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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 18, 2005, 10:03 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 175
Default

aladyforty wrote:
Quote:
I upgraded to a 300D about 9 months ago and would never go back, however, it's only worth the move to DSLR if you are going to buy lenses otherwise you could get very bored with the kit lens only. If you are not prepared to buy more lenses, a prosumer with a good optical zoom would be the way to go.
Yes, you can pre-configure higher contrast, sharpness, etc... But, if you are used to getting very sharp images, as I was with my Minolta A200, you will want to invest in a very good lens. The kit lens, and other inexpensive lenses, generally produce "soft" images which require sharpening during post-processing. What I have discovered quickly about lenses, which is true with just about anything else: You get what you pay for. Don't waste a $1000 camera with a $99 lens.
ChrisDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2005, 11:55 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 414
Default

I was in the same situation just about a year ago myself. I had a Sony F717 and I loved it. I had a lot of control over settings and it was a good camera. I started looking at the Digital Rebel and considered trading up. I also looked at the Nikon D70, but since I already owned a Canon SLR with a couple of lenses and a Flash I went with the Canon. After printing a few pictures with the DRebel, I could notice a difference in the color accuracy and detail in the shots. I am also happy with all the options available to an SLR that are hard to come by when you have something like a Sony, which are usually all proprietary with that company.

As mentioned, not too many people who go DSLR look back to the old days.

Good luck and have fun.

Dave Porter
headhunter66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2005, 2:34 PM   #13
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

ChrisDM wrote:
Quote:
But, if you are used to getting very sharp images, as I was with my Minolta A200, you will want to invest in a very good lens. The kit lens, and other inexpensive lenses, generally produce "soft" images which require sharpening during post-processing. What I have discovered quickly about lenses, which is true with just about anything else: You get what you pay for. Don't waste a $1000 camera with a $99 lens.
DSLRs produce "softer" images because that is what they are designed to do. It is mostly a function of the degree of anti-moire filter that is placed in front of the sensor. Generally the more expensive the camera the more the manufacturer errs on the side of extra filter at the expense of in camera sharpening.

When you say "used to getting very sharp images" I can't help wondering exactly what you mean. Do you mean at 240ppi on a print? Or at 300ppi on a print? How large is your print and at what distance are you viewing it? Or are you judging it at 100% magnification under photoshop (which by the way is essentially irrelevant)? Or at 800x600 resolution on an image resized for web display?

The point is that sharpness is different for each of these output types. Something that is optimally sharpened for 100% viewing in Photoshop is completely artificial, it only matters for pixel-peeping and actually degrades the quality of the print.

Once you have added too much sharpening, or indeed even sharpening of the wrong kind and you use the image for another purpose you are degrading that image quality, artifacts can appear in the image and, like moire, once the artifacts exist they are essentially impossible to get rid of. You can add more sharpening but you can't take it away.

You might find this article interesting:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...harpness.shtml

And finally, all of the kit lenses on the Rebels and 20D are quite capable of producing very sharp results if the photographer knows what he or she is about. The MTF charts for those lenses make it perfectly clear that this is the case, if one can't get sharp pictures from those lenses it's not usually the fault of the equipment.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2005, 10:00 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 4
Default

as188 wrote:
Quote:
One more question.

Understand that post processing is a normal part of the DSLR experience....however just wondering for those situations where I simply want to print straightfrom the original image (eg. family events, etc), do the configurable settings onthe XT provide for simulation of the kind ofoutput one gets fromPoint/Shoot cameras.?

Yes, on the 350XT, and 20D, you can set the level of Sharpness yourself. By default, both cameras operate in what is called Parameter 1 in the basic zones (camera does all the work). If you shoot in the creative zones (where you set most settings), the camera shoots in Parameter 2 which is a little bit softer, and they expect you to post process the images. You can however, use your own settings, and save them to 3 user sets (called Set1, Set2, and Set3). If you want, go on the Canon web site, click on the 350XT, and download the manual. Read the part about Parameters.

When I was comparing the 17-85 to the Sony V1, I made my own Parameter and cranked the Sharpness all the way up, but it didn't seem to help. The images still looked soft, and I didn't have any other lenses to compare against, so I sold it and got the 24-70L.

Moving into the DSLR is a whole new hobby. For example, I've recently gone to the library and checked out a bunch of books on taking pictures and PS7.0. Most books there are a few years old, but they still offer good advice. I never did this with the Sony V1.

And I agree, once you move into the DSLR world, the lens choices will be the big deal. That's why I'd say to skip the 17-85 and go with a 17-40L to start. You won't be happy with the kit lenses.
robvia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2005, 10:31 AM   #15
Member
 
dougsmit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 90
Default

Just an opinion: If your family photos don't mean enough to you to put in the additional work to make them look good, then keep shooting them with the old camera. There is nothing wrong with family photos being well exposed with good tonality and sharpness. The practice might even be valuable for you in learning how to use the camera so when you shoot something (whatever that is) important to you.

I also disagree regarding the kit lens or the 17-85 being disappointing in practical use. The differences between them and the high end glass might not be obvious on unimportant family photos since you probably won't be making 20x30 prints of these unimportant snapshots. For 4x6 scrapbook prints, the kit lens is fine. I do admit that some of my kit lens shots won't stand up to 20x30 printing (so I just make 12x18's of them). It is easy to say a lens is garbage because you took a bad photo with one. It is harder to explain why someone else was able to take a good photo with the same lens and there are plenty of good photos taken with both of these 'disappointing' lenses. When I am as good at my part of photography as these lenses are at their part, I'll be happy to replace them.


dougsmit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2005, 12:09 PM   #16
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

robvia wrote:
Quote:
And I agree, once you move into the DSLR world, the lens choices will be the big deal. That's why I'd say to skip the 17-85 and go with a 17-40L to start. You won't be happy with the kit lenses.
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...62&forum_id=65

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...52&forum_id=65
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2005, 12:38 PM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I agree with peripatetic - you might want to check the MTF's of the EF-S 18-55 kit lens against the EF 17-40 L as well...

-> you'll be surprised! :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2005, 1:20 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

There is an attachment for the EOS cameras called an "Angle Finder C" that attaches to the eyepiece and gives you a right angle finder, it also can magnify the view you see 1.25 or 2.5 x

I am also left eyed(right dosen't work too well) and apart from the nose prints on the lcd I do not find it a problem.
I found the eyepiece extender EP-EX15 helped with that quite a bit. It extends the eyepiece about 15mm out from the back of the camera.

ChrisDM wrote:
Quote:
The one thing I do miss is being able to frame shots on the LCD. I am "left eyed", and has been awkward so far getting used to using a viewfinder. Plus, I used the LCD on my A200 to frame shots that were low to the ground, etc. Something I can't do with my XT.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2005, 3:10 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
AlpineMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 357
Default

I went from a Canon S230 to a Canon 20D w/ kit lens and the Canon 75-300 IS USM lens. Since then, I've learned a lot, and purchased the following: Canon 50mm f1.8 lens, Tamron 28-75 f2.8 XR Di lens, and the Sigma EF-500 DG Super flash. Going from the little S230 to the 20D was a great move for me. I was not into photography at all before the move, but now, am addicted!

BTW, don't always believe the saying "you get what you pay for". A good example of this would be the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 lens or the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG lens vs the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L lens.


AlpineMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2005, 2:36 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5
Default

Got the Rebel xt body with the Sigma 18-200 as my first lens.....haven't had time yet to really play around with it but looking forward to it later this weekend. Thanks for all the responses on this thread.
as188 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 9:21 PM.