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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 19, 2005, 10:28 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24
Default

I bought the 20d a couple of weeks ago and finally got a chance to take it out today to a ball game. I've been using the Rebel for about a year and was impressed with the sharpness of the photos but I don't see the same with the 20D. The sharpness of the photos seems to vary and I can't tie it down to anything. A few sample links from the ballgame today are below but have been resized for viewing. Note the white lettering seems to bleed out on the purple jerseys and the photos are not crisp and clear. These were all shot in Av mode at 800 or 1600 ISO using Parameter 1. I accidentally reformatted the CF card when I put it back in the camera so I can't get the exact exposure numbers butI thinkI recall 1/800 onthe shots ofthe pitcher. The weather was total overcast. Lens is the Promaster 28-300 3.5 (made by Tamron) with a UV filter in place.

Thanks,

Gary

http://members.cox.net/garyalford/test/test1.jpg

http://members.cox.net/garyalford/test/test2.jpg

http://members.cox.net/garyalford/test/test3.jpg

http://members.cox.net/garyalford/test/test4.jpg


garyalford is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 19, 2005, 10:37 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24
Default

I forgot to mention that I have had this same problem with the Canon 18-55mm lens. Some photos are incredibly sharp (like I expect) but about 2/3 are blurry like the ones above.

Gary
garyalford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2005, 12:03 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Ponin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 139
Default

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...20&forum_id=37

Have a look at this, it may help.
Ponin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2005, 4:59 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I agree with Ponin. Check out that thread.

These don't look particularly blury to me. Did you have a smaller digital before this? Or shoot film? The 20D is known for producing fairly soft images. But you can sharpen them up very well with some post-processing.

The first two look better than the last two. But the last really aren't that bad to my eye.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2005, 5:04 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24
Default

I guess I'm used to the sharpness of the 6mp Rebel. I reset all settings on the 20Dbefore going out today and the photos did look better but the white lettering on jerseys seems to bleed out into the darker areas of the jersey, almost like a halo effect. Other than that the photos did look better today. Perhaps a setting was messed up but was fixed when I reset. I still think the halo effect of white is a bit too much though. I'll try some sharpening in Photoshop.

Gary
garyalford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 1:43 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 301
Default

What parameter set are you using? If you are looking for vivid color and sharpness that you get from a point and shoot or the standard setting for the DReb you need to choose parameter 1 (the20D defaults to parameter 2 in the creative zone).

Actually tocome close to matchinga point and shoot (still might be a bit soft due to the AA filter) you would need to make a custom set with the following:

Sharpness +2
Contrast +1
Saturation +1



Bob
BobA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 8:15 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

The Canon 20D generally takes softer photos than the point & shoots, which takes a little while to get used to. After a while, you appreciate the "film-like" quality of the 20D.

Another phenomina I noticed with my 20D is the pictures don't look that sharp on a lousy monitor, but if I view them on a high quality laptop screen the photos sharpen up considerably, as well as saturation improves.

Maybe try out a high quality flat screen LED monitor, and you'll soon have a big grin on your face.

Another point is your probably testing your equipment to the max in a low light situation. Even the best of lenses aren't as sharp wide open, and low light/high ISO's only magnifies the situtation.

Try some sunny day photos as a comparison.

You may be having a little "buyer's remorse" which we all go through. The more I use my 20D, the more I realize I have a serious photographic tool.

-- Terry


terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 8:24 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

One more point.

I noticed your posting indicated your using a UV protector. You could obviously take the filter off in low light situations. Your promaster lens is F3.5 which is somewhat slow to begin with.

A few pro photog friends of mine convinced me not to use filters as "lens protectors".Filters reducelthe amount of lighthitting your sensor. Generally your looking for all the light you can get.Filters add distortion as well (especially cheap filters).

If you take good care of your lenses, you shouldn't have a problem. Slight little scratcheson the protective coating of your lens over the years won't show up on your photos.

I live close to the edge. I never use a filter unless I need the effect of the filter. I take good care of my lenses. I use a bulb to get the dust and grit off, and then use a little photo paper to wipe off the inevitable little spots about four times a year.

Other photog's will probably disagree with my opinion on filters.

Terry


terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 9:19 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I certainly agree with cheap filters. They certainly do more harm than good.

I didn't think (I'm a bit ignorant here) that a good quality filter (B&W, for example) did anything but block IR frequences. You're suggesting that they block light in the visible spectrum. I didn't think that was true... but don't honestly know.

They can add distortion, but a multi-coated filter should help minimize that. Is it 0 distortion? I don't know. I felt it was worth the protection to get one. But I'm not sure I was right. I did buy a good one, though, knowing that a bad/cheap one was certainly not worth it.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 21, 2005, 9:28 AM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24
Default

Thanks for the replies. I did change to Parameter 1 yesterday and did find better results. I'll set a custom parameter and raise the sharpness and see what that does as well.I know the low light is a killer. I have a Sigma 70-200 2.8 lens but the press and officials get antsy when they see a spectator with professional equipment. Seems they are afraid an unlicensed commercial photographer is taking photos and not buying press passes so I stick with the smaller lens.

On filters,Ithought of removing it last night.The only reason I use it is to protect the lens. I have tried a few different filters for different things andreally don't care to use them. I find I can do more with software now than filters.

The photo below is from yesterday with the Parameters 1 setting. Shutter 1/1600 f6.3, ISO 800, full 300mm zoom. Can't complain at all.


http://members.cox.net/garyalford/test/Patterson06.jpg

Gary


garyalford 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 6:04 PM.