Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 16, 2006, 10:35 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

and heres the sony. see the difference in brightness and color and sharpness(well not sharpness thanks to the heavy compression I just used)


Attached Images
 
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2006, 2:21 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
wsandman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 318
Default

Based on the composition of the photo, it seems that youwere closer when you to the photo with the Sony. The AWB setting in the Sony photoseems to have worked better too. What picture style is the camera set to? Try standard or neutral. You should alsoto check the focal points making sure the entertainment center is selected and that your exposure is correct.There's a learning curve, but once you're over it, you won't go back to the Sony, except for convenience.
wsandman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2006, 2:55 AM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

wsandman1- Thanks for your input. The Sony was taken at the same distance. It seems closer because I croped it a bit so I could rezize the .jpg to make it small enough to upload here.

I had the Sony set to default for everything. I had the WB set to center and made sure the Sony and Canon was aimed at the same object before I took the shot.

Tonight was my son's birthday. A week before the main trip. I think out of like 80 shots I took, maybe half came out ok where the exsposure was correct for the shot. Of course out of those shots, maybe 8 was suitable to framing. Haha. Thank God for digital. Anyways, still not sure why some comes out ok, while others dont. The Sony always took bright shots, although some come out looking oversaturated. I need someone to train me on this new camera. haha

I just hope its not a bad lens or something. Talking about the out of focus. Not about the darkness, as I'm sure that has to do where the camera is taking the light metering from.
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2006, 4:43 AM   #14
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Welcome to the SLR learning curve.

Looking at the Canon shot:

It is quite badly underexposed, and I'm not at all sure where your focus point is, but it seems to probably be around the left of the TV from our perspective.

The pop-up flash is not powerful enough to light a whole room at that distance, so the only part of the picture that is properly exposed is the flower.

The rest is about 2-3 stops underexposed.

Also you are using the 17-85 at the widest end at the maximum aperture of f4. It's not a terribly sharp lens at that aperture. For decent sharpness at the wide end you should really be using f8 or f11.

So you have lost 2 stops there add that to your current underexposure of say 2 stops and you should really be looking at using ISO 1600 for that shot to give you an aperture of f8 and the same shutter speed of 1/60s.

What shooting mode were you in? Because it's not clear exactly where your focus point was. I would suggest changing to Single Shot, because then the camera will not fire if it cannot get a focus lock. In AI mode it will trip even if no focus lock has been achieved.

When comparing the two cameras you need to keep in mind that the Sony has a 7-50mm focal length lens (28-200 equivalent) and the Canon has a 17-85 (27-135 equivalent) so make sure you adjust your field of view (i.e. the 35mm equivalence) to be approximately equal on the two cameras.

In these shots I notice that your 35mm equivalent was about 28mm on the Canon shot and 36mm on the Sony shot. That's a fairly significant difference in optical zoom and you would therefore expect the Sony shot to have a bit more detail.

Also you must realise that the Sony by default will deliver more saturated and sharpened pictures than the Canon default settings. There are some rather nasty artifacts in that Sony crop, and I would much rather be working with the Canon picture if trying to process those shots. If you want the punchy colours and over sharpened look of the Sony just dial in some extra in the menus - you'll need to check the manual as to how to do that.

Remember that you have been using your Sony for some time now, and are probably quite accomplished at getting the best from it. You have only just started out with the Canon, and SLR photography is a lot more complicated, the choices have to be made by YOU not by the camera.

If you want to do some comparisons between the two cameras then start first without the flash, in a well lit outdoor scene. Calculate equivalent angle of view between the two cameras and ideally use a tripod.

Flash is an advanced topic and you would do better to treat it as a whole separate learning curve.

The Canon is a far superior tool, but also demands more from the operator.


peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2006, 8:43 AM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 36
Default

when i bought my rebel XT i found it dificult at 1st too get used to because i was used to a kodak easy share point and shoot. My exposure was off also... what i did was set the mode in creative zone to P, then i changed the drive mode to continuous, then i used the auto exposure bracketing (AEB). You can change the exposure up to 2 full f stops. You would have to be the judge onhow much you want to change it. Then when you press the button to shoot, the camera will take 3 continuous pictures. The 1st at the orignial exposure, then the decreased exposure, and last the increased exposure. There you have 3 shots of the same pic and your able to see what you have to do when your out taking photos. I use the AEB quite often now... your bound to be able to use one out of the 3 shots. And yes .... thanks for the digital camera that we are able to delete the pictures we don't like.
scotiez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2006, 8:57 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Mugmar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,152
Default

I have to concur with peripateticand scotiez. I got My Rebel XT a Little over a year ago after shooting with a Canon G3 for a while. I was more than a little disappointed at the flatness and softness of the pictures compared to the rightout of the camerashots of the G3,and wondered if I made the right choice by buying a DSLR.

After doing some research here on Steve's and other camera sites I found that most all pics taken with any DSLR need to be run through some kind of photo-shop type program to make fine (or in some cases major) adjustments to color, sharpness, shadow/highlights etc. It isbit ofa learning curve but well worth it. I would not trade this camera for anything, except maybe a 5D.

I seem to learn something new every tijme I use the camera and run pictures through photo shop.

Hope we were all able to help you out a little. :|

Keep shooting Mugmar



Mugmar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2006, 11:22 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

peripatetic-

>It is quite badly underexposed, and I'm not at all sure where your focus point is, but it seems to probably be around the left of the TV from our perspective.
Actually Its just about where I cropped the shot, the falmily photo to the above right of the tv.

>The pop-up flash is not powerful enough to light a whole room at that distance, so the only part of the picture that is properly exposed is the flower.
That would make sense. But I was using the same "pop-up" flash as the Sony. From thelooks of it, the Canon's must be about 1/2 as strong. I really need to get a external flash.

>Also you are using the 17-85 at the widest end at the maximum aperture of f4. It's not a terribly sharp lens at that aperture. For decent sharpness at the wide end you should really be using f8 or f11.
You are right, but both the Sony and the Canon was shot at the f4. Or as least I think they were. I think the Sony kept defaulting to 2.0, but I think I had manually changed that to 4 to keep it the same.


>What shooting mode were you in? Because it's not clear exactly where your focus point was. I would suggest changing to Single Shot, because then the camera will not fire if it cannot get a focus lock. In AI mode it will trip even if no focus lock has been achieved.

Single shot. And not using the 9 focus points. Just the center point.

>In these shots I notice that your 35mm equivalent was about 28mm on the Canon shot and 36mm on the Sony shot. That's a fairly significant difference in optical zoom and you would therefore expect the Sony shot to have a bit more detail.
Both "should" be at the same reading. at around 28mm. The Sony full picture shot I uploaded was cropped so I could upload it.


>Also you must realise that the Sony by default will deliver more saturated and sharpened pictures than the Canon default settings. There are some rather nasty artifacts in that Sony crop, and I would much rather be working with the Canon picture if trying to process those shots. If you want the punchy colours and over sharpened look of the Sony just dial in some extra in the menus - you'll need to check the manual as to how to do that.

Remember that you have been using your Sony for some time now, and are probably quite accomplished at getting the best from it. You have only just started out with the Canon, and SLR photography is a lot more complicated, the choices have to be made by YOU not by the camera.

If you want to do some comparisons between the two cameras then start first without the flash, in a well lit outdoor scene. Calculate equivalent angle of view between the two cameras and ideally use a tripod.

Flash is an advanced topic and you would do better to treat it as a whole separate learning curve.

The Canon is a far superior tool, but also demands more from the operator. \


Hopefully, as long as its not something hardware related, I'm hoping I'm learning how to use it better because of people like you giving me tips. I thought of the Sony f828 as a dslr for beginners as I couldn't change the lens with it and no viewfinder, but besides that, it had many features a dslr had. But I guess theres alot to learn on a "real" dslr. Thanks for the help!

scotiez-

Thanks for the AEB thought, I'll try that.

Mugmar-

Yup, I guess I will need to learn to run my pics I want to keep through my photoshop. Hehe. Yeah...5D.. Yum.


starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2006, 2:18 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1
Default

It does look like the Canon shot is out of focus, and way underexposed. That's not soft--it's downright blurry. But the Sony shot also looks terrible--huge amount of noise, some jaggies, and visible sharpening artifacts. You could sharpen and lighten the Canon image to match the Sony and I bet it will look better. Or you could just up the sharpening level in the Canon--and if you get a shot that bad, take another one with a different exposure and focus point. Given the noise, I wonder if the Sony was shot at a higher ISO, allowing a faster shutter speed and less camera shake than the Canon shot--what were the speeds, apertures, ISOs, and was the Canon lens' IS on?

All digital chips put out a "raw" image that's a bit fuzzy, and it's up to the camera's software and settings how much to sharpen it (or whether to simply give you the raw data). The higher level the photographer the camera is made for, the less the camera sharpens it, figuring the photographer herself would rather control that--it's easy to sharpen an image more, it's quite difficult to fix the damage done by oversharpening. So a sharper image persay may not mean the camera's resolution's higher or that the lens is sharper--it just means the software is doing more. In the Sony image, the software is clearly doing too much--that image is beyond salvation. Pretty much the same applies to color saturation, contrast, and white balance--every bit of processing throws away some of the original data, leaving the photographer less to work with in realizing the image how SHE (rather than the camera) sees it.

I got my XTi (actually a Kiss Digital X) a while ago, and immediately spent about 60 yen (55 cents) to buy a self-stick piece of rubber a couple inches square, which I cut down, beveled, and put on the front of the grip to make it a bit bigger for my hand--it even blends into the finish pretty well, though I generally prefer anything that makes my gear look more downmarket and less tempting. I also got a battery grip (Merkury, not Canon, but it seems quite well made; from eBay), and that also improves the grip and handling considerably. Seems like a lot of people complain about the grip issue, when fixing it seems so simple--certainly not a reason to choose one camera over another. Be picker about the level of detail a camera can capture (not the same as resolution), noise level, and the lens.

I also picked up the EF-S 17-55 mm IS lens with the camera--I can't rave enough about this lens. Sharp in the corners, even at full aperture, at every focal length. And the IS is a dream. You can actually get a sharper lens with the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for $800 less; no IS but the better sharpness and 1-2 stop speed advantage over the 17-85 IS would make it a better choice for anyone considering what lens to buy for the Canon. Check out the review sites to see why the 17-85 doesn't win many fans--photozone's reviews are pretty typical at http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html.
privard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2006, 2:43 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

privard-

If you get a chance, send me a picture of something indoor with objects that would show sharpness like maybe something with words, taken about 12ft away. Don't edit it. Then I can see if yours look any more clearer than mine. I know your lens is different than mine, but at lease it shows me its my lens and not the Canon. Don't shoot with a "L" lens if you have one. Or do, but send me the same picture so I can see why the "L" is so exspensive. Please, please. :-)


[email protected]

Yes, type it as it is. Its my junk email that I post on sites.

Both cameras I kept all the settings the same as best as I could. I'm not sure now, but I think it wasat leastf4and shutter was something. The Sony was gonna take it at f2.0 but the Canon cant go that low.

Yeah, I know what you mean about over sharpening on the Sony. When I zoom up on that shot, its too sharp. Would look ok as a 4x6 maybe a 8x10 if you're not picky. Again these weren't edited so I could "tone" it down a bit and make the shot better. And I know if I did the opposite with the Canon, the same would hold true. But maybe I was expecting something alot sharper looking. But even at the highest level for .jpg, I think the Canon compresses way more than the Sony did. Sony was a 8MP camera and the file sizes (yes, I know its partly relative) are larger than the Canons. Go figure.

But I still get an overall sense of the picture not being sharp. It maybe the lens, as it was said in different reviews thats its great for a take around lens, but not a money making lens per say. But I cant just go down to the store and try out different lenses. Actually I COULD but the store is dark. And small. Don't think he would want me trying out a bunch of things only to prove its a defect in the camera where he would need to swap AGAIN. I did show it to him. My pictures. He did say it was softer than he thought it would look but then he applied some sharpening (unsharp) to it and brightened the picture. It looked like it came out of the Sony. Which is good. In the sense it looked as good. But I was hoping to be in another scale better.

Oh. One thing I liked about the Sony is it has a built in LASER auto focus for dim pictures. THe Canon doesn't. (as far as I can tell). It'll just hunt to AF and give up. Or I can use the flash and it'll fire a few burst to help focus. But then everybody in the picture ain't looking so hot at the camera by the time it fires. The Sony fires the laser focuses then I can take the shot. Not 100% foolproof, but so far its alot better than the Canon. I wish the timer light could've been used to help focus or something like how the Canon point and shoot cameras have. Granted it aint gonna focus on far objects but if I was using thatSMALL flash that comes with teh camera, it would help alot in focusing.




starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2006, 7:12 AM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 58
Default

I just found my new best friend on the camera. If you have to use flash, take EVERY shot possible with FE Lock! All of my shots came out dim unless I used FEC (Flash Exp comp) at +1.-2. Once I started using FE Lock, I can now shoot with the FEC at 0 point. All my shots look bright withoutit looking to bewashed out.
starstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:35 PM.