PLEASE HELP - CANON 40D PHOTOS NOT GOOD NIKON D60 BETTER?

<p>Thanks again to everyone who has replied to my post. You have ALL been a tremendous help!</p>

<p>Phil Hawkins... yes, I'm picky. Why did I buy a Tamron lens? Because I am just getting into digital photography and didn't have the $1,100 Canadian to drop on the Canon 17-55mm IS USM f/2.8 lens right now. I just purchased the 40D body so this would have been a lot of cash to drop in one purchase. I will be saving up for the Canon lens, but in the interim, the reviews for the Tamron have been excellent. </p>

<p>Daniel Lee, your information is **EXCELLENT**. As an aside, I did happen to contact Canon Canada support yesterday and provided the link to my sample page before I posted in this forum. They were going to escalate it to a manager for review. </p>

<p>Well, I received a call from Canon just about an hour ago, and the very informative and knowledgeable fellow (David) basically confirmed everything that was said by all of you knowledgeable people in your replies. He did state that the two cameras will not behave the same due to the different processors and the sensors (Nikon D60 uses CCD and Canon has a CMOS). He also confirmed that my shutter speed was way too slow and educated me on the "shutter speed should equal the focal length" rule, and that as a minimum, I should have been at 1/60th of a second or higher.</p>

<p>All in all, Canon and all of you have confirmed that my camera equipment is fine and that I just need to learn more. </p>

<p>Daniel Lee... Just as a test, I took two more images this morning using as close to your recommended settings (I can't seem to dial in 1/90th sec shutter unless that was a 'typo'). Obviously the subjects are not here, but I did take the shots in the same dining room and under the same lighting (although some ambient outdoor light is coming in through the windows but it's an overcast day here). WOW! What a difference! Below is the link to the page with these new samples. I cannot believe how sharp the image of the tequila bottle is when zoomed up! You are the man!<br>

<a href="http://www3.telus.net/rico/40DImages/samples_danielsettings.htm">http://www3.telus.net/rico/40DImages/samples_danielsettings.htm</a></p>

<p>To Daniel Kennedy and Richard Martin, thank you for supporting my equipment selection and advising me of your excellent results with the same combination. I feel much, much, better about my equipment now, and know that I simply have to learn - A LOT!</p>

<p>I have just purchased Adobe Lightroom 2 and will eventually learn to shoot in RAW. Step-by-step I hope to gain a wealth of knowledge as you have all done over the years.</p>

<p>I thank you once again for all of your precious time in responding to my concerns and for providing such valuable feedback. All the best of health and happiness to everyone in 2009! Have a Happy New Year. Rico.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Curious if the OP used "P" - Program or the green rectangle ("idiot mode") setting? It does make a world of difference. Also was the focus point set, or did the camera pick it? I've heard of people complaining about focusing issues with Canons and didn't know they could choose the focus point themselves and not let the camera do it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Great posts by Daniel Lee.<br>

I had an EOS 30D, got stolen replaced with a 40D (thanks to my insurance Company), fantastic camera but it took a good investment of time and effort in learning how to get decent results. Used to have an old Pentax film system couldn't understand why it took me so long to go digital. <br>

You want to see a top quality detailed comparison go look at <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/</a> and <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond60/">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond60/</a> these guys do this all the time so they are highly reliable and respected technical review site. Looks to me like the 40d is a better camera.<br>

Read the manuals read the websites, go on courses, get to know every angle of the camera, and then work out how you want to use it. Practice it get in the groove and even then you will cock up, forget you set ISO to 1600 etc etc. Use raw, use your favourite raw converter makes a big difference, gives you total control of the end result but at the cost of time and effort. It wont correct poor composition or poor focussing though. If you want to get lots of pictures out fast use a white balance card with the camera white balance control, eg if you into sports and cant be bothered with the time involved in getting all the flexibility of using your PC to process the raw image.<br>

In the end the camera is only a tool, its what you do with it that means you get great results (or otherwise). You got to put the time in to learn how to master the camera, and then some more to learn how to master making great photos. Its a big investment way beyond which camera you buy, actually with the way bodies are now effectively consumer electronics you will go through a new body say every 2 to 5 years. Its more important to invest in the system and take a long term view!<br>

Hope that helps.<br>

M</p>

<p>Hi Bob B.... As Daniel Lee pointed out, the image I posted of the male subject turns out to be shot in Av Mode. I did shoot the original photo in "idiot mode" as you say (green rectangle) and it looked almost identical to the photo I currently have posted. </p>

<p>In the posted image, what I tried to do was match the aperture of the Nikon D60 (f/5.6) so I did switch the 40D to Av mode and dialed in f/5.6 to see if that would make a difference in the color, etc. It did not, but I also realize there were many other factors that played a part, particularly the fact that the ambient light took priority over the flash and my slow shutter speed.<br>

Thanks.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Rico,<br /> <br /> Your Tamron lens is fine. Tamron, like everyone including Canon and Nikon, makes some great lenses, some good, and some junk. Your particular lens has great image quality. Do not worry yourself over it or waste money trying to replace it. Your money would be better spent on additional lenses.<br /> <br /> Personally I factor the DSLR crop into the shutter speed/focal length rule. So at 50mm on a 40D, which is equivalent in field of view to 80mm on a 35mm body, I would shoot a minimum of 1/90. (If I have to I will shoot slower and try to brace myself. Another trick is to take 3-5 shots in continuous burst, shutter held down through the burst. One will be sharper than the others as hand shake is a random event.)<br /> <br /> <em>Daniel Lee... Just as a test, I took two more images this morning using as close to your recommended settings (I can't seem to dial in 1/90th sec shutter unless that was a 'typo'). Obviously the subjects are not here, but I did take the shots in the same dining room and under the same lighting (although some ambient outdoor light is coming in through the windows but it's an overcast day here). WOW! What a difference! Below is the link to the page with these new samples. I cannot believe how sharp the image of the tequila bottle is when zoomed up! You are the man!</em> <br /> <br /> See, I told you ;-)<br /> <br /> You're probably seeing 1/80 because your camera is set to shift in 1/3 stop increments. Mine is set to 1/2. Doesn't matter either way.<br /> <br /> <em>I thank you once again for all of your precious time in responding to my concerns and for providing such valuable feedback. All the best of health and happiness to everyone in 2009! Have a Happy New Year. Rico.</em> <br /> <br /> Good luck in your learning. I hope to see you and your photos around photo.net in the future.</p>

<p><em>In the posted image, what I tried to do was match the aperture of the Nikon D60 (f/5.6) so I did switch the 40D to Av mode and dialed in f/5.6 to see if that would make a difference in the color, etc. It did not, but I also realize there were many other factors that played a part, particularly the fact that the ambient light took priority over the flash and my slow shutter speed.</em></p>

<p>It's common for new users to misunderstand what Canon bodies are doing with flash in the various exposure modes. Basically in Av the camera will choose a slow shutter speed to let in ambient light mixed with the flash. The idea is to get the background and some of the atmosphere of the room lighting, but fill in and properly expose the main subject with flash. It's actually a good idea except when it results in a harsh color cast that the user doesn't understand.</p>

<p>When I shoot with flash I almost always shoot M. In Manual the camera is still automatically adjusting flash output for optimum exposure, but I can control both my shutter and aperture to try and get the desired depth of field and ambient light. It's important to remember that your range of shutter/aperture options are more limited when flash is used with M because the flash is only so powerful. So I don't stop down to f/22 with flash, for example, because the flash probably won't be powerful enough to properly expose the scene at that aperture. And while a Canon EX flash can sync to any shutter speed, I don't generally choose a speed faster than 1/200 because that again requires more flash power. (High speed sync is really for fill flash outdoors on a sunny day.)</p>

<p>You should play with the camera/flash combo in both P and M modes to see what you like best.</p>

<p>Yes, that is what I was saying above (in my first response). In Nikon cameras, you have to enable "slow flash" (mixing ambient and flash) exolicitly when you want it; in Canon cameras, it always happens in Tv and Av mode.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>..and you can use this excellent camera behaviour to get creative.</p>

<p>Look here for example (attached image). Just took this an hour ago - with a 1D with external 580EX II flash. I was on Av, with exposure compensation set to minus one and two-thirds stops (1-1 2/3). And flash set to zero/ The Exposure comp allowed me to darken the background (it was actually brighter than I made it here), while flash then illuminates the foreground.</p>

<p>Flash can be the most amazing light if you learn how to use it, and practice makes perfect.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Brilliant analysis Daniel!</p>

<p>I tried to do something similar with my Canon DSLR and a Nikon DSLR in a retail store. Having the Canon set exactly the way I like to use it and then merely guessing that the Nikon was set reasonably close turned out to be a complete waste of time! Again. different ISO settings and even different resolution settings. These sorts of body comparisons must be done in a controlled manner with complete knowledge of both systems!</p>

<p>Yes!</p>

<p>:-)</p>

 

<p>Let me start by saying that all the advice I've read in this thread is very good (but I didn't read it ALL!). The best advice is that the camera is a tool and the 40D is a capable tool. That said, I wouldn't compare a 40D to a Nikon D60. I would compare the 40D to the Nikon D90. The D90 offers better metering, more focus points (and one is cross hair), a 920,000 pixel LCD vs the 40Ds 230,000 pixel and the D90 is cheaper than the 40D! BTW- we started shooting digital with a Canon 10D and went through them all: 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D. But I would take a D90 over a 40D any day of the week. And a D300 truly rules (once you shoot with 51-focus points, you won't go back!).</p>

 

<p>Rico,<br>

I have the 40D and the same experience. Try to use only the center focus point. Even that when viewed at 100%, the images are not as sharp as (far less sharp than) the ones from Nikon. I have been frustrated since I bought it in June 08. I shot raw only, but that does not help much. You crank up the sharpness, noise is more pronounced. I have read a lot on Canon forums to improve the IQ, but after a while following all the instructions, I figured out that's the camera problems. Not only you and me have these problems with the 40D. Go to Dpreview's Canon forum, you will see a lot of unhappy 40D owners. If you can return, do it. If you want to stick with Canon, try the 50D or 30D. But for my experience, go with Nikon. Get the D60 or D40 with a cheap SB600, you will see big differences on sharpness, keeper rate, color, exposure consistency.<br>

Tuong</p>

<p>Half year ago:I had the same problems, like you, after I purchase my 40D. I used to compare it with other cameras and I was very frustrated: How come, I bought a Canon of 1.000 EURO and the pictures are ugly? This camera should make fine pictures like the ones that I saw in the magazines. Finally I hired a pro photograher who teached me all about the aperture, shutter speed and so on.<br />Today: my 40D make better pictures now? No, she always did, now I LEARN how to use my camera. I forget AUTO Mode and jpegs, my camera is always set up on M(Manual) and RAW.<br />I decide to answer Rico because I know how he feel and Rico, squeeze all the information you can from the abouve guys and trust them and you will see that <em>one day your Canon 40 D ;) will take better pictures then Nikon.</em></p>

 

<p>Hey Rico, look another exemple of a guy, Mr. Tuong, who is so superficial, IMO. Why? Because on dpreview's site Canon 40D received Highly Recommended and Canon 50D received Highly Recommended Just - meaning with resevations.<br>

On the other hand Mr. Tuong lead the discussion to the eternal fight between Canon and Nikon. I don't find it very instructive.<br>

Is the first time when I'm agressive and I don't feel good about it. But I think that I'm right based on my personal experience with digital cameras.</p>

 

<p>Perhaps I can weigh in again.</p>

<p>It is always better to avoid "Nikon vs Canon" wars. The comparison here is an easy one though: the 40D is a better camera than the D60.</p>

<p>Does it take better pictures? No, it does not. Pictures depend on the photographer, and on the photographer's knowledge.</p>

<p>You should learn the basics of exposure ("what is aperture", "what does shutter speed do", etc), and you should also learn about:</p>

<ul>

<li>The autofocus system - see my explanation above ("where" and "how")</li>

<li>Flash modes ("slow flash" on Nikon vs Flash in Tv/Av on Canon) </li>

<li>Exposure compensation ("The +/- button")</li>

<li>White balance (esp. in mixed light)</li>

<li>Shooting RAW</li>

<li>The modes and what they do - first the "scene modes" like portrait and sports, but as soon as possible the creative modes (Tv/S, Av/A, M)</li>

<li>Difference between P and Auto</li>

<li>Metering modes</li>

</ul>

<p>A lot to learn, but it's not difficult - taking a quick course usually helps a LOT. Or else, google the above subjects.</p>

<p>Michael</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I had a post last night and now I saw another post from Tudor who felt offended. I am so sorry about that. I just want to tell my observation. I have both systems, and the pics I want to show to my family are always from Nikon. What can I say? I bought the 40D based on dpreview.com and that was a mistake. When I shot bottle using self timer like they did in dpreview, yes the 40D with 10 mpix was sharper than the D40. But when I shot people, that was a different story. I did not know why. Pic was not sharp, and skin tone made me depressed. At first I thought I might get a lemon. But after reading several posts day after day in dpreview's Canon forum, I knew I was not the only one who had to deal with these problems. Maybe it was my technique. But for shooting people, I think just focus at the eye, press FEL, recompose, and then click. The rest can be taken care of with DPP. But I cannot get a good pic in term of sharpness and color, yet after six months of ownership of the 40D.<br>

With my experience with the 40D, what do you expect me to suggest to Rico?<br>

Tuong</p>

 

<p>I am sorry if it already mentioned but may I add that nikon Aperture Priority vs Canon Aperture Mode is quite different. In my film Nikon Film Camera, In Aperture and Program Mode, you can change the aperture but if you use flash the shutter speed won't go below 1/60.<br>

With my canon 400D the shutter speed will varied depend on the ambient light on Av.<br>

so if you want to compare maybe it is best to go full manual on both.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Um, does no-one read what I wrote? :-) I pointed this out twice already above, and touched on it once more, so that is three times. Here's a fourth:</p>

 

<ul>

<li>Nikon needs to you explicitly enable "slow flash" if you want it. Otherwise, it sticks to 1/60th or faster. </li>

<li>Canon enables this in Av and Tv mode every time. But in P mode it sticks to 1/60th or faster.</li>

</ul>

<p>Anyone who does not understand, please ask now - this is quite important.</p>

<p>To compare you do not need to use Manual. You can either use Slow Synch flash on Nikon, or alternately, you can ensure your Canon does not go beyond 1/6oth by using Tv mode set to 1/60th sec.</p>

<p>Cheers,<br /> Michael</p>

 

<p>What this thread suggests, as usual, is that in almost all cases the things that make one brand seem better than the other are usually more about the user than the camera. Comparably equipped cameras by companies like Nikon and Canon are more or less equally capable and can produce images that are indistinguishable by viewers.</p>

<p>Switching to brand A because you don't think that your brand B camera is "good enough" is usually not as effective as figuring out why you aren't getting the results you expect from brand B.</p>

<p>Agreed, G Dan. I see this as a teacher who teaches all these cameras: the similarities between brands <em>of the same generation and class</em> are very great indeed - any differences are very minor and subtle. I usually tellpeople who are in a class to learn brand A: what you are learning here today will also enable you to use a camera of brand B or C in just a few minutes. Even the symbols chosen by the respective manufacturers are usually almost identical.<br>

And this is good news: imagine if camera manufacturers did not learn from each other.</p>

 

<p>I have the same problems. I bought Canon 40d ($1079 fr. Newegg) for Xmas just nearly 30 days. I shot a lot of pictures indoor for Christmas with external flash Speedlight 430EX II.<br>

My friend has a Nikon 90d ($1149 fr. Newegg) , he took pictures when I am taking pictures. All his pictures seemed like sharper and much more good focus.<br>

I call Newegg and like to return the Canon 40d, the will charge me $162 for restocking. I am little hesitated.<br>

However I have not taken any outdoor pictures, but for now I am very disappointed with the quality of focusing and sharpness of indoor photos of the Canon 40d.<br>

What do you guys think?</p>

<p>quang phan,</p>

<p>i suggest you read all the responses above. they explain it very well.</p>

<p>in a few words - you need to learn how your camera works. i explain above how the focus system works. also, we explain why you get motion blur in certain modes. your camera is very good - it is you who simply needs to learn how to use it. it's not difficult. if after you read all the above posts you still have a problem, please do ask again.</p>

<p>good luck.<br>

michael<br>

ps - apologies, all. the shift key does not work on this keyboard so i lack capitals or shift-symbols.</p>

<p>Hi Quang,<br>

Yes, all the answers are above. The 40D is an excellent tool. However, I usually recommend the Nikon system especially when someone is relying on flash for proper (any) exposure. Again, the D90 has two more focus points and a better metering system than the 40D. And the Nikons are generally regarded as having a better flash system (in part due to better metering to begin with). Now none of this matters if you learn to use the camera (shutter speeds, exposure compensation, flash exposure compensation and so on). And learning these basics are always a good thing. But if you just want to pick up the camera, point & shoot; then the Nikon system will tend to be a bit better because of the metering and focus points.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

<p>It looks like you have the right answers above as to the cause of your troubles, however, if your monitor hasn't been calibrated, don't be too quick to judge color. As was mentioned, your 40D photo had lots more ambient light in it, which appears to have been red/orange tungsten colored light. AWB usually fails when mixing 2 different colors of lighting. The Nikon photo had much more flash and less ambient room light in it, making it easier for the body to determine color balance. This also reduces that red/orange tungsten tone. By the way, the nikon photo does look blue on my monitor as well.<br>

The 1/focal length rule is to be considered a minimum for dependable, acceptable, (not good) results. (if you are steady) If you analyze closely, you will find that in many situations, you will need to double this or more if you want to move from acceptable to good in image quality. Best of luck to you.</p>

<p>I keep hearing about all these extra focus points Nikons have compared to Canon. I wonder why since many , many people including myself have given up on letting the camera pick the focus. <br>

Most people who are tired of the camera missing focus use the CENTER point. How does having a whole bunch more points insure correct focus?<br>

I don't care if the entire viewfinder is covered with points, (apparently some cameras approach that) the camera is too stupid to know with certainty what the human wants in focus. <br>

I have Nikons and Canons BTW.</p>