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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 15, 2006, 4:32 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
Default

I am not sure if I am posting this in the correct forum.

I received my 30D a week ago. This is my first DSLR. It takes good pictures but they look less sharp then my point and shoot digital. I was shooting in large fine jpg and now I am switching to Raw. I have photoshop 7.0 software but it does not work with 30D raw files. So I have several questions:

Can I use Canon's software to convert raw files to TIFF files and then use PS 7.0 to do rest of the PP? WouldI lose anything in quality by doing that (compared to upgrading to PS CS2)?

What EXIF viewer will be good to use with my camera?

What would be a good workflow to get the most quality pictures with this camera and bundle of software I have (Canon packaged software plus PS 7.0)?
harana is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 15, 2006, 10:32 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 171
Default

What P&S camera did you (still) have? If your P&S camera was also 8Mp it is possible that pictures can be equal or even better in sharpness. Also, sharpness on 30D will depend on what kind of lens you are using. Do not expect much from 'kit' lens but 17-85 IS should be of acceptable quality.

For the other part of the question I hope someone with right experience in RAW manipulation can answer.
GM2006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 2:39 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 414
Default

Also, DSLR's are known to be softer than Point and Shoots to create better portraits. Sharpening can always be done during processing if you want to increase the sharpness.

Dave
headhunter66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 5:28 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

The DOF also has a big part in point and shoot... :idea:

With a dSLR only a very narrow portion of an image is in focus (near the focus point) whereas with a P&S almost everything is in focus instead making the overall picture seem sharper, but the flip side is that it's harder to isolate the background from the main subject (i.e. larger DOF because of smaller sensor in P&S)

What makes you think shooting in RAW will make a picture sharper than JPEG? :?
NHL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 8:24 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

You can adjust the sharpness of the JPG images as processed by the camera, but defintely shoot RAW or RAW+JPG.

Quote:
Also, sharpness on 30D will depend on what kind of lens you are using. Do not expect much from 'kit' lens
It doesn't matter how many times we try to debunk the myth, there seems to be a universal (and wrong) belief that the 18-55 kit lens can't produce sharp pictures.

Look at the MTF and tell me how much better you would like it to be for $100?

At any rate set to f8 @ 55mm it's sharp enough for any kind of testing you fancy, and as good as many far more expensive lenses. The performance is also quite respectable at f8 @18mm, and at the wide angle you will frequently be using a small aperture to get good depth of field.

It's not a great lens, but it's not rubbish either, if you know what you're doing you should be able to get very decent results.




Attached Images
 
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 8:52 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

Conversion from RAW you can use the included Canon 'Digital Photo Professional' program or download 'Raw Shooter Essentials' from http://www.pixmantec.com/products/ra...essentials.asp a very good program. PhotoShops CS2's raw converter is good, but there are better ones out there.

The images look soft because of the antialasing filter over the sensor, not because of any lens.
This topic comes up a lot for prople making the switch to DSLR's.
In PS try hitting it with an unsharp mask, using something like 50, 1.2, 0 as the settings.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 12:51 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
there seems to be a universal (and wrong) belief that the 18-55 kit lens can't produce sharp pictures.
Well, I didn't say that you cannot produce sharp picture with kit lens. Please take a look at test pictures Steve took from this kit lens. They are not always to good and sharp. And that is not belief and it is not wrong. I do not have exactly this lens but have one from Elan film camera, which is close enough. I've compared test shots from Sigma 17-70 to my EF lens (28-80) and at some situation those two lenses can be comparable but overall, Sigma is just better, which you would expect from more (not much) expensive lens.

I've repeated couple of times on some of my previous topics that when I compared more expensive Canon 100-400/L IS to my EF 75-300, sometimes cheap zoom would (appear that way to others as well) outperform more expensive 'brother'. So I am not firm believer that everything more expensive is always and in every aspect better. Also it is known to most people that price difference is not proportional to quality difference.

More expensive lens will be (usually) sharper, with less CA, better in corners, better in greater range of f-stops. There are couple of sites on Internet where other people compared different Canon lenses, including 'cheap kit lens' and including L-series lenses. I have to say, L-lens IS better (and sharper) than kit lens (EUREKA!).

If that is not the fact, I do not know why people quickly replacing their kit lens with more expensive ones?

It is as funny to say that 30D will produce better picture than, for example, Rebel. But many people would rather pay more and have 30D or 20D than XT. And the difference in picture quality here is probably non-existent comparing the difference between two lenses.

For example, I would say this picture is not sharp enough; it is decent and excellent for $100 lens:

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2005_...s/IMG_7565.JPG




GM2006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 3:37 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Default

The ZoomBrowser software that comes with your camera will allow you to see the settings of each photo. See image below for the info it shows. I found it interesting to see the focal length my zoom lens was set to when I took the shot. As in my post above, you can also see the autofocus points that were focussed at the time of the shot.
Attached Images
 
Flash99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 5:22 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
What makes you think shooting in RAW will make a picture sharper than JPEG? :?
I think I can shoot in RAW and then do PP to make it look sharp and remove any other artifacts which may be distracting. But that is what I am thinking and need advice/coaching from experts like you to help me out. Remember I am a total beginner with DSLR.

GM2006- Iam using30D with Sigma 17-70mm lens. I think I have a fairly decent lens but now need to work on my digital processing techniques toget most out of this equipment.

PeterP- I will download 'Raw Shooter Essentials' but in product notes it did not say it supports 30D. Can I use Photoshop 7.0 after processing with 'Raw Shooter Essentials' for further processing?

Flash99- Looks like ZoomBrowser software provide good EXIF info. I will try that for a while and see how it works out.

I thank all of you for your input.

I am still unclear about the overall workflow to getbest results...:sad:

harana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16, 2006, 7:29 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
What makes you think shooting in RAW will make a picture sharper than JPEG?
At first I didn't want to shoot in RAW. I tought there is no much difference between JPEG and RAW as well. But there is and that is easy to see with 30D (or other) that can take both JPEG and RAW at the same time. Just open both pictures in software, zoom 100% ... and compare! You can see more details in RAW than in JPEG which is not any surprise.


GM2006 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 4:28 PM.