DSLR upgrade from Point & Shoot stupidest question ever

[haas]

I've been using a Canon SD200 3.2mp for almost two years, taken over 8000 shots. Here are some of my best shots (IMO), http://www.flickr.com/photos/porcelain_duck
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/porcelain_duck)
Not pro by any means but it's definately more than i expected from such a low res tiny camera. The color is fantastic and sharp for zero editing (except on the obvious ones in "Art") Anyway i really got into photography after about a year and saved for a Rebel XT, and just got the XTi when it was released.

I know it's not a p&s and that the kit lens doesn't do it justice, but even with my friends 17-40mm f4 L-series i'm a bit discouraged. I haven't been able to edit RAWs because adobe hasn't put camera raw out for the XTi/400D yet but the pics aren't as good looking.

I know theres much learning but i expected to at least take equally as good shots. I'm hoping you'll tell me i suck :P because i want to learn and take great pics, but if it's a matter of buying $1500 lenses then i may be out of luck because i just can't afford that yet...

Guess i'm just looking for encouragement, i don't want to take the camera back but it's too expeisive otherwise. I've tried the Canon app, photo pro, to do RAW but either it's not as good or i just suck, cause everything's off. This is a huge post and i'm sorry but i'd really appreciate some help. Thanks to anyone who reads this.

[Bob_A]

Can you post an image? Chances you are used to the pumped up saturation, contrast and sharpness of a P&S. A DSLR will produce images that have less aggressive in camera sharpening, lower contrast and less saturated, but generally produces a more faithful reproduction of the scene. Read page 26 of the following guide from Canon:

http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/EOS_Digital.pdf#search=%22how%20to%20get%20the%20m ost%20from%20your%20eos%201%20class%20dslr%22

[Mark_Cohran]

What most shooters who move from P&S's to DSLR's don't realize is that there's a lot more post processing required with DSLR's than with P&S's. DSLR's are rather unforgiving of bad technique, because very little to no (depending on the mode) processing is done in camera. The beauty of the DSLR is it's versatility and the ability to control nearly every aspect of the photographic process.

You can get by quite well with Photoshop Elements which should have shipped with your camera and with Digital Photo Pro for RAW processing to convert your photos into something that PS Elements can use.

Don't get discouraged. Work with your camera and you'll soon be getting the results that you want. We see posts like this here all the time, and then a few weeks later the OP comes back and tells us how much they love the camera.

Mark

[haas]

Thanks, for replying. I did some heavier RAW editing and it's starting to look better. Going to go after some of the same scenes that i captured with my SD200 and will post a few pics tonight. Thanks for that link it is great! And Mark, you have a serious amount of lenses. I'm thinking of buying one of these lenses, any suggestions

-Canon 17-85 F/4-5.6 IS
-Canon 17-40mm f4 L (can get from a friend for same proce as the 17-85, but i'm worried i'll miss the range ending at 40mm)
-used Canon 28-70mm f2.8 L

...guess i'm looking for a good walkaround lens for around 500-600USD (i'm in canada). trying to find a high quality lens with good zoom but also covers wide angle as much as possible.

I WANT the 24-70 or 24-105 but that's not going to happen :P

Also getting one of these, is the canon worth the extra $$? :
Canon 100mm macro OR
Sigma 105mm macro

[picturecrazy]

Go for the 17-85. It is a great lens, I used it for quite a while and it didn't disappoint me, though you may find a lot of people here will bash it because it's not up to L standards... newsflash... it ISN'T an L.

The range on it is fantastic, and I got some excellent and sharp photos from it.


http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/1785/a.jpg

http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/1785/c.jpg

http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/1785/d.jpg

Shot Wide open:
http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/1785/f.jpg

Shot wide open:
http://yoonl.brinkster.net/misc/1785/g.jpg



BTW, none of the above shots have any post processing. They are straight out of the camera. I am a JPG shooter and RAW annoys me. With the 17-85 I used Parameter 1 (or standard picture style) with saturation bumped up one, contrast up 1, and sharpness up 1. Usually gave me a result that I was happy enough with to not post process. This is for my personal shots that I don't want to deal with post process. (For clients I do it differently)

Also, I tried the 17-40L and 40mm is WAY too short for a walkaround!! You have to be right in people's faces to get closer perspectives... It's designed for full frame (and maybe 1.3 crop), so I would leave it for those bodies personally.

[Mark_Cohran]

-Canon 17-85 F/4-5.6 IS
-Canon 17-40mm f4 L (can get from a friend for same proce as the 17-85, but i'm worried i'll miss the range ending at 40mm)
-used Canon 28-70mm f2.8 L

...guess i'm looking for a good walkaround lens for around 500-600USD (i'm in canada). trying to find a high quality lens with good zoom but also covers wide angle as much as possible.

I WANT the 24-70 or 24-105 but that's not going to happen :P

Also getting one of these, is the canon worth the extra $$? :
Canon 100mm macro OR
Sigma 105mm macro

I don't buy third party lenses, and I don't buy EF-S lenses, so I really can't help you with recommendations there. I can tell you the the 17-40L and the 28-70L lenses are essential parts of my kit. For an all around walk-about lens, though, I prefer the 24-105. Since that's out of your range, I'd recommend the 28-70 f2.8L. Mine has never dissapointed me.

I have the Canon 100mm macro and it's wicked sharp and easy to use. I can't speak to the Sigma, because, as I've said, I don't buy non-Canon lenses. I've have too many problems with them in the past to make it worth the risk and effort to me.

Good shooting,

Mark

[blam]

picturecrazy: nice shots =) thats the lens I'm looking to buy when I pick up in my XTi next month

[Curtis N]

I'm hoping you'll tell me i suck :PYou suck. ;)

But that's ok. We all do at first.

When you graduate to a DSLR, the inherently shallower depth-of-field means that focusing is more critical and DOF becomes an issue that you need to contend with.

Post a shot or two with EXIF info and you will get some great help here.

[haas]

Thanks everyone this is very helpful, i will post some shots later when i'm home. Glad i found this forum!

Picturecrazy, this shots are amazing! Definately leaning toward that lens now as i think it suits exactly what i'm looking for right now. It's just when you read about the things like distortion and such that you start worrying about stuff that i probably wouldn't have noticed. Like my battle with chosing a new LCD (dell 2007wfp, excellent screen btw and S-IPS)

[dbett]

I also just moved to the XTi after using various P&S cameras for a long time.

I really like the 17-85 lens. It's got great range - especially on the wide side, which is hard to get on non-EF-S lenses with the sensor size on the XTi.

[cfcRebel]

Congrats on the upgrade Hass. Don't be discouraged. What you experienced is actually shared by a lot of shooters jumping from P&S to DSLR ;). Eventually you will get a better grip of the new camera, and will never look back to your P&S.:)

Good quality lens helps but that doesn't mean u need a $1500 lens to get good photos. Search around the forum and you will find some good walkaround lens with reasonable price, such as the Sigma 17-70mm, Tamron 28-75mm....etc.

As for post process, visit the forum's "RAW & Post Process". I learned a ton over there. Plenty of good tutorials shared by our fellow members.:)

[lefturn99]

I echo Curtis N's comments. I struggled for a few weeks and the DOF was the biggest challenge. I also bought the 17-85mm IS and it's a great lens. It does have some distortion at the wide end, which is easily fixed in Elements. Everybody is different, but I don't find I use the extreme wide end much, and I've not seen distortion when zoomed in a little. I'm satisfied.

[michaelbehlen]

For PP may I suggest Adobe Lightroom? Its in Beta right now, and its free. I like the program a lot, but I have also never used RAW, just downloaded lightroom first and liked it. I suggest it, very very easy program to use. Also, can I suggest the 50mm 1.8, its around 90 bucks, and a very excellent lense.

[haas]

Did a bit of editing with Digital Photo Professional. They look better shrunk down of course. As you can tell i'm looking forward to a macro lens :P


1/200, f6.3, ISO 100:
http://www.porcelainduck.com/rebel/IMG_0189_raw2.jpg



1/200, f13, ISO 100:
http://www.porcelainduck.com/rebel/IMG_0293_raw.jpg


1/125, f6.3, ISO 200 plus a circular polarizer. couldn't get the sky to look right without it. Using Canon 17-40 f4.0L lens
http://www.porcelainduck.com/rebel/IMG_0391.jpg


I think i'm a bit afraid to up the ISO since P&S. Also sometimes when i set the aperture priority at say f4 even with flash the shutter speed is low and causes blur from camera shake. I don't know why the shutter has to be slow when close to something and using a flash.

I'm really leaning toward the Canon 17-85mm IS lens, looking at the Canon 28-135 too but as nice as the zoom would be i might miss the wide for outdoor scenes. Thanks