Canon--want sharp images and vibrant color

tlee

I own a Canon Digital Rebel and a 30D. My Digital Rebel bit the dust (infamous error 99--Canon repair will cost $210--labor only-- just to check it and clean it--no guarantee of fixing the problem, and who knows what cost it will be to replace parts). I really liked the sharp images and vibrant colors my Rebel produced--I prefered using it for my macro shots. My 30D is great for portraits. It produces softer images. My macros seem to have more noise when I use the 30D (and, yes I've tried several different picture styles, used manual mode and raw, etc. , to see if I could get the 30D to be less "soft".).

So, I am looking to replace the Digital Rebel with another Canon camera. I want one that will hopefully produce similar images to the Digital Rebel. I am thinking about renting a Rebel XTi, to check it out. Any other suggestions?

ziggy53

The 30D should be capable of very similar images to the original dRebel. I am not sure why it should be (or would be) any "softer".

Both the Canon XT/350D and XTi/400D are viable replacements for the dRebel 300D.

tlee

ziggy53 wrote:

The 30D should be capable of very similar images to the original dRebel. I am not sure why it should be (or would be) any "softer".

Both the Canon XT/350D and XTi/400D are viable replacements for the dRebel 300D.

I agree. I should be able to produce similar images. That's why I've tried several different settings on the 30D--hoping it was a novice user's error. I will keep trying. I am still interested in a second camera. Thanks for the quick response!

Dusty Sensiba

Never owned a 300d but...
I've got a digital rebel xt, pretty good camera and seems to be pretty similar to the original rebel in a lot of ways.

ziggy53

tlee wrote:

I agree. I should be able to produce similar images. That's why I've tried several different settings on the 30D--hoping it was a novice user's error. I will keep trying. I am still interested in a second camera. Thanks for the quick response!

What are the current "Picture Style" settings?
Are you using a custom style?

yoyostock

ziggy53 wrote:

What are the current "Picture Style" settings?
Are you using a custom style?

I think that's what might be going on too...I have a 20D and the default customs settings (in your menu) on it were, I believe, Parameter 1. I boosted saturation and sharpness by using Parameter 2. Maybe the default settings on your Rebel XT were sharper than those on the 30D?

tlee

ziggy53 wrote:

What are the current "Picture Style" settings?
Are you using a custom style?

The picture styles they have in the camera are: Standard;Portrait;Landscape;Neutral;Faithful;Monochrome. These styles can have different settings for sharpness, contrast,color saturation,color tone,filter effect (monochrome only), and color toning (monochrome only). The basic set up of theses styles only vary in sharpness (except monochrome). You can go in an change the settings yourself--making them sharper/less sharp; more/less color, etc. . I have tried different sharpness levels--I just get more noise the sharper I go, I don't really see much difference in the sharpness--maybe I'm too pre-occupied with the noise. there are many different setting combinations I could try--and I'll continue to try more.

I hope this answered your question(s). If not, just let me know.

tlee

yoyostock wrote:

I think that's what might be going on too...I have a 20D and the default customs settings (in your menu) on it were, I believe, Parameter 1. I boosted saturation and sharpness by using Parameter 2. Maybe the default settings on your Rebel XT were sharper than those on the 30D?

The picture styles settings, allow you to adjust sharpness, color sat., etc. . I just have not found a combination that matches what I got in the rebel. Agian, I like the 30D for portraits and landscapes--it's the macros that I'm not happy with. Thanks for the suggestion.

pathfinder

I would think that the 30D is as capable, or much more capable, than the Digital Rebel was. It should not have higher noise either.

Are you shooting in Manual or Av mode? ISO 100??

In the green modes - - the ISO choice is up to the camera of course. BUt I know that you know that.

Is there a focusing issue with a different body, perhaps?

If you have access to Photoshop CS3 with ADOBE Raw Converter 4.1, try processing some images from the 30D, and push the Clarity slider 3/4s of the way to the right and watch the image get sharper. Wow!!

When I process images from my 1DsMkll, they look very soft also - but a push with the Clarity slider creates stunningly sharp jpgs in Photoshop even before I add any sharpening at the conclucion of editing.

I wish you could se the detail in this image of the Aspens in Colorado two weeks ago. Every leaf is tack sharp - this 16x9 crop from a full frame image comes very close to 2 1/4 square film quality. It is razor sharp.



Give the Clarity slider a try if you have access to it. The improvements in ARC 4.1 are to die for.

tlee

pathfinder wrote:

I would think that the 30D is as capable, or much more capable, than the Digital Rebel was. It should not have higher noise either.

Are you shooting in Manual or Av mode? ISO 100??

In the green modes - - the ISO choice is up to the camera of course. BUt I know that you know that.

Is there a focusing issue with a different body, perhaps?

If you have access to Photoshop CS3 with ADOBE Raw Converter 4.1, try processing some images from the 30D, and push the Clarity slider 3/4s of the way to the right and watch the image get sharper. Wow!!

When I process images from my 1DsMkll, they look very soft also - but a push with the Clarity slider creates stunningly sharp jpgs in Photoshop even before I add any sharpening at the conclucion of editing.

I wish you could se the detail in this image of the Aspens in Colorado two weeks ago. Every leaf is tack sharp - this 16x9 crop from a full frame image comes very close to 2 1/4 square film quality. It is razor sharp.



Give the Clarity slider a try if you have access to it. The improvements in ARC 4.1 are to die for.

O.K., now this is not fair ()! I just got CS2 a few months ago, and I've been thinking about when I would start wanting CS3, and now you've given me a really good reason to start saving for it!

I've been shooting mostly in Manual. Occasionally in auto. I've tried taking shots of the same subject/same lighting in both--the softness is still the same. It does not make sense to me--the 30D should be better--or at least the same. I still think it could be me. It's usually something simple that's overlooked or forgotten that fixes a enigma like this.

I really appreciate the feedback. I am re-reading the manual, just in case I missed something.

David_S85

yoyostock wrote:

I think that's what might be going on too...I have a 20D and the default customs settings (in your menu) on it were, I believe, Parameter 1. I boosted saturation and sharpness by using Parameter 2. Maybe the default settings on your Rebel XT were sharper than those on the 30D?

Actually, Param1 is the setting for more vivid colors and increased sharpness. Param2 yields softer images and more subdued colors. From the owner's manual, page 57.

The 20D defaults to Param1 in its basic shooting modes. In Av, Tv and M - any param set in the menu can be used, or picture styles in the 30D.

Eric&Susan

I too went from the 300d to the 30d and at first I thought the 30D was not as good as the 300d. It lacked the sharpness and clarity of the 300d. I tried many different pictures style adjustments and it got slightly better.

Then I purchased a new 24-105 and it backfocused. So I sent it in along with the 30d for calibration. Only when I got it back and a note from Canon did I figure out what the problem was.

Not only was the lens backfocusing but so was the 30D. Now that it is fixed I love it and feel that it out performs the 300d the way I thought it should.

just a thought,

Eric

Glenn NK

From the comments, it seems that the OP is shooting JPEG's, not RAW (otherwise why the discussions about camera settings - when shooting RAW, it doesn't matter what the camera settings are).

There can be a world of difference in how different cameras process JPEG:

The Rebels are usually considered a "consumer" camera, while the 30D is a "prosumer camera".

Could it be that the Rebels apply more in-camera sharpening than a 30D to a JPEG?

Has the OP shot RAW images with both cameras for a comparison in what the cameras CAN produce? (As opposed to JPEG).

tlee

Eric&Susan wrote:

I too went from the 300d to the 30d and at first I thought the 30D was not as good as the 300d. It lacked the sharpness and clarity of the 300d. I tried many different pictures style adjustments and it got slightly better.

Then I purchased a new 24-105 and it backfocused. So I sent it in along with the 30d for calibration. Only when I got it back and a note from Canon did I figure out what the problem was.

Not only was the lens backfocusing but so was the 30D. Now that it is fixed I love it and feel that it out performs the 300d the way I thought it should.

just a thought,

Eric

Thanks--I'll definitely check into that.

tlee

Glenn NK wrote:

From the comments, it seems that the OP is shooting JPEG's, not RAW (otherwise why the discussions about camera settings - when shooting RAW, it doesn't matter what the camera settings are).

There can be a world of difference in how different cameras process JPEG:

The Rebels are usually considered a "consumer" camera, while the 30D is a "prosumer camera".

Could it be that the Rebels apply more in-camera sharpening than a 30D to a JPEG?

Has the OP shot RAW images with both cameras for a comparison in what the cameras CAN produce? (As opposed to JPEG).

I have shot RAW in the 30D, but, the rebel will no longer take images, so I can't compare the two in RAW (at this time). I am very new to processing RAW images. So, I'm sure I could get better results with more practice. However,at my skill level, RAW images have yet to produce anything better--as far as sharpness in macros vs. the Rebel.

Thanks for the suggestion.

wellman

pathfinder wrote:

I would think that the 30D is as capable, or much more capable, than the Digital Rebel was. It should not have higher noise either.

Are you shooting in Manual or Av mode? ISO 100??

In the green modes - - the ISO choice is up to the camera of course. BUt I know that you know that.

Is there a focusing issue with a different body, perhaps?

If you have access to Photoshop CS3 with ADOBE Raw Converter 4.1, try processing some images from the 30D, and push the Clarity slider 3/4s of the way to the right and watch the image get sharper. Wow!!

When I process images from my 1DsMkll, they look very soft also - but a push with the Clarity slider creates stunningly sharp jpgs in Photoshop even before I add any sharpening at the conclucion of editing.

I wish you could se the detail in this image of the Aspens in Colorado two weeks ago. Every leaf is tack sharp - this 16x9 crop from a full frame image comes very close to 2 1/4 square film quality. It is razor sharp.



Give the Clarity slider a try if you have access to it. The improvements in ARC 4.1 are to die for.

Must... resist... temptation... to call Adobe and demand they release Lightroom 1.1 NOW!