[Closed] Mountain Bike Photography

Never very keen on the "filter to protect lens" option, unless you buy a top end filter it's like using the hubble telescope to look through a jam jar when the jam jar isn't needed most of the time.

UV filter saved my lens when I dropped the camera, filter cracked and metal rim bent, lens was fine maybe would have suffered the same fate if the filter hadn't been there

Not it's intended purpose I grant you

Yeah, thats the reason most people give. I just find the damage to every image more annoying than having to replace a lens due to a one-off mistake! 😀

a crack across the filter would probably improve my pictures 😕

Yeah, thats the reason most people give. I just find the damage to every image more annoying than having to replace a lens due to a one-off mistake!

Hark at you. 🙂

Before bike specific i'd suggest learning the relationship between ISO, shutter speed and aperture. Different circumstances will require a different combination of the above. If the biker is under a dense canopy you might be looking at high iso, a slower shutter and a low f-number. If there is an abundance of light settings will change.

Learn how to pan with a subject (to make the background blurry) is a valuable skill for "action shots" as well. I found it good to practise panning at a local car trackday or MTB race where there is lots of subjects going past the same point, you can play with different settings then and see what effect that has.

Imagination and your own ideas, don't copy. There are thousands of photographers doing the same thing and it's very unusual to find decent photos. Lots and lots of practice, if it was easy there would be thousands of good photos out there... 😉

I just find the damage to every image more annoying than having to replace a lens due to a one-off mistake

Got any before and after pics?

Re MTBing shots - quite hard actually to take good pics without them looking utterly dull. I'd suggest getting in unusual spots and shooting from unusual angles. Only so many shots of a rider on a trail the eye can take, really. Something like, I dunno.. a rider on one side of a gulley taken from the other side..? Or set up on a fast corner or some other obstacle and have a mate session it with varying degrees of control whilst you change angles and so on.

Before bike specific i'd suggest learning the relationship between ISO, shutter speed and aperture

Nah, to begin with just stick it sport mode. Have fun first, get interested and then start learning up. Composition (ie actually being in the right place taking the right shot) is waaay more important than fannying about with camera settings.

Composition (ie actually being in the right place taking the right shot) is waaay more important than fannying about with camera settings.

Quoted for troof.

Think about what you want from a shot, then plan it from there. Do you want to show a super gnarly action shot with the rider on the edge of control hurtling round a berm? Probably best not to shoot half a mile away with a wide lens. Harmony with nature and a calming view of the majesty of the terrain? You might not want to be laid on your belly looking up a steep rocky chute.

Get down the woods with a couple of mates, find a fun bit and get them to session it, taking different shots with different techniques from different angles. See what works, basically!

Develop a thick skin too, as everyone will feel the need to criticise your work and tell you what you should have done...

Enjoy it, that's the main thing.

I like trawling Flickr for ideas - there are loads of great amateur photographers out there and you get ideas about types of shots - you'll get lots of links off here as people post their photos.

No point saying composition again, so a couple of techniques...

Panning - for when you want a blurred background for a sense of speed. Stand at 90 degrees to the direction of travel of the rider. Lock focus on rider with a half-press (or even swap to manual focus), move the camera to track them and fully press the shutter as they pass you, but continue the swing through to follow them. You need a slow shutter speed, I use 1/50s to 1/100s and as much depth of field as you can (f8-f13 for example). Use shutter priority to set the shutter speed then do some dry runs to check the aperture and fiddle with the ISO until you get into the range.

Freezing action - the opposite of above where you want to just freeze everything without blur. Shutter priority again 1/640s or faster.

Scenery - google hyperfocal distance. Basically you want a high f-number, say f16 and focus quite close (i.e. a few feet). That way everything in shot will be in focus. So... stick the camera in Aperture priority and dial in f16 and take it from there. A tripod may come in handy, but as you have a stabilised body you should be able to get away with very slow shutter speeds.

And shoot in raw.

Anyone make a rubber coated filter ring with no glass to protect the end of the lens body from damage?

Got any before and after pics?

No, because I only put a filter on if I need it, but I do usually do a test run with stuff I buy to check how much it's trashing the sharpness of the already not very sharp lenses I can afford 🙂

Hark at me indeed 😆

I'm a bit of a pixel peeper it has to be said, but primarily because the one thing that really really cheeses me off is when I manage to make a half decent shot (rare) it's usually screwed up by having my cheap lens on! Having said that, I do recognise that sharpness etc is only part of the picture, I just sold a poster print which I'd consider my worst image ever sharpness wise!

As for MTB images - no idea, I don't do moving subjects 🙂

Anyone make a rubber coated filter ring with no glass to protect the end of the lens body from damage?

You'd be hard pushed to notice any negative effect of a decent protective filter. Even a cheap one will only be an issue with flare.

You'd be hard pushed to notice any negative effect of a decent protective filter. Even a cheap one will only be an issue with flare.

Thing is you need to specify decent. A £10 amazon jobby really softens an image, you need to make the jump to 50+ to get one that doesn't, so I guess it depends on your definition of decent.

You need to take care selecting which focus point you use, got a feeling that the K-x doesn't show the active focus point in the viewfinder (very strange because my older K200D did)

The lens hood is worth using, avoids flare and also protects the lens, I don't use a filter either except from a polariser occasionally

For scenic shots as mentioned above, go for something like f/16 and focus about a third of the way in to get everything with detail

Definitely learn the basics of exposure, also don't judge your pics on the camera LCD as they will look a lot different when viewed on a monitor.

Don't forget to back up your pics, memory is dirt cheap and nothing worse than losing a great shot through carelessness

Finally just enjoy, unless you are very good or lucky your first efforts will probably be not that clever, all comes good pretty quick though.

One other thing, buy a decent strap something like an Optech for about fifteen quid, makes for a much more comfortable time than the supplied one.

Thing is you need to specify decent. A £10 amazon jobby really softens an image, you need to make the jump to 50+ to get one that doesn't, so I guess it depends on your definition of decent

If I get a chance and the garden birds are co-operative will take some pics later using a 400mm with and without a Hoya Pro1 UV filter.

From experience I know it does make a difference and only keep it for odd days when its windy and sand/grit etc is blowing about.

half-press

If you only know one thing about how your camera works, it should be this.

Half pressing the button focuses and sets up the picture, then fully pressing it from there takes the picture. For action shots in particular, it can be very difficult to get the shot as even with a nice camera there's a delay as it focuses. Top tip - decide where you are going to snap the rider and focus on that bit of trail - the ground or an asjacent tree or something. Half press the button, then when s/he comes around, presto - instant picture.

The other alternative (but not all cameras have it, and it's not so foolproof) is to use continuous focus mode (it has different names on different cameras). On my Oly, if you half press the button it will continuously adjust to focus on whatever you are pointing at. So if you track a rider coming towards you it'll be trained on him or her, so again you should be able to snap instantly whenever you want.

Oh and also try using burst mode, so you can hold the button down all the way and it keeps on snapping. Good for getting the one shot you want or providing you with several candidates to choose from. Also good for pretending to be a paparrazo which is a great laugh.

Don't bother with RAW. Unless you know what you are doing it's way way more trouble than it's worth. It's one of those things you can learn about if you want to a few months down the line, or you can ignore completely and just take bloomin pictures.

It's better to clean a £25 Hoya filter 20 times a day than it is to clean the front element of your lens.

Lots of good advice above.... I'm definitely a fan of protective filters. If you're planning to stand in a studio with your camera on a tripod then, yes, by all means remove the £25 Hoya UV filter from your £1000+ lens.

If however, you're likely to be out and about in the rain and the mud, photographing 18 stones of bike and rider with a wide angled lens then a filter is a-very-good-idea.

I don't use them at weddings but I do use the deepest lens hood I can get away with purely to protect the lens' front element.

The other alternative (but not all cameras have it, and it's not so foolproof) is to use continuous focus mode (it has different names on different cameras).

I use a filter and a lens hood. I've bumped the thing several times with it swinging around my neck as I scramble for a good shot - just lightly, but the number of times it happens means that even at 10 quid a time it would still be annoying to have to worry about filters.

Only once did I see flare caused by a filter. It was indoors in the daytime, and there was a ceiling light in the top of the frame. At first I thought it was my lens being rubbish (with some disappointment) but no, it vanished when I removed the filter 🙂

Good online tutorials here:

http://leadinglinesphotography.net/category/tutorials/on-line

A quick filter test. Not the most inspiring of images but they do show high contrast and include a shiny thing.

Originals:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

100% crops:

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Which one has the filter?

I must just be a careful dancing fairy with a camera, mine never gets clobbered or particularly muddy/wet, even when snowboarding with it. I mustn't be being gnar enough 🙂

From the image, 5th, I'd say the second had the filter on - less detil on the dents on the left of the tool and less detail in the thread. But that could be down to missed focus instead if you didn't lock manual.

Yep, you're right. I think you're also right to say it could be down to the vagaries of a handheld shot.

To spot the difference in print I'd have to print at least a 1m poster. Even then I suspect the printing would hide any difference.

Are they both exposed the same? Bottom image looks a fair bit lighter, can see it in the muddy smudges and around the logo. I can see how the filter could affect metering and other choices the camera makes, and tbh mine will often adjust the exact same shot slightly differently twice in a row.

Nice sharp image tho, what camera?

Are they both exposed the same? Bottom image looks a fair bit lighter, can see it in the muddy smudges and around the logo. I can see how the filter could affect metering and other choices the camera makes, and tbh mine will often adjust the exact same shot slightly differently twice in a row.

Nice sharp image tho, what camera?

Camera is a Sony a900 with a Tamron 80-200 f2.8.

Could be that the change in light with the filter could have caused the camera to do something slightly differently. Don't you lose half a stop of light anyway?

Even then I suspect the printing would hide any difference.

True, but sitting behind the screen looking at it I'd be dissappointed knowing it could have been better.

True, but sitting behind the screen looking at it I'd be dissappointed knowing it could have been better.

Just print it 3x2, job's a goodun.

& woosh, the OP leaves, to be never be seen again...............

don simon - Member

Imagination and your own ideas

Is the best advice so far 😉

I suggest go out riding alot and take millions of pix.

Take a compact as well.

WOW!!

Cheers guys, only just had chance to read through them all. Already got myself a Lens Hood, for protection and also for what it was ment for 🙂

i think i tried to Sprint before i could walk with getting a little lost in full manual mode, so as suggest, went for Sport, took note of what it was doing with the settings and went to Aperture priority and had a mess, some interesting results.

AF.C for continual focus on the Pentax, i had a good read of the manual before hand 🙂
Not really seeing the advantages to RAW/RAW+ but i guess this comes down you your Photoshop/Gimp/other post image software.
HDR on a moving Image?

Also planning to go to a few BDS rounds this year, i see it as a never ending line of photo's and my mates are already getting bored with doing the same corners 1000's of times. Already think skinned, from Yorkshire 🙂 (Flat cap and pipe to prove it).

I guess its all down to 1 thing and that is enjoying what you are doing and its an added bonus if other people like what you are doing.

there's some general tips here:> http://leadinglinesphotography.net/category/tutorials/on-line

Dougie specialises in "adventure" photography and is an MTB'er.

Having been playing with a new camera recently RAW is great in very low light; what comes out as just a big black blob in a jpeg contains a fair bit more detail in RAW, so you can brighten it up a bit without it becoming all weird.

Fake HDR can be done on a single RAW exposure of a motion shot, bu not true HDR.

True, but sitting behind the screen looking at it I'd be dissappointed knowing it could have been better.

Oh dear! 🙂

Now I can see the advantages of shooting in RAW for HDR stuff 🙂

Might I suggest looking at alot of the crap that's out there and deciding how not to do it... 😆

Having been playing with a new camera recently RAW is great in very low light; what comes out as just a big black blob in a jpeg contains a fair bit more detail in RAW

I'd blame my camera for that. It calculates the exposure based on the available light then takes a RAW image. It THEN processes this to a JPEG if you are in that mode. So if it's darkening the image too much you need to have words with it.