Am I expecting too much ?

[Tog]

For the past 5 years I've used a Fujifilm S1 together with a Nikkor AF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D. It was a fantastic combination and I was always pleased with the results.



Sadly it was stolen from my car last month so I decided to replace it with a Canon and went with the 20D + 70-200 f/4L.

With the advancement of technology over the past few years I was expecting at least comparable results to my old system but, after using ithe 20D for several weeks, I'm not so sure.



Here's a very unremarkable snap taken today at the beach. Please ignore the content, my only purpose for posting it is discover whether I should expect a sharper focused image. I've never managed to get any much sharper than this ( for this particular shot the focal length is 159mm, aperture F/4 and exposure time 1.2500 sec. )

The conditions were almost perfect (clear day, very bright sun)



So my question is; would you expect better ??



I thank you in advance for your valued opinion.

[Bosscat]

Shooting at F4 and 1/2500 you have a very narrow depth of field, and took any chance of showing flowing water away with those settings. I woulda used alot slower shutter speed if I was there.

[Michaelmjc]

You have to remember Digital cameras such as the 20D need some post processing done to achieve the desired results. I edited it a bit, it was a 2 sec job... but does look a bit better.

[Tog]

Shooting at F4 and 1/2500 you have a very narrow depth of field, and took any chance of showing flowing water away with those settings. I woulda used alot slower shutter speed if I was there.

Thanks Bosscat, I appreciate your comments but the wave breaking out of focus was kind of what I was expecting. I just though the subjects might have been a bit crisper? I don't know.

[Tog]

You have to remember Digital cameras such as the 20D need some post processing done to achieve the desired results. I edited it a bit, it was a 2 sec job... but does look a bit better.

Thanks Michaelmjc and you're right, you have improved the picture but this evening I've spent some time comparing unprocessed images from my old S1 against unprocessed pics. like this from my 20D.

The S1 wins hands down.

I have to say I suspect the 70-200 f/4L lens.....

[Michaelmjc]

The 70-200L lens is a great lens, I dont think it is the lens thats not doing the job. Film and digital are really different.

You can also set the parameters with yuor 20D... set the sharpness to full and the saturation up... Film and digital will probably never be the same right out of the camera... so thats why you post process.

[Tog]

The 70-200L lens is a great lens, I dont think it is the lens thats not doing the job. Film and digital are really different.

You can also set the parameters with yuor 20D... set the sharpness to full and the saturation up... Film and digital will probably never be the same right out of the camera... so thats why you post process.

....but the S1 isdigital ! http://home.fujifilm.com/products/digital/digitalcamera/fxs1pro/

I have been comparing didital with digital.

[tim]

Instead of F4 and 1/2500th try F8 and the appropriate shutter speed. Lenese are typically sharper stopped down a notch or two from their widest, though that lens has an excellent reputation. The shot looks plenty sharp to me, in that web sized version.

[Tog]

Instead of F4 and 1/2500th try F8 and the appropriate shutter speed. Lenese are typically sharper stopped down a notch or two from their widest, though that lens has an excellent reputation. The shot looks plenty sharp to me, in that web sized version.

Thanks Tim, now that's something I didn't know, I'll try stopping down a little and see if that helps.

....but if you think the image is as sharp as I should expect then maybe I should just stop whinging !! :)

[Dante King]

I hate to say it BUT Michaelmjc is not correct. Both digital cams here. Here is my take on the shot. Wish I had the raw file to adjust as it appears that this file would look sweet with a little PSCS added. Did the adjusts on a mac laptop that has an uncalibrated screen so appologies if it looks off.

[Dante King]

Thanks Tim, now that's something I didn't know, I'll try stopping down a little and see if that helps.

....but if you think the image is as sharp as I should expect then maybe I should just stop whinging !! :)

It is actually a great image when I slow down and read the entire post. At f/4 its pretty damn sharp. Stop whining and send me the lens for some comprehensive testing, takes a couple years, and them I'll ship it back with the results! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Tog, welcome to POTN forums!

[HJMinard]

I would expect - indeed, I get - better results from that camera/lens combination. There are many factors that could contribute to your problems, however. In bright light, I'd use a smaller aperture and slower shutter speed - but that said I'd still expect better sharpness from that lens, even wide open.

Did you use the auto focus point selection or did you manually select one of the focus points?

I agree that all Canon digital SLR images can be improved in post processing, but I somewhat disagree when people immediately assume that's the problem when someone complains about sharpness. Perhaps I was fortunate to get a better than average 20D, but I get better sharpness than your example ... straight out of the camera using "Parameter 2" (zero in-camera sharpening).

I'd give yourself a little more time to get fully acquainted with your new camera, and if possible try some different lenses to see if you get better results.

[robertwgross]

There are several different things going on here.

It could be the fault of the lens. It could be the fault of the camera. It could be the fault of the user in selecting odd settings like f/4 or autofocus mode. It could be the fault of inadequate post-processing (sharpening, etc.). It could be high expectations. It could be almost anything. Trying to make a judgment on one single image is tough.

---Bob Gross---

[Curtis N]

For the past 5 years I've used a Fujifilm S1 together with a Nikkor AF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D. ...I decided to replace it with a Canon and went with the 20D + 70-200 f/4L.Slap me if I'm missing something, but you're comparing two lenses with VERY different focal length ranges. The shot you posted was at 159mm, beyond the capabilities of the Nikkor.

It's not an apples-to-apples comparison.

[Bob_A]

Thanks Michaelmjc and you're right, you have improved the picture but this evening I've spent some time comparing unprocessed images from my old S1 against unprocessed pics. like this from my 20D.

The S1 wins hands down.

I have to say I suspect the 70-200 f/4L lens.....

The unprocessed images from the 20D could certainly be a bit softer looking than from the S1 and have less contrast and saturation. This doesn't mean that the 20D's output isn't as good ... in fact it may even be better. Which camera has a stronger anti-aliasing filter? What are the in camera parameters set to for the 20D compared to the S1?

From what I've read about the S1 or S2 is that they have exceptional jpeg quality straight from the camera requiring little post-processing. This isn't the case for Canon DSLR's IMO, however the information is all there for fantastic images, but some post processing is usually required.

[Spod]

I switched from Nikon to Canon about 18 months ago. Initially, I too was disappointed with the quality of results I was getting from 'L' glass. I soon learned that the 'fault' was with my technique - I was using the camera as if it were my Nikon. After a short time I got the hang of it and ever since then I've been extremely pleased with the quality and have no regrets about the switch.

These days I shoot Raw and leave all the in-camera settings (saturation, sharpness etc) at zero, prefering to control everything in PhotoShop. I'm particularly keen on the new Smart Sharpen filter in CS2.

[Michaelmjc]

Sorry my bad, I was under the impression it was a film camera.

[Andy_T]

I think that the image is very good with the post processing applied to it.
The Canon camera that has the reputation of great images straight out of the camera is the old 1D (MKI) with its CCD sensor.

Do you have any examples from your Fuji how the straight-from-the-camera results were?

Best regards,
Andy

[SAZABI]

Ok... as I am reading this thread, this question came up again and I seriously ask myself many times already:

Shouldn't I expect good pictures straight out from the camera if the camera is considered as a "GOOD" camera?

Of course, i know that I am a n00b and don't have very good photography technique.
However, it is very disappointing when the % of good pictures I am getting from my old S50 is higher than my rebel xt + L glass (17-40, and 70-200 2.8) straight out from the camera.

Have been considering to upgrade to 20D, but I will think again after reading this thread... :confused:

[bolantej]

i have shot many jpegs and had great success with image quality. the raw files always need some pp. post processing is just part of the "process". it allows you the most control, which is the point of owning an slr.. if you don't want control, stick with the point and shoots. only my opinion.

[Salleke]

I hate to say it BUT Michaelmjc is not correct. Both digital cams here. Here is my take on the shot. Wish I had the raw file to adjust as it appears that this file would look sweet with a little PSCS added. Did the adjusts on a mac laptop that has an uncalibrated screen so appologies if it looks off.

Hello Dante King,

Can you please tell us what you did to the picture to make it look so much better?

Thank you.

[DavidEB]

well, if you examine the sand grains you can see the depth of field is very shallow. The grains at Mom's left knee are crisply in focus. A little closer, at kiddy's toes, and they're visibly Out Of Focus. Maybe an inch or two behing Mom's shadow underneath her they are also OOF. So the depth of field is less than the span of the subjects. The only parts of Mom that are in focus are her trunk, which is relatively featureless, and part of her face. The right side of her face is a little blurred, as are the hairs on her right forhead and ponytail.

A 70-200 at f4 has far narrower DOF than you're used to coming from a point-and-shoot. Stopped down, it should produce stunning images. Wide open, the images can be fantastic if composed with DOF in mind.

now I've earned myself opportunity for a pun -- the photo is softer than a baby's bottom. sorry.

[BigRed450]

Tog:
In the last 5 years there has been great strides in digital tech and also in digital thinking. You have just experienced that very thing. The current thinking is that the photographer wants full control over images, to be sharpened and enhanced as he wishes. Hence, in-camera processing (which BTW cannot match the power of PS) has been reduced to a minimum in order to give photographers that control. Too aggressive in-camera processing will affect the image quality especially with enlargements. The S1 was and still is an exceptional camera, but in-camera processing is aggressive as it was in all FujiFilm cameras of that time... If you prefer not to post process your images simply go into the parameters and jack up the Contrast, Saturation and Sharpness until you get the effect you want... RAW formats are the only ones you can compare reasonably..

Here is a very basic Post Process .... little contrast, little sat and a little sharpening.
http://jtphoto.ca/webimages/Tog IMG_0001b.jpg

[Michaelmjc]

Hello Dante King,

Can you please tell us what you did to the picture to make it look so much better?

Thank you.

Looks like he added some saturation, sharpening, a bit of contrast and resized the picture so everything is in better focus.

Dante if you did something else, let us know.

[Tog]

Do you have any examples from your Fuji how the straight-from-the-camera results were?

Best regards,
Andy[/QUOTE]

..and after seeing some of the post processing on what is only a web version of the original I now see that perhaps the camera is not so much lacking as my own skills !

Andy, in reply to your request for an un-processed (with the exception of pixel reduction) example from my old Fulifilm S1, here's a shot taken on a very similar day (and coincidently on the same beach) a couple of years ago during a volleyball game.
Speed: 1/2000 sec, Aperture: F5.7 and Focal length: 105mm (at the lenses maximum zoom)
It's worth noting that the lens, a Nikkor 28-105mm f3.5-4.5D IF can be bought for half the price of a Canon 70-200mm F/4L !!

[Tog]

Tog:
In the last 5 years there has been great strides in digital tech and also in digital thinking. You have just experienced that very thing. The current thinking is that the photographer wants full control over images, to be sharpened and enhanced as he wishes. Hence, in-camera processing (which BTW cannot match the power of PS) has been reduced to a minimum in order to give photographers that control. Too aggressive in-camera processing will affect the image quality especially with enlargements. The S1 was and still is an exceptional camera, but in-camera processing is aggressive as it was in all FujiFilm cameras of that time....


hmmm...I find your explanation intriguing. I'm going to spend a little time 're-visiting' some of my other 20D shots to see if I can reveal the beauty hidden within !

[Tog]

Hello Dante King,

Can you please tell us what you did to the picture to make it look so much better?

Thank you.

...and to reiterate Salleke's post, how did you do it, Dante ?? That really was quite remarkable considering the quality of the image you had to work with !

[Michaelmjc]

...and to reiterate Salleke's post, how did you do it, Dante ?? That really was quite remarkable considering the quality of the image you had to work with !

He used photoshop the same program I used to do it.. By making the picture smaller it makes everything look clearer and sharper.

[Tog]

...and finally can I just say how overwhelmed I've been by this forums response to my question. What an enourmous wealth of knowledge !! I'm new to this community but feel I've learnt so much already (from this thread alone !)

Thank you all so much for your contributions. :D

[Michaelmjc]

Glad to help, now leave this forum! No joke you will be soo broke, its not even funny.

Everyone peer pressures you into buying stuff! make it stop! :cry:

[Curtis N]

It's worth noting that the lens, a Nikkor 28-105mm f3.5-4.5D IF can be bought for half the price of a Canon 70-200mm F/4L !!How does the price of the Nikkor compare to Canon lenses of a similar focal length range?

[Tog]

How does the price of the Nikkor compare to Canon lenses of a similar focal length range?

point taken.

[BigRed450]

Tog: In all honesty this web version of your S1 image looks no sharper to me then the 20D image you posted. However, it does have a little more contrast and saturation.... Images also always need to be sharpened after being resized for web viewing ( USM A-500 R-0.2 T-0 ).

[Andy_T]

I second BigRed450's opinion. If you look a mommy's hand and face in the second picture, it would not strike me as very sharp, especially in such a small picture.

In addition to that, a picture taken at f/5.6 @ 105 mm will have a lot more DOF than one taken at f/4.0 @ 160 mm.

Bottom line ... get to know the camera better and hone your post processing skills before prematurely coming to the conclusion that the camera is not good.

It has been stated very often on this forum:
Do not expect the same results from a Canon DSLR without any experience with it as from a p&s camera (which the Fuji S1 most certainly is not, but others complained that they got better pictures with their S series).

If you give a guy in driving school a Ferrari F40 to start with, he most likely will not do as well with it as with a Dodge Neon with automatic transmission. Still, most people will agree that the car is capable of more :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[CyberDyneSystems]

Tog,

Please read this thread;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=63137


And then this one;
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81932

Hope this helps ;) :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Do not expect the same results from a Canon DSLR without any experience with it as from a p&s camera (which the Fuji S1 most certainly is not, but others complained that they got better pictures with their S series).


S1 was actually there first in a great line of DSLRs... very nice camera using Nikkor lenses.. but they had CCD with aggresive Post Processing.. in fact with there built in interpolation.. the "S series Process the hell out of every thing...

Arguably.. the Fuji's have the best in camera post processing of any cameras made.. I would certainly agree with this.. for excelelnt results straight out of Camera..

But .. that's if you go in for that sort of thing :lol: :lol:

My point is .. that of all DSLR's the Fuji's have the most internal post processing.. this is NOT the norm with DSLRs...

Tog,
read the thread I posted above.. see if any of this makes sense..
If you want internal processing.. you can at least try the paramters settings in the 20D..

But if you must have the camera do the processing .. Your only other option would be to look at another Fuji.

[ksmattfish]

Ok... as I am reading this thread, this question came up again and I seriously ask myself many times already:

Shouldn't I expect good pictures straight out from the camera if the camera is considered as a "GOOD" camera?

The only cameras that don't require post shot processing are Polaroids. Personally, I've never been a big fan. ;)

[Loaded]

OK i have been reading and I feel for the the guy. I was in the same boat and have come 180 Now i shoot only in raw and review each photo and process each . I am beginning to have an Eye for RAW or as an ex film guy "the negative" it now real easey to see shots and what can be corrected in them. And for artistic reasons or display reasons i can adjust sat/hue/exposure/ for any occasion

[Andy_T]

Funny experience for me was that when I moved from my G2 to the 20D, I also expected that.

On the G2 I had been using RAW only with conversion to TIFF and post processing with liberal amounts of USM added in PS to get the best out of my images.

On the 20D with Tamron 28-75/2.8 large JPG straight out of the camera with '+1' settings for colour and sharpening is totally sufficient to get tack sharp images.

Best regards,
Andy

[dkord]

Comparing both pics: the one shot with the Canon is a backlit scene shot against bright water where the subject is in shadow.
Fuji image is front lit and by the color looks like the sun is lower.
Different circumstanes and considering the degree of difficulty of a back lit scene, I think the Canon performed well.

[jobber73]

Just for fun. My post-processing attempt:

[RodBarker]

Hi
I think every digital image can be improved in Photoshop , some will have huge improvements , Canon are well aware of the Photoshop influence flooding the world of imagery and so produce cameras grounded from pro use and know that the bottom line is if you shoot digital and want the very best image result you must post process in Photoshop .
Having said that to get the very best out of an image Photoshop has technical requirements of the image going in and Canon caters for that better than most cameras , jpegs are great for happy snaps but cannot compare to a raw image that has been through PS in the hands of somebody that knows how to use it , digital photography and Photoshop are like blood brothers and I think Canon feels the same way , they know the road to great digital images ends in Photoshop so they build cameras with this worklow in mind more so than out of the camera happy snaps .

Rod

[michael.luczkow]

It's that lens at F4. I have that lens and I run into that all the time. It's a good lens when there is enough light. One thing you do not want to do with that lens is put your camera in Av and go shooting at F4 (unless you have to). I'd say try again and then tell us what you think...

[Salleke]

Just for fun. My post-processing attempt:

Wow, you did a very good job at this picture.
Can you please tell us what you did exactly?
Thank you.

[jobber73]

Just the standard.

Level Adjustment - Saturation - Noise Reduction & downsized (trying to hide some of the jpg artifacts from the original :) )- USM

The whole process took just a moment or two. It may be a little "much" and might even be a little over the top for my tastes, but it seems like a lot of people are going for that P&S look with their DSLR's.