Canon 400D (Rebel Xti, Kiss X)

[mhm]

Great Picture! I love the colors and bokeh. Did you use any flash with the shot? The only thing that I would suggest is to practice focusing on the eyes and switch to either AI focus or AI servo to help with the focus. You may also try playing with 2nd curtain flash sync as I have found that this usually adds a nice sparkle to the eyes. Again great shot and look forward to seeing more.

Jason

No flash. What is "2nd curtain flash sync?"

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Great Picture! I love the colors and bokeh. Did you use any flash with the shot? The only thing that I would suggest is to practice focusing on the eyes and switch to either AI focus or AI servo to help with the focus. You may also try playing with 2nd curtain flash sync as I have found that this usually adds a nice sparkle to the eyes. Again great shot and look forward to seeing more.

Jason

Could you explain how or why second curtain sync would change things in a picture like this? I've used it for longer exposure shots with self-illuminated bits that are moving. I didn't realize that it would have an impact on a portrait shot.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

No flash. What is "2nd curtain flash sync?"

It first helps to understand that the camera's "shutter" is really more like a pair of curtains. As the first curtain moves across the sensor, it opens the sensor so that light can hit it. The second curtain follows behind it blocking the sensor. On shutter speeds slower than about 1/200s (it varies from camera to camera), there is a period of time between when the first curtain has completely revealed the sensor but before the second curtain has started to cover it. On faster exposures, the entire sensor is never exposed all at once. Instead, the curtains have the effect of moving an open slit across the sensor limiting the amount of light that hits it.

A couple of interesting things are affected by this. First, your camera will usually only let you use a flash at a relatively low shutter speed. That's because the flash is almost instantaneous. If the two shutter curtains were moving at the same time, only the part of the sensor revealed by the slit between the two curtains would see the light from the flash.

Another interesting tidbit is that most (if not all) DSLRs give you the option of having the flash fire as soon as the sensor is revealed (first curtain sync) or just before the sensor starts to close (second curtain sync). In my experience, this is typically done when a light source is moving during a relatively long exposure. The classic example is a car with it's headlights on at dusk. If you use first curtain sync (usually the default), you will expose the car at the start of the exposure and the headlights will keep exposing while the shutter is open. The result is a car with what looks like light beams shooting out ahead of it. With second curtain sync, the headlights move during the exposure, but the car is exposed at the end of the exposure. The result is a car where the lights trail backward rather than forward from the headlights. This gives the viewer a sense that the car is moving forward rather than shooting out beams of light.

Some flash units have a high speed sync mode. Ironically, this mode causes the flash to operate slowly. Instead of firing in an instant, the power of the flash is lowered and the duration is increased. The same amount of light is put out, but it is spread out over a longer time. With this mode, it doesn't matter that the sensor is never fully exposed. Instead, the flash stays on for the entire duration of the shutters moving.

Yet another intersting fact is that when you take a fast shutter speed shot, like 1/2000s, the shutter is open for more than 1/2000s. It's just that no one part of the sensor is uncovered for more than 1/2000s.

If you really want to freeze motion, use the longest shutter speed your camera allows without using high speed sync, and have your flash provide most of the illumination. The flash duration will be much faster than the time it takes for your shutter curtains to swing across the sensor. It's much easier to make electronics (like a flash) work fast than it is to make mechanical things (like a shutter) work fast.

Incidentally, this only applies to SLRs, DSLRs, and any other cameras that use dual curtain shutters. Most digital P&S don't use mechanical shutters. I don't have a good understanding of how this applies to them.

 

[Zeagle]

It will not have a tremendous impact on the picture, but I like to try subtle changes to try and take a more pleasing/creative picture. For me with what I have seen and played with, I find that it softens shadows, allows more available light, brings out a persons eyes in direct closer portraits and works best in indoor low light situations. This is all subjective of course and is another reason why I love digital so much. Digital allows anyone to tinker with an unlimited amount of settings without costing anything with regards to film or processing. I know that this is not a great technical explanation so hopefully this recent example portrait posted here will show my thinking better.

2nd Curtain sync is not something that I would do with a moving subject in a well light area, either indoors or out, and as you noted it will create trails and or blur in the final picture because of the motion. For outdoor pictures High Speed Sync would be more ideal as long as you have a camera body and flash that is capable of this function.

Mainly this is a preference/trait that I carried over from the TTL Flash days. For the most part E-TTL flash is harder to work with 2nd curtain sync, since it will fire a pre-flash and the subject may move thinking that the shot is finished before the final flash fires. However, it is a custom function that is easy to set in most SLR/DSLR bodies and worth a shot.

Could you explain how or why second curtain sync would change things in a picture like this? I've used it for longer exposure shots with self-illuminated bits that are moving. I didn't realize that it would have an impact on a portrait shot.

 

[Marypoppinsiam]

I am having a difficult time making a decision between these two cameras. I love the antishake in the camera body of the Sony vs the Canon, but the Canon is well a Canon. Right now I have a Canon Elph that I love but I am wanting to get into the SLR arena. I am basically an ametuer photographer that loves to scrapbook. We travel a lot and my son plays baseball. I know lots of you have a opinion and that is what I need!

I have looked at both these cameras multiple times and I need to make a decision soon (upcoming vacation). Can some one help me???

Mary

 

[Master Mason]

So questions I would have

1. Have you held both of them, and which one feels better in your hands?
2. Have you looked at the cost and availiblity of lenses you will want or need? (I know nothing of minolta/sony lenses).

I have a canon XT and I too shoot a ton of baseball pics. Personally I think your going to want to have at least a 70-200 f/4 for the baseball, I use the 2.8 version, but it is almost twice the cost. I am sure that Minolta/sony has an equivalent, so you should look at that and see what it would cost you.

But the biggest factor to me would be the 1st one, how does it feel in your hands. The IS really isn't a factor for sports photography as it won't stop your subject from moving.

 

[YEKCIM]

Just to muddy the water a bit...

Have you considered Pentax and/or Nikon's competing models?

~YEKCIM

 

[jann1033]

i wouldn't base my purchase on IS...if it's not in the body, it's in the lens...the lens is might cost more but well imo the verdict is still out on the in body IS( can you tell i'm bitter from messing around for 8 months with IS problems? ). and let's face it, it's almost becoming like mps, a marketing tool...how long have people used non is lenses/cameras and done fine with them? I can't say i see a ton of difference in shake factor of my IS lens vs non IS lens photos, although canon is good with higher iso so if i raise the iso (and still don't have a ton of noise) maybe that kind of makes up for no IS or maybe cause i'm more unconsciously conscious of my camera technique when i'm not using IS, i don't know. the in lens IS has been around longer so technically they've had longer to find and hopefully work out some kinks.( my problems were with what i think might be one of the first IS lenses made) not that it doesn't have it's uses, just not what i would base the purchase on.

try them out and no doubt you'll feel natural with one and the others will have little quirks you dislike. any will give you a decent photo, some have better sensors but none are really bad( i think some reviews say the pentax is soft and you need to use raw to get the best shots but it's not like they totally stink otherwise, canon is better for noise but the nikon and sony are probably better is some other area, none are perfect and none are awful). check out some samples in reviews and see which you like the best for image quality and how much you are willing to spend for it.

the only benefit might be since you are used to a canon they might be set up somewhat similarly. ( not familiar with the elph but my slr and dslr dials are similar as is daughter's powershot) sine you are going to use if for vacation it might be harder to start totally fresh with another brand plus you might be able to use a cf converter for your old memory cards( guessing they are sd?) with the canon, i think sony uses a special type of card.

 

[Marypoppinsiam]

Well, the Canon is a much lighter camera than the Sony. The only thing is I don't think I will be changing out the lens as much as you guys probably do. I guess it might be a marketig ploy about the IS in the body, but all your point and shoot cameras are starting to incorporate them into their products, so I guess that is why I thought the IS in the body was important.

I have looked at the Nikon D40 only because the camera store was having a special on them, but that camera didn't have all the bells I was looking for. I haven't looked at the D50.

Why is this decision so hard to make? I never had any trouble in picking out my point and shoot Canon Elph.

 

[YEKCIM]

I have looked at the Nikon D40 only because the camera store was having a special on them, but that camera didn't have all the bells I was looking for. I haven't looked at the D50.

Not sure what "bells" you are looking for, but I would go with the camera *system* (body features + available lenses and accessories) that best suits your needs. I have the D50 and am very pleased with it; however, it is next to impossible to find, new. There are some factory refurbs out there, for $450 or less, body only.

~YEKCIM

 

[jann1033]

Well, the Canon is a much lighter camera than the Sony. The only thing is I don't think I will be changing out the lens as much as you guys probably do. I guess it might be a marketig ploy about the IS in the body, but all your point and shoot cameras are starting to incorporate them into their products, so I guess that is why I thought the IS in the body was important.

I have looked at the Nikon D40 only because the camera store was having a special on them, but that camera didn't have all the bells I was looking for. I haven't looked at the D50.

Why is this decision so hard to make? I never had any trouble in picking out my point and shoot Canon Elph.

sorry didn't mean to confuse you here , i meant all the manufactures have IS in either the lenses or bodies so if you really want it you can get it with any... a P&s has to have it in the body since they don't change lenses naturally.

you probably will find you want more lenses than you think, for example to match the zoom of say a 12x P&s , you'd probably need at least 2 or 3 lenses( even if you get a 18-55kit lens, you'll need at least one more to get 70-200 or 300mm or so and might want something for lower light as well ie night time shots).

 

[AndrewWG]

Well, I didn't buy a camera yet, but I did go look at them at Best Buy. Well, I was amazed at how much I DIDN'T really like the 30D. I was bummed about this for a few reasons:

1. The focus never focused on what I wanted to take a pic of. I wish I had brought my CF card with me so that I could tell if this was really true, but the red lights were showing focus just about everywhere BUT what I wanted to focus on. Is this normal?

2. The thing is a beast of a camera. Big, bulky and somewhat uncomfortable to hold. I could most likely get over this as I am just used to the S2IS size but it felt awkward.

3. The controls didn't seem to be what I thought. Buttons on the front and back, the dial, more buttons on the back and the on/off switch was even quite difficult to use.

So I think I'm back to thinking of the XTi unless someone has a real compelling piece of information that would make me want the 30D. I MAY even be willing to look at the 5D (major cost issue of course) but I have a feeling that the body size is comparable to the 30D and maybe even bigger? I am going to go to a real camera store soon and really try them all out. Although I have lenses (cheap ones but they work well) for the Canon, I may have to break down and look at the Nikon. This was not how I had envisioned the shopping experience to be, but what can I do.

My goal in all of this is to have a camera that I can take great photos with as a hobby but possibly look into going professional with in some period of time, probably quite a few years though. Any other suggestions?

Andy

 

[Master Mason]

the 5D is definately even bigger.

If the 30D was not comfortable, then go with the XTor XTi, once you get used to using that, the size of the 30d won't be so much of a deal to you, and then when you outgrow the XTi you can move in that direction.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Well, I didn't buy a camera yet, but I did go look at them at Best Buy. Well, I was amazed at how much I DIDN'T really like the 30D. I was bummed about this for a few reasons:

1. The focus never focused on what I wanted to take a pic of. I wish I had brought my CF card with me so that I could tell if this was really true, but the red lights were showing focus just about everywhere BUT what I wanted to focus on. Is this normal?

2. The thing is a beast of a camera. Big, bulky and somewhat uncomfortable to hold. I could most likely get over this as I am just used to the S2IS size but it felt awkward.

3. The controls didn't seem to be what I thought. Buttons on the front and back, the dial, more buttons on the back and the on/off switch was even quite difficult to use.

So I think I'm back to thinking of the XTi unless someone has a real compelling piece of information that would make me want the 30D. I MAY even be willing to look at the 5D (major cost issue of course) but I have a feeling that the body size is comparable to the 30D and maybe even bigger? I am going to go to a real camera store soon and really try them all out. Although I have lenses (cheap ones but they work well) for the Canon, I may have to break down and look at the Nikon. This was not how I had envisioned the shopping experience to be, but what can I do.

My goal in all of this is to have a camera that I can take great photos with as a hobby but possibly look into going professional with in some period of time, probably quite a few years though. Any other suggestions?

Andy

If you think the 30D is big, try a 1D series camera. Pro style cameras have built in portrait grips and are much larger than the 30D. My 10D (similar to the 30D in size) feels positively tiny to me.

 

[ukcatfan]

I guess it might be a marketig ploy about the IS in the body, but all your point and shoot cameras are starting to incorporate them into their products, so I guess that is why I thought the IS in the body was important.

I believe you mistook Jann. I believe that she is talking more on the reliability on the in-body IS. It certainly does work as marketed, but no IS system works miracles. If you need low light action abilities, then IS will not help because you would already have to be at a shutter speed fast enough to prevent motion blur and that is fast enough to take IS out of the picture. You need a fast lens for that.

I did some basic tests with my K100D and the IS improved my abilities by around 1.5-2 stops. It is more useful to me b/c I do not do too much action shooting at all.

Kevin

 

[Groucho]

I'm very fond of Jenn but I'm not sure why her bad experiences with in-lens IS make her suspect that in-body IS is unreliable? What's being done is fairly similar but the in-body stuff uses larger components and I suspect will be more reliable. Anecdotally, I haven't heard any issues with any in-body IS systems whereas I've heard plenty of in-lens IS issues. Granted, anecdotal evidence is about as useful as a winter jacket in WDW in July, but...

And, again, most IS lenses cost more than any IS-equipped DSLR body.

I am having a difficult time making a decision between these two cameras. I love the antishake in the camera body of the Sony vs the Canon, but the Canon is well a Canon.

Nothing sells Canons like that name on the front. Just pretend the XTi was made by Joe-Bob's Cameras and judge the two on merit. (And yes, pretend that Joe's Cameras has same line of lenses available, before someone responds about that!) The Sony is meant to be a higher-spec camera, ignoring the image stabilization issue. The XTi is entry-level, the Sony is positioned somewhere between Canon's XTi and 30D. Certainly closer to the former than the latter, but still, definitely a notch about entry-level.

What features was the D40 lacking that were available on the XTi? The main one I can think of is depth of field preview, but a Nikon fan could counter that the D40 has spot metering while the Canon doesn't.

My preferences are well known (see my signature in case you don't ), but ultimately, all the DSLRs will produce extremely similar image quality, given identical lenses. Think about ergonomics, what features are important to you, price, etc, then you can make an informed decision.

 

[Anewman]

I am having a difficult time making a decision between these two cameras. I love the antishake in the camera body of the Sony vs the Canon, but the Canon is well a Canon. Right now I have a Canon Elph that I love but I am wanting to get into the SLR arena. I am basically an ametuer photographer that loves to scrapbook. We travel a lot and my son plays baseball. I know lots of you have a opinion and that is what I need!

I have looked at both these cameras multiple times and I need to make a decision soon (upcoming vacation). Can some one help me???

Mary

Coming from a lifetime Canon shooter, the Sony A100 would be my choice for countless reasons.

But as Master Mason mentioned Anti-shake(IS) does not help when taking sports photos, unless you are shooting a sport where the athlete stands completely motionless.

And, again, most IS lenses cost more than any IS-equipped DSLR body.

Well yes and most pro level lenses without IS also cost more than currently available IS-equipped DSLR bodies, since most IS lenses today are PRO LEVEL it is not really a surprise.

Since this thread is about Sony vs Canon I would like to point out that in MOST CASES the Canon PRO LEVEL IS lenses are still less expensive than the PRO LEVEL Sony/Minolta counter parts.

some popular examples

Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 = $ 2,299.95
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS = $ 1,599.00

Sony 300mm f/2.8 = $ 5,699.95
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS = $ 3,899.95

 

[Marypoppinsiam]

Thanks everyone for all your great advice. I really need to hear it from people that have used SLR's before and know what they are talking about. After reading the posts it just amazes me on what kind of world I am getting ready to set my foot into. I have just been a point and shoot kind of girl and now I feel like I am Neil Armstrong getting off the ship to step on the moon for the first time. This is a whole new ballgame for me. I will still do my investigation to see what will fit me the best.

Here is a question for you, do you use your SLR's more than a point and shoot camera, lets say at WDW?

Thanks again for all the great responses!!!

 

[Master Mason]

I only use an SLR at this point. I made a large investment, so that I could get better pictures, and pictures that I otherwise wouldn't have been able to get.

There is a learning curve, and you have to get used to not being able to just throw it in your bag, but once you experience it, if photography is any type of passion for you, you'll be hooked for life

 

[MICKEY88]

i think sony uses a special type of card.

the sony alpha uses CompactFlash Type I and Type II, Microdrives and Memory Stick Duo/PRO Duo with included adapter. Compatible with FAT12, FAT16, FAT32 file systems