Reading mode: Light Dark

40D : LCD bad for checking focused pic

Go to last post
Glenn W. said:
What I've found is that if a photo really is in good focus and if you
bump the sharpness setting up higher, you CAN see focus reasonably
well on the LCD.

For those of you who shoot jpeg this may be of little or no help, but
if you shoot RAW, bump the in camera sharpness up to 7, then zoom in
all the way... you can see if the shot is in focus. If you shoot
JPEG, you most likely do not want focus bumped up to 7, as it would
likely make post processing a problem...
Click to expand...
I shoot RAW and I just tried this and it works. This made my day! Finally, I can zoom in to check focus on my 30D. Thank you very much!

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
 
timmer350 said:
it seems unbelievable that with the advent of huge CF cards, that
Canon doesn't use a larger preview JPG - its about 10K in size right
now!
Click to expand...
I thought it was 1MB or so. Where did you get that info out of curiosity?

(And I COMPLETELY agree - it would be great if they gave us the option of using a larger preview image, OR pressing a button on a review area to do a slower, but real image extraction for focus).

--
http://www.pbase.com/stevegrillo , Equipment on profile page
 
Shifter said:
I wish the 300D had those options. ;-)
Oh.. you meant the D300?
(strange why Nikon named their cam similar after the best selling
DSLR of all time...?)
Click to expand...
And Canon named their 5D the same as the Konica Minolta 5D which came out first. Not that any of this amounts to a hill of beans though. :-)

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
 
Will people stop saying 300D already?

The camera you are talking about is the D300.

The 300D is a years old camera -canon- made, aka the original digital rebel.
 
I agree, I am pretty much underwhelmed by the low-res LCD. It's bigger, sure, but it doesn't seem to be as sharp as the 20D's. However, once I realized you can turn on the display of the focus point(s) in the custom menu, it suddenly became very useful for quick focus checks by flagging photos mis-focused on the wrong points. Obviously it can't help with issues related to camera shake or motion blur, but it is a very nice feature to have.
 
I've only had my 40D since this morning, but so far I've been able to manual focus with both viewfinder (it's larger) and liveview at 10x, and check focus on images in playback on the LCD at 10x. Seems fine to me.
 
The 40D rear monitor is much better than the previous Canon prosumer cameras.
--
Canon Equipment
 
Read this article and you might learn something as I did.

http://www.popphoto.com/popularphotographyfeatures/4555/mcnamara-report-confusion-over-dots-vs-pixels.html

Nikon marketing is using a different rating method for their new LCD's. They are actually only 307,000 pixels, not 920,000. 920,000 is the dots in the LCD. Sounds like they're getting desparate when they resort to tactics like this.

There are also some images on the Nikon forum supposedly taken with a D3 at a show in Berlin at ISO 200 and 6400 and all the Nikon people are already picking them apart and hoping the final camera is better than what's shown.

It's always wise to wait for the actual reviews before getting too excited,

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.
 
Henry

That's interesting as it's not in agreement with the findings in McNamara's article. I have to disagree with the camerahobby article as Canon's spec sheets specifically state 230,000 pixels, not dots. IMO McNamara's article is much better supported.

Bob
Henry Richardson said:
See the Sept. 2 entry for a good explanation of the dots/pixels thing
and how it relates to Canon and Nikon:

http://www.camerahobby.com/index.htm

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.
 
go count them. 40D definitely does not have 640x480. Nikon does have 4x higher res. canon is 320x240. nikon is 640x480. he is correct that nikon does not have 1200x800 or something though and that is dumb that they all count dots!
rwbaron said:
That's interesting as it's not in agreement with the findings in
McNamara's article. I have to disagree with the camerahobby article
as Canon's spec sheets specifically state 230,000 pixels, not dots.
IMO McNamara's article is much better supported.

Bob
Henry Richardson said:
See the Sept. 2 entry for a good explanation of the dots/pixels thing
and how it relates to Canon and Nikon:

http://www.camerahobby.com/index.htm

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
Click to expand...
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
My PBASE page is new and growing so please be patient.
Click to expand...
 
SteveDude said:
timmer350 said:
it seems unbelievable that with the advent of huge CF cards, that
Canon doesn't use a larger preview JPG - its about 10K in size right
now!
Click to expand...
I thought it was 1MB or so. Where did you get that info out of
curiosity?

(And I COMPLETELY agree - it would be great if they gave us the
option of using a larger preview image, OR pressing a button on a
review area to do a slower, but real image extraction for focus).
Click to expand...
i'd prefer the latter. obviously the processor can handle it certainly for some sort of slow peek. don't want yet more wasted space though.
 
Henry Richardson said:
Glenn W. said:
What I've found is that if a photo really is in good focus and if you
bump the sharpness setting up higher, you CAN see focus reasonably
well on the LCD.

For those of you who shoot jpeg this may be of little or no help, but
if you shoot RAW, bump the in camera sharpness up to 7, then zoom in
all the way... you can see if the shot is in focus. If you shoot
JPEG, you most likely do not want focus bumped up to 7, as it would
likely make post processing a problem...
Click to expand...
I shoot RAW and I just tried this and it works. This made my day!
Finally, I can zoom in to check focus on my 30D. Thank you very much!

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
Click to expand...
Please clarify: You mean that WHEN shooting RAW, the sharpness setting (which is irrelevant to the RAW capture in that case) indeed DOES have an effect and this effect is ONLY upon .jpg thumbnail of the RAW picture?

Do I understand this well enough? And if yes, does the same apply to the other settings? Contrast, saturation etc.


Yannis
Comment my gallery at http://www.larios.gr
 
Maxis Gamez said:
It's not a monitor!! lol... but I agree with you some what! Digital
SLR's should have better resolution.
Click to expand...
Nobody AFAIK demanded higher reso displays before Nikon put one in their next cameras. (Sure there may have been some post like this I have not seen or just do not remember.) Now it's seem to be a matter bigger than life - like to get pro AF with fine-tuning to the around $1k amateur cameras.

For the focus check, qVGA would be just fine if Canon would show zoomed actual image instead of the zoomed thumbnail. I do not know if Nikon does the same, but I hoped Canon would have gone with the full res image zoom with Digic3.

I'm quite sure the VGA display and probably somewhat more pro oriented AF will be part of the next Canon xxD release ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Multiple exposures, X100VI
Replies
0
Views
5K
Jeff Biscuits
J
H
Simple method to check focus shift
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
Leonard Shepherd
L
T
Shades of genius now long past
Replies
0
Views
2K
Tom Caldwell
T
M
LCD preview changes when focusing in AF-C (part 2)
Replies
1
Views
268
Erik Baumgartner
Erik Baumgartner
M
Trap focus & ttartisan 6 bit adapter
Replies
6
Views
2K
mainoo
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top