking on board the comments from forum members I feel that I will only improve. Posting on here keeps me on my toes and stops complacency setting in. There are always people here with more experience and that drives you (or me at least) to want to produce pictures of a higher standard.
 
TBF, In my experience, fast bikes on a big race track are amongst the hardest things to capture cleanly - do not under estimate how hard it is to get a sharp bike race image.
Ive been shooting bikes for 10 years and even rented a D500/150-600 Sig S for Motogp @ Silverstone this year - and was STILL vaguely disappointed with the results.....
 
Fordsabroad said:
I was a little dissapointed with the overall standard of my shots, far far less keepers than i would have hoped for. I had far more out of focus than I would have liked. I would like to blame the Sigma 150 - 600 but I think it was me not the lens. The shutter speed varied between 800 - 2000 so I don't think it was movement. I wish I had taken my 300 F2.8 as well for a comparison. One of the professionals there told me of a good spot but said it was a difficult shot as you had to lean over a low wire fence and shoot through a high one. I thought I had cracked it but on returning home there seems to be some sort of diffraction degrading most of the images - oh well lesson learned, The 300mm 2.8 wide open may have helped.
Here are some of the better ones, comments and constructive criticism would be welcome and appreciated.
Click to expand...

Set the focus on the lens so that it's 10m to Infinity (will stop a lot of searching) and if on cannon make sure you're not on AI Focus as I've found it to be pretty hopeless (%dMK3)... did you have a support for the lens? If you're at 600mm any movement is going to cause blur... I use a big beefy monopod (Turn of OS if on a tripod or monopod) I've found f/8 to be a good sweet spot for the lens, anything lower can look a little soft at 600.
 
Thanks for the advice Keety, I will use a monopod with the Siggy. I would anticipate that a speed of around 1000th would be good to stop the action.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top