Canon RF/EF Lens Recommendation - Dog Running?

[cedge]

I bought a Canon R8 earlier this year and its AF system has impressed me in being able to lock and track focus on my Border Terrier. My specifc interest/need is in capturing my dog running towards me when we are out and about on walks.

I have had a lot of success, but the best compositions I find are generally when she fills the frame and currently with the lens I use (Canon EF 85mm f1.8); at this point I find she encroaches within the minimum focus distance of the lens (0.85m) (or maybe the camera/lens combo struggles at this point?) and the critical shots are out of focus where it matters i.e. her eyes. Example attached from this morning (focus behind the eyes) - this is from a burst of about 20fps, AF case 1, tracking sensitivity 1 (locked on), whole area AF. This one in particular was shot at f1.8 but I could of equally put an image here as an example where the same behaviour occurrs at higher aperture values. To give the camera some credit, the shots that were OOF on the eyes, the focus confirmation box was not on the eye so at least it isn't giving me false positives which was the case in other cameras that I have tried in the past.



Is there a better EF (or RF) lens that will enable me to get the kinds of shots I am after? I think it needs to be a fast lens, f4 might not be enough in low light conditions/woodlands. I guess one of the EF 70-200 f2.8 options is probably what people will recommend but is there anything else I have overlooked, preferably with fast AF and that is a little lighter/easier on the wallet?

I had looked at the EF 135mm f2 but its minimum focus distance is 0.9m so I'm not sure whether that will be any different albeit the focal length being slightly longer may alleviate the issue. Assuming that its a mfd issue and not a camera struggling to focus that close issue?

 

[LongLensPhotography]

the longer the better here.

70-200mm f/2.8 would be the sort of obvious choice here, and you will be mostly at the long end. If you have plenty of light to work with you could even try the slower 70-300mm or 100-400 flavours.

I reckon 200mm f/2.8 would also do a very similar job, perhaps only costing you a couple of closer frames, with the advantage of being much sharper and cheaper
135mm also can work similarly but personally I would prefer a longer lens working with very small and fast subject like these.

At the end of the day you will send the dog on a few runs so you should have something to choose from.

 

[cedge]

Yes, I did about 7 or so runs this morning so lots to choose from but all to often my preferred composition (close up) will be out of focus when using the 85mm f1.8. I had considered the 70-300 L as an option but I think I would be worried that for this purpose it would not be fast enough in terms of AF or in aperture for these kinds of subject. I think I would be better opting for a 70-200 f4 but I'm not convinced that f4 would be fast enough for low light situations either.

 

[cedge]

Just going off tangent, I came from an Olympus E-M1.2, to a Fuji X-H1, to a Sony A9 Mk1 and now to the Canon R8 in the hope each would perform better than the previous camera regarding this specific requirement. Out of these, I have had ironically most success with the E-M1.2 (and the 12-40 f2.8 Pro lens) but ideally wanted to move to FF for lower noise / better high ISO performance (and the 'FF look'). However, I have been thinking recently about whether to give the OM-1 a shot and whether it would be better than the R8/EM1.2 for this specific interest and better at focusing close to the camera? As whilst a long lens might help I agree, my favoured compositions tend to be when she comes close to the camera (whether thats because she knows a snack is imminent....).

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I think I would be better opting for a 70-200 f4 but I'm not convinced that f4 would be fast enough for low light situations.

deep down in the woods or just before dusk you may struggle with that and will be hitting uncomfortable ISO settings.

besides the older f4 IS mk1 beeing pre-2009 is a little restricted by the way aperture and AF works, and would have capped fps in mechanic shutter mode, which I absolutely do not recommend here despite any shutter roll - this is not a huge problem at all with dog running forward. mk2 would be almost as expensive as f/2.8 and to be honest despite all the talk I didn't find it any better optically and with massive smears at 70mm I just went and got rid it off it at the first opportunity.

f/2.8 EF series are also pretty crappy lenses but you are unlikely to run too deep into the worst of it with R8 and fast action dog photography

 

[LongLensPhotography]

As whilst a long lens might help I agree, my favoured compositions tend to be when she comes close to the camera (whether thats because she knows a snack is imminent....).

camera should be fairly irrelevant here other than you will be hitting MFDs and taxing AF to death. The real problem is that dog is all over the place up close, and your aim will be almost inevitably the first point of failure

 

[Phil V]

I’ve done this a bit with my kids dogs, and the zoom is definitely an advantage.
70-200 2.8 is ideal, and if you can find one, the pre IS one is optically better than the first couple of IS lenses, at a bargain price, and you’ll even get some stabilisation on the R7.

 

[cedge]

Thanks Phil, I have the R8 though so no stabilisation but this doesn't help when shooting subjects at upwards of 1/1000th of a second anyway. My concern with the pre IS 70-200 f2.8 would be AF speed.

 

[cedge]

camera should be fairly irrelevant here other than you will be hitting MFDs and taxing AF to death. The real problem is that dog is all over the place up close, and your aim will be almost inevitably the first point of failure

My technique is pretty good and not too irractic, I hold the camera on the vertical close to the ground with the LCD flipped to the bottom so I can look down and see, then just make small movements to track the direction of the dog.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

70-200 2.8 is ideal, and if you can find one, the pre IS one is optically better than the first couple of IS lenses, at a bargain price, and you’ll even get some stabilisation on the R7.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

non is lens may be simpler but is older design.

Who knows if one was a duff copy and the other a stellar copy, but results kind of speak for itself. Neither is great, but old one is only ahead at 200mm f/4 and 5.6.

 

[Adam-G]

Another vote for a 70-200 here too. I do a lot of this type of shot and you get a lot of wonderful frame filling, compressed look at the end of the zoom range.

https://flic.kr/p/2qmupH9

https://flic.kr/p/2qmnE2F

These are both shot at the 200mm end of the zoom and I always love the images it produces in this scenario.

I'm not a Canon shooter so unfortunately I can't offer specifics for the mount but just stopping by to say that range and versatility is great for the type of shot you want to get.

 

[cedge]

Lovely images Adam, is the eye hit rate with the S5M2 good or do you get a lot of false positives where they say they are in focus but focus was missed?

 

[Phil V]

Thanks Phil, I have the R8 though so no stabilisation but this doesn't help when shooting subjects at upwards of 1/1000th of a second anyway. My concern with the pre IS 70-200 f2.8 would be AF speed.

I’ve had one for 20 ish years, and for most of that time the camera would have been the weak link in the AF system.
I’ve shot with both the latest RF 70-200’s, and couldn’t say I noticed a speed difference.

As for the IQ? According to some I’ve got a bag full of useless L and Art lenses, but I never spent my life shooting test charts, just delivering images to delighted customers

 

[Phil V]

If you like I can pm you a series of images of a black lab shot on an R6 mk1

 

[Adam-G]

Lovely images Adam, is the eye hit rate with the S5M2 good or do you get a lot of false positives where they say they are in focus but focus was missed?

Generally as long as focus is confirmed as acquired the hit rate is very good. I also stop down to f4 to give a little bit of leeway but it does well considering it's more of an all round camera than something that specialises in fast action capture.

 

[cedge]

I don't think I am quite ready to get a lens which is going to weigh 1.6kg (the RF lens equivalent is lighter but is way out of my price range at the moment). As a compromise, the EF 70-300 L is on my radar as a more general purpose range for landscape as well as potentially 'action' in decent light; does anyone know whether the AF on this lens is comparable with the EF 70-200 f2.8 lenses?