Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 19 Dec 2007 (Wednesday) 10:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2 issues with my 40D and a plea for H. E. L. P.!!!!

 
acigarnut
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Wisconsin, United States
     
Dec 19, 2007 10:41 |  #1

Hello everyone: I have upgraded to the 40D from the 20D and there are a lot of cool things here. I have two issues/questions however:

1. I noticed that the file size is actually SMALLER (3 meg/average) on the 10mp camera, while the old 20D (8mp camera) averaged about 3.5 or 4 meg. WHAT THE H@#L?

2. This is the 'biggie'. I notice that when I am in their "standard" picture style, the highlights are TOTALLY blown (even with the custom function to correct this) and the colors are TOTALLY over saturated. The only fix I have found for this is to use the "faithful" picture style and mess around with sharpening after the fact. Has anyone had this issue?

Lastly: I print a lot of 8x10s for people. I noticed on an older 1d mk2 that you could get a focus screen with two black vertical lines that in effect showed you where the crop lines are. Has anyone tried to put one of these on a 40D? Does Canon make one ? HELP!!


Canon EOS 5D mkIII and all "L" glass. Now all I need is the ability and time to use them all!!

"Don't just talk, say something."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Riff ­ Raff
Goldmember
Avatar
1,111 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
     
Dec 19, 2007 10:47 |  #2

My overall answer for both issues: shoot in RAW format. Try out Adobe Lightroom in conjunction with the RAW images - I've never seen a need for JPEGs in the camera since I tried it. Picture styles and such only affect JPEG images.


Shawn McHorse - Shawn.McHorse.com (external link) / AustinRocky.org (external link)
DSLR: 5D Mark III Compact: S100 Flash: 580EX II Bag: Tamrac Rally 5
Lenses: 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS,
50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timnosenzo
Cream of the Crop
8,831 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Sep 2005
Location: CT
     
Dec 19, 2007 11:05 |  #3

acigarnut wrote in post #4534442 (external link)
I notice that when I am in their "standard" picture style, the highlights are TOTALLY blown (even with the custom function to correct this) and the colors are TOTALLY over saturated. The only fix I have found for this is to use the "faithful" picture style and mess around with sharpening after the fact. Has anyone had this issue?

Do you notice this issue on your computer or on the camera's LCD? Unfortunately my 40D's LCD doesn't accurately display colors, saturation, contrast or sharpness, but pictures on the computer look good...


connecticut wedding photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
acigarnut
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Wisconsin, United States
     
Dec 19, 2007 11:12 |  #4

timnosenzo wrote in post #4534548 (external link)
Do you notice this issue on your computer or on the camera's LCD? Unfortunately my 40D's LCD doesn't accurately display colors, saturation, contrast or sharpness, but pictures on the computer look good...

The problem is on the computer, and thus the actual file. I know the screen is a bit "off" and I only use it for reference. The screen ROCKS by the way compared to the 20D.


Canon EOS 5D mkIII and all "L" glass. Now all I need is the ability and time to use them all!!

"Don't just talk, say something."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,483 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Dec 19, 2007 11:24 |  #5

I think the Standard Picture Style is Canon's attempt to provide P&S type jpgs for those who like that sort of thing. If I were to shoot jpgs I would probably choose Neutral, as I do if I use DPP. Mostly I use another converter and screw the images up all by myself.

As regards the file size question, obviously they are compressing the 40D jpg more. If that bothers you the only remedy is RAW.


There are interchangable screens available for about $35, I think. You could try taking your screen out and etching or even Magic Markering it. If it doesn't work out it will only cost you 35 bucks to replace it. There was a photo tutorial on changing the screen posted on this forum a few days ago.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
islandboy
Member
32 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Somewhere in the sun
     
Dec 19, 2007 11:46 |  #6

I know that color and saturation are often times a matter of personal taste but I find my 40D produces good jpegs out of the camera on the standard picture style setting. I also use the standard picture style setting as a starting point for most of my raw processing because I like well-saturated colors. I don't find it to be over-saturated or garish and I don't find it any more saturated than anything I used to shoot with my 20D. Is it possible that the hue, saturation and/or contrast were accidentally increased in your picture style settings?

As far as the exposure, I find that most photos actually tend to underexpose a bit and in situations where the highlights might be a problem, I can usually watch the histogram and keep the highlights protected. Highlight priority does preserve more detail in the highlights at all picture settings but I don't find it to be a huge difference from what I get without it.


Canon EOS 40D, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS, Speedlite 430EX II, G5, G11 with underwater housing, Powershot A95 with underwater housing, SD850is, Vixia HF S100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberPet
Hiding Under a Rock
Avatar
4,052 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2005
Location: Piteå, Sweden
     
Dec 19, 2007 12:31 |  #7

If you shoot in high quality Jpeg or even Raw, and the files are smaller in weight (not physical pixel size) than with your old 20D, how about your 40D camera has a better algorithm to compress files.... or even less noisy files, that should decrease the weight of the files right there. Also, hight contrast images will be different in size than low contrast images.

Not sure why your images should be blowing the highlights unless you actually do blow them with a bad exposure. I have my camera set to "Neutral" to be sure that it doesn't add any contrast or saturation that might blow any highlights. See if that setting might work for your better, as it should be zero'd settings all over the board.

As for cropping for 8x10 (evil format if you ask me), since your viewfinder only shows 95% of the actual image, it would take a lot of math to figure that out. But you could always put some black tape on the LCD screen on the back, and make sure when you chimp that you won't cut off anyone's head or limbs after the fact.


/Petra Hall
Click here to view my geeky gear list
I shoot as much as possible in available light... sometimes, my flash is available – Joe Buissink

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Glenn ­ NK
Goldmember
Avatar
4,630 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Victoria, BC
     
Dec 19, 2007 12:44 |  #8

acigarnut wrote in post #4534442 (external link)
Hello everyone: I have upgraded to the 40D from the 20D and there are a lot of cool things here. I have two issues/questions however:

1. I noticed that the file size is actually SMALLER (3 meg/average) on the 10mp camera, while the old 20D (8mp camera) averaged about 3.5 or 4 meg. WHAT THE H@#L?

2. This is the 'biggie'. I notice that when I am in their "standard" picture style, the highlights are TOTALLY blown (even with the custom function to correct this) and the colors are TOTALLY over saturated. The only fix I have found for this is to use the "faithful" picture style and mess around with sharpening after the fact. Has anyone had this issue?

Lastly: I print a lot of 8x10s for people. I noticed on an older 1d mk2 that you could get a focus screen with two black vertical lines that in effect showed you where the crop lines are. Has anyone tried to put one of these on a 40D? Does Canon make one ? HELP!!

Questions:

1. What PP software are you using? Some software cannot do anything with blown highlights; some cannot even recognize them (DPP). Lightroom and CS can do both.

2. What metering mode is your 40D set to when highlights get blown? Depending on the subject, this can have a huge effect.

3. Why not shoot RAW, and set Picture Styles to NEUTRAL, and set CONTRAST to minus 2? This will get your histogram (which is a JPEG) closer to the actual RAW exposure levels.

Comments:

1. Sharpening is NOT the way to correct blown highlights.

2. This thread might be useful:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=411402


When did voluptuous become voluminous?

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
islandboy
Member
32 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Somewhere in the sun
     
Dec 19, 2007 13:02 |  #9

Glenn NK wrote in post #4535118 (external link)
Questions:

Some software cannot do anything with blown highlights; some cannot even recognize them (DPP).

This is not the case. The most recent version of DPP has warnings for shadow and highlight clipping and no software Lightroom included, can recover highlights that are fully blown. If the highlights are fully blown, there is no information and therefore nothing that can be recovered. Highlight recovery can only work on highlights that are not completely blown and any software that allows you to adjust the raw exposure settings (i.e any raw convertor) can recover over-exposed highlights as long as the area still contains some info. The advantage of ACR/Lightroom over DPP when it comes to highlight recovery is that you have an extra stop of exposure you can recover in ACR/lightroom.


Canon EOS 40D, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS, Speedlite 430EX II, G5, G11 with underwater housing, Powershot A95 with underwater housing, SD850is, Vixia HF S100

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dream ­ Merchant
Senior Member
425 posts
Joined Jul 2007
     
Dec 19, 2007 15:03 as a reply to  @ islandboy's post |  #10

To answer your first question, the 40D either captures or stores images at 72dpi, whereas the older models do it at 180dpi, hence the confusing (smaller file) sizes on a 40D despite the higher MP.


Editing welcome :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberPet
Hiding Under a Rock
Avatar
4,052 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2005
Location: Piteå, Sweden
     
Dec 19, 2007 17:14 |  #11

Dream Merchant, the dpi (which is in fact ppi) has no meaning at all to the size of the files. Sorry.


/Petra Hall
Click here to view my geeky gear list
I shoot as much as possible in available light... sometimes, my flash is available – Joe Buissink

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark_Cohran
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
15,765 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1809
Joined Jul 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
     
Dec 19, 2007 18:03 |  #12

Dream Merchant wrote in post #4535956 (external link)
To answer your first question, the 40D either captures or stores images at 72dpi, whereas the older models do it at 180dpi, hence the confusing (smaller file) sizes on a 40D despite the higher MP.

Totally incorrect. DPI has no impact on the actual file size. The DPI parameter is only used when the image is sent to an output device. Until you do that, DPI is meaningless in terms of the file size.


Mark
-----
Some primes, some zooms, some Ls, some bodies and they all play nice together.
Forty years of shooting and still learning.
My Tumblr Site (external link) (NSFW)
Follow Me on Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dream ­ Merchant
Senior Member
425 posts
Joined Jul 2007
     
Dec 19, 2007 20:13 as a reply to  @ Mark_Cohran's post |  #13

Oh, ok. Thanks for the heads up. ;)

Does that mean that what was asaid earlier about the files being 'more compressed' is true? If that's the case, would it affect image quality up to say ... 12"x16" prints since JPEG is already a 'lossy' format?


Editing welcome :D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
therock
Member
Avatar
201 posts
Joined Oct 2007
     
Dec 19, 2007 21:25 |  #14

@ Dream Merchant. Help us help you. Half you question is on size and the other on IQ. Unless I missed it you did not state the mode you were shooting in. RAW, sRAW or jpg? Your file size hints at it and the last post does too but I would like to hear it from you.
Can you post a blown image with exif data with lens type in tact so we can pick at it for you? Some of us love this stuff.
I only shoot RAW but none of the IQ complaints you report are common to my 40D.


therock @ alcphoto.net (external link)

50D/ EFS 10-22 / 17-55 2.8 IS / EF 50 1.4 / 28-135 Kit Lens / 70-200 2.8 IS / EF 300 f4L IS / EF 1.4x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberPet
Hiding Under a Rock
Avatar
4,052 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2005
Location: Piteå, Sweden
     
Dec 19, 2007 21:25 |  #15

Full JPEG quality will always be the best. As technology evolves the technique to compress files gets better. So it might not be such a big difference in size from a camera made 3-4 years ago from a camera that was released just 6 months ago. The camera manufacturers always work on new ways to tweak the algoritms to make better compression. It's not the same as the files compressed in Photoshop for instance.

But image quality has nothing to do with compression of a jpeg (well not alone), as there's always better image chips, resolution (amount of pixels), etc, in each upgrade of a camera. So there's a lot of different things that comes to play when it comes to image quality.


/Petra Hall
Click here to view my geeky gear list
I shoot as much as possible in available light... sometimes, my flash is available – Joe Buissink

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,579 views & 0 likes for this thread
2 issues with my 40D and a plea for H. E. L. P.!!!!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is idauria
1074 guests, 276 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.