Canon Rebel XTI I'm very unhappy with it

[Old-Man]

I got a Canon Rebel XTI a month or so ago. I have to say I'm very unhappy with it. The pictures come out real dark in most of the settings. I posted this a few weeks ago and I also called Canon. I was told to adjust the setting on it. My understand is you can only adjust the setting on AV, P, and TV mode. You can't change them in full auto, portrait, landscape, close-up sports, or night portait. If this is true what a waste of a camera. In full sun the pictures come out a lot darker then they are. Can this be fixed in the full auto, portrait, landscape, close-up sports, or night portait mode?

I just got back from my first nice vacation in over 5 years. This was the main reason for this camera. I have to say 80% of the picture looked like crap if you ask me. I don't know if it's the person behind the camera or the camera. Then to top it the camera stopped working 4 days into the trip. I had to pull out my $120 Nikon camera to finish off the trip.

I think tomorrow will be another day on the phone with Canon. I'm wonder how many other people have the issue with the dark pictures. I know a number of you have posted you have the same issue.

Here's a picture in this thread showing how dark they are. This picture was taken in full sun. http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31460

[Rooz]

to have the cam stop working 4 days into the trip is a seperate issue and is obviously a faulty product. just unlucky and this is covered under warranty for sure.

the photo outcomes are another matter. i suppose to set your mind at ease, the xti is one of the best performing dslr's on the market so its certainly the user and not the camera. you can see from these forums that the xti can produce stunning photos with a little practice and know how.

the setting adjustability you commented on is common to all cameras, not just the canon.

Av allows you to adjust aperture
Tv allows you to adjust shutter speed
P only allows you to adjust flash essentially

every manufacturer uses the exact same variables sometimes under slightly different names but these have been around for decades. i had the same settings on my old canon eos500 film camera.

all other modes, (auto and scene modes), determine settings for the user but often times the results aren;t as good as people expect. there is a significant learning curve going from p&s to dslr. the other thing is that people who buy a dslr just assume that cos its a much better more expensive camera, they don;t have to do anything cos the camera does it all. unfortunately it doesn;t work that way.

i have noticed a number of people are getting ordinary results and some quite peculiar settings from the 400D's auto settings so maybe the auto adjustments aren't as "novice" friendly as the nikons. i don't know the answer really.

the most common thing people new to dslr's get wrong is the lighting and exposure. the most common are where the beautiful sunny sky turns out perfect and the people in front are grossly underexpsosed and in shadow. thats a matter of the light and the camera expsoing for the background and not the subjects in the foreground.

interestingly, the nikons have a tendancy to overexpose and from what coldy is saying the canons underexpose. so the first thing you may need to do is adjust your EV to +0.3 or +0.7 to try and set it right. alternatelty, shoot it in raw and then in post processing, adjust your EV value manually to see how much difference it makes in your photos.

the other recommendation is to use Av whenever possible and use the smallest number aperture setting, (the widest aperture). look at your shutter speed, if it drops below say 50, then bump your iso up to compensate. Av will produce better results than auto in probably 90% of occasions.

would also strognly suggest you practice and check what settings other people are using to achieve the results they are getting and replicate those settings.

it would be really helpful if you posted some of your vacation pics that went wrong for some further help. pics of a fishbowl make it hard to see what may be done to improve. lots of people here who can help and make recommendations to try and get you to enjoy the camera more. :)

BTW: its a common issue to have a nikon finish the job a canon couldn't do so don;t be too surprised at that. :D:p

[Old-Man]

Rooz, thanks for the info. I will post up some picture tomorrow, it's a little to late to do it tonight, will I guess it's morning now (12:16am). LOL

Thanks for all the other great info. I guess when I was looking at SLR cameras the guy at the store filled me with a bunch of BS when he said anyone can take great pictures with it. I had no idea I was going to have to play with the settings all the time. He said it's a click and shoot camera.

Talk to you guys tomorrow!

Old-Man

[Honest Gaza]

BTW: its a common issue to have a nikon finish the job a canon couldn't do so don;t be too surprised at that. :D:p

In my best Rambo voice.......

"He drew first blood" :D

[griptape]

Shooting in raw is a great way to save a picture that was improperly exposed. The software that comes with the camera will let you adjust batches of pictures at the time, so anything in the same lighting that was shot with the same wrong settings can be adjusted with a couple clicks all at once instead of one at a time.

And if the person selling you a DSLR said it was as easy as a point in shoot... Well technically you CAN just point and shoot. You'll just end up with very mediocre results. Especially with the kit lens.

Understanding exposure isn't as hard as you might think though. It just takes a little time and experimentation.

[griptape]

I posted this before, but I think it might be worth posting again in this situation:

The most simple way to explain shutter speed and aperture; Aperture is almost identical to your pupil. In bright light it gets smaller so your brain receives less signals of light. In the dark, it gets bigger so your brain receives more signals of light. In a camera, the shutter needs to open wider (smaller number, see chart below) to let more light pass to the sensor in dark situations, and open less wide (larger number) when there's more light than the sensor needs to receive.

Shutter speed is like closing your eyes, and then opening them (then closing them again). If your eyes are closed and you open them for a half second, they won't take in as much light and information as they would if you left them open for say 2 seconds. But any information that is taken in on a camera will simply overlap itself (blurring) for as long as the shutter is open instead of discarding the extra information like our brain does.

It's just a matter of combining the two (along with ISO, but that's easy enough to figure out on your own aside from the technical aspects of it) at the right combination of taking in the right amount of light, for the right amount of time. For instance, you could have a 20 second exposure at f/22 that turns out with the same exposure as a 1/1500 exposure at f/1.8. There's no set formula for it, it all depends on the lighting. So there's a little bit of trial and error, but hopefully this will give you a basic understanding.

And here's a picture of various apertures:
http://l.yimg.com/tech.yahoo.com/util/anysize/384x-99999998,http:%2F%2Ftech.yahoo.com/imagecache/wiley/5/16/51649fd92e3053227e0b90b3a3f762830-7645-9802-3_0213.jpg

[24Peter]

There's a lot of good information in this thread and the OP seems happy with the advice he's been given. But I also think Canon sells the XTi as their entry level DSLR with the knowledge that lots of people buying the camera will use it in full auto mode. So to tell the customer to change settings in order to get good photos is a little suspect to me. Canon should sell a camera where 90% of the photos shot in full auto mode are properly exposed.

I did one photo shoot with an XTi and I noticed within 5 minutes it had metering/exposure issues (and I wasn't shooting in full auto). So it seems disingenous to me to lay the blame at the users feet. I'd ask for my money back from Canon. (My rant :eek: )

[photowire]

Shooting in raw is a great way to save a picture that was improperly exposed. The software that comes with the camera will let you adjust batches of pictures at the time, so anything in the same lighting that was shot with the same wrong settings can be adjusted with a couple clicks all at once instead of one at a time.

And if the person selling you a DSLR said it was as easy as a point in shoot... Well technically you CAN just point and shoot. You'll just end up with very mediocre results. Especially with the kit lens.

Understanding exposure isn't as hard as you might think though. It just takes a little time and experimentation.

Auto on the Canon sucks. JMO but if you have a 400D, the effort to learn the other settings will be worth it, most definately.

I think the other Canon's P&S have much better auto settings, at least what I can tell from my wife's camera. Me personally, I am not touching her camera if I can snap with my dRebel instead! :-)

[coldrain]

I got a Canon Rebel XTI a month or so ago. I have to say I'm very unhappy with it. The pictures come out real dark in most of the settings. I posted this a few weeks ago and I also called Canon. I was told to adjust the setting on it. My understand is you can only adjust the setting on AV, P, and TV mode. You can't change them in full auto, portrait, landscape, close-up sports, or night portait. If this is true what a waste of a camera. In full sun the pictures come out a lot darker then they are. Can this be fixed in the full auto, portrait, landscape, close-up sports, or night portait mode?
You never read or responded in the earlier tread you posted. Already we tried to make you understand that your under exposing was user error induced, meaning you will have to understand how a camera meters exposure... you would have under exposed photos with ANY camera with the same settings.

I just got back from my first nice vacation in over 5 years. This was the main reason for this camera. I have to say 80% of the picture looked like crap if you ask me. I don't know if it's the person behind the camera or the camera. Then to top it the camera stopped working 4 days into the trip. I had to pull out my $120 Nikon camera to finish off the trip.
No idea what to say to this, you don't post any pictures that "look like crap. So how can we tell you what you do wrong.
And how did your camera "stop working". Dead battery? Was it broken?
There is no real "severe underexposing" problem with the XTi, and if yours actually broke, that is just bad luck. Just look around on internet and this forum, you will see many people making many nice photos with an XTi/400D, without taking special measures for exposure. If you are not prepared to actually discuss problems, and just post once and let the thread die, how can we try and help you figure out what you have to watch out for in certain situations, and explain what you do "wrong"?

I think tomorrow will be another day on the phone with Canon. I'm wonder how many other people have the issue with the dark pictures. I know a number of you have posted you have the same issue.

Here's a picture in this thread showing how dark they are. This picture was taken in full sun. http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31460
I explained in that thread WHY the photo is darker than you would expect it to be. You will have that problem with ANY photo camera, if you tell the camera to expose automatically on that blue, as the camera sees the bright light blue, thinks it should be a mid tone, and therefore underexposes to get the blue to show a mid tone blue.
This will happen with a Nikon, a Pentax, a Sony, a Panasonic and what not.
So.... try to understand exposure and camera metering, and try to adjust when necessary. You could for instance have metered with the [( )] mode on a goldfish. This would have made the photo a lot brighter than metering on the bright blue water. As long as you let the camera determine exposure from the bright blue, you will always get a too dark photo. Simple.

[coldrain]

There's a lot of good information in this thread and the OP seems happy with the advice he's been given. But I also think Canon sells the XTi as their entry level DSLR with the knowledge that lots of people buying the camera will use it in full auto mode. So to tell the customer to change settings in order to get good photos is a little suspect to me. Canon should sell a camera where 90% of the photos shot in full auto mode are properly exposed.

I did one photo shoot with an XTi and I noticed within 5 minutes it had metering/exposure issues (and I wasn't shooting in full auto). So it seems disingenous to me to lay the blame at the users feet. I'd ask for my money back from Canon. (My rant :eek: )
There is nothing strange going on with the XTi in automatic modes, just that it sets the metering to [(.)].
If you want to set the camera to different metering modes (partial metering: [( )], or center weighted: [ ] ), you have to set your camera to P, Av, Tv, M or A-DEP.

Comparing an XTi with an XT seems to show a very light underexposure for the XTi, nothing strange or weird at all.
The two photos the OP posted in the other thread were more or less properly exposed, the goldfish photo was shot into bright water with sun on it, and the OP finds it odd the goldfish are too dark... Same as making a photo with very bright sky, and wondering why the landscape looks a bit dark.

[Rhys]

I have the XT and the 30D.

The XTi is the XT with some added bells and whistles.

Basically, compared to the 30D, the XT is pretty poor.

I take the XT as my vacation camera. The 30D is my workhorse.

The XT focusses well only with Canon lenses.

Re: dark exposures... you need to expose for the shadows and use DPP to correct for the highlights.

[timmciglobal]

You found the XTi different from 30D? I noticed no difference when I tried an XTi.

As far as exposure goes those shots don't seem that bad and threw the magic of raw a lot of slight (1 stop difference) underexposure can be saved with very little quality loss generally.


Tim

[barb1686]

I am no professional, so my photos are probably crap to a pros, but I am happy with them in auto mode. Take a look at my photos in my gallery...all taken in auto (full, sports, macro, portrait, etc.) as I am still learning. Many of the ones in the zoo were taken under shaded trees and in dark hallways (with sticky glass). Also, the ones in Pittsburgh were taken in a moving vehicle. I'm impressed with the quality.

I ordered "Understanding Exposure" from Amazon, as many people have suggested. Maybe you could do the same, or get it from the library? It's seems to be an easy read (I haven't had time to get into it yet). You can read the first few pages on Amazon's website.

I am interested where you purchased the camera and if it was a refurbished model. Also, how did it break?

Here's a direct link to my Rebel XTi Set:
http://flickr.com/photos/barbevans04/sets/72157600352890706/

[aparmley]

OP -

I took a look at the other thread (with the sample images) the blue tub looks properly exposed (read - how the camera is programmed to expose for blue) to my eyes. You might want to do some testing or some reading so you can understand how the camera is going to expose different colors - it might be hard to understand at first, but once you understand that the camera wants to make everything as close to grey as possible then you start to read your scene a little differently and then you dial in the appropriate EC to, exactly what the name implies, compensate.

(Maybe I should clarify)

dark color > Your cameras meter will = overxposure
medium toned color - Your cameras meter is not bad at getting these close
light color > Your cameras meter will = under expose

Want a quick test: grab a white shirt and a black shirt - take a photo of each - does the black look too grey? does the white look too grey? Now, shoot them again, this time with the black shirt move the EC to - 1 1/3 and when you shoot the white shirt move the EC bar to + 1 1/3 - how do those look?

Read your manual to understand the different meter settings, partial, evaluative, center-weighted and how they take their readings.

Good luck to you.

[Rhys]

Here are two photos. One exposed for highlights is very bad and one exposed for shadows. both processed from RAW to give the best results. see the difference between them. Same camera, subject and lens.

[zmikers]

Now, what I am about to say here is totally, 100% my own opinion and there is no evidence of this so please come back with your own thoughts and I don't mean to offend, but I believe that there are many complaints about the xti underexposing or not exposing properly because the xti seems to be the camera of choice when stepping up from the p&s into the dslr. What I believe happens is that, because the xti is their first dslr, people haven't allowed for the learning curve and take a few snaps and wonder why their pictures are underexposed. I think the op in this thread, and many more I have read, should take some time to practise and maybe read "understanding exposure" by Brian Peterson and then they will find that the xti can perform very well.

[Honest Gaza]

I am in total agreement with Zmikers :)

I can't imagine that too many people buying the 400D (XTi) are migrating from another DSLR camera. They will probably be migrating from a P&S....like I did.

I was fortunate enough to take some test shots from a mate's DSLR prior to my purchase and was "enlightened" as to the absolute crap results that can be achieved by a novice with a DSLR :D.

Research on this forum prior to my purchase explained why this "could" occur and as such, I made my purchase in the full knowledge that user input is a definite requirement.

Like Zmikers said, the 400D (XTi) is unfortunate that it is the "camera of choice" that many people new to the DSLR world buy as their entry ticket to the game.....so yes, it's going to have it's share of knockers.

Learn how to use it properly (as you will need to do with any DSLR), and you'll be much more happier with your purchase.

[noyjimi]

it's possible that the body is underexposing like peter said. the xti i tried had that "problem," though it wasn't severely underexposed. also, i've had a 17-40 L lens go bad on me resulting in very strange exposures.

if you have another lens and/or body, it should be easy to rule out equipment problems. or you can take the gear to a camera store and try with their body/lens.

[zmikers]

I am in total agreement with Zmikers :)

I can't imagine that too many people buying the 400D (XTi) are migrating from another DSLR camera. They will probably be migrating from a P&S....like I did.

I was fortunate enough to take some test shots from a mate's DSLR prior to my purchase and was "enlightened" as to the absolute crap results that can be achieved by a novice with a DSLR :D.

Research on this forum prior to my purchase explained why this "could" occur and as such, I made my purchase in the full knowledge that user input is a definite requirement.

Like Zmikers said, the 400D (XTi) is unfortunate that it is the "camera of choice" that many people new to the DSLR world buy as their entry ticket to the game.....so yes, it's going to have it's share of knockers.

Learn how to use it properly (as you will need to do with any DSLR), and you'll be much more happier with your purchase.

:DThanks for the vote of confidence:D:p LOL

[Old-Man]

Sorry for taking so long to get back to this. It has been crazy around here.

First I want to say thanks to everyone that posted on this. Lets me see if I can answer some of the questions.

After posting that other threat I have done some of the changes people talked about. I went into TV and AV and took some picture to see how they turned out, dark like most. Then I went in and changed some of the settings. It did help a lot with some of the images. It seems like the major issue is taking pictures of people. They just come out way to dark. On TV setting I have AV at +2, ISO 800. I have messed with the settings a few times. I had ISO from 100 to 800and 800 seems to look the best.

Here's what I'm talking about when I say dark. http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/367/19335823ug3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
If you can't see the face of the person it's not worth taking. I took over 40 pictures and deleted 37 of the because of the darkness to the face of all of them.

Some pictures turn out real nice like this one, but no people in the picture. http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/2839/56799719zg1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Here's another picture. As you can see the person in it is over exposed and behind it is under exposed. http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/7088/14005667ld3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


I know a lot of it comes down to me not knowing what I'm doing with the camera now. Like what I say before the sales person told me it was more of a point and shoot camera with outstanding pictures. As I know now it's not. After I learn more about the camera I'm sure that will change.

I didn't shoot anything in RAW. The reason was I wasn't able to pull it up in RAW with the program I have. What programs are good for this? Also now much can you clean up a picture in RAW. If someone has one that they can post that will help a lot. Do the same picture, but clean it up.

As for the camera not working on the trip. Everything worked until you took the picture. Then I think it said error 99 and it told me to pull the battery out and put it back in. I pulled it out and put it back in a number if times. I also pulled the card out to see if that happy to fix it. The battery had a full charge on it also. I tried 3 days to get it to work with no luck. When I got back home, now it works without doing a thing to it. I will call Canon this week about it.

I want to say thanks again to everyone that's taking the time to help me.

Old-Man

[JTL]

It looks like you have the contrast setting cranked...yes/no? That would be a big no-no. And anyone who told you the XTi was "more of a point and shoot camera" was either a liar or a moron (and most likely, both). Blame them for setting your expectations incorrectly. The XTi is a very sophisticated piece of photo equipment.

And, BTW, without full EXIF info, everyone's just guessing about your results anyway...

[Christian]

And, BTW, without full EXIF info, everyone's just guessing about your results anyway...

Exactly.

Stop using the "save for web" option because it strips the Exif info. Also, the software you got with the camera should allow you to edit RAW photos. Just use the "save as" when you convert it to jpeg.

[timmciglobal]

Let me preface this with saying I mean this in the spirit of helping you:

You don't comprehend how photography works, what exposure is or why your photos are bad. It's not your camera. That's raw and "in your face" but I think you're going to benefit by hearing it in the end.

Let me explain some about exposure and how your camera works:

A digital sensor (or film) has a certain range of brightness it can capture in any photo. It's like a ruler that can be placed "anywhere" but only whats inside of that ruler will be captured. This is known as "dyanmic range" and is measured in stops. If you take a point in your frame which is "Darkest" in terms of light reflecting off of it then put the "ruler" of dynamic range from that point you get the "brightest" object that the camera can distinguish from total white on one end and on the other end the darkest object the camera will show without being "total black". Your camera wants to try to make the overall scene exposed so that you retain the most information about what the camera thinks the scene is about in evaluative metering and in center weighted and partial it wants to make that area "middle" of the ruler so you have information on both sides.

Now let's go by your pictures:

First picture of the girl in the black dress is perfectly exposed. Look at her face... she's in bright daylight with shadow on part of her face. The only way NOT to have the shadow is to use a flash (your on board flash may not be powerful enough to overcome it, depends on range to subject) to fill in the "Shadows" on her face so one part of her face isn't lit MUCH brighter then the rest. Want proof it isn't your camera? Take a piece of what paper and hold it next to a bright light in front of) see how PART of the paper becomes very bright and the further away it gets the paper "looks" darker even though you know it is all the same color?

The shot of girl on the railing has the same problem. The background water and sky is MUCH MUCH brighter then the girl on the railing probably under partial shade the camera though recognized the shot and said "ok he probably wants the center darker image exposed more then the background" and decided to value the "center" readings of brightness more then background. Again, this would of required using a FLASH and a low ISO setting so that the background and the subject had a closer "brightness" level so that both would fit "inside" of the ruler.

What does raw do? why do people keep talking about it? #1 thing raw does is let you move that "ruler" down or up a little bit. It is NOT a cure all as it only lets you move the ruler up or down the equivalent of 1 to 2 EV levels in most cases and in some cases does almost nothing but does help in enough of them that "Raw" is a good thing to shoot in. As far as included software I think canon digital pro opens raw but I'm not sure if it's included with an XTI, maybe someone who has an XTI can help me there. If not photoshop elements newest version does open raw with adobe's fantastic camera raw utility and might be worth investing in.

As far as "what" you can do? It's really learn how to be a good photographer. A point and shoot won't do anything that much better. Some of them are a little better at exposure since the scene modes are more specific to "What" your taking and not general helper scene modes like on XTi but it comes down to learning what the camera is telling you, how to adjust for different situations and how to process your images.

I know that comes off pretty raw and rude and I'm not claiming to be a great photographer or even a good one but I can recognize when it's ME who's the problem and when it's not and the vast majority of the time it's me.

Tim

[coldrain]

You can call Canon all you want, this will not change how light works. Sun on something makes something bright, the other shadow parts will be dark.

This will be the same with ANY camera. If you choose to make a photo in the shade, with very bright back lighting (the boat pic), then don't complain about a light background or a dark person!

This is just a photographic reality, and you will have the same "problem" with ANY camera.

Next time, when you make a photo like that, use the flash to fill in the shadow! Or dont make photos like that. If you find filling in the portrait with fill flash too complicated, use the "night" auto mode. That will provide fill flash.

About the photo where you claim the people/faces are too dark, the faces in the sun are fine! What do you want? For the sun not to make shadows?
Only a letter to god might change that. But don't keep your hopes up....

There is nothing wrong with your XTi, and why you would go up to ISO 800 with outside daylight photos is a mystery to me.

The only thing you need to do is: put your camera on "P". Then put the metering on " [( )] " in case of faces and bright/shadow conditions. Then meter with the center AF sensor marking on the faces by holding down the shutter button halfway pressed. Then press the " * " button, the camera will now remember that exposure metering. Now frame the photo like you want it to be framed, and press the shutter button totally down.
Then you have a photo with moderately well exposed faces, without knowing too much about exposure settings.

Of course, for "correctly" exposed landcape or whatever photos, you can change the metering mode to " [(.)] " or " [ ] ".

[Mark_48]

Here are a couple of links to tutorials from Canon. One is fairly basic and generic and the other is specific to the XT. both of these may help gain a better understanding of the camera and it's functions

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/enjoydslr/index.html

http://www.usa.canon.com/content/rebelxt_tutorial/rebelxtlessons.htm

Canon Learning Center home page
http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=HomePageAct

Not sure if this would appeal to you or not at least to get a better understanding of the camera.

http://www.bluecranedigital.com/XTi.htm

Listed at Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Canon-Digital-Rebel-400D/dp/B000KC7ZM4/ref=sr_1_2/002-7719322-3004860?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1182721706&sr=8-2

[griptape]

Here's the same picture with and without raw editing. It's not an end all be all solution, but there are times when you can save a shot you would have lost. But it's really best for when you're were close to getting it right, and just need to adjust a little bit. ISO 400 f/18 shutter speed 250. Raised brightness two full stops (as high as the Canon software goes). Also a 100% crop to show you on a dark picture like this, you'll end up with grain, but again, I could print it fine as a 4x6 if I wanted.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/Original.jpg
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/Raw.jpg
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/fullcrop.jpg

Now on the other end of the spectrum, here's a shot that's severely overexposed, darkened two full stops, which is where raw is also really nice, because you don't lose quality, and again, it's a shot that instead of being a complete throw away, is usable if I wanted to.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/original2.jpg
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m235/nothingisworking/raw2.jpg

Again, don't expect miracles, and in your particular situation, you'd be much better off taking the time to learn more about the camera and about how the camera actually captures the images than relying on raw to save you. But it is a useful tool when you're not 100% sure about your lighting.