Ugly Duck 40D (ISO3200)

First full day with my new camera and it rained... pretty much all day... ... and the sun was nowhere to be seen anyway, in true POTN tradition to christen my new bit of kit a lovely duck picture for you...

Sorry it had to be done...

Taken using a 100-300 f4.5 - f5.6 lens wide open @200mm 1/500sec, RAW and converted using DPP.

The more i get to use this camera the more i love it. Can't see the trusty 350D being used much anymore... .

As you can tell i am very happy and IMO a very worth while upgrade indeed...it just seems so darn quick.

ISO3200 resized and USM.

Wow!! that looks great! It looks like my 350D at ISO 400! :-\
Thank you for posting this image. I'm thinking of upgrading my 350D to the 40D and shots like this always reinforce my decision.

Coming from a 350D myself the difference is vast, the viewfinder on the 40D is so big and clear it great. The 3" screen is superb... when reviewing images the small image you get when checking the histogram is almost as big as the 350D full screen image...! its so quick, it got a real sence of urgency about it.

The list of things i really like about it could go on and on...

Do it... you really wont regret it...

Do you have in camera NR switched on?

Thanks, Yeoer! It's been a definite decision, I'm just waiting for a scholarship check to come. People who read my posts are probably thinking "Why the heck doesn't he have that money yet?" I don't know, either, but I'm about to call and see what's up. I'd really like to have a 40D by my Fall Colors trip to the Sierra Nevadas on Oct 19!

I was THINKING about getting the 5D, but I don't think I can justify spending that much on a camera just yet. I've done great portraits on the 350D, I've seen great weddings done on the 20/30D, I think I can spare myself the extra money now and spend what I'm getting on the 40D, a sturdy tripod, flash, and maybe some glass.

Hi mcmadkat

I do have it switched on but i'm not sure if the in camera NR is applied to RAW files or not. I'll have to do some more testing to find out.

30 seconds later... I have just done a quick test and yes it is applied to the RAW files.


Please disregard the above... see below...!

Yeoer, are you using DPP or something else to process the raw files? If something else, then I think it's very interesting that in-camera NR applies.

Sounds like you might be using DPP, though, which almost certainly uses the in-camera settings for this (there's a NR tab with settings that I'll bet changes depending on whether or not you have in-camera NR enabled)...

Yeoer-

Thanks for the takes! If the NR is applied to RAW, that's something new, right? I checked my daughter's XTi and the NR was only applied to a jpeg.

Tony

am I the only one that thinks that's not bad?

Looks really good at 3200.

Hum... My first check was done soley on the camera... viewing two idetical images one with NR and one without... on screen (camera) the image with the NR applied appears cleaner (less chroma) which has wrongly lead me to believe the NR was applied to the RAW file.

On closer inspection in DPP both images are identical so the NR is NOT applied to the RAW file...

Sorry for the confusion. This is why i take pictures and do not test camera's for a living.

Take a shot without it on...

good detail, caught the expressive eye.

Absolutely excellent.

If NR was on in the camera, DPP will read that it was set (it is tagged to the RAW file as metadata) but it is not physically applied to the RAW file.

The photographer can then choose whether to allow DPP to apply the in-camera setting to the jpeg or tiff at conversion.