File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Dear /p/, I think I got my most favorate sports related picture the other day. What does /p/ think?

(Sorry, watermarked so bitches don't steal.)
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 20DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:03:27 19:59:43RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Time1/4000 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length130.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width980Image Height1472
>> Christopher !LQd6JHwoaQ
Good timing I guess, bit dark, looks like he missed the ball. Shot on auto, nothing spectacular.
>> Anonymous
>>149149
It doesn't matter what mode he's in. If it's a good shot, it's a good shot. This is coming from someone who almost exclusively shoots in manual, spotmeters about 75% of the time and uses CWA for the rest, and manually focuses. I like working that way, but if someone works well another way, so what?

The photo's not too great, though. Good for illustration of the sports section or something, but not much else.
>> Anonymous
>>149149
Oh, and I just checked the EXIF. Aperture priority is far, far from the green box mode.
>> Anonymous
>>149149

He didn't miss the ball, it's right on the bat.
>> Anonymous
>>149149

Funny you mention that, I bumped it up to ISO 800 after this series of shots.
>> Anonymous
>>149165

Looks above it to me.
>> Christopher !LQd6JHwoaQ
>>149163

look under it to me.

>>149160

my bad
>> Anonymous
That ball tipped hit the ground, and because of the field (Made of rubber material) it bounced like crazy.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>149174

Here is a picture of what it looked like when balls hit the ground, it was not natural.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 20DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:03:27 20:24:28RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardExposure Time1/3200 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length130.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width1040Image Height816
>> Anonymous
Is that the 70-200 f2.8?
Because that is some of the worst CA I have ever seen.

Plus 1/4000th of a second, so why doesn't the batter look sharp?
>> Anonymous
>>149192

Lets just say the 20D is not the best camera out there.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>149195
Er. Let's not just say that. The camera body really has nothing to do with that.
>> Anonymous
>>149198
I hear some of the brand new bodies correct for it automatically now (D300 D3 that i've heard of)

But ya that looks pretty horrible. I thought the Canon 70-200 was considered a fantastic lens?
>> Anonymous
>>149198
Well, not exactly. That's purple fringing, which is distinct from normal CA and which (if I understand correctly) comes from some arcane interaction between the light in the scene, the lens, and the specific digital sensor. If you look, there's no green edge on the other side like there is with normal lateral CA.

But it doesn't really matter for this shot.

>>149200
It is considered so, but IMO it's overrated. Versatile, perfect specs to be a pro workhorse, but not really a good lens. That's purely subjective, though. I'm pretty sure it has to test well; otherwise, Canon wouldn't risk "L" prestige on it.