Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    681

    40D white balance problem?

    In his review, Jeff wrote the following:

    "It took some work, but I ended up getting a nice macro shot out of the 40D, using the Sigma F2.8, 50mm EX macro lens. When shooting in JPEG mode, I could never get the white balance right, no matter how much I tweaked it. So, I ended up shooting in RAW mode, where I was able to get rid of that annoying color cast."

    It seems like the Canon EOS 40D might have some kind of white balance problem. What are your thoughts about this?
    Wesan

    "Analogue"/film cameras
    Agfamatic 2000
    Canon EOS 600 (SLR)
    Fujifilm Fotonex 310ix (APS)

    Digital cameras
    Samsung Digimax 101
    Canon Powershot S3IS

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    358
    White balance difficulties is not limited to just 40D's. Both my XT and 30D needs to be fixed too!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    3,109
    White balance on my 40D seems a bit better than it did on my XT, but Rat is right: I don't think Canon has ever been know for its camera's WB abilities. That being said, my 40D seems to be quite good in almost all instances except tungsten lighting. AWB never gets that right. But then I need only manually switch to the tungsten setting and it's fine.

    Also, keep in mind some lenses influence WB. I've tested a couple of Sigma's in the past (24-70 F2.8 in particular and occasionally the 105 F2.8 macro) which were just a mess when it came to color cast. (The Sigma 18-200 OS I have now is great in that respect.) So perhaps that influenced Jeff's results.

    In any event, WB issues are certainly not a reason not to get a 40D if that's what you're thinking.
    Canon A720 IS, 40D w/ BG-E2N, 28 1.8, 50 1.4, Sigma 70 2.8 macro, 17-40 F4 L, 24-105 F4 L IS, 70-200 F4 L IS, 430 EX, Kenko 2X TC & Ext Tubes, AB strobes and more...
    View my photo galleries here: imageevent.com/24peter

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    WB and to a lesser degree metering have never been canon's strength. but really, someone who buys a 40d is going to shoot RAW anyway surely so while it is an incovenience, i agree with peter, not really a reason not to buy the camera.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    It is not the white balance that is bad with a Canon 40D (and likewise 400D/30D/5D etc.). Canon's Automatic WB is what, for most people, in many cases, gives unsatisfactory results with ARTIFICIAL light.

    It does depend a LOT on exactly what artificial light source is "seen", colours between different artificial light sources can vary a lot.
    Canon's approach is to not try to adjust totally towards "white light", as to not rob the photos from the character of the scene. Their approach is a bit too "light" in certain cases though.

    Another point where some people claim Canon's WB is weak is with the incadesent and fluorecent light source settings. But here Canon does not preform badly. There are many colours of those types of light sources, and depending on the choice of colour results may vary. In reviews, the performance of those presets totally is dependant on the chosen light bulb or tube the reviewer uses. This explains why some reviewers rate the Canon WB presets better, and some rate the Nikon presets better.

    Canon's custom white balance works very well, just like Nikon's white balance.

    If in doubt, just check a lot of Nikon snaps posted in forums like these. Often you do see wrong white balance choices, also in natural light, where people get to look too magenta/pink for instance. Just like you see some WB problems in some Canon snaps posted on forums like this one.

    Jeff Keller did not explain exactly what was his problem in getting white balance right, but my guess is that AWB and the artificial light source presets did not give wanted results in his artificial light studio shots.
    Custom white balance would have resolved that, even in JPEG.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    WB and to a lesser degree metering have never been canon's strength. but really, someone who buys a 40d is going to shoot RAW anyway surely so while it is an incovenience, i agree with peter, not really a reason not to buy the camera.
    "Inaccurate" WB is the main reason I shoot RAW, but I think this would be the case with any dSLR and is not specific to the 40D.
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,275
    I find that AWB even in daylight tends to give an overly blue result
    I am shooting completely custom WB now
    flickr
    dcrp shooter's on flickr

    7D,Bge7,Canon 70 200 F4L IS,Canon 17 40 f4L,Canon 100 2.8 Macro,Canon 400 5.6L,580 EX II,Tamron1.4XTC SP AF

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Northern Colorado, USA
    Posts
    2,225
    To be honest, my D200 doesn't AWB in incandescent light very well either. I don't know about newer Nikons, but for indoor lighting I will at least set the type of light that I think will work best. Of course, I shoot RAW, so I can just batch adjust WB in post processing. With Nikon Transfer and Nikon ViewNX (both free downloads) this is simple and fast.

    I'm only mentioning this since it should be realized that non-solar lighting is difficult for any camera. One thing you have to realize is that while we may call a bulb incandescent, there are a wide range of color casts to various brands and even models within brands of lights. With flourescent lighting, you can actually buy tubes of specific color temperature, though those are generally more expensive. And, after all that, as the lights age, they change color. Then, you have the problem of mixed lighting. So, frankly, the camera's AWB doesn't stand a chance of getting it perfect.

    Even outdoors, you should realize that color temperature changes with time of day. But, we can actually use that to our advantage, in order to saturate a sunset that's not quite as yellow/orange/red as we had hoped.

    The only question I have is, "Why are higher temperatures cooler?"

    BTW: That's a rhetorical question.
    Eric Lund
    Nikon D200
    Nikkors: 17-55mm f2.8, 18-200mm f3.5-f4.5 VR, 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 VR, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.8, 55mm f2.8 AI-S micro, 105mm f2.8 VR micro
    Other Lenses: Tokina 12-24 f4, Tamron 75-300mm f4-5.6 LD macro
    Stuff: Nikon SB800, Nikon MBD200, Gitzo 1327 Tripod w/RRS BH-55LR Ballhead, Sekonic L-358 meter

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by erichlund View Post
    (---)The only question I have is, "Why are higher temperatures cooler?"

    BTW: That's a rhetorical question.
    Sorry, just have to give an answer anyway... Because it's "cool" to be "hot"!

    Thanks for all the replies! If I understand your replies correctly, most of you are talking about the auto white balance. I can understand if AWB can have problems getting it right under all types of conditions. But I would think that Jeff uses manual white balance, using a grey (or white) card. I doubt he uses auto white balance for the test I quoted.

    Shouldn't cameras get the white balance (more) correct, if you use manual white balance with a grey or white card, instead of auto white balance?
    Last edited by Wesan; 11-05-2007 at 01:45 PM.
    Wesan

    "Analogue"/film cameras
    Agfamatic 2000
    Canon EOS 600 (SLR)
    Fujifilm Fotonex 310ix (APS)

    Digital cameras
    Samsung Digimax 101
    Canon Powershot S3IS

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Warsaw/Poland
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by erichlund View Post

    The only question I have is, "Why are higher temperatures cooler?"

    BTW: That's a rhetorical question.
    Well...its not exactly a retorical question, at least to me
    Color temperature is measured in the Kelvin scale ( 0 Kelvin = Absolute Zero)
    The reason that the higher temperatures are cooler and lower are warmer is :
    If You take a piece of steel and put it in a hot enough oven, it will start to glow. First it will glow red, then orange, then bright orange and almost white and then...then it will melt
    If You would find a piece of metal (or any other object) that would not melt in very high temperatures, You would find that it would glow in a very cool blueish color when heated up to about 9,000 K ( 8,727 C)
    Color temperature measurement is needed in technologies to perform color management for devices, software, etc. It bases on what we observe in nature. Go to the settings on your monitor and change the temperature from 6500 K to 9300 K and you'l see for Youreself

    Edit: As the above explanation might sound very simple, the subject of color management itself is far away from simple. In fact, its still beyond me after many years of dealing with.
    Last edited by koti; 11-05-2007 at 06:47 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •