As some have seen in my last post, i am having auto focus issues..

First let me say Thanks! I really appreciate the help. Trust me, i WANT this to be a user error, so i can figure out how to get better. AND all the advice is appreciated.

I really do love my camera... just not my pictures (yet)

PLEASE read all of the post, thanks!

1.) A3 = OFF in all photos

2.) Capture NX2 Focal Points Shown here


3.) all EXIF data is via EXIFTOOL

DOG..

Some say the Grass behind the dog is what was targeted, and the focal point is right where they say, but if that is in focus.. i need a refund on my lasik. (link to the RAW/NEF)

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxZGEyODAxOTYtYzhiZS00ZjU5LTgwNWYtMzkzYmZiMTJjOGQw&hl=en
DOG.

The Dog was no more then 2 meters away (maybe 3)
Focus Distance : 5.62 m
Circle Of Confusion : 0.020 mm
Depth Of Field : 2.42 m (4.66 - 7.09)
Field Of View : 25.8 deg (2.57 m)
Focal Length : 52.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 78.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance : 27.00 m
Light Value : 13.6



My Son Skating

Apparently the camera's focus point is on the white ice under his right arm (left side from this view), what it could have locked onto back there i don't know (white field).. when the kid is in the WHOLE frame.

Raw File
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxOTgwN2JhNDYtYTlmYS00Y2ViLTk1OGItNDRlNzdmYmQyZDAw&hl=en

again, he couldn't have been more than 15-20 feet away, not the 6m it suggests. 50mm prime lens used here

Focal Length : 50.4 mm
Focus Distance : 5.96 m
Depth Of Field : 1.02 m (5.49 - 6.51)
Field Of View : 26.8 deg (2.84 m)
Focal Length : 50.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 75.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance : 69.34 m
Light Value : 8.3


Last Picture, is my son at the rail.. I am sure that he wasnt 3m away, but from this image, his right hand looks ALMOST in focus, but not the left, and the Jacket (the apparently focal point) is also soft, like its at the edge of the Depth of Field. same with the face.

Raw File
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxMGU5YjU4YmYtNDk1Ni00MjhmLWFjODctOWVlZjBiYmVhODcw&hl=en

Focus Distance : 2.99 m
Circle Of Confusion : 0.020 mm
Depth Of Field : 0.25 m (2.86 - 3.12)
Field Of View : 26.6 deg (1.41 m)
Focal Length : 50.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 75.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance : 69.34 m
Light Value : 7.0



Thanks again!

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

Settings:
A1=Focus
A2=Focus
A3=Off
A4=On
A5=On
A6=AF39
A7=On
A8=AF-F (Full Time Servo), Subject Tracking
B1=1/3
B2=1/3
B3=Off
B4=Center Weight 8mm
B5=?
C1=Off
C2=Auto Meter-off Delay = 6s
C3=10s,1,.5s
C4=Monitor Off Delay10s,20s,10s,10s,5m
C5=1m
d1=3,L
d2=On
d3=ISO
d4=ON
d5=ON
D6=3
D7=100
D8=on
D9=auto
D10=Off
D11=Off
D12=on
D13=LR6
D14=MB-D11
e1=1/320s
e2=1/60
e3=off
e4=AE
e5=-->+
f1=LCD BACKLITE
f2=reset
F3=FV-LOCK
F4=preview
f5=AE/AF Lock
f6=Reverse rotation
f7=off
F8=ok
F9=+0-
F10=AE/AF Lock

Firmware
A 1.01
B 1.01
L 1.002

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

I am fairly new to the D7000 (3 weeks), I believe the issue you are having is due to the setting a1=focus. Try setting it to release, and you need to make sure your focus point is where you want it when you release the shutter. I'm assuming your are in AF-C mode. For relatively still subjects, I've had luck with AF-S single point(I like have control over the focus point). Hope this gets you closer, I'm still learning too.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>you are having is due to the setting a1=focus. Try setting it
>to release, and you need to make sure your focus point is
>where you want it when you release the shutter.

I think you are mistaken here, "Release" means, take the picture even if it is not in focus. "Focus" of course, means take it only when it is in focus..

Or at least that is my understanding

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

>i WANT this to be a user error,
It probably is.
It may come as a surprise to find out having bought a camera with an AF system to be told AF is not infallible with some types of AF target.
In fairness to Nikon they clearly explain this in the section in camera instruction books on getting good results using auto focus, and at
https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4585
Your son's jacket (the shot where you are holding his hand) is very dark toned and very low contrast so AF has a fairly high chance of failure - example 1 in the link.
In the second shot of your son the face is very low contrast so again there is a chance of AF failure.
I have not checked if the dog photo was in continuous AF (needed as the dog is moving) or the shutter speed, which needed to be at least 1/500 to stop subject movement. The fur on the dog is very fine detail so for a third time there is a possibility of AF failure.
Summing up modern camera take many "straightforward" pictures extremely well, but other pictures need some input from the photographer to get a first class result.

Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.

Len Shepherd

>again, he couldn't have been more than 15-20 feet away, not
>the 6m it suggests.

You and the camera could both be right - 5.96 metres is equal to 19.54 feet

Unless I'm missing it, you're not giving us perhaps the most important pieces of information - which AF Mode and which AF-area Mode (you'll find these described on pages 91-95 of the D7000 manual) are you using?

Brian
Welsh Nikonian
Check out the Nikonians Team pages

>
>>again, he couldn't have been more than 15-20 feet away,
>not
>>the 6m it suggests.
>
>You and the camera could both be right - 5.96 metres is equal
>to 19.54 feet
>
>Unless I'm missing it, you're not giving us perhaps the most
>important pieces of information - which AF Mode and which
>AF-area Mode (you'll find these described on pages 91-95 of
>the D7000 manual) are you using?

af-c 21 Points, but i dont think everyone realize that nothing in those pictures are actually in focus.

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

>Unless I'm missing it, you're not giving us perhaps the most
>important pieces of information - which AF Mode and which
>AF-area Mode (you'll find these described on pages 91-95 of
>the D7000 manual) are you using?


AF-C 21 Points (A3=Off)

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

With respect to the dog photo this result is a combination of not filling your AF sensor with your intended target (according to the NEF the AF sensor is barely skimming the dog's upper left lead leg, but is mostly on the grass just to the left of that) and camera shake. In this case the AF system easily would get confused about what you are trying to focus on. I also see at 100% quite a bit of motion blur, can you explain your position when you shot this (standing/knelling?) and can you think about how you actually shot and then try and explain it. You would be surprised how much motion blur you can introduce by simply pressing down on the shutter the wrong way. I don't know if you need a Lasik refund, but the grass just to the left of the dog's left lead leg, and parallel to that point is the most in focus of anything in the photo, it appears AF thought that is what you wanted to focus on (understandably as most of your sensor was on it), although some camera shake is still evident there.

As for your son skating, again, according to the NEF your AF sensor is actually completely covering the ice between his right hip and hand, just in front of the blue line. As your aperture is only F/1.8 and your AF point is quite a bit behind your son, it is not surprising that your son is pretty much completely out of focus here. The blue line to his right looks sharp, parallel to the AF point. I don't think AF-C 21 point dynamic is the preferred AF mode for a shot like this BTW. Unless your son is a particularly fast skater, if you used AF-S and set your AF sensor right in the middle of his chest you would have gotten a much better result (centering it over his face probably would get an even sharper shot of what matters, his eyes). Were you aiming for his hand or did the dynamic AF choose your AF point for you? I am struggling to figure out why the AF is so off of the target.

Finally the shot of your son at the boards, it looks like you hit focus around his right hand. There is no NEF (the linked file is just the EXIF data) so I can't confirm this. I also don't think AF-C is the proper AF mode here, AF-S and centering your sensor over your son's face would have produced a much better result.

IMO this is clearly user error. Ultimately, your biggest problem is not filling your intended target with your AF sensor. This is a major AF no-no. In the photo of your son skating, the AF point is not even touching your target, it is no wonder your target is not in focus.

I would practice using AF-S, not AF-C, and nailing your AF by filling your active AF sensor with your intended target. I would also practice your shooting technique by using the tips in this thread:

http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=329&topic_id=6812&mesg_id=6812&page=3

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>With respect to the dog photo this result is a combination of
>not filling your AF sensor with your intended target
>(according to the NEF the AF sensor is barely skimming the
>dog's upper left lead leg, but is mostly on the grass just to
>the left of that) and camera shake. In this case the AF
>system easily would get confused about what you are trying to
>focus on. I also see at 100% quite a bit of motion blur, can
>you explain your position when you shot this

OK, i accept that the dog was moving, i was panning... just a bad shot

>(standing/knelling?) and can you think about how you actually
>shot and then try and explain it. You would be surprised how
>much motion blur you can introduce by simply pressing down on
>the shutter the wrong way. I don't know if you need a Lasik
>refund, but the grass just to the left of the dog's left lead
>leg, and parallel to that point is the most in focus of
>anything in the photo, it appears AF thought that is what you
>wanted to focus on (understandably as most of your sensor was
>on it), although some camera shake is still evident there.

"not filling your AF sensor" doenst the 21 Points in the AF-C pretty much cover that whole area?

>As for your son skating, again, according to the NEF your AF
>sensor is actually completely covering the ice between his
>right hip and hand, just in front of the blue line.

How did it lock onto white background (down and left of center)? Rather than the moving target in the Center of the Picture?
Clearly, he was in the center of the Frame, and of the 21 Points, it picked one not on the kid at all

>As your aperture is only F/1.8 and your AF point is quite a bit behind
>your son, it is not surprising that your son is pretty much
>completely out of focus here.

Yes, given the point it picked, true, but why that point?

>The blue line to his right looks sharp, parallel to the AF point. I don't think AF-C 21
>point dynamic is the preferred AF mode for a shot like this
>BTW. Unless your son is a particularly fast skater, if you
>used AF-S and set your AF sensor right in the middle of his
>chest you would have gotten a much better result (centering it
>over his face probably would get an even sharper shot of what
>matters, his eyes). Were you aiming for his hand or did the
>dynamic AF choose your AF point for you?

I did not pick his hand. AF Chose that point.

>I am struggling to figure out why the AF is so off of the target.
>
>Finally the shot of your son at the boards, it looks like you
>hit focus around his right hand. There is no NEF (the linked
>file is just the EXIF data) so I can't confirm this.

Sorry, its linked here now, you can see that he is not in focus, and not moving, neither was I. and
the FOCUS point was dead on his chest.. Might have been better if i picked his face, but this shot should have worked
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxNGJlMzU3MTItMWMxOC00YjJkLWJlOGYtMDg1NmY4MTQ2MmE2&hl=en

>I also don't think AF-C is the proper AF mode here, AF-S and
>centering your sensor over your son's face would have produced
>a much better result.

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

>"not filling your AF sensor" doenst the 21 Points in
>the AF-C pretty much cover that whole area?

>How did it lock onto white background (down and left of
>center)? Rather than the moving target in the Center of the
>Picture?
>Clearly, he was in the center of the Frame, and of the 21
>Points, it picked one not on the kid at all

>Yes, given the point it picked, true, but why that point?

>I did not pick his hand. AF Chose that point.

You are confusing auto-area mode and dynamic area. Auto-area chooses your subject for you, i.e. it selects which of the AF points it will use to AF regardlesds of the last one you 'selected'.

Dynamic area will focus using the last AF sensor you selected and if your subject breifly moves out of that area, it will 'track it', so to speak by using the surrounding sensors.

So the fast that your son or the dog was within the area generally of the 21 AF sensor points means little, the one you choose was not on them when you took the photo.

I may add that auto-area mode works as well as I think one can hope given that you are asking the camera to read your mind and determien what you are trying to focus on. This is why I suggest practicing in AF-S mode and get used to moving your AF sensor around the frame to your target. Then when you move on to the Af-C modes you will be a pro at this.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

As I said in your original thread, I feel the dog image has two issues. One is the missed focus as I originally suspected and was confirmed when you provided this thread with the AF bracket showing. The second issue I feel is due to the VR. As you say every part of the image appears blurry. There is a difference between blur and focus. I was able to tell the grass behind the dog was the focus plane even though no grass blades where apparently clear. My suspicion is that the VR did not have time to settle which will blur everything even though it is in focus.

As to the shutter speed, well without knowing the speed of the dog it’s hard to say if 1/500 is sufficient. But analyzing the image, to me there seems to be no great evidence of motion blur. I have not looked at the NEF but did download the original full sized JPEG. When I looked at it at 100% or greater view the dogs ID tags and front paw to me do not show the dogs motion so 1/500 seemed to be sufficient. An example is a shot of my dog which I believe was moving about as fast as your dog was by your description in that other thread. You can see the front paw with a little blur (the front paw would be moving faster than the dog is running) and some blur in the snow she kicked up, but 1/500 was enough to freeze her well enough for the intended purpose. The image is no great work of art and is not going to win any shows, but my wife loved it on her desk at work and proudly showed it to everyone she could.




(See now why I wondered where you got a picture of my dog?? LOL)


Your second example shot is without question focused exactly where the focus bracket said it did. One look at the ice and blue line shows it relatively sharp.


The one with your son at the railing is again focused pretty much where the bracket indicates. But as pointed out at f/1.8 you are dealing with a very narrow DOF. And that does not mean that the edge of the DOF is in focus but relatively sharp. A lens can only focus on a single plane of the three dimensional scene field. In a perfect lens that plane would be projected as a point source; trouble is there are few if any perfect lenses. So even on the plane of focus the detail is represented by an airy disk or blur circle known as the CoC (circle of confusion). So even if the plane of focus was rendered as a point source, moving away from that plane and the airy disk becomes progressively larger. In the image your sons back hand was the plane of focus, the face was near the far edge of the foreground side of the DOF making it appear less sharp then the areas closer to the plane of focus. As pointed out when imaging people or animals as the main subject, it is best to put the focus point on one of the eyes. When people view images of people or animals, they tend to look to the eyes for sharpness, and will accept a certain amount of lack of sharpness elsewhere and still describe the image as being sharp.

Summing up, while it is possible to get a defective new camera that needs recalibration or replacement, right now the evidence points to pilot error.

Of course these are only my observations and opinions, I could be wrong.
Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

Pete, what are you doing with my DOG!

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

Ok, lets kick out the dog picture,

It could be moving dog, panning camera, pilot error...

Question 1 Filling the AF - Sensor, the Red Bracket is only the CENTER Point, the surrounding points are also checked in AF-C 21 correct?

Question 2 - Filling the AF - Sensor, a lot of post suggest that I am not filling the AF Senor correctly, but i am not understanding what I am doing wrong..

With AF-C 21 Points.. How did this shot pick white ice as the focus point? Rather than the moving kid (walking speed) who is clearly in the center of the Frame?

RAW Link
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxOTgwN2JhNDYtYTlmYS00Y2ViLTk1OGItNDRlNzdmYmQyZDAw&hl=en
EXIF Data Link
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxZDQ1MTliNGMtNTdjNC00MTk2LTkxOWQtNTE3ZDRlNWU5YTNj&hl=en

Focus Point Shown here


Question 3 - DOF should be right if the focus point is where the NX2 file say it is.

Focus Distance : 2.99 m
Circle Of Confusion : 0.020 mm
Depth Of Field : 0.25 m (2.86 - 3.12)
Field Of View : 26.6 deg (1.41 m)
Focal Length : 50.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 75.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance : 69.34 m
Light Value : 7.0

RAW LINK
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxNGJlMzU3MTItMWMxOC00YjJkLWJlOGYtMDg1NmY4MTQ2MmE2&hl=en
EXIF LINK
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B3NVrviAhwmxMGU5YjU4YmYtNDk1Ni00MjhmLWFjODctOWVlZjBiYmVhODcw&hl=en

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

As I stated above, in AF-C dynamic mode you select the AF point not the camera.

If you have not done so already set your A4 custom setting to ON. Now your active AF sensor will always be red when you go to focus. Make sure whatever you want to be in focus you fill with that box, and then some as your sensor is actually bigger than the box. If the sensor portion outside of that box is on something that has a lot of contrast the camera can still be fooled sometimes.

If you want the camera to select your target use auto-area AF, but don't expect miracles, it will suprisingly nail it more often than one would think it could. For critical shots hwoever this is like trusting your shots fate to the camera gods.

In Af-C dynmaic mode, once you have locked focus on a target the camera will 'track it' if it moves.

Just to finish off the photos you have given us, the photo of your son at the boards makes sense as well. The hand in focus is parallel to the focus point on the chest, whereas the face appears to be just on the edge of the DOF here thus explaining why the face is not tack sharp whereas the hand is. If you used F4-5.6 for this it likely would have been fine. Also, if you aimed for the head/eyes, even at F/1.8 it would have been better (everything is stationary and the face/eyes are big enough to fill a sensor). With people if the eyes are sharp, you usually have a keeper.

I think if you learn the how the various AF modes work and when to use them you are going to have one of those AHA moments where it all falls into place.

Jason

p.s. I think this thread should be linked to the original thread that began this discussion.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>As I stated above, in AF-C dynamic mode you select the AF
>point not the camera.
>
>If you have not done so already set your A4 custom setting to
>ON. Now your active AF sensor will always be red when you go
>to focus. Make sure whatever you want to be in focus you fill
>with that box, and then some as your sensor is actually bigger
>than the box. If the sensor portion outside of that box is on
>something that has a lot of contrast the camera can still be
>fooled sometimes.

A3=OFF
A4=ON

Am I understanding this wrong?

AF-C (21)
If i understand correctly, you place the red box on the kid, and Track him (which i did)
If the Kid Moves, the Camera use the 21 Points to Predict where the next focus point will be
You seem to suggest that is the case (below)

>In Af-C dynmaic mode, once you have locked focus on a target
>the camera will 'track it' if it moves.
>
>Just to finish off the photos you have given us, the photo of
>your son at the boards makes sense as well. The hand in focus
>is parallel to the focus point on the chest, whereas the face
>appears to be just on the edge of the DOF here thus explaining
>why the face is not tack sharp whereas the hand is.

Maybe i need more work with DOF, if his chest is the Focus Point, and given

Exposure Time : 1/320
F Number : 1.8
Exposure Program : Aperture-priority AE
ISO : 800
Focus Distance : 2.99 m
Circle Of Confusion : 0.020 mm
Depth Of Field : 0.25 m (2.86 - 3.12)
Field Of View : 26.6 deg (1.41 m)
Focal Length : 50.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 75.0 mm)
Hyperfocal Distance : 69.34 m

doesnt that mean that .25m is in focus? half in front half in back?
I am pretty sure this head isnt .25m, and most days it sit directly on top of his chest.

Am i missing something?

>If you used F4-5.6 for this it likely would have been fine.

Tried too, but even though, i thought it was good light, i needed 1.4 and 800 ISO just to get to 1/320.

>Also, if you aimed for the head/eyes, even at F/1.8 it would have been
>better (everything is stationary and the face/eyes are big
>enough to fill a sensor). With people if the eyes are sharp,
>you usually have a keeper.
>
>I think if you learn the how the various AF modes work and
>when to use them you are going to have one of those AHA
>moments where it all falls into place.

I can only hope! Thanks for the continued help.

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

>A3=OFF
>A4=ON
>Am I understanding this wrong?

This is correct.

>AF-C (21)
>If i understand correctly, you place the red box on the kid,
>and Track him (which i did)
>If the Kid Moves, the Camera use the 21 Points to Predict
>where the next focus point will be
>You seem to suggest that is the case (below)

Presuming focus locked on the kid properly to begin with (i.e. you covered the target entirely with your choosen focus sensor and depressed the sensor half way, or press your Ae-L/AF-L button if that is what you use to focus, and keep it pressed until you snap the shot). Also I think if this is what you intended to do you should have used AF-C and 9 point, as this appears to be a pretty predictably moving target at a relatively slow pace. 21 point would be for quicker less predictable things, like birds in flight. More is not necessarily better here, and this is not the mode Nikon recommends (they would recommend 9 point, as you will see when you read th elink I post below).

>Maybe i need more work with DOF, if his chest is the Focus
>Point, and given
>doesnt that mean that .25m is in focus? half in front half in
>back?
>I am pretty sure this head isnt .25m, and most days it sit
>directly on top of his chest.
>
>Am i missing something?

You are talking about 12.5 cm on either side of your focus point IF your lens actually split DOF 50/50 in all circumstances (they don't) and without accounting for the tolerance within which a lens and camera body are calibrated for autofocus (this is not a pin point measurement, it is subject to some leeway as has been discussed in other threads). Ultimately, in the photo of your son at the boards, the actual face of your son maybe 10-12 cm or more in front of the focus point on the chest in this photo, which puts it on the edge of and possibly (depending on the DOF split and your lens/camera calibration) outside of the DOF. DOF runs paralell tot he focus point and his head is perpendicular so the further point away (the front of his face) is what is causing the photo to appear out of focus (for people we always look at the face first, particularly the eyes). Really with that type of DOF, and where the AF sensor was, this result is entirely expected.

>I can only hope! Thanks for the continued help.

Let me answer your post below this one with a link from Nikon:

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d7000/features02.htm

It summarizes the AF modes pretty succinctly. I would think for all of these shots of your son, you could have used AF-S. The dog photo could be shot with either AF-S or AF-C 9 point.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Let me answer your post below this one with a link from
>Nikon:
>
>http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d7000/features02.htm
>
>It summarizes the AF modes pretty succinctly. I would think
>for all of these shots of your son, you could have used AF-S.
>The dog photo could be shot with either AF-S or AF-C 9 point.
>
>Jason


Thanks so much Jason et al., I will be going out tonight and taking some more pictures.. Practice Practice Practice

moving to 9 Point AF-C and attempt to target the center mass of the head..


As for lighting, should i bump up to F5 or F8 and just increase the ISO unitl i get acceptable high Shutter times? Go for a flash?

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

I get a lot of i don't understand AF-C (21)

Could you help out here, You can see that he is in the center of the frame.

Therefore, my A4 Target had to be on him.

How did it pick that other point on a moving target? white ice?

Some say i picked it, how can that be when its not in the center of the viewfinder?

THANKS

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

>I get a lot of i don't understand AF-C (21)
>
>Could you help out here, You can see that he is in the center
>of the frame.
>
>Therefore, my A4 Target had to be on him.
>
>How did it pick that other point on a moving target? white
>ice?
>
>Some say i picked it, how can that be when its not in the
>center of the viewfinder?
>
>THANKS
>
>
>
>

I re-read this post and wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. Of course if you choose to use the center focus point it would be in the middle of the frame, but you can of course move the focus point around the frame. Also, as I see you were shooting in portrait orientation, it is even possible that you moved the AF point accidentally (sometimes I press the directional pad accidentally in this orientation) moving the AF sensor out of the middle.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I didn't even realize you could do that. At least not in AF-C mode. I will have to go back and read that part in the manual.

Thanks for the heads up on that

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

Stop down the Aperture

increased the ISO until i got at least 1/800 of a sec

changed to AF-C (9) and aimed for Center Mass of the object

More Comments?

Visit My Website Nikon Fanboy.

There yah go!!

Nice action shots and good looking pups.

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Looks great to me. You could probably open up the aperture a little and get the background a little more OOF but you certainly can't complain about sharpness of the subjects in these photos.

#3 is my favourite, that is one happy dog!

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I think some of you folks need better monitors....

This is an action shot, albeit a little slow on the shutter speed, but with certainly more clarity then the D7000 tends to produce.



Compare the settings. ISO of 220 versus 1600 in the D7000 why is that? Granted f/5.3 versus f/11 but still....

The problem with the D7000 is you never know if you are going to miss that moment.

BTW, great shepherds!

Rob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you are into boating checkout: www.SilvertonForums.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I'm not sure what point you're making, Rob...?

Your shot was taken at ISO 220, 1/500th at f/5.3, while the shots in the post above were at ISO 1600, 1/1250th at f/11. That's only about 1/2 stop difference, which is no doubt explained by the differing ambient light levels.

At 1/500th, there is clear motion blur in your dog, and focus seems to be on the background.

When set up and handled appropriately, there's no reason why a D7000 should not match or exceed the usability and quality of a D60.

Brian
Welsh Nikonian
Check out the Nikonians Team pages

>I think some of you folks need better monitors....
>
>This is an action shot, albeit a little slow on the shutter
>speed, but with certainly more clarity then the D7000 tends to
>produce.
>
>Compare the settings. ISO of 220 versus 1600 in the D7000 why
>is that? Granted f/5.3 versus f/11 but still....
>
>The problem with the D7000 is you never know if you are going
>to miss that moment.
>
>BTW, great shepherds!
>
>Rob
>

Wow, for a minute I thought I accidentally wandered into a DPReview forum.

The OP is working on their technique and the results speak for themselves, he is growing by leaps and bounds.

Your post doesn't relate to anything the OP asked about.

You don't like the d7000, we got that loud and clear from your previous posts. I am not sure why you have not returned/sold it and moved on. Ultimately this random bashing is inaccurate, unhelpful and unfortunate. Some people actually want to learn to use their camera.

Jason

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I am not random bashing. The point here is that there is visible noise in the shepherd pictures. No one offered that comment. It takes a high ISO to capture those images at the expense of IQ???

By contrast, the image I posted is me standing in a pool. Not a 10 point prone stance or any other less then convenient posturing for a shot. oh, and yes there were waves in the pool as well.

I represent the counterpoint to D7000 fan base, which does appear to be less than objective. I actually have one and use it and post pictures from it and and from other Nikons as well. Half of the people I see responding to issues concerning the D7000 don't indicate they actually even own one. The other half that do indicate they own one don't have any of their images to help express there points. Maybe they can not get a good image either....

I feel bad that the OP images have not been better. These are moments missed that can never be captured again. However, insisting on doing this and doing that to get good IQ seems counter productive. Look the D7000 looks good on paper, no question about that but, just how many missed moments do you want people to have?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you are into boating checkout: www.SilvertonForums.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>I am not random bashing. The point here is that there is
>visible noise in the shepherd pictures. No one offered that
>comment. It takes a high ISO to capture those images at the
>expense of IQ???
>
>By contrast, the image I posted is me standing in a pool. Not
>a 10 point prone stance or any other less then convenient
>posturing for a shot. oh, and yes there were waves in the
>pool as well.
>
>I represent the counterpoint to D7000 fan base, which does
>appear to be less than objective. I actually have one and use
>it and post pictures from it and and from other Nikons as
>well. Half of the people I see responding to issues
>concerning the D7000 don't indicate they actually even own
>one. The other half that do indicate they own one don't have
>any of their images to help express there points. Maybe they
>can not get a good image either....
>
>I feel bad that the OP images have not been better. These are
>moments missed that can never be captured again. However,
>insisting on doing this and doing that to get good IQ seems
>counter productive. Look the D7000 looks good on paper, no
>question about that but, just how many missed moments do you
>want people to have?
>
>

I thought it was obvious that the settings used to capture the photos were not normal. I would assume the OP presumed that people responding had basic photography knowledge and read the entire thread. The OP is trying to understand the AF modes, not how to take clean ISO shots or the ideal F stop for these photos. His exaggerated F stop was meant to ensure that his test of the AF mode had merit and bad results could not be attributed to a DOF issue. These photos are completely unprocessed and taken at ISO 1600, of course they have some noise, so would photos taken on a D3s.

I appreciate that in a previous thread you were unable to garner support for your incorrect view about the d7000, so I guess personal attacks are on the menu now.

The OP's original photos were bad because he did not understand the AF modes, not because of the d7000, as proven by the much improved results using the AF modes properly. Your attempts to make this a 'd7000' issue are getting ridiculous.

Jason

BTW for people who want to see well done, properly processed photos of running dogs they can look here:

http://wildlifeacrossthewater.blogspot.com/2010/11/nikon-d7000-af-speed-test.html

I highly recommend looking at his 100% crop

Wow, I guess this guy just got lucky...8-9 times in 2 seconds.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

"The problem with the D7000 is you never know if you are going to miss that moment."

Honestly, I think the OP's first picture of his dog that he was trying to improve on is better than this image. You didn't capture the moment.

There is a lot of good information in this thread about focusing on and capturing fast moving subjects that is relevant here as well. Regardless of which camera one is using, getting a sharp capture of a moving subject isn't easy, and it isn't a point and shoot proposition. This image underscores that unless you were trying to get a picture of the chair.

I think if you carefully read both threads on this subject you can improve your results the next time you try a shot like this - whether you do it with your D7000, a D60, or some other camera.

Visit my gallery.

Fair enough. Clearly there was no target to focus on in the air above the pool water to pre-focus and be there when the dog comes to that point. In this situation you don't know where the dog is going anyway. There is a 8' range it could enter the pool. The point of using this image to contrast the OP other images is that with the D7000 you are not allowed the latitude of spontaneity as with other Nikon cameras. If that was the case this thread would not exist.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you are into boating checkout: www.SilvertonForums.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I understand it may have a frustrating number of options, and yes, it takes some time to learn them, but I also believe it rewards that time.

My experience is that it is better than my D200. It focuses dead on in situations that my D200 struggled with.

At the risk of judging too much from one picture that you have posted, it doesn't appear that you mastered the focus options on the D60 either. You're disproving your own thesis with that image. It was a spontaneous moment that you missed with the D60. I KNOW the D60 could have captured a great image in that situation.

All of these cameras have a lot of options and take time to learn. Spontaneous moments are the toughest ones to catch. We have to scramble to remember the settings appropriate for the situation, make sure they are dialed in, and then take the shot. It is a stressful situation. Maybe happy stress, but stressful none the less and it's difficult to remember steps, settings, technique in those situations, and we lose the moment. It has happened to me many times and continues to happen - with a camera, with a rifle, with a golf club - all pretty much the same.

It's a tool. Learn the tool, understand the limits, and practice, and practice again, so you don't have to think in spontaneous moments. Like any new piece of technology, the more time you spend learning and practicing with it, the less evil it becomes.

Visit my gallery.

The classic arm chair quarterback. I am eagerly waiting for a better mid-air image you have taken with a D60. I am always willing to learn.

Rob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you are into boating checkout: www.SilvertonForums.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Not a D60 (D200) and not mid-air, but it is a running dog. I put my gallery images up for anybody to see. And you're right, I am in an armchair watching Dancing with the Stars (wife's idea).

Visit my gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

Please drop this line of discussion, Rob.

Criticisms of other members, all of whom are all simply trying (and succeeding, from what I can see) to help Wesley, are unjustified.

Thank you.

Here's my "flying dog" offering - taken with a D300...







...but I have several from the same shoot which are pretty much completely blurred. Photographing running dogs from short distances isn't easy, whichever camera is used

Brian
Welsh Nikonian
Check out the Nikonians Team pages

Attachment #1, (jpg file)