20
\$\begingroup\$

When shooting events or action photos, engaging people, I often find that frontal (or rear) perspective may be very expressive, but my problem is focusing when the subject moves towards the camera (or away from it). I rarely have even a single decent shot in a series.

If I use AF, then the lag between autofocusing and the shutter release is long enough for the subject to move out of focus. This is especially a problem when shooting wide open. Burst shooting doesn't help here, because the subject is by definition moving more and more out of focus.

I tried focusing manually anticipating the subject, but my eyes are far from perfect in focusing, I often focus at the wrong plane (and it's hard to focus manually when there is nothing at that point yet).

What techniques do you use to shoot such photos?

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
10
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ What model of camera do you use, and which autofocus mode(s) have you tried? \$\endgroup\$
    – Rowland Shaw
    May 9, 2011 at 12:54
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ My condolences. Poor AF on moving subjects is probably the worst thing about my K10D, and I think the K20D is not a lot better. \$\endgroup\$
    – coneslayer
    May 9, 2011 at 13:55
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Nor the newer Pentax models. Continuous autofocus is the weak spot of Pentax's AF system, and this particular case is the worst of it. \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    May 9, 2011 at 14:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I'd just like to note that I'd really appreaciate MF tips and tricks. \$\endgroup\$
    – sastanin
    May 10, 2011 at 16:07
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @jetxee — If you post it as a new question I'll totally vote it up. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    May 10, 2011 at 16:12

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
16
\$\begingroup\$

This is a classic use-case for continuous autofocus (AF-C). Nikon uses that term, Canon refers to this mode as AI-Servo.

This does not guarantee anything though, just improves your odds depending on:

  • Which camera you use: Advanced cameras have predictive-autofocus which calculate the speed at which a subject moves and keeps moving the focus in that direction. This is to be used in combination with burst mode.
  • Which lens you use: Brighter lenses can focus faster even if you shoot at a smaller aperture. Different lenses also focus at different speeds for plenty of other reasons.
  • The speed of your subject: Obviously!
  • The contrast of the subject: Contrast is required to focus and the more contrast the easier it is to focus, so the lens can focus faster.
  • Shooting aperture: A small aperture gives you more depth-of-field so focus can be less precise. Keep in mind if it is too small, the shutter-speed will cause the subject to blur.
  • The focus point: In almost all cameras the center focus-point is more sensitive and can focus faster and with less light.
Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ Predictive autofocus sounds like a cool thing to have, but my camera doesn't seem to do it (well), or simply the focusing speed is not enough. In AF-C it tends to stick to some focus positions for too long, before it starts readjusting. So it feels like delayed focusing, rather than predictive. But I'll try to test predictiveness of AF-C though. Thank you. \$\endgroup\$
    – sastanin
    May 9, 2011 at 13:53
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Now that you added your camera information. I can confirm that it is true. I used to have a K20D and I now have a K-7 and K-5 but neither can do it, which is why I also have a Canon 40D for sports photography. \$\endgroup\$
    – Itai
    May 9, 2011 at 14:12
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It seems I'll have to improve my MF skills... \$\endgroup\$
    – sastanin
    May 9, 2011 at 14:34
1
\$\begingroup\$

Unless your SLR has predictive/"intelligent" continuous autofocus, you're going to have a hard time overcoming it unless you have good enough eyesight and are quick at manually focusing. Unfortunately for most people, that's not the case.

Canon's continuous predictive autofocus is called AI Servo.

Nikon's is simply called continuous auto focus.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Pentax calls theirs continuous mode, and says this about it: "When the shutter release button is pressed halfway to focus, the camera automatically tracks the subject if it is determined to be a moving object." That implies some degree of prediction — but the problem is, it doesn't do it very well. I'm a Pentax fan, but this is a weak spot. \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    May 9, 2011 at 23:11
1
\$\begingroup\$

If there is space behind me or in front of me... I use AF-continuous and move forward or backward at the same speed and directions as the subject. This works but you must be aware of your surroundings so your don't run into things and build a clumsy reputation.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ So, instead of worrying about one variable (the subject movement) you introduce a new one (your movement)? In what situation does this actually work? In most situations it's a recipe for a disaster... \$\endgroup\$
    – walther
    Oct 30, 2017 at 12:44
-6
\$\begingroup\$

You need to switch your camera to Continuous Focus. Focus Priority (Assuming your camera has such). Currently, Nikon is the only company on the market which provides the best AF for tracking subjects.

But most of all it takes a lot of practice to feel how the AF behaves on your camera.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Have you considered writing answers that don't involve switching to Nikon gear? \$\endgroup\$
    – coneslayer
    May 10, 2011 at 20:48
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @coneslayer — agreed that that's not very helpful, but it is true that Nikon's continuous AF is better at this. I don't know if they're really the only company, but I don't think this deserves the downvotes. \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    May 10, 2011 at 21:04
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @mattdm I think it's safe to say that Canon's AF is decent with moving subjects as well, given their popularity with sport shooters. If @Ben hadn't also recommended a Nikon camera in the noise thread, I would not have made the comment. photo.stackexchange.com/questions/11910/… \$\endgroup\$
    – coneslayer
    May 10, 2011 at 21:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ Listen dudes, if I said something untrue, say it, but dont criticize me for stating the fact. Yes, Canon AF is very good, and probably even faster at acquiring focus in daylight, but Nikon is better at tracking the subject in focus, and acquiring focus at low light. I know this from personal experience. \$\endgroup\$
    – Ben Bibikov
    May 11, 2011 at 14:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ You are phrasing your personal preferences and observations as very strong statements of fact. If something is based on your experience or subjective observations, phrase it as such. For example, you could say that you found the Nikon Foobar 3000 to be superior to the Canon 93 Delta for tracking moving subjects. When your first two answers here involve making very strong claims in favor of a particular manufacturer, without providing evidence, you come across as a shill. \$\endgroup\$
    – coneslayer
    May 11, 2011 at 15:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.