# Blurry Pics



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

I take pictures at my daughters soccer games. I take around 1300 pics in a 1 hr game. I am lucky to get 1/3 of those pictures clear. I am not sure why. The field is still the smaller soccer field, she is not on the adult size field yet. I sit at the one end of the field to take pics. My daughter is the GK so she is at the other end of the field. I am thinking I need more of a zoom the 300 zoom is still too far away sometimes. I have read a lot of things online and here about all the different setting. For the longest time I just used the generic sport setting on the dial of the camera. I changed setting around and tried to shoot some in the aperture setting and shutter setting. Didn't seem to make a difference in the pics. 
So here is my question, what setting should I use to shoot U12 girls playing soccer? All of these games are during the day. Sunlight is strong usually unless it is a cloudy day. 

Thanks




The 1st 3 are of my daughter and out of focus. The last 2 are better pics.


----------



## Designer (Sep 3, 2013)

Without pictures to analyze, we have to wonder if it is camera movement that is causing blur.  Whenever you are using a telephoto lens, your shooting technique should be to hold the camera very still, even if you have boosted the shutter speed.  Taking action shots usually means the photographer is trying to pan or take quick shots, and not always holding the camera steady.  Do you have a monopod available?  If not a monopod, then you can use your tripod even if the legs are tied together (for portability).   Also, the point of focus is important as well.


----------



## texkam (Sep 3, 2013)

Post some pics and we'll try to get to the bottom of it.


----------



## 480sparky (Sep 3, 2013)

Asking photo questions like this without sample photos is like asking your mechanic what's wrong with your car without bringing him your car to look at.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

Ok, I will post some pics tonight to show you what I mean. 

Thanks

Yes, I use a monopod. I do try to take action shots and pan the camera fast. I like to get action shots.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 3, 2013)

Could be your movement or shutter movement, although being outdoors in sunlight it should be possible to get a fast enough shutter speed (at least 1/250 but 1/500 or 1/1000 or faster would be better - if it's cloudy you might not be able to get as fast a shutter speed as when it's sunny). 

I'd slow down because for an hour game that's a huge number of photos per minute. Can you sit along the sidelines? You could try different vantage points, try going early and finding a place (maybe during the end of the previous game or in between games) where you'll be able to get the net and goaltender in the frame. 

If you can be where you're facing her, and can get her framed in your viewfinder, then wait til the action comes to you (to your end of the field). That gives you time while play is at the other end of the field to get set and ready so when play comes in front of the net you can get shots of her in action. 
.
Think about what will be in the frame, notice your backgrounds, and be aware of keeping the camera steady and straight. I find it helps me sometimes to lower the camera and take a few seconds break then reframe the shot - I think like many things it takes practice and as the season goes on you might find you're getting better at keeping the camera steady and at periodically checking and making sure the shutter speed is fast enough.

edit - Or the panning could be the problem, I've done hockey for years but don't feel like panning is that easy for me; that takes practice too. Try practicing on the dog or cars going by or something til you're able to do it and get shots without the blurriness


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

Sharon,

I know I take a lot of pics but I do take pics of the whole team. there is a team Facebook page that I use to save all the pics too. That way all the parents and the girls can see the pics that turned out good. The girls really like seeing them. I know some parents have saved the pics and then got them printed out for frames also. So just not taking pics of my kid. Anything taking pics helps me with is my sanity well my daughter is sometimes what stands between a win and a lose. 
I have tried the sidelines but I usually dont get good pics because everything is a side view. This is why I went to taking pics form the end of the field. I get the girls facing me. I try to keep the camera steady but I know I dont always do a good job of it.  I do not have the camera with me but I am sure the shutter speed is either 1/500 or 1/1000 setting. 

Thanks


----------



## Designer (Sep 3, 2013)

Hi, ropeman.  Thanks you for posting some pictures.  Unfortunately, the EXIF does not contain the exposure data.  Will you please post the EXIF for one or more of these shots, please?  Include the lens, ISO, shutter, and aperture.  

BTW: do you have any filters attached, such as a UV filter?


----------



## Braineack (Sep 3, 2013)

these almost look digitally zoomed on a pns camera.


----------



## Dao (Sep 3, 2013)

Are those photos heavily cropped?


----------



## hirejn (Sep 3, 2013)

The first batch simply looks out of focus, in which case you need to learn techniques for sharp focus. I'd need more information about the other images.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 3, 2013)

Seeing the pictures now, these don't look like camera movement or shutter blur, but look like exposure and/or focus problems. See what your meter is indicating when you're shooting in bright sunlight, looks like your camera was getting too much light for those first three, maybe the aperture needs to be smaller.

Even if you want lots of pictures if you take time to think about your camera settings and adjust during the game as the light might be changing and as the players move around, that could help you get better pictures.


----------



## texkam (Sep 3, 2013)

The Canon 70 to 300 zoom is not particularly sharp and if you are heavily cropping and/or shooting outside the sweet spot of the lens, that will only exasperate the problem.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

The pics are cropped. Some r only shot woth the 70 lens not really zoomed out. Like I said I am a full soccer field away from my daughter so I need to work on zooming out to 300 and focusing better. I usually dont have a lot of time to react. I will work on it

Thanks.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 3, 2013)

I shoot some kids soccer and I spend my time walking from end to end, hoping to catch good action.

You have a crop frame camera so at 300 mm you are close to 500.  That 's a long lens (but also not so sharp)
1200 pictures in an hour is just huge; 20 a minute for an hour.
I would bet you just aren't getting focused when the shot is taken; is the camera set to allow exposure when not focused?


----------



## DiskoJoe (Sep 3, 2013)

ropeman said:


> Sharon,
> 
> I know I take a lot of pics but I do take pics of the whole team. there is a team Facebook page that I use to save all the pics too. That way all the parents and the girls can see the pics that turned out good. The girls really like seeing them. I know some parents have saved the pics and then got them printed out for frames also. So just not taking pics of my kid. Anything taking pics helps me with is my sanity well my daughter is sometimes what stands between a win and a lose.
> I have tried the sidelines but I usually dont get good pics because everything is a side view. This is why I went to taking pics form the end of the field. I get the girls facing me. I try to keep the camera steady but I know I dont always do a good job of it.  I do not have the camera with me but I am sure the shutter speed is either 1/500 or 1/1000 setting.
> ...



Take less shots but of better quality. 1300 is way too many for one hour. A lot of cameras do not refocus when using burst mode so the as the players move your shot is locked in on another focus point.


----------



## weepete (Sep 3, 2013)

Are you using AI Servo mode? Also parial or centre weighted average metering may help.


----------



## DiskoJoe (Sep 3, 2013)

ropeman said:


> The pics are cropped. Some r only shot woth the 70 lens not really zoomed out. Like I said I am a full soccer field away from my daughter so I need to work on zooming out to 300 and focusing better. I usually dont have a lot of time to react. I will work on it
> 
> Thanks.



This is a major problem. You cant "react" to the shot. You have to anticipate the action and where things are headed and basically wait for them to hit the perfect spot.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

weepete said:


> Are you using AI Servo mode? Also parial or centre weighted average metering may help.



I am using AI Servo mode


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

DiskoJoe said:


> ropeman said:
> 
> 
> > The pics are cropped. Some r only shot woth the 70 lens not really zoomed out. Like I said I am a full soccer field away from my daughter so I need to work on zooming out to 300 and focusing better. I usually dont have a lot of time to react. I will work on it
> ...



I wish I could anticipate the action but 12 yr old girls are very unpredictable. I try to anticipate the action sometimes but it never seems to work.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

The_Traveler said:


> I shoot some kids soccer and I spend my time walking from end to end, hoping to catch good action.
> 
> You have a crop frame camera so at 300 mm you are close to 500.  That 's a long lens (but also not so sharp)
> 1200 pictures in an hour is just huge; 20 a minute for an hour.
> I would bet you just aren't getting focused when the shot is taken; is the camera set to allow exposure when not focused?



I am sorry I am not sure what you mean by " set to allow exposure when not focused"


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

Designer said:


> Hi, ropeman.  Thanks you for posting some pictures.  Unfortunately, the EXIF does not contain the exposure data.  Will you please post the EXIF for one or more of these shots, please?  Include the lens, ISO, shutter, and aperture.
> 
> BTW: do you have any filters attached, such as a UV filter?



The pic are too big to post. they are over 2 mb in size. The lens I use is 70 to 300 canon. The iso is large setting. I do not remember the shutter or aperture setting. I changed them through out the tourney which was over 2 days.


----------



## The_Traveler (Sep 3, 2013)

ropeman said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > I shoot some kids soccer and I spend my time walking from end to end, hoping to catch good action.
> ...



On my D700, I can set the camera to release the shutter even when the focus is not locked on.


----------



## texkam (Sep 3, 2013)

Consider buying the Canon 70-200 f4L. About $550 used. You could then sell your 70-300 to recoup a bit of that cost.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 3, 2013)

texkam said:


> Consider buying the Canon 70-200 f4L. About $550 used. You could then sell your 70-300 to recoup a bit of that cost.



What about the zoom distance? Like I said I am pretty far from my daughter now and next yr I will be even farther. Will the 200 zoom be enough?


----------



## Designer (Sep 3, 2013)

ropeman said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > Hi, ropeman.  Thanks you for posting some pictures.  Unfortunately, the EXIF does not contain the exposure data.  Will you please post the EXIF for one or more of these shots, please?  Include the lens, ISO, shutter, and aperture.
> ...



I was not asking for you to post a larger size photograph, what I was asking for is the intact EXIF, or at least your shutter speed, the ISO, and the aperture, at least, and if you could, the entire EXIF, which has more information in it.  The reason I was asking for that is so we could evaluate the photograph in terms of the actual settings used.  The method you used to post the pictures has stripped most of the data from the individual pictures.

If you can't post photographs while leaving the EXIF intact, at least you can look at it on your own computer, and post the shutter speed, ISO, and aperture with each photograph.  

Second part: do you have any filters attached, such as a UV filter?


----------



## Designer (Sep 3, 2013)

ropeman said:


> texkam said:
> 
> 
> > Consider buying the Canon 70-200 f4L. About $550 used. You could then sell your 70-300 to recoup a bit of that cost.
> ...



You might have to find another vantage point from which to photograph the keeper.  Where do the pros position themselves at a full-size soccer match?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 3, 2013)

This might give some ideas on vantage points etc. - at the bottom of the article is a link to the photographer's Sportsshooter member page and his website. GOOOOOOOAL! A new team debuts in Seattle


----------



## texkam (Sep 4, 2013)

> What about the zoom distance? Like I said I am pretty far from my daughter now and next yr I will be even farther. Will the 200 zoom be enough?


^  





> You might have to find another vantage point from which to photograph the keeper. Where do the pros position themselves at a full-size soccer match?


The 70-200 f4L is a top quality lens and the the best option for a tight budget. To get a quality lens with more reach expect to pay significantly more. The 400 f5.6 will run you $1300.00 and it's a slower lens. Fast long glass gets very pricey.

Something to consider, I have a friend that bought some pretty nice gear (mostly used) to shoot his kid's events. After they graduated he got rid of it all to go with a Sony NEX system. He really didn't have much difficulty selling this nice gear at a competitive price. Of course he didn't quite get back what he originally paid, but the way he looked at it, the price difference was simply the cost of renting what he needed for the few years he shot his kids. A good spend.


----------



## bratkinson (Sep 4, 2013)

ropeman said:


> The pic are too big to post. they are over 2 mb in size. The lens I use is 70 to 300 canon. The iso is large setting. I do not remember the shutter or aperture setting. I changed them through out the tourney which was over 2 days.



Earlier in this thread, you indicated the pictures were cropped down. In your post quoted here, it's down to a 2mb file. Assuming you started with a JPG of approximately 5-8mb, that's a MAJOR cropping! When cropped that much, unless subject and camera motion have been completely stopped with a sufficiently fast shutter speed *==AND==* the focus is absolutely dead perfect, the result will be blurred. Shooting in AI Servo mode is also an absolute requirement. Add to that, the EF 70-300 isn't reputed to be among the sharpest of the non-L lenses in Canons' lens catalog.

As suggested above, you may want to invest in the Canon EF 70-300 f4-5.6L lens for improved sharpness.

Edit: Could the focus point selected by the camera be on a subject (another player) that was physically closer to you than the desired subjects which are likely outside of the DOF? That might be the explanation for why some of the pictures are blurry. Understanding how your camera decides which of multiple focus points to use is critical.  It's usually the one that's the closest 'lockable' focus point.  If you haven't already done so, change your camera settings to use only the center focus point.  That would solve the 'wrong subject focus' problem.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 4, 2013)

> I was not asking for you to post a larger size photograph, what I was  asking for is the intact EXIF, or at least your shutter speed, the ISO,  and the aperture, at least, and if you could, the entire EXIF, which has  more information in it.  The reason I was asking for that is so we  could evaluate the photograph in terms of the actual settings used.  The  method you used to post the pictures has stripped most of the data from  the individual pictures.
> 
> If you can't post photographs while leaving the EXIF intact, at least  you can look at it on your own computer, and post the shutter speed,  ISO, and aperture with each photograph.
> 
> Second part: do you have any filters attached, such as a UV filter?



I will have to look at my computer and see if I can get that info for you. No UV filter just a clear filter. 



> This might give some ideas on vantage points etc. - at the bottom of the  article is a link to the photographer's Sportsshooter member page and  his website. GOOOOOOOAL! A new team debuts in Seattle



Thanks I will look at this site and see what he says.



> Edit: Could the focus point selected by the camera be on a subject  (another player) that was physically closer to you than the desired  subjects which are likely outside of the DOF? That might be the  explanation for why some of the pictures are blurry. Understanding how  your camera decides which of multiple focus points to use is critical.   It's usually the one that's the closest 'lockable' focus point.  If you  haven't already done so, change your camera settings to use only the  center focus point.  That would solve the 'wrong subject focus' problem.



I will have to look at my setting for the focus point. Thanks for the info.


----------



## Designer (Sep 4, 2013)

ropeman said:


> I will have to look at my computer and see if I can get that info for you. No UV filter just a clear filter.



The EXIF can also be displayed in your camera.  

I suggest you lose the clear filter and try again.


----------



## ToddnTN (Sep 4, 2013)

ropeman said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > Hi, ropeman. Thanks you for posting some pictures. Unfortunately, the EXIF does not contain the exposure data. Will you please post the EXIF for one or more of these shots, please? Include the lens, ISO, shutter, and aperture.
> ...



Use flickr.com, they will let you post 1tb of pictures to their site free of charge. Then you can just provide a link to the original pictures, at which point you will receive far more help.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 4, 2013)

Designer said:


> ropeman said:
> 
> 
> > I will have to look at my computer and see if I can get that info for you. No UV filter just a clear filter.
> ...



Here is the EXIF info you were looking for.

F=stop = f/5
Exposure time = 1/1250 sec
iso speed = iso-200
exposure bias = 0 step


----------



## Designer (Sep 4, 2013)

Thanks, ropeman.  With an exposure time of 1/1250, you should be getting sharp focus.  We have seen with some filters on the lens it could affect the sharpness.  I think you should try your next photography without the filter.  Also, check the inside surface of the lens for dust.  That is one place that is often overlooked when examining a lens for dust.


----------



## sm4him (Sep 4, 2013)

First of all, I would NOT buy a "better" lens right now. It might be better quality, but my guess is at least 75% of your issues are user-related, so figure those out FIRST, then upgrade the equipment if you want.  It IS possible to get decent soccer photos with a standard lens like that. I used the Nikon equivalent for the most part last year shooting my niece's soccer games, and after a few "learning experience" games, got pretty decent results.

I would NOT stay in one place, and I would NEVER try to shoot the whole game from one end of the field. If I HAD to stand in one place, it would be as near to the middle of the field as I could get, along the sidelines. But it's better if you can move around. Don't worry about the fact that it means you're not getting shots "head on." You actually WILL get some "head on" shots, as the players angle themselves according to where the ball is. But even if you don't--actions pics from the side are fine, since that's the way most people are used to seeing soccer.

Make sure your shutter speed is at a MINIMUM of 1/500. 1/1000 is even better, if you have enough light.  Aperture maybe 6.3 or 7.1 and ISO, whatever it has to be to get a decent exposure.

Now comes the tricky part. If you understand the game, it will be easier. I was a keeper myself for many, many years, so that helped me anticipate what was going to happen. You will get MUCH better action shots if you take the time to learn the game well enough and anticipate where the ball is going. You said you tried that and didn't have much luck with it. KEEP doing it; the more you work on following that ball, learning the game and being able to anticipate the next move, the more "luck" you will start having.  Yes, the younger kids can be a challenge because of their unpredictability (such as, they don't always GO to the ball like they should), but you will learn how to anticipate their moves better and better with practice.
Focus right on the number on their jerseys as they're running, or on your daughter's chest as she's going for the ball. If you focus on the ball, you'll end up with oof players.

EDIT: Oh, and as others have already said, if you have a "protective filter" on the camera, carefully unscrew it before the game...and then hurl it as far away from you as you possibly can, and leave it there.


----------



## ropeman (Sep 5, 2013)

> Thanks, ropeman.  With an exposure time of 1/1250, you should be getting  sharp focus.  We have seen with some filters on the lens it could  affect the sharpness.  I think you should try your next photography  without the filter.  Also, check the inside surface of the lens for  dust.  That is one place that is often overlooked when examining a lens  for dust.



Thanks I will check the surfaces for dirt. I will also get rid of the protective lens cover. I try to stay at one end so I get the girls faces in the pics. I shot from the side for 2 yrs and then read somewhere about going to the ends of the field and shooting. I decided to do that and started getting better action photos of the team just not my daughter. Also, by going to the end of field I can get away from all the other parents. Sometimes other parents are annoying and I do not say a word during the game. You would understand because you played the position but you really need to concentrate more then other positions because there is no one behind if you make a mistake. 

Thanks to everyone for all the great info. My daughter has a scrimmage this weekend and I will stand on the sidelines to take pics. See if they come out good. I will post here and let everyone know what happens. My other daughter has a Field Hockey tourney so it will be a weekend of picture taking. 

Thanks again. 



> First of all, I would NOT buy a "better" lens right now. It might be  better quality, but my guess is at least 75% of your issues are  user-related, so figure those out FIRST, then upgrade the equipment if  you want.  It IS possible to get decent soccer photos with a standard  lens like that. I used the Nikon equivalent for the most part last year  shooting my niece's soccer games, and after a few "learning experience"  games, got pretty decent results.
> 
> I would NOT stay in one place, and I would NEVER try to shoot the whole  game from one end of the field. If I HAD to stand in one place, it would  be as near to the middle of the field as I could get, along the  sidelines. But it's better if you can move around. Don't worry about the  fact that it means you're not getting shots "head on." You actually  WILL get some "head on" shots, as the players angle themselves according  to where the ball is. But even if you don't--actions pics from the side  are fine, since that's the way most people are used to seeing soccer.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the info. I will work on anticipating the action better.


----------



## cbarnard7 (Sep 5, 2013)

Hi ropeman,

I'm no expert (and there are a few pro sports photogs here that can probably help more) but I recently tried shooting my wife's coed game while I was injured. (http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...allery/334928-coed-soccer-football-shots.html) They're not excellent, but what helped me was on my Nikon, I used the AF-C mode that constantly focused while I was panning. I also have a VR lens, so that helped with blur as well. I shot these all handheld with a 55-200VR on a full-sized field at ISO ~1600 and 1/250-1/500s.

Also, you're much better off (in my opinion) standing at half and shooting. I know your 300 can zoom across the whole field, but it doesn't need to. I think half is a much better vantage-point for you since your daughter is a goalie. Another cool shot could be from behind the net with a wide angle as she's coming out for the ball? A lot of cameras are placed behind the goal in professional games to catch the goal/save. 

And lastly, like others have said: it's much better to take less pictures with better quality. I never really use burst mode, and if I do, it's only 2-3 shots at a time. I've played soccer my whole life, so I know where the action is going to be (going up for a header, taking a shot, hitting a corner/free-kick, doing a throw it, challenging/tackling for the ball...etc) and then just snap as it's about to happen.

Good luck!


----------



## ropeman (Sep 5, 2013)

> Also, you're much better off (in my opinion) standing at half and  shooting. I know your 300 can zoom across the whole field, but it  doesn't need to. I think half is a much better vantage-point for you  since your daughter is a goalie. Another cool shot could be from behind  the net with a wide angle as she's coming out for the ball? A lot of  cameras are placed behind the goal in professional games to catch the  goal/save.



The one problem I have with standing at mid field or on the sideline is that I do not get the girls coming at the net to score. They do this a lot in a 1 hr game, for the last 8 games they are avg'ing 4 to 5 goals a game. I would love to go behind the net but that is not allowed at this level. 

My daughter has been playing soccer since she was 8 so for the past 4 yrs. I have had to sit through a lot of soccer. i never played a game of soccer, played football my whole life. 



> They're not excellent, but what helped me was on my Nikon, I used the  AF-C mode that constantly focused while I was panning. I also have a VR  lens, so that helped with blur as well. I shot these all handheld with a  55-200VR on a full-sized field at ISO ~1600 and 1/250-1/500s.



Is AF-C mode mean AI servo mode ?


----------



## cbarnard7 (Sep 5, 2013)

ropeman said:


> > Also, you're much better off (in my opinion) standing at half and shooting. I know your 300 can zoom across the whole field, but it doesn't need to. I think half is a much better vantage-point for you since your daughter is a goalie. Another cool shot could be from behind the net with a wide angle as she's coming out for the ball? A lot of cameras are placed behind the goal in professional games to catch the goal/save.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, AI Servo is the same (where you half-press down the shutter release button to pan with an object and constantly focus). 

If you can't stand behind the goal, I'd stand by the corner flag and move to the other side of the field (other end line) halfway through the half and only shoot the players attacking the goal closest to you. This way, you can snap pics of the other team against your daughter (and her goalie skills), and then halfway through the first half go to the other side and snap pics of your daughter's team attacking their goalie. 

I know you want to capture it all so just compromise and split time between both subjects (your daughter and her team).


----------



## 114florida (Sep 6, 2013)

Yes, these looks Zooming in normal camera.


----------



## CameraFu (Oct 23, 2013)

For your photos to be less blurry you're going to have to make sure you shutter speed is high to catch the movements in action. It's easier to take photos like this on a bright day, so you don't have to turn your iso which causes alot of grain, but still can have a bright photo. What type of camera do you have?


----------



## alviataylor (Oct 28, 2013)

These pictures look good to me but it may be because i am not such a big professional.. Need to learn more about it.!


----------



## Braineack (Oct 28, 2013)

alviataylor said:


> These pictures look good to me but it may be because i am not such a big professional.. Need to learn more about it.!




I took this with my 300mm from a VERY far away distance and still cropped the image in significantly.








Focal Length270mmExposure1/800F Numberf/5.6ISO160

I'm not saying this is the greatest picture in the world, but you should be able to see the difference in IQ between this and the OP's.


----------

