Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Jonathan Wienke on August 03, 2005, 07:59:06 pm
-
It's not an issue. Changing aperture is easily done; the controls are either right under your finger or thumb, and unlike working with an aperture ring on the lens, you can see the change as you make it without even having to remove your eye from the viewfinder. Try that with a Leica.
-
Otherwise, and if you do go down the Canon route, you could do a lot worse than a 2nd hand 10D, I was shooting weddings with it until recently when I upgaded (the resolution and AF) and downgraded (almost everything else) to the 1Ds.
You know, pom, it's mostly thank to you that I remain skeptical to purchasing a used 1Ds (I can now probably get one for approximately USD 3000), given that I'd be loath to lose some of the qualities I have with my 20D.
(And the water resistance is something I partially solve with that Kata rain cover, anyway.)
I'll rather wait until used 1Ds MkII bodies arrive on the market when people are eagerly selling theirs to upgrade to the MkIII, or whatever Canon's going to call their next model.
But more in response to the original author, wouldn't also a used D60 be worth considering, or is the 10D a real upgrade towards the D60?
The same goes for a used Nikon D100, which as far as I know is an excellent camera, too.
-
Mark, let me quote myself,
With blacks the underexposure would need to be far less, approx 1.5-2 stops underexposed for the same effect.
In other words that amount of banding is visible in blacks at 1.5-2 stops underexposure!! Although the banding is far less at 0.5 stops underexposure it is still noticeably present and can give a red tinge to otherwise black suits. Not even having a 0.5 stop leeway of underexposure is very very hard!
(http://www.bphotography.co.uk/059.jpg)
iso 100, approx 1.5 stops underexposed, do you need to see what it's like at iso 400 when even slightly underexposed?
-
Mark or any other 1Ds shooters, is the pattern of banding and the location the same with your 1Ds even if less accentuated, or do those two bands of red look totally unfamiliar? I'm having an operation on my ankle in September and will be out of work (weddings) for two months. If it seems that there is problem then that would be a perfect time to send the camera back for repairs.
-
So I ordered it from expresscameras.com for a pretty good deal. I got it in a package with a Sigma "70-300mm f4-5.6 APO Zoom Macro SuperII Pro Lens" and another lens which our dealer claimed was a step up from the kit Nikon lens. I ordered it next day shipping so it would be here in time to leave for the trip, so hopefully that all goes well and I don't get a ton of replies from you guys telling me, "You've been HAD!" or something.
Sorry, but you've been had. Go to resellerratings.com and you'll find that on a scale of 1 to 10, their customer satisfaction os 0.57:
http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1805.html (http://www.resellerratings.com/seller1805.html)
If it looks too good to be true, it is. If you act quickly you may be able to cancel the transaction before they ship, otherwise you'll just get the camera without any accessories like a battery or charger and have to pay ridiculously inflated prices for them. If they call or email you to "confirm" the order, take the opportunity to cancel the order and tell them to go f*** themselves. And dispute the charge with your bank or you'll never get your money back.
-
Mark, you don't have to worry, I will try, I jsut have to make sure in advance that they cannot claim that the banding is an inherent feature of the 1Ds and documented as such, and that they cannot be resposible for my underexposure, i.e. the camera was designed for perfect exposure and what happens when I underexpose, whatever the amount, is my own fault
-
Glad it seems to be working out for you. Before you declare victory, make sure all the warranties are USA warranties. Also make sure all the goods are brand new, that battery, charger, etc are what they are supposed to be, nothing is reconditioned, not demos, and they have valid serial numbers (which you can find out when you register the equipment on the manufacturers' websites if that is possible. Those are the real essentials. As for the deal, click into www.bhphotovideo.com and see what they would have charged you for the same package. If all this checks out OK, sleep well.
-
I stumbled onto this wonderful site trying to find the best information on DSLRs. So far, the review on the Rebel XT was the best I've seen by far. Numbers and statistics do little for me; I am in the market of purchasing my first DSLR camera. Currently, I own/am borrowing a Canon AE-1 Program camera from 1981 with a zoom lens of 35-105mm. I love this camera dearly. Now... here is my pickle. I am wanting to dip into the photography business-- I figure wedding photography is the best way to make money for my education at this point-- but I have never worked with a DSLR camera, and I am not very well endowed with cash at this point.
Thus, I was comparing the Nikon D70 and the Canon Rebel XT. So far, it seems the Nikon looks like an easier camera to use, but I am interested in the opinions of professionals who have checked out both of these models. My biggest concern is the moire/warping effect in blown-up images. On one website, a reviewer noted a discoloring effect in the pattern of a man's shirt when the image was magnified. I'm sure this wouldn't go over well with detailed bridal gowns.
I talked to a young man who works at a photography store in town and he owned a D70 and didn't seem to know what I was talking about. Was he just being pompous, or does the D70 not have as many problems with moire in bricks/detailed patterns?
Basically, I want to know whether it is worth buying one of these cameras now, or if I should wait and save my money for a more expensive camera with better filters against moire. I'm just starting out in this business and would greatly appreciate any suggestions or feedback anyone could give me.
-
I may get shot down on this one, but I've used both cameras a decent amount, and I really think the XT is easier to use. The D70 has a nicer feel to it, but it (in my opinion) not as well layed out. Keep in mind I said used, not owned, but those were my impressions.
-macgyver
-
Pom, in what important (to you) respects was a 1Ds a downgrade from a 10D?
Jan, I was confronted last year with a choice between a used 1Ds and a new 20D. The 1Ds was much more expensive, but I bought it anyhow. The trade-off for me was very simple: the main advantages of the 20D are lighter weight, faster camera-on, faster image processing. DIGIC 2 may also produce less noise at higher ISOs, but for me that is largely an academic issue. The main attractions of the used 1Ds were simply build quality (when I buy stuff - except printers - I tend to keep it a long time), full frame 24x36 and higher resolution, which I value alot for making enlargements of cropped images. All this goes to show simply that what one buys is a very personal decision based on what one considers to be most important for his/her own situation. It's fine for first-time buyers to solicit opinions like this on the web, but as I mentioned above, that is why it is worth putting alot of effort into some basic system decisions relative to ones needs and preferences.
-
Thanks for the insight pom. As I rarely need to expose at speeds higher than 400, that is not an issue for me, but I can see it being an annoyance for people who need it. Regarding the banding, I wonder whether any other digital cameras perform better at five stops underexposure - that is quite a severe test and not a normal way of making photographs, as you well know. I have under-exposed by a stop or two at ISO 640 and there was some noise in the shadow areas, but easily handled with Noise Ninja.
I agree, the zoom feature is "primitive", and processing is slower than on the most recent models. I find the weight an asset actually (except when carrying it) - the sheer inertia helps steady the camera!
Jan, not that any of this is relevant to "wowhorse" who started the thread with an apparently innocent question about whether to buy a Rebel or a D70, but just for the record, there is about 37% increase of resolution (measured by pixel dimensions) between an 8MP 20D and an 11MP 1Ds. As both sensors are 12 bit depth and both have ample resolution at least to size A3, relative to the 1Ds there would have to be really major advances in the 20D's sensor design and software for there to be that much difference in rendering of shadow detail between them. Once we're dealing with cameras in the range of the 20D - 1Ds, I think shadow detail depends alot on exposure and post-processing strategies rather than fine differences in the hardware.
-
Jan, not that any of this is relevant to "wowhorse" who started the thread with an apparently innocent question about whether to buy a Rebel or a D70,
Of course it isn't.
"Never go off on tangents, which are lines that intersect a curve at only one point and were discovered by Euclid, who lived in the 6th century, which was an era dominated by the Goths, who lived in what we now know as Poland."
- Unknown from Nov. 1998 issue of Infosystems Executive.
but just for the record, there is about 37% increase of resolution (measured by pixel dimensions) between an 8MP 20D and an 11MP 1Ds.
No, that's "37% increase of total pixel count".
"Total pixel count" and "resolution" are two different things, it makes no sense to consider a camera with twice the number of megapixels as twice the resolution, unless those megapixels are distributed differently.
That's why I was so careful to write angular resolution in the context of lenses; horizontally, the 1Ds sensor has effectively 4064/35.8 = 113.5 pixels/mm, the 20D 3504/22.5 = 155.7, which is what counts when you use the same lens.
And if you choose to change the focal length for the lens on the 1Ds in order to achieve the same FOV as the 20D would have, the resolution advantage to the 1Ds is 4064/3504 - 1 = 16% horizontally.
Similarly, the advantage for the 1Ds MkII at the same FOV is 42.5% horizontally, but the sensor has "only" 138.7px/mm of effective resolution.
This is what the Nikon folks are talking about when they say that the D2X (180.9px/mm) has greater resolution than the 1DsMkII. And of course they're right, in the sense that the D2X ought to be noticeably more demanding of its lenses.
I'm a bit stunned to see that this hasn't caught on, even though the same arguments were used in the "Digital vs. film" debate, just with digital vs. film instead of digital vs. digital.
As both sensors are 12 bit depth and both have ample resolution at least to size A3, relative to the 1Ds there would have to be really major advances in the 20D's sensor design and software for there to be that much difference in rendering of shadow detail between them.
I was actually thinking of the other way around; that the 1Ds probably doesn't show much better shadow detail than the 20D. But that may also depend on whether we look at the same print size for the same FOV or not.
Once we're dealing with cameras in the range of the 20D - 1Ds, I think shadow detail depends alot on exposure and post-processing strategies rather than fine differences in the hardware.
Now that is something I think is easy to agree on, unless you're experiencing problems like those pom has.
And since you don't seem to be experiencing the same kind of problems, my guess is that he has been unlucky.
FWIW, there are circumstances when banding shows up at ISO 100 on a clear, blue sky even with my 20D, but those are rare, and difficult to reproduce. I'm guessing at electromagnetic disturbance from something, but what?
I've long been thinking that modern DSLRs should incorporate a Faraday cage to reduce the risk of electromagnetic noise from external sources, and maybe they already do. Of course, there's a possible problem with that big hole in the front of the camera if you have to block GHz frequencies. ::
-
Jonathan, you are generally correct that if it looks too good to be true it is and your advice is a timely call to action. But before assuming "wowhorse" has been had, perhaps he should first call the dealer and make sure that he will be receiving every piece that is normally supposed to be "in the box" AND that the equipment is neither USED nor a DEMONSTRATOR AND that USA WARRANTIES are included, then if he finds trouble, he should cancel the transaction. [I always use B&H as my benchmark of value because you always get what you are supposed to get from them usually at the best available prices for the goods in question - anyone who can sell the correct item or bundle of items cheaper than B&H you have to wonder about.]
-
I've booked half an hour with a 1Ds on Tuesday (local friendly camera store that has one for rent) so I can run side by side test shots, I think that side by side comparisons of two 1Ds's, both Mark I's, should give me a pretty good argument.
-
Thank GOD everything came in the mail today-- all as ordered, with no problems. Considering what I paid, I really didn't get such a bad deal. $1300 for a Nikon D70s body, a Sigma 70-300mm Macro super lens, a Sigma 28-70mm high speed zoom lens, a flash memory card of 256, a battery and charger, two UV filters, a lens cleaning kit, and a "free" camera case and tripod. It may not have been the deal I thought it was, but I'm pretty much happy with the goods-- I can see no problems so far with them, except for the viewfinder of the super lens being really grainy. And they are all under warantee.
Notice, I didn't order a ton of little extras like many other people were suckered into, though I was talked into 'upgrading' the lens and ended up getting two. Granted, I would probably never again order from these people b/c they were so hard to deal with over the phone, were very pushy, and from other feedback, seem very unreliable. If I hadn't requested next day air shipping, I may not have gotten this stuff at all.
Well, anyway, if I did get swindled a bit, innocense is bliss at this point. I'm just happy everything arrived on time and is new out of the box.
-
With the lens you have, moire is unlikely to be a problem because it is unlikely to be able to focus sharply enough to cause moire. Moire only happens when the image projected by the lens has alternating detail that roughly matches the pixel spacing of the sensor. An anti-aliasing filter blurs the image just enough to allow the Bayer color interpolation to figure out the real colors involved, and a cheap lens will blur the image even more so to the point where moire will probably never happen. But the anti-aliasing filter and a good RAW converter will prevent moire in most cases, even with very sharp glass. You're worrying about a non-issue that is typically easily fixed in Photoshop anyway.
-
I think your biggest concern in buying a digital camera if you intend to do increasingly serious work down the road should be that once you start in one system you build lenses and accessories in that system and sooner or later you become financially married to it by virtue of the high costs of replacing all that stuff should you wish to change systems. Thus before you plunge it is best to take a good hard look at what system you think you would prefer to get married to before telling the salesman "I do". This requires web and hands-on research that relates your personal preferences, requirements and prospective investment over time to the offerings of the major system manufacturers. You want to look at bodies (weight, feel, construction), sensor quality, other features, ease of handling, logic or intuitiveness of the control systems, lenses, flash units, post-capture processing issues, etc. For example, there has been alot of recent discussion about the awkwardness of Nikon's lock on the white balance algorythm for their RAW format. Apart from websites such as this one, DP Review, Galbraith, Steves Digicams, etc., Katrin Eismann's book on digital photography has alot of useful guidance for someone just getting into it. It's also good to go to your dealer's more than once and handle various models to see what seems to feel best for you.
-
NOISE!!!
The noise over iso 640 makes the camera pretty useless at those speeds.
Noise banding in the lower section of the horizontal in the blacks means that you need to 'expose to the right' all the time even at iso 100.
For landscapes this may not be a problem, for wedding photography, especially flash work this means that you either nail the exposure spot on or you're f****d.
I used to underexpose slightly with the 10D to protect the highlights, if I do that now I will get red noise banding in the blacks. This can be a serious problem using fill flash with the bride as sparkly/shiny areas of the dress will blow out at the correct exposure for the face. Underexposure means that the tux of the groom will have banding issues.
Admittedly this has been very good dicipline in that I meter everything by hand using an incident meter and my exposures are pretty much spot on, frame by frame for a 12 hour wedding. Much less post process time as well.
I've bought a Lightsphere II to hopefully get around the problem of highlights in the dress blowing, with initial tests it gives softer fill on the face, I don't have a convenient bride for two weeks though...
Apart from that the zoom feature is primitive, the review is slower by the 10D and although it's only by a second or so, you would be suprised how long a second can seem when 'moments' are happening all around you and you are still checking the histogram!
Other than that it's a very heavy creature, I can't handhold it under 1/60th and even then...
But mainly the banding in the lower part of the frame, I shoot with a lot of blacks in the picture and it's a serious issue as I have no leeway in the shadows at all, supposedly one of digitals greatest assets.
(http://www.bphotography.co.uk/banding.jpg)
This extreme example of a white wall and cushion shot at iso 100, 5 stops underexposed shows the pattern of the red noise banding, almost as if half the frame had worse noise control. With blacks the underexposure would need to be far less, approx 1.5-2 stops underexposed for the same effect. Remember this is with iso 100. There are workabouts but it's pathetic anyway.
BTW if anyone can tell me that this noise banding in the lower half of the frame as opposed to the upper half is non characteristic of the 1Ds, my camera is still under warranty and you would make me a very very happy man...
-
I own and have used both the 10D and 20D extensively.
Supposedly, the big advantage of the 10D over the D60 was lower noise. I don't know, I never owned a D60.
But the claimed advantages of the 20D over the 10D are: lower noise, faster response, and greater resolution. All quite true according to my experience. I no longer use my 10D due to these quite obvious improvements. Next week my 10D will be listed on eBay.
-
*small wave* Hi, it's the original poster again... hah.
Well, I didn't know my little ol' post would ignite such conversation-- but I did want to tell you guys, I was pushed just enough away from the Rebel that I fell into the lap of the Nikon D70S, and in combination with planning a spur of the moment trip out west, I figured what the heck! So I ordered it from expresscameras.com for a pretty good deal. I got it in a package with a Sigma "70-300mm f4-5.6 APO Zoom Macro SuperII Pro Lens" and another lens which our dealer claimed was a step up from the kit Nikon lens. I ordered it next day shipping so it would be here in time to leave for the trip, so hopefully that all goes well and I don't get a ton of replies from you guys telling me, "You've been HAD!" or something. It's really overwhelming when I'm just getting into this and there is SO MUCH on the market, and I have barely scratched the surface with information on digital cameras.
I am so excited to play with my new gadgets! I've never had a nice digital SLR so this is going to open a new world for me, and hopefully will steer me into the right direction for business.
Anyway, thanks for all your help! I'm sure I'll be back for more questions later!
You have not been "had", but it sounds like you have a telephoto lens to start with. Is that really what you want? What about normal or wide focal lengths, which a kit lens would cover? (Or did you also get the kit lens?)
-
wowhorse: best wishes for fine results with your new camera. Enjoy it.
jani: one would NOT use the same lens on a 20D that one would use on a 1Ds if one wanted the same field of view, and in those circumstances the manner in which both you and Nikon are defining resolution doesn't hold up. There is much material on definition of resolution both on the L-L website and in other literature. It indicates "resolution" is much more complicated than either of us are discussing here.
pom: as I mentioned, I have not noticed in my work the kind of red banding in black areas that you have brought to our attention, nor did any of the websites that reviewed the 1Ds when it first hit the market mention such an issue (e.g. Luminous Landscape, Imaging Resource and dpReview to name three of the main ones). If you use the same lighting and lighting techniques for capturing the same clothing with other digital cameras and they did not produce this phenominon, perhaps you should discuss the issue with Canon and let them check the camera unless they come up with some cogent reason for it - which would really be interesting to know about.
-
Jonathan, you are generally correct that if it looks too good to be true it is and your advice is a timely call to action. But before assuming "wowhorse" has been had, perhaps he should first call the dealer and make sure that he will be receiving every piece that is normally supposed to be "in the box" AND that the equipment is neither USED nor a DEMONSTRATOR AND that USA WARRANTIES are included, then if he finds trouble, he should cancel the transaction.
Did you look at the link I posted? expresscameras.com is a totally sleazy scam outfit. I'm not assuming anything; read their reviews and you'll find nobody that has done business with them has anything good to say about them. And calling them is a waste of time, they're a bunch of liars. Read their reviews.
-
It's under a warranty from the company I bought it from 2nd hand, not Canon, I doubt they will agree that there is enough of a problem to warrant a chip replacement costing more than I paid for the camera. Bugger!
-
I'm also concerned, when it comes to the Rebel XT, with changing f-stops because I'm so used to spinning a dial, and it seems pretty laborious from the review on this website. Then again, I don't know the difference in how the Nikon D70 performs when it comes to changing apertures.
-
If you will be shooting weddings then keep in mind that you will need a backup camera as well. The XT is a bit too small to hang pro level lenses from, unless you will be shooting only with primes, I know I couldn't work with that thing hanging off the end of a 24-70L or 70-200L. I dont know about the speed, responsiveness, etc but keep in mind that it is the bottom rung of the Canon DSLR ladder, not that it's not a good camera, but maybe not one for professional use.
I know several photographers shooting weddings with the D70 which is the Nikon's equivelent to Canon's 20D, a step up from the XT.
I would either recommend the D70s (I have a friend who bought one as backup to the Fuji S2 though after he saw the flash exposures swopped the S2 to backup role instead!) or a 20D.
If you are happy with it then you could use the canon AE-1 as backup, just make sure that you are able to shoot the entire wedding - in your advertised style - on film, should your DSLR die or be murdered at the beginning of the day.
Otherwise, and if you do go down the Canon route, you could do a lot worse than a 2nd hand 10D, I was shooting weddings with it until recently when I upgaded (the resolution and AF) and downgraded (almost everything else) to the 1Ds.
On an aside, don't spend a bunch of money on the camera and skimp on the lenses. A problem with DSLR's is that you will notice anything less than top quality lenses very fast, don't waste your money, save up a bit longer and get the best, anything less will cost you more money in the long run and plenty soul wrenching.
-
Pom, in what important (to you) respects was a 1Ds a downgrade from a 10D?
If I may intrude with my recollection, it was performance in shadow areas, where the 10D was noticeably better.
Judging from what I've read, the 1Ds is not an improvement over the 20D here, but I don't know if the 20D is as good as the 10D.
Jan, I was confronted last year with a choice between a used 1Ds and a new 20D. The 1Ds was much more expensive, but I bought it anyhow. The trade-off for me was very simple: the main advantages of the 20D are lighter weight, faster camera-on, faster image processing. DIGIC 2 may also produce less noise at higher ISOs, but for me that is largely an academic issue. The main attractions of the used 1Ds were simply build quality (when I buy stuff - except printers - I tend to keep it a long time), full frame 24x36 and higher resolution, which I value alot for making enlargements of cropped images.
In my case, the used 1Ds was still noticeably more expensive than a brand new 1D MkII, which would have been too expensive for me anyway. Today, purchasing the used 1Ds would put the total sum of my already acquired 20D body and the 1Ds body at less than purchasing the 1D MkII.
The "resolution" advantage of the 1Ds isn't much compared to the 20D (16% more pixels in either dimension in the final image), but you can get by with lenses that the 20D would strip bare because of its greater angular resolution (37% horizontally or vertically). Cue the arguments con/pro stitching. ::
And wide-angle is of course easier with the 1Ds full frame, which is something that I sometimes miss with the 20D.
As for build quality, the 20D is good, but it's not as bombproof as the 1-series, and of course it shouldn't be exposed to rain or such. I fully expect to be able to keep it at least 5 years, without worrying about it falling apart. A 1-series body should last "forever".
I didn't think I'd appreciate the high-ISO performance of the 20D until I suddenly used it.
All this goes to show simply that what one buys is a very personal decision based on what one considers to be most important for his/her own situation. It's fine for first-time buyers to solicit opinions like this on the web, but as I mentioned above, that is why it is worth putting alot of effort into some basic system decisions relative to ones needs and preferences.
Absolutely.
And if my priorities weren't towards getting better lenses, a photo printer, software and other gear, I'd probably have aimed for a 1-series camera myself.
-
I see what you mean, but I haven't experienced it at such low ISO and limited underexposure.
-
*small wave* Hi, it's the original poster again... hah.
Well, I didn't know my little ol' post would ignite such conversation-- but I did want to tell you guys, I was pushed just enough away from the Rebel that I fell into the lap of the Nikon D70S, and in combination with planning a spur of the moment trip out west, I figured what the heck! So I ordered it from expresscameras.com for a pretty good deal. I got it in a package with a Sigma "70-300mm f4-5.6 APO Zoom Macro SuperII Pro Lens" and another lens which our dealer claimed was a step up from the kit Nikon lens. I ordered it next day shipping so it would be here in time to leave for the trip, so hopefully that all goes well and I don't get a ton of replies from you guys telling me, "You've been HAD!" or something. It's really overwhelming when I'm just getting into this and there is SO MUCH on the market, and I have barely scratched the surface with information on digital cameras.
I am so excited to play with my new gadgets! I've never had a nice digital SLR so this is going to open a new world for me, and hopefully will steer me into the right direction for business.
Anyway, thanks for all your help! I'm sure I'll be back for more questions later!
-
I'd say it's possible Pom's camera is more susceptible to the banding issue than most copies of the 1Ds. I've encountered it a few times, but always in images underexposed by at least a stop, and mostly at higher ISO settings. I've seen reports of people who sent their cameras in to Canon and had the sensor replaced under warranty and the problem went away, but details are hazy as this was like 2 years ago. It may be worth contacting Canon service if being without the camera for a few weeks coincides with a planned recuperation anyway. Include an example image, preferably with the least amount of underexposure possible, when contacting Canon.
-
Pom, if their warranty is worth the paper it's printed on the camera should meet Canon's own technical performance specifications, and if it doesn't their warranty should obligate them to fix it. What it costs them is not your issue, and you won't know what you can achieve before trying. Obviously if you expect trouble getting the warranty respected you need to make doubly sure you have the problem well demonstrated and documented so they can't wiggle out unless they can clearly prove to your satisfaction that the problem does not reside within the camera.
-
Hi Jonathan - did what you suggested - you're right. It raises real questions about the meaning of consumer protection laws and what to do about governmental institutions that don't work.