manual vs auto focus
I use a Nikon D90 with a Nikon f/4-5.6, 70-300 mm lens. I feel like I miss a lot of good action shots because of slow auto focus. Would manual focusing be better and what do most people use? Is the auto focus bottleneck in the camera, the lens, or the communication between the two? :confused:
If I were using a lens with an f2.8 would the camera in auto focus mode, focus faster?
I have the camera set on continous high, and AF-C. I use a Scan Disk Ultra II, 15 m/s.
Sometimes good action shots require good timing. For some action shots, if you can see it happening in the viewfinder, it's already too late.Originally Posted by ann shiller
Manual focus definitely do not track the action automatically for you. But, if you can do it with manual focus, do it. Or, you can try pre-focus on where the action will happen and use depth of field to help you. Then again, it just doesn't work well for some of the actions.Would manual focusing be better
Auto-focus.and what do most people use?
Definitely not the 70-300f4.5-5.6 VR lens. It may be slower than some lenses, but it can definitely do the job. Been there done that.Is the auto focus bottleneck in the camera, the lens, or the communication between the two?
Presumably, I suppose. I would say do not expect focus lock to happen instantly under all kinds of situations all the time though.If I were using a lens with an f2.8 would the camera in auto focus mode, focus faster?
Ditto.I have the camera set on continous high, and AF-C..
Ann, My brother has a D90 and it seems to focus really well on BIF and at airshows. I am still shooting with a D200 and in my opinion, the D90 is faster and more precise. We both own the 70-300, they do search a bit at low light, but they perform very good, especially around f8. Also, try to shoot the 70-300 at 260 mm max, even at f8, my lens performance drops off a bit. My brother just purchased the 70-200 VRII lens and their is no comparison between the two. 70-200 does not search, locks on super fast to all subjects. You must remember that the 70-200VRII is a $2200 pro metal body lens using Nikon's newest technology and the 70-300 is Nikon's $450 plastic consumer lens.
Ed
Last edited by Ed Grella; 10-27-2010 at 01:59 PM.
Desmond and Ed,
Thanks for the comments and advise. Wish I could afford the pro equipment but I have a feeling that improving on technique and fundemental photography skills are my options at this point.
Desmond, sounds like you are successful with the same equipment, but have you moved on to bigger and better?
Ann
Errr...I have never used a D90. I was mainly saying the 70-300 is a good lens. Consumer lens as it is, it is a darn good consumer lens.
I think you can say I have something bigger and better. Thing is, I still use the 70-300 a lot. Here's one from last Friday on a very cloudy day (70-300 f4.5-5.6 VR on a D700):but have you moved on to bigger and better?
Beautiful. Yes and I guess the D700 is a "tad":p better, but heres the thing I keep wondering about, what makes it better?. Is it a faster response time, better construction..? As far a plastic, is the the lens plastic or the housing? Guess I have some more research to do before I make any major purchase. And is the bird a Herring Gull?
D700 is a full-frame camera. AF-wise, I think both D300, D300s and the D700 and up are better than D90. It's the processor that makes the difference.
I believe it's the housing.As far a plastic, is the the lens plastic or the housing?
Don't know. I just took the picture. :oAnd is the bird a Herring Gull?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote