Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    when i was refering to the xti underexposure, i was more refering to the original post rather than the inserted pics. the nikon pic is sharper but thats not just as a result of the lens.

    not sure how do adjust xti camera sharpness, surely theres a menu that tells you how to do that, an xti user can fill you in. if not, here is a link to the menu to adjust those settings...

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page10.asp

    personally, i prefer to have my images as neutral as possible out of the camera and run adjustments in PP.
    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

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    So Calif
    Posts
    3,226
    Of the samples above, I'd say the Nikon's are more pleasing. However, there are plenty of excellent XTi shots posted around. I think you just need to learn your particular camera.
    Pentax K20D/K5/15/21/40/70/10-17/12-24, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5/150-500, Tamron 90 Macro/70-200 2.8, Canon SX20 IS/Elph 500HS
    (formerly Pentax 50 1.4/50-200/55-300/K100D, Sigma 18-50 2.8/70-300 APO, Tamron 28-75, Viv 800, Tele-Tokina 800, Canon S3 IS, Samsung L210)
    http://s133.photobucket.com/albums/q78/KylePix/

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,923
    First you say you like the Nikon better, then the Canon. Which is it? As far as bodies go, buy the one you like better, i.e., the one that handles best and seems the most intuitive to you. Lenses are a whole different story.

    If you don't like the D40 'LO' display, use M mode. Both shutter and aperture are displayed regardless of the resulting effects. Otherwise the camera is telling you that your settings won't correctly capture the image. If you want a whole lot of control, you should use M anyway.
    Nikon D40 + kit lens

    Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D AF(...or not)

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    as fion mentioned, use M to get rid of Lo. effectively what the camera is saying to you is "forget it unless you have a tripod." nothing really wrong with that. whether its 1/2s or 1/4s is irrelevant really, its gonna look like shit.

    as for the iso auto...its a bit assy for a user to ASK the camera to do the iso for them but then complain that they can;t see the iso value. to me, that doesn;t make sense. if you want to have control over iso then don;t use auto iso. if you want the camera to select it for you then why would you want it to display the value ? what would the point be given you can't change it ? its like putting it in auto WB and then complaining it doesn;t give you the WB temperature while your shooting.
    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. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    24

    Still comparing D40 and 400D

    I think it would be better to have the shooting parameters always displayed before the shot in any mode. I would think most people would agree, but perhaps that is just the engineer in me talking. Even if I tell the camera to adjust ISO automatically, I'd still like to see it's choice. Just like if I put it in aperture priority, I'd still like to see the resulting shutter speed it plans to use. It just make good basic sense to be able to always display these three most basic parameters in anything other than idiot (full auto) mode. Even then, it would be nice to have the option imho though.

    I know I can use M to see the shutter speeds below "Lo", but my point is I shouldn't have to. Look, it's a fantastic camera, I'm just sharing a personal preference of mine. It's like in a car, some people prefer temperature gauges and others a simple light that comes on if the temp it too high. I prefer gauges because I like to know just *how* high it is.

    I took another set of pictures this morning with the two cameras and I have not yet gone through them. In this set I compare the effects of changing the contrast and saturation on the canon 400D, and also changing the color mode from IIIa to I1 in the Nikon D40. I also vary the exposure comp on the Canon from 0 through +1. Maybe there is a combination here that will make the Canon shots look as good to me as the Nikon. If I find something interesting I will post.

    If anyone is particularly interested and would like coppies of the original full images please PM me and I will mail them.

    Thanks,
    RIch

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by fionndruinne View Post
    First you say you like the Nikon better, then the Canon. Which is it? As far as bodies go, buy the one you like better, i.e., the one that handles best and seems the most intuitive to you. Lenses are a whole different story.

    If you don't like the D40 'LO' display, use M mode. Both shutter and aperture are displayed regardless of the resulting effects. Otherwise the camera is telling you that your settings won't correctly capture the image. If you want a whole lot of control, you should use M anyway.
    I like the Canon for features (adjustability and layout of buttons)
    I like the Nikon better for overall image quality.

    Problem is I'm not sure how much of this overall image quality is due to the lens, and how much is due to the body (including the image processing that goes on before storing to jpeg). I suppose I could move to RAW on both to eliminate this. Maybe I'll try that next, but my goal is to find the camera that produces the best jpegs for now at least. Maybe move to RAW when I have more time to learn about post processing.

    I am new to digital DSLR, so I may be doing something wrong. If anyone can help me to better understand how to tweak the canon for better IQ I would be very open to hearing your suggestions. I figure with these two kit cameras side by side I ought to be able to do a fair and thorough evaluation. This is my goal. To determine which is best for me and return the other. I have about 2 weeks. What tests should I try?

    Thanks for any help,
    RIch
    Last edited by rpauls; 12-20-2007 at 07:27 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    Quote Originally Posted by rpauls View Post
    I like the Canon for features (adjustability and layout of buttons)
    I like the Nikon better for overall image quality.

    Problem is I'm not sure how much of this overall image quality is due to the lens, and how much is due to the body (including the image processing that goes on before storing to jpeg). I suppose I could move to RAW on both to eliminate this. Maybe I'll try that next, but my goal is to find the camera that produces the best jpegs for now at least. Maybe move to RAW when I have more time to learn about post processing.
    if you prefer the canon body due to its features then you;d be mad not to get it. rest assured the IQ the 400d can produce is equal to, and in some ways will surpass the d40 once you get the hang of it.
    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

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    The Nikon D40 (and D50) are geared towards the "point and shoot" crowd in standard JPEG output. To get the same with your 400D, bump up the sharpening, the saturation and the contrast on the 400D.

    In situations like that dull outdoor pic you showed, the Nikon lens will do a bit better... it is a tad more contrasty and a tad less CA prone. But, if you stop it down to f8 your results will be better.

    So, yes, part of it is settings, and a part or it is the lens. But in better conditions and more interesting subjects, the results will be better.

    Try the new Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS, it is very sharp and will give you IS to boot.
    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

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,923
    Engineer or no, you won't be using auto ISO when you get into the hang of the camera - it's a simple enough setting to control, and, given the negative results which an automatic selection can give you, it's best to get the hang of which speed works best in the conditions you're shooting in, and set the ISO yourself. After all, any setting over your camera's base is more or less a compromise - more noise for a faster shutter. Only you should decide that compromise (or just get a D300).

    I am toying with the idea of setting auto-ISO, but setting the maximum at 400, since it's so low-noise. That would give me the option of getting in-betweens like ISO 320. Thing is, I already set either 200 or 400 from habit. So it's unnecessary.
    Nikon D40 + kit lens

    Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D AF(...or not)

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    24

    Auto ISO can be a nice option.

    Quote Originally Posted by fionndruinne View Post
    Engineer or no, you won't be using auto ISO when you get into the hang of the camera - it's a simple enough setting to control, and, given the negative results which an automatic selection can give you, it's best to get the hang of which speed works best in the conditions you're shooting in, and set the ISO yourself. After all, any setting over your camera's base is more or less a compromise - more noise for a faster shutter. Only you should decide that compromise (or just get a D300).

    I am toying with the idea of setting auto-ISO, but setting the maximum at 400, since it's so low-noise. That would give me the option of getting in-betweens like ISO 320. Thing is, I already set either 200 or 400 from habit. So it's unnecessary.
    I understand what you are saying and mostly I agree. I too think it is a good practice to get used to setting the ISO yourself based on an understanding of the lighting available and the subject since this setting is probably the primary effector of IQ since it controls the noise floor. But if you haven't got time to try a few settings or if the amount of light is changing (like in a play with different light levels on different scenes for example) the auto ISO feature is a nice tool to have.

    I have found that it used three values as input, not just two: target ISO, max ISO, and min shutter speed. So if I set the target ISO at 200, max ISO at 1600 and min shutter speed at 1/15, the camera will shoot at ISO 200 in all shots unless the light level get so low that even the 1/15 shutter is not slow enough. Only then does it appear to raise the ISO. And the nice thing is it raises it in smaller step sizes then those otherwise available to the user as you mentioned, so I get shoots coming out at ISO 380, 900, 1000, 1200, etc. I guess it is infinitely adjustable actually if it is effectively just an electrical bias sent to the CCD.

    So in conclusion, I think auto ISO is a good idea if your main concern is not blurring the picture by setting a minimum shutter speed for hand held shooting, and I think fixed ISO is a good idea if you main concern is the noise level and you are willing to be very careful with camera motion for slow shots. It's nice to have both choices.

    Rich

Posting Permissions

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