Is a 10D right for me? (My concern is post processing)

[patrick_cox1]

I am a current Elan 7 user and I am considering purchasing a 10D but

am not sure if digital is right for me. I am very attracted to the

immediacy of digital and the opportunity for learning that this

offers. However I am concerned about the amount of additional time

and work that may be required to post process my images. I shoot

mainly family, travel, landscape and equine (racing, jumping,

environmental...) I would be OK with spending a little time on post

processing certain images but I also want the ability to simply print

family snapshots. I know this may sound like a task more suited to a

P&S camera, but my experience with P&S people shots is that I have

significant problems with red eye. Thanks for any advice.

[jbq]

You don't have to personally do any more post-processing with a digital camera than with film.

 

You can drop a memory card in most 1-hour labs and get minilab-quality prints (just like with film).

 

Or you can drop your files (probably burnt on a CD) in a good pro lab with instructions on retouching and they'll do the work for you (just like with film).

 

Or you can do the post-processing yourself on your computer, in which case you are the one in control (just like with film except that you don't have to scan), and print on an inkjet, frontier, lightjet, or any other printer that accepts digital data in (just like with scanned film).

 

The red-eye problem is mostly caused by direct flash close to the camera. You won't have any more red-eye with digital as you would with film. Get a camera that has a hot shoe, a good external flash, and bounce it off the ceiling or even off a clip-on bouncer - red-eye problem gone.

 

I have an Elan 7 and a 10D, a Minolta Dual IV, and I do all my retouching digitally (both on digital and film). I found that digital takes a lot less time (no scanning, no dust-removing, no issues with color-adjusting negatives).

[rwbowman]

Have you considered looking for a used Canon G5 (or earlier G-series) camera? Such a

camera has many more features than a P&S, including support for the EX-series externally

mounted Canon Speedlites, which can help eliminate red-eye. It would also be a less-

expensive way of trying out digital to see if you like it, as post-processing with the G5 is

pretty much the same as with the 10D. Given the kinds of shooting you say you do, the

G5 would be more than adequate, with one exception: it is slow to focus and fire in many

cases, so for action shots at equine events, it might not fill the bill. I have a G5 and a 10D,

and for times when I'm traveling light or taking snapshots, I use the G5.

[ike k]

Forget G series, you can either go with 10D or 300D since you already use Elan 7 and have some lenses & accesories that come with it? so there you go.

 

Ike

[patrick_cox1]

I appreciate the responses I have received so far. So, let me provide a bit more information about my situation. To go with my Elan 7, I currently have a 420EX flash, a Tamron 28-75 2.8 & a Canon 70-200 F4. I have tried a G series camera and I was very disappointed with how slow the camera was (shutter lag, startup...) Since I like to shoot horse racing and other events, it really won't work for me. Also, I have a 2-yr old daughter and a G series camera is really not fast enough to keep up with her either. I realize that I can take a CF card to my local lab and get prints made, but I am concerned that the quality won't be as good as film if I don't adjust exposure, sharpness and such first. (This is based on comments I have read here and elsewhere.) I also realize there is a learning curve with digital so if I spend the time to learn the camera and how to get proper digital exposure, will I get good quality prints straight out of a 10D with no post processing by me? (Regarding the 300D, that is really not an option for me because it doesn't offer FEC nor user selectable AI Servo focus.) Thanks again for your comments.

[bmeister]

The 10D, with sharpening parameter turned up a notch or 2, makes wonderful out-of-camera JPG images. If you want sharp 4x6 with no post processing, you will be happy with a 10D. If you want pin-sharp 11x17, you will have to post-process a bit on the 10D output. So, what I am saying is YES the output from the 10D is very good to excellent assuming your exposure and focus are good.

[PuppyDigs]

<P>It depends on how picky you are. I'm extremely picky about image quality and love to squeeze every last nuance out of my images, so straight out of the camera just don't cut it.</P> <P>The major image difference between any DSLR--not just the 10D--and point 'n shoot digicams is digicam images are highly processed in-camera. That is, they have large amounts of sharpening, saturation and contrast automatically added to the image when you take the picture. In other words, digicam images are optimized from the getgo to look good on computer monitors. In comparison, DSLRs have little sharpening, saturation and contrast added to the image. Even if you adjust parameters to maximum settings, you still won't duplicate the heavily processed look of a typical digicam. Why are DSLRs designed this way? To simulate the photographic look of film--rather than a processed digital look--and allow the user to select and apply creative options according to taste and need. DSLR images are designed primarily for printing and that's where they really show their stuff. Think of EOS 10D files as digital negatives. Negatives need interpretation--adjustment--to look their best. Here's my basic workflow:</P> <blockquote>1. Upload RAW images to computer via card reader and open thumbnails in EOS Viewer Utility.</blockquote> <blockquote>2. If needed, adjust parameters (WB, exposure compensation, etc.) in EOS Viewer Utility to taste.</blockquote> <blockquote>3. Once adjusted, convert to a lossless format such as 16-bit TIFF. This file serves as my master work file for further adjustments in Photoshop.</blockquote> <blockquote>4. Use "Save As" to save optimized JPEG versions (resizing, levels, sharpening, etc.) for specific print sizes or web display.</blockquote> <P>The biggest problem with 10D files is a lack of dynamic range. Negative film has nearly twice as much range. I spend lots of time using contrast masks and/or blending layers with differing amount of digital exposure compensation to keep contrast under control, i.e., keep highlights from blowing out or shadows from blocking up when I sweeten the mids.</P>

[Spearhead]

<i>The major image difference between any DSLR--not just the 10D--and point 'n shoot digicams is digicam images are highly processed in-camera</i><p>

 

The G5 and other Canon digicams can output RAW files just like the 10D. So this "major difference" doesn't exist. There are major differences, but this isn't it.

[PuppyDigs]

<P>I used to own a G1 and it output RAW files. However, the G series ain't a point 'n shoot digicam as they have much of the same control as an EOS DSLR. Nevertheless, most folks use point 'n shoot digicams--no manual controls--and the JPEG default settings are much more processed than my 10D JPEGs. Indeed, the most common complaint from former digicam users when they buy a DSLR is flat, boring images compared to their digicam. In other words, they miss the in-camera heavy in-camera processing.</P>

<P><A HREF="http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/frary/canon_eos10d_01.htm" TARGET="_blank">My EOS 10D review.</A></P>

[ribook]

Patrick,</p>Your second entry in this post implies that you are satisfied with the prints you get back from the lab. If that's the case, you might want to stick with film. I recently purchaed a 10D. I have an Elan 7, and EOS 3 and a 1N. I grew increasingly frustrated with the work of even the professional labs and decided to do my own work so purchased a CanoScan FS4000US. I've been pretty happy with the results--I have much more control than I ever did before, and I decide what the final photo will look like. But, using film having it processed, scanning negatives, postprocessing...it's a lot of time and effort. The 10D eliminates much of that time (processing and scanning) and I have found that it doesn't take very long to adjust a RAW file to a point where I'm printing a very sharp, very satisfactory 8.5 X 11. What I find time consuming is the process of working through the many RAW files once they've been dumped onto my hard drive so that I can figure out which ones I want to work with. I have found that the Canon software provides a fairly quick way to peruse the Jpeg files contained within the RAW files, and that Photoshop CS offers the best way to post-process the RAW files. </p>My point? If you're perfectly happy with the results you're getting from your lab, there's no real reason to switch to a DSLR unless you have reasons to do so that have nothing to do with the quality of your photos. If you want to take advantage of what a DSLR has to offer in the way of immediate feedback and providing you with maximum control over your eventual prints, then make the leap and prepare yourself for the time it will take you to get a jump on the learning curve. --Russ

[jespdj]

Patrick, if you were disappointed with the G series camera because it was so slow, you're most likely going to be disappointed with any other compact digital camera. Digital SLRs don't have shutter lag problems like digital compact cameras, and so are far more suited to fast action photography.

 

Puppy Face wrote: "The biggest problem with 10D files is a lack of dynamic range." - that's not just a problem with the 10D, but with (almost?) all digital cameras.

[wgpinc]

It's possible that you might be happier with the 300D and shooting jpegs for less after processing. The dRebel is default set for a bit more snappy in-camera processing. Probably be good to pick it up with the 18-55 S lens to cover the wide end because of the 1.6 factor. A great way to get into digital without breaking the piggy bank. Try it for a while and if you like it keep it, otherwise you can sell it and recoup most of your expense. Same chip as the 10D but without the metal body and some functionality. Only one way to find out if digital is for you. Good luck!<div></div>

[PuppyDigs]

"The dRebel is default set for a bit more snappy in-camera processing."

 

Of course, it only takes 30 seconds to set default parameters on a 10D the same way...

[wgpinc]

>>>Of course, it only takes 30 seconds to set default parameters on a 10D the same way...<<<

Absolutely - plus an additional 60% $550 initial investment to get over to the dark (digital) side. No disagreement on my part, he should try digital and see if he likes it. The more we learn the more we can do. I used a G3 for almost a year before I bought an SLR, still carry it downtown in my jacket pocket to shoot on the street when I don't carry my M6. Cheers!

[PuppyDigs]

Lots of reputable dealers are selling the 10D for $1300 to 1400 now. Even B&H dropped its price. I paid $1350 last Summer at Gateway. The extra money is well worth the QCD, selectable meter patterns, larger buffer, glass pentaprism, FEC and magnesium body. For some, the basic black color is worth the price of admission (I'd prefer a brushed stainless steel or natural magnesium body).

[jim_larson1]

Fortunately, the 300D was unavailable when I got my 10D => so I had no choice!

 

But I digress. . .The real question is "do you want digital images or do you want prints". Printing every digital image makes as much sense as scanning every negative.

 

As for processing. . . I have a S40 which has a "raw" mode. You know. . .the 10D images all require a bit more sharpening than the S40 images (but the end results are better). If you like the "exposure" and "saturation" from your P&S digicam, then you probably won't be making any "exposure" or "saturation" changes on your dSLR. If you are not picky, you will find a good default sharpness as well.

 

Frankly, now that I know how to process images, I spend similar amounts of time tweaking my S40 shots as I do my 10D shots. . .

[corrinne_ellis]

I'm a digi newbie and have a Canon EOS 10D. I've read thru the responses to Patrick and I have some questions. First one concerns focusing. Some of you mention sharpening. Can you explain that further? Is the sharpening something I can set on the camera or w/photo software? I'm having problems focusing the EOS in either AF or MF mode. I'll take a pic and it looks very clear on the LED screen, but once I download my pics and look at them in Adobe Photoshop at picture size level (or 100%) all detail is blurry. I've never had this problem before with my other SLRs.

 

Second question is this. Does the EOS only work well with Canon lenses? I have a Quantary lens that I love and used on my Canon Rebel, but I frequently get the message "Err 99" when I use the Quantary lens on the EOS. So much so that I have to use my 28-80 Canon lens.

 

I thought I would really like digital cameras and understand that the Canon EOS 10D is a very nice camera. I am, however, getting discouraged with the results of my pics. Thanks for your help.

[jim_larson1]

There's focus - and then there is sharpness.

 

In photoshop elements, try filters => sharpen => unsharp mask.

 

with the camera at "lower" sharpness setting, I generally use 250%, 0.3 radius, 0 threshold.