400D images vs 5D images

I am struggling with my image quality. I know that most of this has to do with my settings and lens quality but I have noticed that a lot of really clear images are shot with a 5D. Marc Adamus has some incredible images and most of them that I have seen are shot with a 5D. I am assuming that if I am going to achieve the same quality that I will need to use the same camera or a camera with a full size sensor.

There is no doubt the 5D with good glass will give excellent IQ, however it ultimately comes down to the photographer's skill. The 400D can produce superb images that are not far behind the 5D... you need to be more specific when you say 'struggling with image quality'. What settings are you using? What lens? What are you shooting? Lighting conditions etc... more info would help us help you

William

I am using a Canon Rebel XTi (400D), Quantaray 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 lens, tripod. I tri to most of my outdoor shots in the morning. I prefer shooting landscapes and plants. I would also like to shoot some wildlife but need a bigger lens first. My images are not sharp. I have learned that I have been using the long aperature so by correcting that I have made my images sharper but hey are still a bit soft. I have noticed that when I shoot a landscape shot that nothing seems to be in focus. The images look okay when they are reduced but when you view them at 100% they are fuzzy everywhere.Below is a link to a full size image. ISO-100, 18mm, Av 7.1, Tv 1/125. The image was shot at about 2:00 in the afternoon so that might be part of the problem.

http://www.zandecki.ne​t/samples/img_7019.jpg

The image does seem a bit soft. I don't know much about the lens you're using, it's probably a combination of both the softness of the lens and also the fact you're using f7.1. For landscapes I try to use at least f14-f22 depending on the conditions to bring out maximum DOF (so everything is sharp). Do you have any images taken with a smaller aperature? > f7.1?

I actually picked up a XTi kit not too long ago as my "compact" camera system. So I can compare the two directly. As far as IQ, the main things I find different are you get slightly more resolution and greater dynamic range with the 5D. I think the PQ on the XTi is pretty amazing for a sub $1k camera. I think the main advantage of the 5D is just the composing features you have with FF: it doesn't inherently mean you'll be getting better pictures though.

But you're right....how "clear" an image is has more to do with glass. I suppose one could make a case about FF having better diffusion properties....but that's splitting hairs! I've gotten some great zoo pics using my 70-200mm L with my XTi.

zucchini wrote in post #3963364
I am using a Canon Rebel XTi (400D), Quantaray 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 lens, tripod.

I would try a better lens.....Haven't shot with a Quantaray myself, but I've heard they're pretty bad at being soft and having CA. The XTi kit lens actually isn't that bad for its price. It does have some limitations, but considering the grade, optics are fairly sharp under normal conditions. For best optics in a budget lens, I like Tamrons a lot.

Mark Adamus does a heck of a lot of PP. Don't be discouraged, learn what you can with your current camera, and when you've maxed it out, move on to the 5D.

Mark is a member of this site: www.timecatcher.com
If you look around at the other members, some of the pictures which are as good as his are taken with a 350D.

Get out and take pictures, enjoy your camera.

The XTi is capable of some very high quality images, so I wouldn't worry about upgrading the body. I think the weak link in your kit is probably the lens. You would probably see much better results with a higher quality lens and as willz75 mentioned, stop down your aperture a bit more. Also, are you using a UV filter? If you are, but its a cheap one, consider taking it off. I use UV filters on all of my lenses for protection, but cheap ones can really degrade image quality.

Ur camera is a great camera. But this looks like the lens or your focus point. The softness does progressively increase.
Are you zoomed in slightly. This could result in shallow DOF. Part of your image looks in focus.

I would flip it to auto and shoot as wide as poss and take look. Not heard of your lens.

Agreed - Quantaray lens is weak link. To prove this to youreself, reshoot using your 50mm, in <Av> mode @ f/11(or higher) and ISO100. Note: use the self-timer or a remote release. You'll be very pleased with the sharpness of the photo. Then sell the Quantaray and pickup a good used 10-22 EF-S or 17-40L for your landscapes.

Here is another image taken with a EF-S 10-22mm lens that I rented. ISO 100, 10mm, Tv 6, Av 22. This was taken just after the sun came up and I understand why the tops of the trees are blown out but nothing in the lower part of the image is focus either. I am starting to think that I need to be working with the aperature more.

http://www.zandecki.ne​t/samples/img_6886.jpg

The most improvement in your images will come from mastering your equipment, not from buying new equipment (assuming you're using decent glass to start with). All too often people purchase new gear in an effort to improve their images only to learn that the new body or lens isn't the magic bullet they thought it would be. Learn to use your equipment to it's full capability and then when you can no longer get improvement, then consider upgrading.

Mark

Well, f/22 is pretty weak on a 10-22, that is causing the bad chromatic abberrations and could be contributing to the softness. Try it again around F/11-14, and focus on something in the mid-ground area, let the foreground go soft for now. Also, are you perhaps shooting w/ custom picture settings using a very lower 'sharpness' value?

I have not adjusted any 'sharpness' settings. I am not familiar with that.

How sturdy is your tripod? How are you releasing the shutter?

Something you might want to try is using the mirror lock up feature and either use a remote shutter release or use the timer function. This will help determine if camera shake is contributing to the softness of the pictures.

While I do agree that these images are soft, a lot can be done with these pictures post process to improve sharpness. If you don't mind people editing your images turn on the "Image Editing Ok" flag in your profile.

I'm wondering what point you're focusing on. Really, small apertures become less important the further out to infinity you focus. DOF changes with aperture as well as distance to subject. It's especially easy to see the range of DOF using an old manual lens (where they have a scale easily printed).

As an example, I pulled out my old FD 50mm. If I focus at something 15ft away, at F8 my DOF is 10 to 30ft. At F8, if I focus at 4 ft....my DOF is somewhere around 3.6 ft to 4.4ft. Quite a difference!!

So the closer your subject, the shallower your DOF becomes. A good test of lens sharpness might be to take a close image of something concrete...see how well in focus it is. You also can see if there's any CA in the out of focus areas. With your sample images, I'm seeing a lot of OOF....the quality of OOF seems a little better with the Canon lens

edit....oh, Mike's suggestion about the tripod is an excellent point: could be some camera shake. To reduce camera shake even further, you could try remote shutter release.