Out-of-box color reproduction

[pgosu]

Need some help here. Received my 10d on Tuesday, went to the zoo for my son's 2nd birthday. Of course, it was the perfect opportunity to put the 10d through it's paces. I did, to the tune of about 300 shots. Upon review, I had mixed emotions - some good shots, but virtually all had to be substantially "processed" in Photoshop/Elements, primarily due to weak/washed out colorization. I was quite happy with the sharpness of most of the shots, but the color was another story. Is this (need for adjustment) common with the 10d?

Is it the camera, me or the lens? Here are a couple of examples...haven't figured out how to cut/paste the EXIF info, but will supply the critical info by hand. All shots were taken with a Sigma 300mm f/4.0. The first shot in each group is the unprocessed. The second of each was adjusted in Elements with the "Auto Levels" function (for simplicity's sake). All examples were from the fully-automatic basic zones.

http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96634.jpg http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96635.jpg

Exposure: 1/750 f/stop: 4.0 ISO: 400 Color Space: sRGB

http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96636.jpg http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96637.jpg

Exposure: 1/1500 f/stop: 4.0 ISO: 400 Color Space: sRGB

I'd appreciate any input. Don't be shy about letting loose if the problem lies with the user here - I have pretty thick skin and just want to learn my new rig. I primarily shoot college sports, so I need to have the 10d figured out by August.

Of the 300 or so shots, there were only 4 or 5 where I felt the colors were pretty much right on with no adjustment. Here's one to use to compare.

http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96639.jpg

Exposure: 1/200 f/stop: 5.6 ISO: 100 Color Space: sRGB

[siwatkins]

What mode are you using on the camera?

[pgosu]

I've used most of the available modes, all with pretty similar results.

[brunz]

Put your camera on Program. Press down the shutter release part way. Look at the bottom of the display. The pointer should be right on the zero. If you accidently move the big command dial on the back when the exposure button is half way down, you can easily change your setting to underexpose. I have done this several times. IF the pointer is on the zero, you should get great exposures. You can adjust it to overexpose by moving the command dial when the shutter is part way down on program. Try it....Brian

[PaulB]

I think that the problem lies only in one direction.
Obviously I can't speak for all the shots just the three posted, but I feel that some of the problem lies in the lens.
The exposures seem about right, what we are seeing is image degradation caused by flare and /or low contrast or a combination.
Either of these problems would certainly account for the first two shots which were taken with the lens wide open. The problem has been made worse by the use of ISO400 which does tend to give somewhat flatter results as well. The use of auto levels has improved things no end but I feel that playing with the contrast settings may do better.
The third photo (the orang) is better but the lighting is not very flattering to the model! The metering has made an attempt to compensate for the dark face but has taken the whole frame too much into account: tighter metering on the face would have been better.
Hope this helps.

[PaulB]

As a quick PS to the above - did you use a lens hood?The proper hood for the lens could make a lot of difference.

[pgosu]

PaulB,

This particular lens has a "built-in" hood...which doesn't amount to much...maybe 1/2", total.

A "L" 70-200 2.8 and Sigma 170-300 2.8 are in the budget for the next couple of months, but for now the budget was blown on the 10d.

The best lens I have access to at this point (borrowed) would be a Sigma 70-200 2.8.

[brunz]

I don't think it has anything to do with the lens...or very little. These shots are all underexposed by 1-2 stops and your meter is apparently off on the negative side. Did you check the scale as I mentioned in the above post? If it is ok, then set it to overexpose by one or two stops and I think that you will be amazed at the difference..thanks Brian

[pgosu]

brunz,

Did check it and it's right on 0 in program mode.

Does this mean the body is defective? I understand that stopping up will make a difference, but seems like something you shouldn't have to do on a brand new rig?

[wolverine]

I think your problem lies in the metering that you are using. I found with my D60, that If I used the center weighted meter mode, on a dark object, pictures always came out overexposed. Now I always try to lock exposure on a midtoned subject and reframe to take the shot. Plus, I almost always shoot RAW. That way, even when I take a shot that is underexposed, it is still recoverable. Overexposed shots are not as easy to work with. Is this your first digital? I know that when I first got mine, I got a rude awakening. I was expecting out of the camera shots. And discovered that I had to become my own digital developer.

John

[pgosu]

Yes, it is my first digital. My initial reaction was just what you said - "Hmm, maybe this is just how it goes."

[CyberDyneSystems]

brunz wrote:
I don't think it has anything to do with the lens...or very little. These shots are all underexposed by 1-2 stops and your meter is apparently off on the negative side. Did you check the scale as I mentioned in the above post? If it is ok, then set it to overexpose by one or two stops and I think that you will be amazed at the difference..thanks Brian

If anything they are OVEREXPOSED,.. ei; too much light got in,.. not under exposed.

It looks like it was a bright day,. I concur that if the ISO was at 400 and the lens was wide open at f/4 this is a key part of the problem.

It will take you while to get used to the settings,. I'm guessing that you were in "Sports mode" for the shots where the ISO was 400 and the aperture was f/4?

Try stopping down to f/8 or more and see what that des for your images.

Also Wolverine makes a good point on the metering mode. My very first time out I used "partial" (Canons "almost spot" metering) in some of the worst circumstances. It is taking me some time to figue out when to use what form of metering. Is sports mode default to "partial" metering? I can't remember,. but i think it does.

[brunz]

PGOSU......Woops!!!...thanks for the correction.....I meant overexposed by 1-2 stops. If it were my camera, I would take it back and get a new one or send it in to Canon. It sounds defective to me. I don't think it's the mode or the lenses, these scenes are not that unusual to photograph. Your meter needs some help...send it in.....Good Luck.....Brian

[pgosu]

CDS,

Here's another pic taken yesterday with some different settings.

http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96720.jpg

Exposure 1/500 f-stop 5.6 ISO 100 Color Space sRGB Apeture Priority mode

I have some others up to f/16 that exhibit the same properties as the shots I've posted here.

[pgosu]

One more, before and after...with a small apeture and ISO 100 this time.

http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96724.jpg http://www.rivals.com/uploads/932/96725.jpg

1/60, f16, 100

[brunz]

Esposure looks better but you need to go to asa 400 to get a better/faster shutter speed. If you are shooting f16, you need a higher asa than 100. 400 asa makes beautiful 16x20's on high jpeg quality. Try an asa switch
to get rid of the movement bluriness. Good luck.Brian

exposure looks a little better

[CyberDyneSystems]

Exposure looks MUCH better,. and I think it helps the colors too.

I don't think your camera is busted,.. yet...
Things are allready looking better.
but as brunz points out we are now loosing shutter speed resulting in a soft image. It looks like there was less sunlight this time around,. and maybe the aperture and iso dropped to far to give a good shutter speed.

Are these new pics with the Sigma300mm Prime?
The longer the lens the higher the shutter speed you need,.. so you can see the dramtic diffeerence from your first pics with 1/1500th of a second,. down to 1/60th :(

About Color;

One thing to keep in mind,. The 10D has been reviewed and measured to have the most "accurate" color rendition of any camera ever made. I know that sounds lofty,. but two photography magazines have published this conclusion.

Here is the problem.

The last 25 years or so Film companies have been pushing high color saturations because that is the look that people are asking for. It gives geourgeous deep color and a pristine look to photos,. but it is not "accurate". Quite the cotrary it is "Otherworldly" and beautifull but not what we actually see.

If you are swithching from film, colors can and will look less saturated.

If you want to,. you can adjust how your camera processes jpegs internally to make things jump out a little more. Or intensify things in Software with Photoshop etc.

Once you get the right balance for exposures things will lok better. Try "P" mode and try "Bracketing" the exposure. If you have a really Super Bright sky,. I don't think you need to go higher than ISO 100 unless you are at the races. But if things look a little grey bump up to ISO 400.

[CyberDyneSystems]

P.S.

That big F/4 aperture is not a bad thing all the time,. it is obviously very desireable. It is just a matter of knowing when it is appropriate to go wide open. Indoors with no flash or at a sports even when the sky is gray and cloudy that f/4 will save yourpics,.. but if its a clear super bright day and the sun is not at your back it can and will cause problems.

[henkbos]

It's like learning to drive a new car. Start within a controlable environment, use a tripod and start shooting on a 'neutral' day. You can also use bracketing (adjustable) where you take 3 shots all the time with different exposures.
Don't underestimate post-processing: alsways necessary. There is hardly any out-of-the-box if you want premium results.

[PacAce]

Are you using any kind of filter with the lens? What kind? You pictures look like they're being shot through a glass pane. I took a similar picture a couple of days ago and was wondering why the picure came out that way. I was shooting a crow in my back yard from my dinette. Then it dawned on me that I had shot the picture through the slide door glass. I'm wondering if that's the same type of situation with yours except maybe it's your filter that's at fault.

[pgosu]

no, no filter on that lens.

brunz,

in regards to the ISO setting, I left it there intentionally, trying to create the illusion of fast movement (that little electric go-cart is really slow.)

[brunz]

Oh.....it does have the illusion of movement by looking at the wheels. I thought you were trying to freeze things. Sorry