Please restore my faith in my 400D

willbaroo

willbaroo

Messages
1,214
Name
William
Edit My Images
Yes
Pictures taken using Canon 400D with 18-55mm Kit lens..

1. Cropped and fiddled with....

IMG_9486resized.jpg


2. Orginal JPEG from RAW.

IMG_9486-800.jpg


Is it me, the lens or the camera?

Thoughts welcomed with open arms!!
 
One problem with the kit lens and landscapes is the difficulty in choosing where to focus. It looks to me that the focus is too far out in the distance and has left much of the foreground looking soft.....one of the problems of not being able to focus manually. I'd also suggest a little tweak of the zoom ring to keep away from the limit....you won't see much difference between 18mm and 20mm (especially as you've cropped it later anyway) but the IQ will improve.

Bob
 
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at?
There is no real focal point, did you have multi-point selected?
A quick shadows / highlights and sharpen, and seems alright to me
( but I "don't do" landscapes therfore the crop is perhaps not the most ideal?)

copy_IMG_9486-800.jpg
 
What's wrong with the first picture as you see it?

As far as your kit is concerned, I can only think that the lens is perhaps not the best (assuming it's the non-IS kit lens; the newer IS version is much better) but apart from that there is nothing wrong with the 400D at all ;)
 
Is it the lens flare that is the problem? Did you use a lens hood?
 
I'm not at all worried, I would just like to know that my Camera can take better pictures without me having to process the **** out of them.

If its me then fair doo's, if its my shoddy none IS kit lens then sooper cause theres a 70-200mm L F4.0 on its way!! :)

I love the camera dont get me wrong, I would just love to use it to its full potential!
 
willbaroo said:
If its me then fair doo's, if its my shoddy none IS kit lens then sooper cause theres a 70-200mm L F4.0 on its way!! :)
Click to expand...

Great lens that, I must admit I had thought of it as light as a feather when playing with it on a 40D and in comparison to the 100-400, but on a 350D after taking off the non IS 18-55 it is quite a lump.
 
Canon Bob said:
One problem with the kit lens and landscapes is the difficulty in choosing where to focus. It looks to me that the focus is too far out in the distance and has left much of the foreground looking soft.....one of the problems of not being able to focus manually. I'd also suggest a little tweak of the zoom ring to keep away from the limit....you won't see much difference between 18mm and 20mm (especially as you've cropped it later anyway) but the IQ will improve.

Bob
Click to expand...

Can you not manually focus with a kit lens then?
 
Cobra said:
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at?
There is no real focal point, did you have multi-point selected?
A quick shadows / highlights and sharpen, and seems alright to me
( but I "don't do" landscapes therfore the crop is perhaps not the most ideal?)

copy_IMG_9486-800.jpg
Click to expand...

Not sure that is any improvement Cobra, looks like a shot from a cheap Point and Shoot now :(

The original looks how I would expect it willbaroo, so I don't think you should be worried, only way to fix that without any post processing is maybe a polarising filter, or a ND grad to allow you lift the shadows a little and keep the sky.
 
You have to get used to processing all photos, this is *reality*. I recommend using good workflow RAW converter software, such as Lightroom. I spend about 1min per photo on it to get that result.

L lenses will give far better colour and clarity. 18-55 is really only a total beginner's lens. 17-40L could be affordable excellent replacement. By all means get 70-200 f/4L.

However, you will need to judge the composition, lighting, use graduated filters, polarizers, etc to get best results out of the camera.
 
For what it is worth I had a quick play with your first shot (the processed one) just adding some more contrast and a different crop a quick sharpen, oh and cloned out on small flare and got
2009-06-08_233939.jpg


Which I think it is a very nice landscape shot :) I love my 350D and it produces excellent shots with the same kit lens you have (I think) so I wouldnt be too worried :)
 
Jimmy_Lemon said:
For what it is worth I had a quick play with your first shot (the processed one) just adding some more contrast and a different crop a quick sharpen, oh and cloned out on small flare and got
2009-06-08_233939.jpg


Which I think it is a very nice landscape shot :) I love my 350D and it produces excellent shots with the same kit lens you have (I think) so I wouldnt be too worried :)
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this is overcooked to my taste. Sharpening artefacts are clearly visible 60cm away from the monitor. The colours are more like HDR.

Personally, I would say there is far too much empty sky. A clearer point of interest would help. That's why I don't see much use for WA lenses in the usual surroundings.
 
Jimmy_Lemon said:
Not sure that is any improvement Cobra, looks like a shot from a cheap Point and Shoot now :(
Click to expand...
Fairy nuff Mr Lemon.
Obviously I edited the 2nd of the two
It just looked flat and soft to me, However
as I said, I don't do landscapes that is obviously
why :D
Jimmy_Lemon said:
For what it is worth I had a quick play with your first shot (the processed one)
Click to expand...

Ok so now that looks over saturated / processed and nothing like "natural" Though I don't know the area so perhaps I am wrong again?

I am really glad I don't do landscapes :D
 
You don't HAVE to process every image you take as has been said, in fact personally I prefer to get it right first time in camera and not have to mess about as much afterwards.... I read a decent article in a magazine about processing less and getting it right in Camera, one of the main points it made was to shoot in high quality Jpeg.. the reason being that you force yourself to get it right in camera rather than fixing your mistakes afterwards.... Raw is great but will always require processing afterwards to get the best results.... Learn to shoot well in Jpeg then when you do shoot RAW you can be sure that you're photos will be 90% of the way there before you start.

A RAW is effectivley a digital negative and will require processing so if you are shooting RAW and expecting the results to look perfect without touching them it isn't going to happen. Hence suggesting the Jpeg route, let the camera do what it is designed for then when you wan't more control you can switch to RAW

Oh and P.S.: It's definitely not the camera, do a search on places like flickr for images shot with the 300D, your cameras distant predecessor and you will find some spectacular shots..... it goes like this.... Photographer, then the lens then the camera.
 
Personally I think that your first shot would have been spot on, had the pontoon been in focus.
With raw you have to modify them all. However, I tend to take several shots of a scene (on continous or multiple times), use DPP to review them, process one semi-decently, then copy the recipe to the others. Choose which is best then, and take it further if necessary.
 
I prefer keeping processing to the minimum. To me the original unprocessed version looks about right for a shot taken towards the light - as indicated by the lens flare and shadows in the scene.

So the biggest problem is the time of day and the direction of the light. The kit lens won't be at its best at 18mm and f13 may not be its optimum aperture for sharpness. There seems to be nothing much for the AF to lock onto in the middle of the picture so I'm wondering if one of the secondary focus points locked on to something in the foreground and made the scene a bit soft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top