20D&28-135 underwhelm

[I Simonius]

After reading all the great posts I went to Jessop's and took some shots in the shop with the set up above

Then we looked at them @ 100% on the shop computer in Adobe Elements

Sorry but I was seriously underwhelmed. Dissapointed to say the least!

The shots I took from my 4mp powershot S40 some years ago now, when I was trying it out for the first time in the same shop, presumably on the sa me computer looked better at their 100% (smaller physical size I know but size isn't everything -or is it?) Crisp and sharp

Could it be the lens? tried some shots with a 50mm. Still just not very impressive. Not crisp and sharp as I had imagined they would be. No not camera shake,they weren't blurred just soft. Lacking definition. No doubt the pixels were there but, as I say, I just felt underwhelmed. I felt a bit let down, was I just expecting too much?

Someone tell me it's becuase it was in a shop, with flash, bad settings, or something please! :cry:

[tim]

Photos inside usually suck, unless you're careful. Lens hoods might help a little. The 28-135 has a reasonable reputation, not for sharpness, more for value. Try taking the photos again outside, and try the Tamron 28-75 if you can.

[Columbus Photo]

flash? settings? Did you use a flash? what was the subject you were shooting?

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

:lol: Must be the 20D :lol:

The D60 with the 28-135 I use has not given me this issue. Sharp inside and out. With external and on-board flash, auto and other modes, etc.

Again, without knowing the settings and circumstances (EXIF) it is really hard to say.

Try again, paying attention to settings, lighting etc. Inside and out. And pay attention to the computer set up too.

Good luck

[Marvinspu36]

The Canon 20D uses an anti-aliasing filter on the sensor. While providing significant benefits to overall image quality, this has a side effect of making the images appear somewhat soft. Canon recommends sharpening the image in post processing using the Adobe USM (unsharp mask) or other sharpening tool to restore the sharpness to the image. Also, point and shoot cameras tend to severely sharpen the images in-camera. The 20D does not sharpen as severely. And, depending on what mode you used (Basic or Creative) there may have not been any sharpening applied. In Basic mode there is moderate sharpening applied. In creative mode, if the paramater 2 (default) is used, there is no sharpening applied. This is prefered, as you can selectively apply sharpending during post processing. The images come out very sharp, if you use proper shooting techniques.

Also, while a nice walk-around-lens, the 28-135 does not typically produce tac-sharp images. If you go to the photo sharing sections of these forums, you will see many images taken with the 20D that are very sharp and have very nice color saturation.

Do a search on the forum for "20D soft" and read through some of the posts. You will find helpful info there. Click here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=54646&highlight=20D+soft) for one such post.

Hope this helps.

[L Pagan]

i own a 10D with the 28-135mm IS lens and it works great for me.. here's a picture i took over the summer..

Full EXIF Info
Make Canon
Model EOS 10D
Flash Used No
Focal Length 80 mm
Exposure Time 1/250 sec
Aperture f/8
ISO Equivalent 100
Exposure Bias
White Balance (-1)
Metering Mode matrix (5)
JPEG Quality (6)
Exposure Program shutter priority (2)

[charlesu]

I think you are being too hard on the lens. Take a well exposed image (make sure there's no blur from hand shake) that's been focused properly. Re-size it to 600 pixels wide. Provide some moderate USM (75, .9, 4) and take a look. If it's not good enough, it's likely you are only going to be happy with L lenses. Either that, or go back to that 4 year old point and shoot.

[ssim]

What were the camera settings. Was there any in camera sharpening set?

As has been discussed so many times on here the images that come from DSLR are much different than you receive from your P&S. They require a certain amount of post processing that is required.

I have owned three different DSLR bodies and each one takes some time to get the optimal settings for your shooting habits. The first images that I took with my Canon 1DMKII, I looked at them and said, oh god, what have I done. Spent all that money for this. Now I wouldn't give that camera up for anything.

If people are expecting point and shoot results from a DSLR without any post processing, they are best to stay with the point and shoot camera.

The 28-135 lens is probably not one of Canon's best lenses, but as mentioned above it is good value and is widely used.

[I Simonius]

The Canon 20D uses an anti-aliasing filter on the sensor. While providing significant benefits to overall image quality, this has a side effect of making the images appear somewhat soft. Canon recommends sharpening the image in post processing using the Adobe USM (unsharp mask) or other sharpening tool to restore the sharpness to the image. Also, point and shoot cameras tend to severely sharpen the images in-camera. The 20D does not sharpen as severely. And, depending on what mode you used (Basic or Creative) there may have not been any sharpening applied. In Basic mode there is moderate sharpening applied. In creative mode, if the paramater 2 (default) is used, there is no sharpening applied. This is prefered, as you can selectively apply sharpending during post processing. The images come out very sharp, if you use proper shooting techniques.

Also, while a nice walk-around-lens, the 28-135 does not typically produce tac-sharp images. If you go to the photo sharing sections of these forums, you will see many images taken with the 20D that are very sharp and have very nice color saturation.

Do a search on the forum for "20D soft" and read through some of the posts. You will find helpful info there. Click here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=54646&highlight=20D+soft) for one such post.

Hope this helps.
Thanks I will, cheering up a bit now :-)

[I Simonius]

I think you are being too hard on the lens. Take a well exposed image (make sure there's no blur from hand shake) that's been focused properly. Re-size it to 600 pixels wide. Provide some moderate USM (75, .9, 4) and take a look. If it's not good enough, it's likely you are only going to be happy with L lenses. Either that, or go back to that 4 year old point and shoot.
I hated the point and shoot but it was the best at that time - I wasnt forking out for a 4 MP DSLR!
maybe I will go for the L lenses
From what I have read the 70-200f4L is one to go for -but at the shorther end it's a harder choice
If he full frame cameras ever come down in price I would like the lenses to work on those as well
Used to have F1ns and a full range long long ago in a former life :-)

[I Simonius]

What were the camera settings. Was there any in camera sharpening set?

As has been discussed so many times on here the images that come from DSLR are much different than you receive from your P&S. They require a certain amount of post processing that is required.

I have owned three different DSLR bodies and each one takes some time to get the optimal settings for your shooting habits. The first images that I took with my Canon 1DMKII, I looked at them and said, oh god, what have I done. Spent all that money for this. Now I wouldn't give that camera up for anything.

If people are expecting point and shoot results from a DSLR without any post processing, they are best to stay with the point and shoot camera.

The 28-135 lens is probably not one of Canon's best lenses, but as mentioned above it is good value and is widely used.
I don't mind forking out for the better lenses but I'm lost as everythings changed so completely since when I used to shoot regularily (20 yrs ago)
I have read the lens section but am still treading water, dark water....;-)

I do use PHSP so am not afraid of post processing but it's difficult to get an idea afore forking out £1000 on a camera you know sop little about

[I Simonius]

Lovely pic and character, but impossible to tell how it would look at 100%
Thanks though:-)

[I Simonius]

Well I went back in the shop today and..................20D with:
50mm 1.8 @125 5.6 overcast but not dark clouds, careful focussing , the detail's there but it is so soft. Sharpening once helps but twice is way too much
10-22 lens @10mm also soft, just no crispness even around where there were reflections of the direct low sun
So....still underwhelmed I'm afraid
The examples of the XT that I've seen look more promising

[Marvinspu36]

Can you post or attach the full size, untouched, image? That may help some of the experts here to give you a better idea of what is going on.

[scottbergerphoto]

Comparing out of the camera images of a P&S and a 20D are rediculous. As mentioned above, DSLR images require USM. The color tones and detail of the two cameras are in very different classes.
Scott

[aliflack]

Well I went back in the shop today and..................20D with:
50mm 1.8 @125 5.6 overcast but not dark clouds, careful focussing , the detail's there but it is so soft. Sharpening once helps but twice is way too much
10-22 lens @10mm also soft, just no crispness even around where there were reflections of the direct low sun
So....still underwhelmed I'm afraid
The examples of the XT that I've seen look more promising


try stopping the 50mm down to 2.8 or so, if you don't find it to be a damn sight sharper...

also, why look at 100%? Get some prints made and compare them to your P&S

[bigadg]

you could alwas get yer self a polaroid,

[I Simonius]

I did post that these were shot at f5.6
Why 100% - because I want to be able to print at 100% or larger
Compare to my P&S? A P&S is a P&S!
I am waiting for a camera that can comare to FILM not P&S

I have seen shots on the web that are better than the ones that I have seen on the 20D in the shop, and so either the impression from the shots on the web are misleading or there's some reason why I can't replicate those characteristics IRL :rolleyes:

[I Simonius]

you could alwas get yer self a polaroid,
If you refer to the 3' by 4' polaroid camera used to record priceless works of art in the museums, the only problem is that I prefer a little more portability than that afforded by a hundredwheight of wood and metal, not to mention the film!

[I Simonius]

Can you post or attach the full size, untouched, image? That may help some of the experts here to give you a better idea of what is going on.
I couldn't because I was using the shop camera, but they might let me,... I'll take a CF card in today and see.
Actually today might be a better bet as the weather is more contrasty
Fingers crossed

[I Simonius]

Comparing out of the camera images of a P&S and a 20D are rediculous. As mentioned above, DSLR images require USM. The color tones and detail of the two cameras are in very different classes.
Scott
I entirely agree with you , which is why I'm concerned at the APPARENT low quality of the 20D
I underline APPARENT.
I have to have some measure by which to judge the quality of this camera, the only one available to me currently is the in-shop computer.
It is not beyond the realms of possibility that there is a problem with this specific camera, nor is it beyond them that I am not giving the camera a fair test, which is why I am trying to elicit as much help as possible from you guys that DO know about DSLRS

As I said previoulsy I used to have F1ns and shoot professionally so I understand a fair bit about photography, but where I fall down is knowing about digital. It's a new field ( minefield?) to me.

There are so many buttons and menues on these things for me it's like going from driving a tank to a jumbo jet.

If I were buying to make money again from photography I would go straight for the 16mp camera and not think about it, but this is just a hobby for me now, I have earned my money in a completely different field for the last 20 years.

I know I 'm not going to get 16mp quality from an 8mp camera, I'm not being unfair in that
regard, nor do I expect FILM quality. What I am looking for is the kind of details and quality of shots taken oon the same setup and posted on the net

My question is why is there such an apparent disparity between other's results from the 20D and those I see IRL.
The mamager in the shop has 2 20Ds but he is biased and whilst a very nice chap, gives me sales-speakor non commital critiques of the shop 20D's results.

I will definitely try to get some pics on my own CF card, I can see this is otherwise a futile enquiry

[scottbergerphoto]

There really is no comparison to the quality of images between a P&S with an APS-C sensor and a 20D. Part of the problem as you said is that you don't have much knowledge of digital. A P&S, should work better for you. It manages the color, sharpening , contrast, etc all in the camera. A 20D file contains far more data and possibility then any P&S. To utilize that possibility requires that you learn some basic image editing techniques-Levels/Hue-Saturation/Unsharp Mask. The 20D and other Canon DSLR's were not designed to give out of the camera post cards. Yes, many people just crank up the color and in camera sharpening and output jpeg's but that won't give you the best results. Try a comparison after you've learned a little or sit with someone who already knows how.
Scott

[aliflack]

I did post that these were shot at f5.6
Why 100% - because I want to be able to print at 100% or larger
Compare to my P&S? A P&S is a P&S!

My bad, speed reading your post missed the 5.6 part!

100% on a computer won't do justice to a normal print - when you say 100% what do you mean? As far as I know (which ain't all that much!) what size image the camera gives in pixels (eg 3000 x 2000) is then divided by DPI (e.g. 300) to give you the size in inches of an acceptable print - 10" in this case. Is that what you mean by 100%?

By comparing to your P&S I meant get prints of images taken with both and see how they compare...

I went from a crappy APS film camera to the 300D last summer - my pics came out really flat and lifeless to start with, but now I get superb (for me ;)) images that a P&S would be hard pushed to get anywhere near to.

As others have said, digital SLR images need post-processing to look their best - if you don't have the kit or don't want to spend the time to tweak them, then probably best to look elsewhere.

Good luck with it, I'm sure if you took the plunge you would find yourself taking awesome photos within a month or two!

[I Simonius]

There really is no comparison to the quality of images between a P&S with an APS-C sensor and a 20D. Part of the problem as you said is that you don't have much knowledge of digital. A P&S, should work better for you. It manages the color, sharpening , contrast, etc all in the camera. A 20D file contains far more data and possibility then any P&S. To utilize that possibility requires that you learn some basic image editing techniques-Levels/Hue-Saturation/Unsharp Mask. The 20D and other Canon DSLR's were not designed to give out of the camera post cards. Yes, many people just crank up the color and in camera sharpening and output jpeg's but that won't give you the best results. Try a comparison after you've learned a little or sit with someone who already knows how.
Scott
Ahhh, should have said...don't know much about the CAMERAS, but do know about Photoshop, have used it for years

[I Simonius]

My bad, speed reading your post missed the 5.6 part!

100% on a computer won't do justice to a normal print - when you say 100% what do you mean? As far as I know (which ain't all that much!) what size image the camera gives in pixels (eg 3000 x 2000) is then divided by DPI (e.g. 300) to give you the size in inches of an acceptable print - 10" in this case. Is that what you mean by 100%?

By comparing to your P&S I meant get prints of images taken with both and see how they compare...

I went from a crappy APS film camera to the 300D last summer - my pics came out really flat and lifeless to start with, but now I get superb (for me ;)) images that a P&S would be hard pushed to get anywhere near to.

As others have said, digital SLR images need post-processing to look their best - if you don't have the kit or don't want to spend the time to tweak them, then probably best to look elsewhere.

Good luck with it, I'm sure if you took the plunge you would find yourself taking awesome photos within a month or two!
post processing I do have the time for, in te shop they only have Elements but all the same I still think there should be more to the screen display in terms of sharpness

What I need to determine is the resolution and dynamic range of this psrticular camera, I accept that those who own the camera onlist are happy with it, just checking really that the one in the shop isn't a dud

[Marvinspu36]

When you go to take a sample picture to post here, it might be a good idea to also take the same picture using your point and shoot for comparison. Also, if they have any L series lenses, try using one of those for the same picture as well as the 28-135mm.

[Budley007]

Even with "L glass", you'd still be hard pressed to get the best image possible without some post processing. (I'm not saying it's impossible, but I've never had a photo say "Don't touch me! ...I'm perfect!")

I post process P&S shots for a couple of friends of mine from time to time and almost always manage to improve the results on every shot. So these cameras don't produce near-perfect photos either.

Any number of factors can contribute soft photos, some of them are actually inherent to the technology. If your photos look soft at 100% magnification without post processing, then welcome to the club. Mine do too. ;)

[SeanH]

Don't know if someone already said it but Point & Shoot cameras like that one in their standard sharpening (factory set) are about the same as the max sharpening on the 20D.......and way above the 1 series camera settings.

LOL......... but yea I thought the same thing about my 20D & L lenses compared to my S60, but go over a 8X10 print and it's night & day difference

[I Simonius]

Don't know if someone already said it but Point & Shoot cameras like that one in their standard sharpening (factory set) are about the same as the max sharpening on the 20D.......and way above the 1 series camera settings.

LOL......... but yea I thought the same thing about my 20D & L lenses compared to my S60, but go over a 8X10 print and it's night & day difference
Well I thought I'd bite the bullet and so here I am with a new 20D and 10-22 / 70-200f4L / 50 1.4. Circular polarisers. skylights, spare battery and 1GB CF cards!

Digits intertwined!

I decided that if there was a problem with the camera Canon will fix it, otherwise I need to start studying for my phd in using a 20D :-) :-) :-)

[I Simonius]

ps-swapped my old P&S for a 1GB CF card

[I Simonius]

Even with "L glass", you'd still be hard pressed to get the best image possible without some post processing. (I'm not saying it's impossible, but I've never had a photo say "Don't touch me! ...I'm perfect!")

I post process P&S shots for a couple of friends of mine from time to time and almost always manage to improve the results on every shot. So these cameras don't produce near-perfect photos either.

Any number of factors can contribute soft photos, some of them are actually inherent to the technology. If your photos look soft at 100% magnification without post processing, then welcome to the club. Mine do too. ;)
- an honest reply!
very refreshing - thankyou!

[Mike H]

Well I thought I'd bite the bullet and so here I am with a new 20D and 10-22 / 70-200f4L / 50 1.4. Circular polarisers. skylights, spare battery and 1GB CF cards!

Digits intertwined!

I decided that if there was a problem with the camera Canon will fix it, otherwise I need to start studying for my phd in using a 20D :-) :-) :-)

You just have to have patience and expect to put in the amount of time learning that people usually put in with learning to shoot/process/print with film cameras, maybe more. I've made shots with the 10D and 28-135/3.5-5.6 that I was very happy with; they're quite sharp.

When I was shooting a Hasselblad camera I took it for granted that I was going to get good results because the camera and lenses were great. For the most part the results were very good, but I had spent years learning to handle a camera, process film, and print with an enlarger before I bought that camera. Now many people (and I include myself in this) expect that since digital cameras give "instant" results that they have no learning curve to deal with. It's not so. The 20D is a terrific camera; work with it before you declare it a dud. And remind yourself often that so many people are getting great results with the 20D that there must be something there.

Mike H

[Marvinspu36]

Congratulations. Once you get the hang of using the camera and processing the images, you will be one happy camper. There are so many things about the 20D that I really like. I'm slowly getting the hang of choosing the right lens and settings for the job. I haven't had much time to practice yet, though.

There are a number of options for sharpening, including the built-in USM in Adobe. If I remember right, you said you are familiar with Adobe PS. I have two different plug-ins for sharpening that I am experimenting with. One is the 20D CSpro (http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/20DCSpro) by Fred Miranda, and the other is Ultra-Sharpen (http://www.ultrasharpen.com/) by Ultra-Sharpen. They each seem to have their strengths and weeknesses.

Enjoy your new toy...I mean tool. :D

[I Simonius]

You just have to have patience and expect to put in the amount of time learning that people usually put in with learning to shoot/process/print with film cameras, maybe more. I've made shots with the 10D and 28-135/3.5-5.6 that I was very happy with; they're quite sharp.

When I was shooting a Hasselblad camera I took it for granted that I was going to get good results because the camera and lenses were great. For the most part the results were very good, but I had spent years learning to handle a camera, process film, and print with an enlarger before I bought that camera. Now many people (and I include myself in this) expect that since digital cameras give "instant" results that they have no learning curve to deal with. It's not so. The 20D is a terrific camera; work with it before you declare it a dud. And remind yourself often that so many people are getting great results with the 20D that there must be something there.

Mike H
Thanks Mike,
It is precisely because I could see that so many others were getting the results that I went ahead and bought it. I'm not declaring it a dud, I was just being cautious

[I Simonius]

Congratulations. Once you get the hang of using the camera and processing the images, you will be one happy camper. There are so many things about the 20D that I really like. I'm slowly getting the hang of choosing the right lens and settings for the job. I haven't had much time to practice yet, though.

There are a number of options for sharpening, including the built-in USM in Adobe. If I remember right, you said you are familiar with Adobe PS. I have two different plug-ins for sharpening that I am experimenting with. One is the 20D CSpro (http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/20DCSpro) by Fred Miranda, and the other is Ultra-Sharpen (http://www.ultrasharpen.com/) by Ultra-Sharpen. They each seem to have their strengths and weeknesses.

Enjoy your new toy...I mean tool. :D
What built in USM,? Ultra sonic motor in Adobe?
DOH! Unsharp mask, silly me!
LOL

Thanks for those links and I will enjoy my new TOY! (it's a part of my midlife crisis!)

It may eventually become a tool if I ever get as good and as spontaneous as I was with my F1's
:-)

[I Simonius]

I see Ultra sharpen pro is for Windows only, I'm on Macs, so the CSpro looks handy, anyone else used it?

Should this be a new thread?