| Herman's gallery |
Canon Equipment Photography, User Review Pages by Herman J. Muller |
| Index | ||
|
| Click on any of the above categories to go there |
|
I
Click on image to see at full screen The above procedure was completed for both images (TIFF and JPEG) obtaining, as near as I could tell, identical results.
That the Canon 20D and its competitors
will make 35mm film photography eventually obsolete is a fact. It is
clear that, unless you are a "die-hard," 35 film cameras and film
scanners are becoming a thing of the past. I found myself at this
cross road when I badly needed to replace an obsolete but still
working film scanner. I decided for the Canon 20D rather than
investing in a state of the art scanner of similar expense. As it
appears, I made the right decision. I ended-up with higher
resolution images than I could have obtained from any film scanner,
eliminated the film development process with its inherent chemical
solution pollution, have instant access to the shots of the day and
not to mention, total control over the quality of the process. What
a deal!
* If the test images @ 97 DPI (26x36 inches) were properly edited and up-sampled to 300 DPI, the result would have made acceptable poster quality images.
"The EOS 20D has an extensive ISO range (from 100 to 1600 plus ISO 3200 in extended mode), and the sensor features a newly developed set of narrow-gap micro lenses and noise reduction circuits to improve performance at high ISO's, and optimized photodiode configurations for improved performance at all Isis. This results in larger, clearer, sharper and more detailed photographs right from the start." The above quote is, by many readers regarded as an interesting "sales pitch" and quickly read-over. Most film users would regard the ISO ability as useless to them. After all, using film with a higher ISO rating is a quality trade-off and a certain limitation for enlargements. ISO 400 ok, but 800, 1600 and 3200? When I read the ISO spec's, I thought that it was interesting but shooting at such high settings will certainly result in a useless image due to pixel grain and noise. So, I parked the idea of evaluating it until I made some pictures at an ISO 200 setting and decided to enlarge the image to 12 x18. I was surprised to see very little quality difference between images photographed at my usual 100 ISO settings and the ones done at ISO 200 and so a question evolved. Could I shoot large average lit areas without using flash equipment? The areas I had in mind were well lit sports events, stage performances etc.. A few weeks before, I had started a new layout for my web site the subject being "Renaissance Hotels & Resorts." I had the exterior shots of three four-star rebuild local resort-hotels but how about the interior? How do I shoot the large lobbies, lounges and veranda's I wondered. Camera mounted flash gear would not work unless auto triggered slaves would be set-up all around the scene. A big no-no for a four star hotel with its daily traffic and the afore mentioned question began to have an answer. One of the hotels with large open incandescent illuminated areas was within walking distance and I decided to do the ISO evaluation there. The results are amazing, see below.
Above images are web quality (72DPI,) Click on either to enlarge The above pictures were taken with a Canon 20D digital camera using a Canon 28-135mm zoom lens @ 28mm or, (compensated for the Cmos size, 28mm x 1.6 = 44mm) @ 44mm focal length . The lens has IS (image stabilization) and the camera was handheld at 1/6 sec exposure. The aperture was set to f-14, ISO to 1600 and White Balance to Auto. Post processing from RAW format was curtailed to adjusting the White Balance from "Auto" to 3200 Kelvin because the auto setting produced to much orange cast from the incandescent illumination and warm colors of the interior. (Like exposing day-light film to incandescent light without a filter or not using a flash.) Taking the picture without flash relying on ambient light only, produced an equal tone throughout the scene that being a mixture of incandescent light, some fluorescent above the bar and incoming day light. No fill-in flash or spot lights were used. The larger image, (click on the picture to see the image at 560 x 350 pixels) shows a pleasing picture with significant clear detail (@ 1/6 sec.). So much for image stabilization (IS) technology. To establish acceptable enlargement quality, in terms of visible grain/pixels and noise, the above image was enlarged to 18 x 24 inches. That is a considerable magnification considering the Cmos image format is 22.5 x 15mm therefore, an 18 x 24 inch enlargement is about an 826 times area increase of the basic Cmos area size. From the 18 x 24 inch enlargement, we selected and cropped an area of 3 x 4 inch detailing the second table lamp on the left indicated by the white window in the above picture. No image processing of any kind was done to enhance it other than the mentioned white balance adjustment. Although the crop is not the best of quality it shows very little grain, pixels or noise at this size. Would we have applied some degree of tweaking and sharpening, it would have produced an acceptable 18 x 24 print whereas a print of same size made from a 35mm equivalent film negative certainly would have exhibited visible grain.
If the lens is mounted on a digital camera with a less than 35mm Cmos, multiply the lens setting by the focus factor in order to obtain actual focus length. For instance, this lens mounted on my Canon 20D which has a 1.6 conversion factor, changes the focal length to 300mm x 1.6 = 480mm turning the lens into a respectable tool. The other day, concrete was being poured on the 26th floor of a new high-rise under construction in my neighborhood. The distance of my view point and the construction activity was about 900-1000 feet or about a small halve-mile. As I observed the activity, I could see the cement pump being positioned but not a lot of detail. I wondered what kind of detail the Canon 20D with a Canon 75-300mm zoom lens would deliver and at full magnification (300mm x 1.6 lens factor = 480mm), took the picture hand held at the following settings; Camera, Canon 20D, Lens, Canon 75-300 USM IS f4.5 @ 300 (480) 100 sec. f 8 AF 100 ISO Hand held, Distance 2200/2300 ft.
I enlarged the picture to about 22 x 34 and cropped the center building corner. I was amazed to see the detail and the lack of noise/grain and to find three workers in the foreground top-corner of the building. I could count the re-bars sticking up in the air. This is amazing! I always found it tricky to make hand-held long-lens shots and found it cumbersome to carry a tripod for the "occasional" occasion. Hence, I got interested in the IS feature. It sure is working!
Canon 100 mm 2.8 Macro lens User Remarks
This lens replaced the older 100 mm non-USM lens. Although I have no experience with the older lens, I must say that this lens should have a red ring around the barrel. The quality for the price (+/- $500.00) is excellent. It was near the end of last year (2006) I obtained the Canon 100 mm 2.8 Macro and I must say I have had a ball with this lens. First of all I must explain why I selected the 100 mm instead of any of the other tree available including the 60 mm macro developed for the Canon digital camera line. One of the decision makers was that I also own an Canon Elan 7 film camera and wanted to maintain interchangeability. The other reasons were that the 100 mm had a longer focal range giving me more distance between the subject and the end of the lens as well as the reputation this lens had when used for portrait photography. A shorter focal length usually presents problems because getting as close as 1:1 means casting your shadow and body movements which can interfere with the subject matter. Getting physically very close to the subject usually results in consequent objection of the item (insect etc.) being photographed. Generally, the further you can stay away from the subject the more you will be successful. A 180mm macro is a great choice for this reason, but they are slower and more difficult to hand-hold. I chose the 100mm as a compromise. This lens features internal focusing without extending the length of the lens with one regret however, the lens should have had IS. Nikon for instance recognized this feature for macro lenses to be important and a few weeks or so ago they (Nikon) announced a Macro Image stabilized lens ( 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor, a macro lens with vibration reduction technology)
Although not all pictures are "outstanding" a few are and as a whole, not bad for a first time experience with this new lens. One of the items that must be considered constantly is the narrow DOF. To appreciate this how narrow this DOF actually is I made the chart below from data obtained from the web.
At a 6 inch distance from the subject, the DOF is near zero regardless the F stop. At 3 feet, the best DOF one can get is 1.95 inch @ F-11 (read in-between the lines) any smaller F stop to increase the DOF will result in violating the ideal f stop resulting in loss of sharpness or compromising and the obvious one would be a higher ISO setting. A higher ISO setting, well you know what happens although my Canon 20D delivers good and very acceptable enlargements even at 400 ISO. The loss of "lens sharpness" at a higher f stop is based on the "shoot at your lens sharpest aperture" rule. For most lenses, that is about two to three stops smaller than wide open. The last shooting variable were you can play with is the light source meaning increase the power of the flash unit. As the chart indicates, the larger the distance between subject and lens, the DOF increases accordingly. When cutting the distance between subject and lens, the DOF becomes extremely narrow and focusing (either auto or manually) without a tripod becomes more difficult.
The left image was shot at about 1500 ft. the right is a crop of the left and reading the crane's name is not a problem. Nice, I think so. Click on the crop!
A ring-lite allows you to illuminate small objects with "shadow-less" flash of light, even at the closest possible distances. The MR-14EX has some unique capabilities that bear mentioning. Firstly, the ring has separate left and right flash tubes, and the light level can be set independently for each up to a 6 F-stop range. Two small incandescent focusing lights illuminate the subject. The unit has all the standard setting capabilities found on the Canon 420 and the 580. Guide number at 100 ISO is about 26 ft. at full power. The unit mounts at 45 degrees on the camera mounting shoe and is designed to fit on all 58mm lenses and a 72mm adapter is available as an extra for the 180mm macro lens. Filters can be attached to the 50 & 100mm non USM lenses and the 180 and S60 USM lenses. With regret I must report that a filter can not be attached to the 100mm USM IS lens. This is a nicely designed and manufactured ring lite however, as top flash equipment goes, it is not cheap but it work very well. Canon Zoom EF 28-135mm IS User Remarks
\\
camera reducing, near eliminating the need for a tripod. Image stabilization allows one to shoot images to at lower light levels. I have tested the lens in light conditions where normally a flash is employed. At 1/25 sec. and 135mm, test shots were very acceptable and at magnification, no blur was detected. According to Canon, the IS compensation is equivalent to two F stops or shutter speeds. Therefore, an image shot at 1/25 sec. is actually shot at 1/100 sec. without image stabilization. Lens quality appears to excellent and the lens is generally referred to by many owners as a "nice-piece-of-glass." I have used this lens frequently under many conditions moving, as well as stationary, as a short or long focal and have always been pleased with the quality of the image.
Canon Digital EOS History
The Current Resolution Lineup
From the above resolution chart one can quickly see that the
50D has the highest sensor resolution in the entire 2009 camera
line followed by the Rebel Xsi. This is very confusing because an
off-hand conclusion would be the 50D is the better camera judging
by the very high number of pixels per square mm. Although the 50D
may be of outstanding image quality, the fact is however that the
pixel size of the full size sensors are larger in size and
different in make-up. How one can establish the actual difference
in image quality between the 1Ds Mark III versus the 50D or the
Rebel Xis, is a matter of technical interpretation and not in the realm of
this review. However, that there is a quality difference, is
obvious otherwise the professional cameras would not be as costly
as they are. Let it be said that the 50D has outstanding
resolution and images produced, with this camera and a capable lens,
are simply
outstanding.
This camera has many operating methods and function settings. I
tried to count them and came up with a close estimate. There
are fifteen shooting settings and there are nine control
categories to fine tune these settings. These fine tuning
categories have sixty five sub settings so, it can get
complicated! The shooting compensations and possibilities are
simply overwhelming but let it be said that, the 50D makes
outstanding picture right "out of the box!" Of the many
tweaking adjustments, there are a number of them that are worth
mentioning. Read on.
AF Drive Mode The Canon 50D has improved AF continuous shooting abilities. Depending on the drive mode, this camera is capable of shooting 6.3 frames/sec. in bursts of 60/90 frames depending on the speed of the memory card used. Considering motion picture framing is between 24 to 28 frames/sec. I wonder what Canon's intend is for this feature but it sure will catch a football sequence!
In 2006, I purchased a macro lens and experiences "out-of-focus"
images. Although the camera did not provided for any
compensations, I wanted to find out if it was the lens or
me so I set out to located the problem My first try was to
line-up a row of staggered and standing-on-edge dominos about
3/8" apart. That told me something but it was a too course
spacing. The next idea was a fixture with crisp black lines. I
had Adobe PageMaker and crafted a focus calibration plate glued
to white styrofoam board and placed it tilted on a 30 degree
angle against a support. It solved my problem although no
adjustments were available to remedy the situation. At a later
date, I constructed a fixture that worked pretty well and made
it simpler to check the FA and correct the camera accordingly.
As a note of interest, I tested all my Canon
lenses with this crude method and found them to all to "dead on"
within the lowest f stop of the lens. If the test fixture made by
Raw Workflow can do a more precise job, one would have to spend
the $140.00 and find out.
What does it do? Depending how the C.Fn setting is selected it can do the following;
* I personally use this setting a lot to avoid "erratic lens behavior" when re-focusing after re-framing" however, I do find the button to small and not in the right position because I do find myself looking for it when I want too refocus. Hopefully Canon wants to redesign this the shape of the button for easier finger recognition. I do not use this setting for macro photography when using a cable release unless I use "life viewing."
Conclusions
The above are a number of the most exiting new features. this machine has many capabilities and is an evolution from the 10D to today's product. This camera is capable, smart and fun to operate. Coupled to a capable zoom lens such as the Canon 28-135 3.5 IS or the Canon 24-105 3.5 IS (little expensive) one has an gets a photographic experience which parallels professional proficiency. One needs to aware that this camera has twice the resolution compared to a canon 20D, the files are also twice as large. If your computer has marginal memory, you need to update your memory for sure! Canon Zoom EF 24-105 mm f4L IS User Remarks
This lens was purchased from B&H. Because of that, the following story had a happy ending. The lens was an Xmas present and an enormous surprise when I opened the package and of course could not wait to give the lens a serious workout. Arriving home after the Holidays I went to take some shots of old barns in the local country site where I live. I made about 38 exposures and after uploading them I was puzzled to see all images taken with an open aperture f 4.0 and with in about eight feet were blurry and they looked as to be out-of-focus. My first reaction was to inspect the lens settings then the camera settings but all appeared to be just fine and I began to feel uncomfortable. I made a number of additional shots with the same aperture and distance settings as before and a number with a greater depth setting like f 8.0. Again, all images were blurry and it begun to dawn on me that this high reputation lens was not functioning properly. Whether is was either the image stabilization or the focusing mechanisms I was not sure but this lens needed to be send back. I called B&H and was advised to send the lens to the nearest Canon repair facility which cost me $ 32.00 for shipping and insurance. That, was a mistake. the was just out of the box and I should have returned it B&H for an exchange. At any rate that was done later in the mean time the lens was two weeks out of my possession. The Virginia Canon repair facility returned the lens with a not the the lens was found to be "within manufacturing specifications." More uncomfortable feelings and I felt that maybe it was me! A few days later an indoor photo opportunity came about and I decided to use the Canon 24-105 4L IS lens assuming it as my doing the lens was not focusing properly and contributed it to excessive camera shake. After all, the Canon repair people had found nothing wrong, so it must be the user. Was I upset when I started to edit the images and found them, with the exception of one, all blurry and out-of-focus! More uncomfortable feelings now mixed with anger. Thirty two dollars down the drain and the big possibility I am the owner of a BUM lens! Again, I called B&H Customer Service. After explaining the problem and the Canon repair verdict, B&H offered to exchange the lens! Now, So, why is this story significant? Well. two reasons. The first one, know who you are buying from. Of all the horror stories I read and hear from I thought it would different to report a good experience. B&H has an excellent trading reputation this being the main reason I buy all my photographic needs from them and I guess it paid off. The second reason is Canon. This Canon 24-105 4L lens is not yesterdays product. Canon has been making this lens since 2006 and probably made hundreds of thousands of them. Knowing Canon manufacturing regimentation and product quality control, I end up with a marginal lens that apparently was focusing and its IS were functioning properly to pass the Canon QC or, it just slipped through the Canon QC. In addition, the lens was supposedly inspected by a specialist at the Virginia Canon Repair Center and found to be "within manufacturing specification." The lens is obviously flawed. A thousand dollar fiasco! How it got by Canon QC and the Canon Repair Center is beyond me. The fact that B&H has offered to exchange the lens was a big personal relieve. The crux of the story being, know who you buy from! If there is a problem with the product you buy from B&H, they are there when you need them!
One of the noticeable things about this lens is the rear located zoom ring. This is different of most lenses on the market as well as for most Canon lenses and it takes a little getting used to. personally, I prefer front ring or push-pull focusing. I guess it is what your are used to. The lens utilizes Canon's ring-type ultrasonic focusing motors, focusing is quiet and very, very fast. In fact, focusing is so fast that it seems to have better response then the medium priced Canon lenses and certainly quieter than the competitive lenses lines. Manual/Auto focus can be switched back and forth simply by turning the focus ring with taken the lens off Auto focus. A little warning here for those who are first buyers of an L lens, because of the fast focusing, be careful when re-focusing or pushing the shutter button halfway repeatedly because the lens might gets confused and front/back focus might be the result. When I noticed this possibility, I started to use the AF-ON back button to focus thereby eliminating the Halfway focus press of the shutter button. The lens has a good balanced feel. A little heavy maybe but that goes with the quality which this lens has. I compared this lens to the Canon 28-135mm 4.5 IS to see how drastic the picture quality difference would be and was pleased to see that indeed, there is a difference in sharpness and contrast and somewhat surprised if not slightly disappointed to see that the sharpness difference between the two lenses was not larger. I also tested the lens against my Canon 100mm Macro and found the 24-105mm 4L IS to be slightly better in sharpness. Since both lenses are about half price of the 24-105 L, one can wonder if that difference is worth the money. From my personnel point of view, I like a tack sharp print and if the print represents a pleasant subject of pleasing composition and color, together with crisp and tack sharp detail, I am very, very content! So, to quote an old one; the decision to spend the extra money lies in the eyes of the beholder! Released in Feb. 2006, this lens had many excellent reviews. See the technical reviews written by the following websites;
|
|
| Top of Page Review Index Page Home |
Herman's gallery |