New camera: Canon 20D?

[LunarMist]

As you should know Canon has a triple rebate program in effect, so make sure to buy from an authorized dealer if the lens or flash is on the program. Also, many Canon lenses tend to fall apart or otherwise require service so a US warranty is advisable.

 

[Handruin]

Well, it does say "All original accessories included, USA warranty". This lens isn't on their triple rebate, but the 20D is, so I'll get at least $100 off the camera.

 

[LunarMist]

I see no mention that they are an authorized Canon dealer. The item could have fallen off the back of a truck for all you know or could have been purchased and is now being resold. In these cases the warranty is void, not to mention any rebates. I only buy from B&H or one of the reliable vendors. I would also get some other lenses and a flash by 1/15 to take advantage of the rebates. Good luck.

 

[Handruin]

I skip the eBay deal and go with B&H. I don't want to chance getting a voided warranty with something this expensive. I appriciate the advie, that's why I'm asking. What other lenses would you recommend from their triple rebate? If I were to want something for wide angle shots, what type of lens would I need (15mm?)?

 

[Mercutio]

I really appreciate the help I get from image stabilizing lenses.

 

[Handruin]

Is the difference that noticeable?

 

[Pradeep]

IS can help when you are shooting with a long lens - i.e. Merc zooming in on the bOObies!

It depends how wide you want to go. If you regularly shoot wide, then a full frame sensored camera would be more appropriate, as you don't have the FOV crop.

If you can find a use for it, the Canon 100mm Macro F 2.8 is a spastically sharp lens. And very reasonable price to boot.

 

[Handruin]

If I got the 100m Macro, that would give me $200 off because of the rebate program? Their rebate is a bit confusing. Here is a positive review of that lens. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Here is a nice picture set with that lens and a 20D, and here is another.

 

[LunarMist]

Doug,

Almost all macro lenses have excellent image quality. The primary consideration is usually focal length. However, we don't know what you are doing with the system or which 35mm film SLR you were using previously.

There are a lot of general purpose 2-3 lens setups for the tiny-sensored Canon bodies such as:

17-40/4 (or 16-35/2.8) + 70-200/4 (or 70-200/2.8 IS)
10-22(EF-S) + 24-70/2.8 + 70-200/4 (or 70-200/2.8 IS)
10-22(EF-S) + 24-105/4 IS + 100-400 IS
17-85 IS(EF-S) + 100-400 IS

etc....

Many people add a 50/1.8 (cheap, but good) or 50/1.4 for low light work and a ~100mm macro. In case you don't know, the EF-S lenses and similar off-brand lenses for APS-C only work with the 300D, 350D, 20D, and future low to mid-range bodies. They do not fit or will not cover the image circle of the larger sensors in the better bodies.

 

[Handruin]

Thanks for the info LunaMist, sorry I didn't respond sooner.

The truth is, I don't even know what I'll be doing with the camera. I want to do everything it is capable of. That may sound bad/unrealistic, but what I'm trying to do is learn. I would like to take macro shots of both wildlife (bugs, trees) and also of other stationary objects like computer parts. I'd also like to take pictures at events like car shows, or a friend's wedding (not FOR his wedding, but as a guest).

I realize the lenses are specific to the body and have a limited life path above and beyond the 20D. If some day I'm ever good enough to be in the business of taking photos for a living, then I'll consider buying a camera along the lines of a 1Ds Mark II. But for now, I'm inspired by the pictures of folks like Tannin, buck and others, so I'm trying to learn on, what I consider to be a very nice dSLR.

Right now I'm doing a bunch of reading, and mainly asking question based on your experieince (and others). I just want to learn, most of which will only come from taking pictures and finding the vision I want to capture.

 

[Handruin]

Camera body showed up tonight. It's a miracle it wasn't stolen. DHL left it dead-smack leaning against my front door as 100's of kids are walking around the street for Halloween. Some how I didn't have to sign for a $1200 camera...crazy fools.

Tomorrow are the lens, U/V, light hood, and CF card...can't wait to play!

 

[LunarMist]

Dell + DH = terrible delivery. It is quite common for items to be stolen and I hear that DHL is a PITA to deal with. Which lens did you get?

 

[Handruin]

For my first lens I purchased the Canon 17-85 EF-S from B&H photo.

 

[Handruin]

Got all my goods today. But someone put her foot down on all my spending...

Be nice, I'm still learning. That's Zelda after walking along my railing.

1/10 sec
F/5.6
85mm
ISO-200
manual

 

[Mercutio]

Your cat lets you take pictures???

Mine try to bite the camera.

 

[LunarMist]

Bump up the ISO for low light shots. The 20D is very good at 400 and OK at 800. Use the correct color balance and avoid underexposure due to the bright light in the background. Were you converting the RAW files with DPP or PS or something else?

 

[Handruin]

Yes, my cat has her moments, but she tolerates pictures fairly well. I took a bunch of her playing with her pink ball, but they blurred because there isn't much light in my office.

Lunar:
I'll give the ISO a boost next time to see what happens. I've mainly been playing with the aperture and shutter speed to learn their abilities (but that's no excuse to forget about changing the ISO from time to time).

I haven't been able to figure out the color balance with this camera (yes I've RTFM, but there is a lot of info to remember). I had it set on auto white balance (might not be the same thing?) until I can figure it out. I know the shot is very warm/orange. The camera has a color temp setting, is this related? it's currently set to 5200k as the default. I've never had this option before, so I left it alone until I can figure it out.

That picture was not shot with RAW, it was the highest level of jpeg. but I have taken a few RAWs and I've not yet converted them. I open then with the Canon software, irfanview32, and picasa.

 

[Handruin]

In my example picture, how would I correct the color balance? Would I change it so that the color of the light isn't as orange? I found the option for "K" under white balance so that I can set the appropriate color temperature. Is this the suggest way of handling it? The manual suggest taking a picture of something white (or 18% gray) and use that as a custom white balance.

 

[i]

(I've said it before but I have to say it again: you have a beautiful cat there, Handy. )

 

[Handruin]

Nothing exceptional, just a test with color temps (and a nice belly shot):

1/5 sec
F/4.5
28mm
ISO-400
color temp:2800K

Not sure if it matters, but I have a tiffen UV protector filter on the lens.
(the room is very orange if you couldn't tell)

 

[Handruin]

(I've said it before but I have to say it again: you have a beautiful cat there, Handy. )

Thanks i! I'm very luck to have found her. The person who gave her up doesn't know what they lost. She is the softest cat ever.

 

[LunarMist]

Not sure if it matters, but I have a tiffen UV protector filter on the lens.
(the room is very orange if you couldn't tell)

Auto WB should be close enough if there are some neutral areas in the scene. Jpegs never looked good to me on the 20D. RAW is much better especially if you do not have good control over lighting and have not established all of the settings for the shoot.

The best place for the Tiffen protector filter is normally the trash. Seriously, it is probably the uncoated green glass crap that degrades image quality and creates ghosting. If you must use a UV filter to protect the lens from blowing sand, surf, etc., at least use a MC one from B+W or Hoya. I would avoid using a UV filter indoors.

 

[Handruin]

Do you recommend using any specific tool for converting RAW files (is one better at it than the other)?

The tiffen isn't green, but I can't say that means anything. This is the one I bought. It was cheap, and probably with good reason.

 

[Tannin]

The guys at DPR (yeah, yeah, there are a lot of gearfreak morons there, but there are people who know their stuff too) say that the 20D auto white balance is a bit weird, in particular that it buggers stuff up under ordinary incandescent light globes.

From my own tinkering, I agree. I have taken to leaving the WB on AUTO all the time except under artifical light (for incandescent, set it to the light bulb symbol) and also under grey, cloudy skies (set it to the cloud symbol). Both of these seem, to my eye, to make a significant difference.

But with that said, I like the warm orange softness, particularly of that first shot. (Yes, she is indeed a beautiful cat!) Not all the time, of course, but for that shot, I wouldn't change it. It suits the mood, and the colour of the cat as well.

I'm surprised to see you using such low shutter speeds! I guess it's a conditioned reflex for me now to go ape the moment I see it drop below a 125th or a 60th. I'm zooming out (to let more light in - this depends on the particular lens, though) and cranking the ISO way up.

Ths is where the Canon really shines: low noise at high ISOs. I have taken to shooting at ISO 400 all the time now, and only drop back to 100 or 200 if I'm in danger of running out of shutter speed, or if I'm doing something (like a landscape) where it might be more noticable than it is with bird shots. I go up to 800 ISO anytime it's a bit gloomy, and 1600 in case of need. Even at 3200 the noise is remarkably low, though I will only shoot at 3200 if there seems to be no other way.

Neat Image - www.neatimage.com - is a brilliant little program for removing noise. OK, it's yet more work to do for a shot, but if it's a choice between getting a blurry low-speed shot of a rare bird or a sharp one with random noise that I can get rid of using Neat Image, then that's a no-brainer. You can't get rid of motion blur or camera shake in post-processing: you can get rid of high-ISO noise.

PS: why is the thread so wide? It's really hard to read like this.

 

[Tea]

I played with it a little bit:

Beautiful cat.

 

[Tea]

PS: I like the light bulb. It gives the picture balance, stops it "falling over sideways".

 

[e_dawg]

what a nice pussy

 

[e_dawg]

cat

 

[LunarMist]

Do you recommend using any specific tool for converting RAW files (is one better at it than the other)?

The tiffen isn't green, but I can't say that means anything. This is the one I bought. It was cheap, and probably with good reason.

It is probably thick green glass, i.e., the stuff that looks green in cross section like a coffee table. If you take the retaining ring out you will see what I mean. A B+W MC, Hoya HMC/SMC or Heliopan filter will be very thin, made from extremely fine glass and polished flat.

I would start with the Canon DPP and Photoshop ARC if you have that, then move to other software if really necessary. Both will allow all processing options to be set after the fact, so slide the color temp to your liking or use the eyedropper to find a neutral area. There are other specialty PS plug-ins like iCorrect EditLab that I use for corercting difficult images, but it should not really be necessary. You can use a grey/white card to set the WB in camera for each scene or use the card as a neutral reference when batch converting the RAW files (preferred).

As Tony mentioned NI is very good, but best done on the clean, unsharpened TIF file rather than a jpeg. Many people use separate NI-processed layer in PS, sometimes masking and applying different levels of noise reduction to different areas at high ISO. At 400 I don't even bother with any noise reduction of the L channel, but there is a little chroma noise. By 800 some L channel noise reduction may be desired and the chroma channels definitely need some. Unless the camera is very cold, ISO 1600 is noisy all over so some serious noise reduction will be necessary and you will have to balance the acceptable noise with loss of details.

 

[Handruin]

The filter seems to be very thin, and shows no green color even at angles. I'll take another look when I get home tonight. I trust your word that it's probably a cheapo filter. I wanted as cheap insurance as I get used to handling the camera. Once I get a camera bag, I'll get better filters. Are there any bags I should avoid (temrac and lowepro were recommended to me)? I'll likely want a backpack style for hiking. Both companies offer those.

What are your feelings on polarized filters (of good quality)? I know they have their place, but do you advise for or against them. Or does this depend on the application just like a given lens?

What practical use is there for ISO 1600/3200? Is this more for special occasions or extreme low lighting that this would be used?

Thanks for all the tips on ISO and file handling (Tea and Lunar). I still have tons more to learn and experiment with so hopefully my questions don't drive you bonkers. This may sound like a dumb question, but do I need to be concerned with the number of pictures I'm taking? I've taken over 300 just last night while I was experimenting/learning. I read the shutter is tested to some 200,000, but I could actually see myself taking that many pictures over the course of a year or three. Over the course of the pictures, I learned a ton about the camera's features and ability.

Tea, do you normally use RAW or jpeg when you shoot? Sounds like I should be sticking to RAW from now on. Those pics from last night were just for learning anyways, so I'm not worried about them being jpeg's.

 

[Handruin]

Lunar, you mention a cheap 50mm lens that some people buy such as the Canon 50/1.8 (roughly $80) or the Canon Normal EF 50mm f/1.4 USM (roughly $300).

I'll be going to a wedding next fall, and I thought a lens like this would be nice for low light situations. I'm not photographing the wedding, just armature/candid shots. I think it could be useful for other low light situations as well. My readig found this to be a good portait lens for the 20D (essentially 80mm), and it was worth the price difference over the 50/1.8 due to its sharpness. Any thoughts on this lens?

 

[LunarMist]

1. There are tons of bags available. It is probably best to visit a well-stocked store and handle them in person. Always get one larger than you need because gear tends to expand. I have dozens of photo backpacks and photo bags, but never quite the right one.

2. Get a good mulitcoated polarizer like the Hoya or B+W. Use it as appropriate, but only then. (Novices tend to overpolarize skies for example.)

3. The shutter in the 20D is designed for 100K frames IIRC. The body will be obsolete by then.

4. High ISO is for getting the shot regardless of image quality, such as for sports or PJ use. You will have to decide whether it is worthwhile or not.

5. The difference in speed between the 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 is not much. Neither lens is that good wide open, but fine at f/2.8. I would not try to use them for available light at that wedding. Bring as P/S instead.

 

[Pradeep]

3. The shutter in the 20D is designed for 100K frames IIRC. The body will be obsolete by then.

At least in my experience the shutters seem to last around double what Canon spec, at least with the 1D/1Ds MKIIs.

If you do happen to wear it out, and if the warranty has expired, a shutter replacement is around $300-$400 (hopefully a lot less for the 20D).

 

[LunarMist]

I wanted as cheap insurance as I get used to handling the camera. Once I get a camera bag, I'll get better filters.

Dare I ask if you are using the hood? A hood is better protection than a filter 98% of the time, so use it.

 

[Handruin]

Yes, I bought the matching canon hood for the 17-85 and I've been using it. Although several of my pictures have solar flares in them during its use. I didn't mention I bought it/used it in fear you might tell me the best place for it is in the trash.

Thanks for helping me with all my question. I'm trying not to overwhelm you with them all at once. I'm just happy to have people with real experience in this subject.

 

[Handruin]

I think my 20D has two stuck pixels.

http://www.handruin.com/public-image/20d/IMG_0679.CR2

I took a picture with the lens disconnected because I saw these two bright dots when I recently took a night image of the sky. They looked too bright to be stars, so I disconnected the lens and took a long exposure to see if it happened to be a spec on the lens.

I've also noticed them in slightly brighter photos, but I think only when the ISO is set higher. Does it look like I have two stuck pixels in the CMOS? These only show in really dark pictures. I don't notice them when looking very closely at well lit images.

I opened the shutter using the cleaning function to look for specs of dirt, but couldn't see anything. I've tried taking several more dark pictures and I don't see them. They are inconsistent.

 

[Handruin]

I did another test where I left the lens cap on and exposed for 8 seconds. There are numerous hot spots including the two I mentioned before.

Tannin, is your 20D as bad as mine with long exposures in the dark? I count at least 10 hot spots on mine.

http://www.handruin.com/public-image/20d/IMG_0692.CR2

 

[Pradeep]

Does the 20D have a noise reduction mode? If so, try a shot with that on, it may subtract the hot pixels.

Sometimes there will be specks of crap on an image, that you can't see with your Mk1 eyeball on the sensor. I would give the sensor a clean in any case, they don't always come out very clean from the factory.

 

[LunarMist]

Hot pixels are fairly common in sensors, much like stuck pixels are in LCDs. Hot pixels are not usually a cause for defect unless there are a certain number and griuping. Even the 1Ds MK IIs have a few. Usually hot pixels are more noticeable only at higher ISOs and longer exposures. One would not expect to see many hot pixels at ISO 200 and 1/125 for example. In longer exposures, dark field correction may interfere with detection.

 

[Tannin]

I can reply at length now - seeing as I am waiting for your 6.5MB raw file to download Doug!

I have not tried any long exposures - nothing over what I can hand-hold, or at least rest on a tree or fencepost with. But I think what you probably want is Custom Function 2 - "long exposure noise reduction". By setting that, at exposures over 1 second, the camera will take the shot, then close the shutter and take another shot with the same settings. Then it reverses the second shot (makes a negative of it) and adds the two together. Result: any camera-induced bright spots are subtracted out and you are left with the clean image. Or that's what I gleaned from page 141 of the manual.

You can do something similar with NeatImage, but this method is probably better, as you get an exact match betwen shot and negative, taken at the same sensor temperature, same camera settings, same everything.