Poor 20D results

[limeydal]

Just purchased a 20D after using a Sony DSC-s70 for the past several years.
The Sony gave me great results at 3.3mp but wanted a little more control and flexibility. Also had used a Canon T90 SLR for a number of years previous and was eager to stick to the Canon brand for the upgrade.

However first results back are disapointing!
Took some test shots of my kids and also some at an awards ceremony with flash.
Images lack the crispness and definition of the Sony and seems less tolerant to exposure differences than the Sony.
Must admit I am still wading through the instruction book ,but on full auto I still expected great results after reading all the reviews on this camera.

My question is, are their any menu settings that I could have set wrong and be drastically degrading the images.Also I have the stock 18-55 lens on which seems very "plasticky" to me. Will this still give good results.?
Any sources of information would be greatly appreciated,as being a Canon "Nut" for years ,I had high hopes for this camera
cheers Dal

[mbze430]

If you can post some pictures. Without actually seeing what your complaints are it's hard to say what is wrong.

[johneric8]

Just purchased a 20D after using a Sony DSC-s70 for the past several years.
The Sony gave me great results at 3.3mp but wanted a little more control and flexibility. Also had used a Canon T90 SLR for a number of years previous and was eager to stick to the Canon brand for the upgrade.

However first results back are disapointing!
Took some test shots of my kids and also some at an awards ceremony with flash.
Images lack the crispness and definition of the Sony and seems less tolerant to exposure differences than the Sony.
Must admit I am still wading through the instruction book ,but on full auto I still expected great results after reading all the reviews on this camera.

My question is, are their any menu settings that I could have set wrong and be drastically degrading the images.Also I have the stock 18-55 lens on which seems very "plasticky" to me. Will this still give good results.?
Any sources of information would be greatly appreciated,as being a Canon "Nut" for years ,I had high hopes for this camera
cheers Dal

Dude I dont know what is wrong with your camera, I get magazine quality out of my 20d blown up at 60X30 .. full auto isnt going to do your pictures justice is some situations. Full auto will give you good results but never great results. SLR cameras take pictures that need work in a photo program. that is because most people can do wonders with them in photoshop. You will have trouble getting your pictures from those other cameras up to par with the 20d images when it's all said and done.

[HJMinard]

Check out this (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=54646) previous thread ... might be helpful. This has been discussed often - I'll see if I can find some of the other threads.

[cmM]

yea, many complain. Not only the 20D, but DSLRs in general. Post processing is a must, and after a few simple corrections and some sharpening you'll get better results. Also, the 18-55 isn't the best lens you can get.

[limeydal]

Been researching and found out a lot on the "softness"issue.Seems the AA (Anti-aliasing) filter permanently mounted in front of the image sensor is whats causing the sharpness concern I had.
So going to make the on camera adjustments suggested and then play around with processing programs.
Seems I was a little naive to think I was going to get results equal to my Sony without "going back to school" to learn how to get the best out of the 20D.
Canons own site and article "getting the most from your EOA-1 classs digital SLR" was a good starting point.
Just looking for a Lens now. Do a lot of photography from a boat so looking at the Image stabilised lenses up to 200 zoom range.Any recommendations?

[CyberDyneSystems]

IS in a zoom,..

Four Options,.
The better choices are 70-200mm f/2.8L IS for about $1,600.00 :(
100-400mmL IS for about $1,400.00

The affordable IS lenses are the 28-135mm IS USM and the 74-300mm IS USM

[I Simonius]

Been researching and found out a lot on the "softness"issue.Seems the AA (Anti-aliasing) filter permanently mounted in front of the image sensor is whats causing the sharpness concern I had.


Can you explain more about how to disable the antialiasing filter - where did you get the info?

[robertwgross]

Can you explain more about how to disable the antialiasing filter - where did you get the info?

No, you cannot disable the antialiasing filter. It is on the sensor surface.

However, you can offset its smoothing effect by sharpening in post-processing.

---Bob Gross---

[drisley]

Even the Sony DSC camera has an AA filter.
The difference is that in point and shoot cameras like that, the manufacturers crank up the contrast, saturation, and sharpness to make the picture look more the way the average Joe wants his pictures to look with no fuss, no muss.
However, DSLR's are designed for people who SHOULD want to put a little more effert into the final product in post production. The results with the 20D will not only equal what you get out of Sony, but will totally blow it away with the right lenses and workflow.

[I Simonius]

I tell you what ...........it's still easier than B^*^*Y darkroom work!! :lol:

[rufis6]

For the reasons stated above I dumped my Canon 20D after upgrading from a Canon 10D. And that was after I thought I upgraded from a Minolta 7000i. Was I ever wrong! I never got the image detail and quality, i,e, tonal scale, contrast, color width, etc, that I got from the Minolta. And that was after all the in-camera settings suggested, the post-processing stated as a requirement: USM, high-pass sharpening, ect.

I am now the happy owner of a Leica R8 and all the above mentioned adjusting, and screwing around with is now a thing of the past. Once again my images come out sharp and all I have to do is scan them on my Nikon Coolscan v and all is welll.

It is a fact that electronic devices in general and digital cameras in particular decrease in price about 50% every year and the quality increases about 50% every year. I was told by an Adobe engineer that for a digital camera to equal a film camera it would have to have 22mb. And since they cost around $30,000.00 my course is clear - I'll wait. So while I have not given up on digital cameras altogether, I am willing to wait a year or two - or longerf.

[Hellashot]

It is a fact that electronic devices in general and digital cameras in particular decrease in price about 50% every year and the quality increases about 50% every year. I was told by an Adobe engineer that for a digital camera to equal a film camera it would have to have 22mb. And since they cost around $30,000.00 my course is clear - I'll wait. So while I have not given up on digital cameras altogether, I am willing to wait a year or two - or longerf.

Someone has worn out their soapbox. I've heard you post this a few other times and I strongly disagree with you. More digital cameras are sold than film cameras because the quality is essentially equal with so much greater flexibility.
You'll probably need to wait 3+ years before the 1-series is 22MB and you'll pay $8000 for it.

[defordphoto]

Not to mention we are suprassing film now.

Psssst: The horse is dead.

Anyway, this is typical of a person upgrading (so they thought) from a P&S to a dSLR. You must perform post processing. I guarantee, without a doubt in my mind (ignoring the fact that I have one) you can get world's better results out of that 20D than any P&S in the world.

[goldstrikn]

Reading these type of posts is really dissapointing. I am getting my camera on MOnday 21st. and I am having 2nd thoughts. The main reason I bought the camera is to get a crisp print, uncomparable to a regular P&S, though I got to say that my Sony DSC F717 is impressive, but I am limited. In other words I wouldn't want to do much correction, though I know is inevitable, you always have to correct something in the final outcome. I guess I'll report my first impressions shortly.

[rufis6]

To: Hellashot/RFMSPORTS:

RFMSPORTS makes my point: "You must perform post processing." I also wonder when was the last time either of you have been in a camera store, ( a good one, that is") A leica R8 is hardly a point and shoot.


__________________


A Leica R8 is hardly a point and shoot.

[ssim]

I find this thread to be bordering on almost humorous. You get a poor picture, it has to be the camera, right.

I bought a 20D a few weeks ago as a backup camera. Today was the first time that I had reall done any significant shooting with it. I was shooting without making many changes to the functions of the camera and was using the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS, 16-35 f/2.8 L or the 24-70 f2.8 L.

I can attest to the fact that this is an example camera. The shots that I took today were more than acceptable for my first outing. In fact a few of them didn't even need sharpening before going to the web.

As is the case in many things in life, the only people that you hear from are the unhappy ones. I'm pretty confident in saying there are probably thousands of satisfied 20D owners out there. Is it possible to get a lemon, I suppose the same way that you can for any product you buy.

This would now be the end of my little soap box rant.

To each their own!

[BigRed450]

To: Hellashot/RFMSPORTS:

RFMSPORTS makes my point: "You must perform post processing." I also wonder when was the last time either of you have been in a camera store, ( a good one, that is") A leica R8 is hardly a point and shoot.


__________________


A Leica R8 is hardly a point and shoot.

Hardly, but it is still only a 35mm, not a MF or LF. If you spent as much on Digital gear as you did on the Leica R8 system you would have a different outlook. If I remember correctly you were using a Canon 75-300 lens on that 20D were you not. That is an entry level consumer grade lens that cannot remotely compare Canon L lenses or to Leica lenses. Maybe you should compare Pro cameras as well.
As I see it your only real complaint is that you have to post-process your images. So send them to a Pro Photo Finisher like you do film, problem solved.
BTW that 22mp film resolution you speak of equates down to about 10-14mp perceptual resolution due to film grain and an 6-8mp Digital SLR equates to about 14-16mp perceptual resolution due to Lack of grain. Not to mention double the Exposure Latatude of Digital. You evidently " HAVE NOT" compared 13x19" or larger prints from 35mm and Digital.

[rfreschner]

Reading these type of posts is really dissapointing. I am getting my camera on MOnday 21st. and I am having 2nd thoughts.

You need to make your own judgement once you get it. There are many settings on the camera that will allow you to get beautiful shots with no post processing. Give it a chance; you probably won't be disappointed.

[defordphoto]

Reading these type of posts is really dissapointing. I am getting my camera on MOnday 21st. and I am having 2nd thoughts.

These are posts by unexperienced and/or uninformed people. Not a slam to them, but they just do not know the facts. All you have to do is read the posts by hundreds of extremely pleased 20D owners and view the many hundreds of photos online to see the true results of what can be accomplished with a 20D.

There are many settings you can play with on the camera to adjust to your personal liking, but most of us shoot out of the camera flat (all settings at normal) and then adjust in post-processing to our personal likings.

But, there are many, many different approaches to the Perfect Photo. You just have to discover what works for you is all.

Reagrding this thread, like with Olympic scores, toss out the really bad ones, toss out the really high ones and then you end up with something in the middle.

The 20D is a great camera. It is a tool. Like any other tool you own, you will learn to master it. And we can help guide you through it and you will produce sharp, clear, contrasty and colorful photos.

We're all doing it.

[rufis6]

To Big Red, et al:

Wrong again: I was using a prime lens, a Canon 50mm f/1.4. And you're wrong on another issue: I have over 25 years experience, medium format and 35mm, so I am no novice. Also be aware that the image of a 35mm camera is larger than that producded by a 20D, there is no 1.6 telescopic effect. You get the full 24 x36 mm image. By the way, thousand of Yugos were also soldl.

[drisley]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=63074

[Dante King]

I agree with you SSIM, I love my 20D. Not always perfect, but it is an awesome machine when you know how to use it and all its supporting gear!

[jobber73]

To Big Red, et al:

Also be aware that the image of a 35mm camera is larger than that producded by a 20D, there is no 1.6 telescopic effect. You get the full 24 x36 mm image.

What am I missing here? This makes no sense to me whatsoever.

You can't compare apples (film) and oranges (digital). You need to make them both apples or oranges. Let's make them both oranges (digital).

The size of the picture on film depends solely on the resolution on which you scan it.

The 1.6 factor of a digital SLR has no bearing on the 'size' of the photo.

If I take a photo with a 35mm film camera 100 feet away from a subject at a 100mm focal length and scan the negative at 2500dpi, I'll end up with a digital file of the photo that is approximately 3445 x 2362 or roughly 8.1 megapixels.

Now if I take the 20D out and photograph the same scene from the same spot at a focal length of 63mm, I'll end up with the exact same photo visually and a digital file that is 3456 x 2336 or 8.1 megapixels.

In the end we have the exact same photograph, but the 20D was sure less work in the end.


On a related subject:

You could scan at a higher resolution (dpi) to end up with a larger file, but in my reading/discussions the number to equal 35mm film is much smaller than the number you mentioned. Most sources I've come across put the number around 8 to 10 megapixels. It's been explained to me that beyond that no more useable detail can be pulled from the negative and you're simply enlarging the photo.

Not sure how true the latter is as you'll find much discussion and debate on where digital equals or beats film. I've seen, read and heard people place that number both higher than ten and lower than 8, but the vast majority of sources I've come across put the 'magic number' in that 8 to 10 megapixel range.

[CyberDyneSystems]

If you are not ready to learn how to use a new table saw safely,. the right way,. then don't get it,. they can be dangerous...

Stick to your hand saw,. it gives excellent controllable results.

[rufis6]

To: CyberDyneSystems:


A Leica R8 is hardly comparble to a "table saw." But perhaps you've never heard of Leica before. Look them up. As a matter of fact, the Leica R8 is coming out with a 10mp back next month. Maybe you would like to try out this, "table saw."

[Moostyman]

A poor tradesman always blames his tools....

[wolf]

A poor tradesman always blames his tools....
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/icons/icon12.gif

[Simon Spiers]

I had the same problem when i conpared them with me Fuji s602.
Here's how i fixed it:-

1 Adjust sharpening to max (improvment is only slight)
2 Adjust the saturation up one stop from centre makes a much less washed out tone.
3 Get rid of that horrid lens:cry:
4 Do some comparson shots between your old camera and your new D20, then ask yourself which one looks most natural?

[pradeep1]

To: CyberDyneSystems:


A Leica R8 is hardly comparble to a "table saw." But perhaps you've never heard of Leica before. Look them up. As a matter of fact, the Leica R8 is coming out with a 10mp back next month. Maybe you would like to try out this, "table saw."


Poor rufis6. I like rangefinder cameras too...consider hanging out here:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/

you'll find more people amenable to your point of view.

Let's all stop lambasting rufis6 and get on with our lives. :D

[Oculus Sinister]

I came from an S1 IS(bought Oct 2004) which did produce excellent pictures, after a few months felt that I needed the flexibility of a DSLR and bought a 20D. As a P&S albeit with a lot more creative control than some models, the S1 IS did produce sharper features OUT OF THE CAM than my 20D but with post-processing the pictures do come to life :) in a most beautiful and better sort of way . Went into DSLR's with full knowledge(from books and web forums) that I had to work at it to make my images the way I wanted them to look. Setting the correct parameters in camera lessened the post processing work but you do still have to do it.

DSLR's aren't for every one. I'm a tinkerer and I want to work at things to produce the results that I want. I'm also a standard division practical pistol competition shooter and my STI competition gun is tuned exactly to my specifications and I also had to work at it, while others are content with something out of the box.

Went into all these as a hobby to relieve the stress of my work as an Ophthalmologist and the more involved I am with a hobby, the more relaxing and stress relieving it is for me. As they say, different strokes for different folks;)

[pradeep1]

I came from an S1 IS(bought Oct 2004) which did produce excellent pictures, after a few months felt that I needed the flexibility of a DSLR and bought a 20D. As a P&S albeit with a lot more creative control than some models, the S1 IS did produce sharper features OUT OF THE CAM than my 20D but with post-processing the pictures do come to life :) in a most beautiful and better sort of way . Went into DSLR's with full knowledge(from books and web forums) that I had to work at it to make my images the way I wanted them to look. Setting the correct parameters in camera lessened the post processing work but you do still have to do it.

DSLR's aren't for every one. I'm a tinkerer and I want to work at things to produce the results that I want. I'm also a standard division practical pistol competition shooter and my STI competition gun is tuned exactly to my specifications and I also had to work at it, while others are content with something out of the box.

Went into all these as a hobby to relieve the stress of my work as an Ophthalmologist and the more involved I am with a hobby, the more relaxing and stress relieving it is for me. As they say, different strokes for different folks;)

Very nicely put there Left Eye. ;)

[I Simonius]

I really understand someone being dissappointed with DSLRS
I had to think very hard and long about whether to go digi or get new Film cameras
In the end it was the darkroom stuff that swung it - I like A1 and bigger prints but I hate producing them wet and all that goes with it,I hate sitting in the dark for hours etc when I could be out shooting or messing about in photoshop which I now enjoy

I'm 52 - it has taken me 4 years to get the hang of PHSP, not because it's difficult but because it requires a different mindset. Some find that easy, others, like me, don't.

When you come from film and have been used to it you look at photography a certain way
Digital requires a whole mind shift
It's that shift that's not suitable for everyone :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Rufis6
I was not lambasting...

The point I was trying to make,. as well as others in this thread,.. is that the switch to a DSLR takes adjustments on the part of the photographer.

This is a simple statement of fact re-inforced very well by Rufis6' concerns.
There is no way around it.

It then becomes up to the individual photographer to decide if the time and effort required to switch from one medium to another is worth the effort.

Either way,. the effort is requred for the best results.

I do not see this being any different from any other craft, artform, or skill. Switching mediums,. tools, styles etc.. is never seemless.



It just seems to me that a few of our members have in this thread tried to explain this,. and how to go about getting the best out of the new equipment and medium,. and in return they have been treated poorly,.... it is not then hard to understand why they may do likewise.

Simon has said it quite well,. his point regarding a chemical darkroom is apt and drives the point home to anyone who has spent time in one.

[drisley]

I used to own a Canon G3, one of the best point and shoots you could buy. The image quality of the 300D totally blew it away. Sure it didnt come out of the camera with as much sharpening and saturation, but there was SO much more detail in the 300D image that I could sharpen it way past what the G3 images were, and get much better results. Now, the 20D is even a bigger improvement.
I've seen images from that Sony, and they are not very good imho. Very noisy and over sharpened.

[limeydal]

Getting better!!!:D :D :D
Well; took your advice and went back to school!
The Canon website had several useful tutorials and especially a" getting the best out of your digital camera" booklet. Explained all about sharpening etc.
So bought a better lens (28-135 IS. ) sorry couldn't justify the better choices with the wife yet!!:rolleyes:
Anyway, spent the weekend shooting a lot of frames and experimenting with the camera ,afloat out on San Diego Bay.
Apart from being pulled over by the Coastguard for looking suspicious(taking photographs of Warships!) I had a great day.
Much better results and had a couple of frames that were outstanding. (Especially as one was of the high speed patrol boat coming over to investigate me!)
Very crisp and the autofocus seemed to track the oncoming boat very accurately.
(Until the part where I noticed they had a machine gun up front and I bugged out!!!)
So much happier and got a glimpse of what the camera can do. Just need to upgrade the operator now!.
Thanks to all those who replied and made suggestions and will continue to browse the forum to improve my skills.
cheers Dal

[drisley]

Good to hear, but, HOLY COW!
That's crazy scary. What did they say? Did they ask to see the pictures?

[Jetmech1]

Just purchased a 20D after using a Sony DSC-s70 for the past several years.
The Sony gave me great results at 3.3mp but wanted a little more control and flexibility. Also had used a Canon T90 SLR for a number of years previous and was eager to stick to the Canon brand for the upgrade.

However first results back are disapointing!
Took some test shots of my kids and also some at an awards ceremony with flash.
Images lack the crispness and definition of the Sony and seems less tolerant to exposure differences than the Sony.
Must admit I am still wading through the instruction book ,but on full auto I still expected great results after reading all the reviews on this camera.

My question is, are their any menu settings that I could have set wrong and be drastically degrading the images.Also I have the stock 18-55 lens on which seems very "plasticky" to me. Will this still give good results.?
Any sources of information would be greatly appreciated,as being a Canon "Nut" for years ,I had high hopes for this camera
cheers Dal

A friend of mine has this camera. It is a good camera and he has had a lot of very good results with it. It took better pics than my Sony DSC S50. I sold the my Sony and went with an Oly C750 which took better pics than the Sony DSC S70. I have since purchased a Canon Digital Rebel and have had even better results than with my Oly C750 which I still use. Maybe you have got a lemon for a camera? I get great results with my Rebel and from what I've seen the 20D should give even better results. I will admit I spend more time post processing my pictures now than I previously did with my Sony and with the C750.

[Raj]

Getting better!!!:D :D :D
Well; took your advice and went back to school!
The Canon website had several useful tutorials and especially a" getting the best out of your digital camera" booklet. Explained all about sharpening etc.
So bought a better lens (28-135 IS. ) cheers Dal

Can you please share the links to these ? I tried Canon USA site but couldnt find the tutorials. Tried to google for the booklet but couldnt find that too. Appriciate if can share.
Thanks

[HJMinard]

Can you please share the links to these ? I tried Canon USA site but couldnt find the tutorials. Tried to google for the booklet but couldnt find that too. Appriciate if can share.
Thanks

Possibly referring to this page (http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/index.html). If you click on the Digital Rebel tab and then "Digital Rebel Tutorials" you'll find quite a bit of info (not necessarily DRebel specific despite the page titles and layout).

[C.S.I.]

I guarantee, without a doubt in my mind (ignoring the fact that I have one) you can get world's better results out of that 20D than any P&S in the world.


I second that...

[watermarkphotography]

Dude TOSS the kit lens for sure. I got better shots with my Minolta dimage 7i. I said it before and I will say it again the Kit lens 18-55 SUCKS. I know some rabit fans are out there and will not like this but I tried it and took it back after two days. I have seen some good shots taken with it but why should you have to work on every photo after you take it when you could get a better shot with a Good lens like a Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 xr DI, or some of canon's L glass.

[watermarkphotography]

IT is not the 20D but the kit lens 18-55 that is the problem.

[C.S.I.]

I have 2 18-55 non USM's.... one for each of my 20/300D's, both are exceptional for the value. For a $100 lens, I think the lens has alot of "bang-for-the-buck".



Maybe I was just lucky, and got good glass on both purchases.


Regards,
Bill

[CaseyScofield]

These are posts by unexperienced and/or uninformed people. Not a slam to them, but they just do not know the facts. All you have to do is read the posts by hundreds of extremely pleased 20D owners and view the many hundreds of photos online to see the true results of what can be accomplished with a 20D.

I have to agree with RFM. Until I got my 20D (3-4 months ago) I only shot film, and at times a P&S Casio we own. While I am by no means a fully-informed or fully-experienced photographer, I have been taking professional shots for 1-2 years.

The 20D provides me with as good of quality (if not more) then any film/P&S shot I ever got. The photos are easier to manipulate, easier to post-process, and just as sharp.

As long as you know your camera, and the basics of Photoshop, the 20D can easily equal (or surpass) any film/P&S. - In my own humble opinion.;)

[watermarkphotography]

I admit I did not give it much time with the 18-55 lens but I was very pleased with the 17-85 IS lens and the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 I almost always use the Tamron unless I need the bigma.

[drisley]

The 18-55mm lens is actually a very decent wide angle lens when stopped down a little.

[hedphonz]

as many people would say, it's not the eqipment it's the photographer. you obviously didn't do the research before you got the camera. your camera isn' a point and shoot. t just takes time to learn how to use it. once you do, you will realize how much the sony sucks compared to your 20D. happy shooting.

[DionM]

I came from film SLRs and my first few shots with my 20D really had me wondering "why did I buy this ... the shots are awful".

Then I learnt a bit about post processing.

Then I bought some good glass.

I now LOVE my 20D.

It is same for many digital SLRs - people I know who bought Nikons and Pentaxs at first struggled, but now are producing amazing photos.

[hedphonz]

plus i forgot to mention that i have a 300D with the stock lens and have gotten some great wide angle pictures with it.

[limeydal]

Raj,
the link HJ provided is the one I referred to.Many thanks.
It's under the max image quality section and in the full version.

Drisley, as for the Coastguard, they were pretty reasonable. They just wanted to make sure I was not a wierdo and did their job professionaly.In fact ,I printed up a 10x8 of the shot I posted and intend to give it to them on the next trip into the bay.Hope to foster a relationship ,as I am out there pretty often taking photos.
And no, they didnt ask to see the camera;just a few questions to establish who I was and what I was up to.

Just need to find a way to keep the camera safe dry & close at hand while bouncing over the waves! Have a zodiac style boat and thinking of attaching a pelican case or the like to the centre console.
cheers Dal

[drisley]

limeydal, great idea. Let us know how/if they like the picture )

[I Simonius]

Getting better!!!:D :D :D
snip
Apart from being pulled over by the Coastguard for looking suspicious(taking photographs of Warships!) I had a great day.
Much better results and had a couple of frames that were outstanding. (Especially as one was of the high speed patrol boat coming over to investigate me!)
Very crisp and the autofocus seemed to track the oncoming boat very accurately.
(Until the part where I noticed they had a machine gun up front and I bugged out!!!)
snip
cheers Dal

LOL!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: