OlgaJ: 10D vs G3

Thank you Olga, for your help, as always.

I had never tried BB's adjustments. prefering to do the leveling, saturation and usm in PS6.0 (had automated the steps through own actions).

I will try BB with the values you specified and see if it works for me.

Take care
-Tarun

OlgaJ said:

Tarun Arya said:

1. Which raw converter you used. Powershovel2 is getting me
excellent colors but too much noise to be of use. BB is okay but
falters in some cases.

Click to expand...

I start with Breezebrowser.If there are highlights that I want to
salvage, I use the combined method of conversion. If there are
exposure changes, I change the exposure in the conversion. I set
saturation, contrast, sharpening to normal. I enable BB's
post-processing and depending on the image, I may set saturation in
there at 120%. Sharpening at radius .5, amount .7, threshold 0.

Olga Johnson said:

2. What was your work flow.

Click to expand...

I'm still working on streamlining my workflow.

Depending on the results from #1, I may go to Photoshop where I may
use one or both of Fred Miranda's actions; the 10D Sharpening
and/or DV action.

Olga Johnson said:

3. What usm values did you use. and whether you applied USM more
than one time.

Click to expand...

Pretty much what I said in #1 for BB and don't worry about it in PS
since I use the Fred Miranda action.

Hope this helps,

Olga

Click to expand...

P Chew said:

Other than print quality, wonder how D60/10D AF preformance
compared with G2 ? From the posts in Canon SLR forum people are
saying it's a no contest.

Click to expand...

this was actually the second time i've gotten to play around with his D60. back in november, i took a few nighttime indoor shots and AF was really poor...it hunted and pecked a lot and seemed as slow as my G2. yes, it was one of the cheaper canon lenses he had on at the time but i was really expecting more. i was shocked that many in the canon SLR forum said they've never had a problem with low-light AF...i was even using the 550EX atop with the focus-assist light. and, believe me, i WANTED to like it.

this last experience was during the daytime (cloudy but bright) and he had gotten some better glass and focus was instantaneous. i expect the 10D to be all the better in this regard from what i've read.

P Chew said:

I for one am really annoyed by G2 AF and manual focus, also F8,
1/1000s limit, also 3x zoom. That's why I often used my film SLR.
My EOS 50 with two cheap lens has much better AF performance.

Click to expand...

yep, i'm annoyed too. i miss so many shots because of the slow performance...even after i've half-pressed and prefocused. for soccer pics, fergeddaboudit! the huge DOF-thing is really what bothers me most, though. still, that has not been enough to get me back to my film SLR...nooooooo, not that!

Thanks for sharing. Your story plus the saga now in canon SLR forum about 10D forcus problems makes feel that I may have to wait a bit longer before jump. Wonder how other DSLR (Nikin, Kodak, etc) perform with repsect to that ? I'm expecting the AF to be as good as my EOS 50. Expect too much ?

Cheers

Chew

21farms said:

P Chew said:

Other than print quality, wonder how D60/10D AF preformance
compared with G2 ? From the posts in Canon SLR forum people are
saying it's a no contest.

Click to expand...

this was actually the second time i've gotten to play around with
his D60. back in november, i took a few nighttime indoor shots and
AF was really poor...it hunted and pecked a lot and seemed as slow
as my G2. yes, it was one of the cheaper canon lenses he had on at
the time but i was really expecting more. i was shocked that many
in the canon SLR forum said they've never had a problem with
low-light AF...i was even using the 550EX atop with the
focus-assist light. and, believe me, i WANTED to like it.

this last experience was during the daytime (cloudy but bright) and
he had gotten some better glass and focus was instantaneous. i
expect the 10D to be all the better in this regard from what i've
read.

NKH said:

I for one am really annoyed by G2 AF and manual focus, also F8,
1/1000s limit, also 3x zoom. That's why I often used my film SLR.
My EOS 50 with two cheap lens has much better AF performance.

Click to expand...

yep, i'm annoyed too. i miss so many shots because of the slow
performance...even after i've half-pressed and prefocused. for
soccer pics, fergeddaboudit! the huge DOF-thing is really what
bothers me most, though. still, that has not been enough to get me
back to my film SLR...nooooooo, not that!

Click to expand...

Good deal! Sounds like you fellas saved the day and likely did a better job than the original shooter anyway --who needs to be tracked down by the Knights---and disbarred of his guns! )

MAC

Ulysses said:

MAC said:

That is a good strategy, last thing I want to do is mess up
someone's emotional day, but at some point have the confidence to
know I can give them results better than most anyone in area.

Click to expand...

The way the job was obtained was this, in a nutshell: They had
contracted a photographer for the job, but he skipped town (with
their deposit, I think). So one of the family members asked the
other photographer (they didn't know he is a photographer) if he
could suggest a nice camera so that the family could shoot some
wedding photos. The photographer suggested that they use him to
do their shooting. They accepted. We came riding in as "knights in
shining armor", so to speak. But we were also confident that we'd
do a much better job than anyone there.

Our mottos were:
Shoot, shoot, and shoot some more.
Capture happiness and joy.

Literally, we wrote those things down in our shot planner!

--

Ulysses

Click to expand...

--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com

MAC said:

Good deal! Sounds like you fellas saved the day and likely did a
better job than the original shooter anyway --who needs to be
tracked down by the Knights---and disbarred of his guns! )

Click to expand...

I really wish we could, MAC. It was a real shame. She was in tears, the family in an uproar with other things to worry about without having to be upset over a photographer. What a heart attack they must have had, going through a photo interview the night before the wedding!

Anyway, another question for you. I need to at least research and find how to hook an umbrella up to a 420EX sitting atop a tripod or light stand.

--

Ulysses

Exactly what I'm thinking about also. I visualize one being on my second tripod with umbrella and then having to buy a second 420 ex and get another stand.....actually I was hoping some type of monopod -- with feet stand -- could work with the second one so I could maximize the utility and get the most out of the gear -- then again, I like to be sure it will be sturdy...and not flimsy--so I just might need to buy something designed for this. Also if you know of best size and umbrella to use, that makes the light very smooth and soft...let me know!

Get over there to B&H! Your be my spy over there...

Headed to shoot national champs -- bucks -- in spring game today on field. We'll see how it goes. A buddy I'm shooting with is going to let me use his 100 -400 IS. My 70 -200 will be very sharp up to about 30yds--but football is huge place. Later -- This bud is for you too!

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4951102

Member said:

Anyway, another question for you. I need to at least research and
find how to hook an umbrella up to a 420EX sitting atop a tripod or
light stand.

--

Ulysses

Click to expand...

--
MAC
http://www.digi-pictures.com

Olga - Thanks for the reply, those were the very 3 lenses I was thinking of going for, the 50mm for the sharpness of a prime at such an amazing price - is it significantly better than the 28-135 IS USM in this respect? Is it the aperture range that makes it necessary for you? Otherwise I'd forego it for a wider angle lens perhaps (especially with the 1.6 conversion issue). Are you happy with the sharpness of the lenses (particularly the big zoom)? In terms of results, as I say, I'm definitely impressed, but then again I know you're an exceedingly capable photographer and skillful post-processor so you might be doing some magic! I'm with you on the Fred Miranda actions BTW, easily worth the money.

H

OlgaJ said:

Thank you for your kind words.

I have not chosen L lenses because of weight and cost.

All bird and duck shots are with a 75-300 IS. The Southfork Ranch
pictures are either a 50 f1.8 ($69 lens and very light) or the
28-135 IS lens.

Olga

HWStone said:

OlgaJ, what leneses did you get for the 10D? I'm looking to trade
up to one but can't realistically afford L series lenses to begin
with. The results you are getting with the 10D look great, where
they with L lenses? I was thinking of gong for maybe an EF 28-135mm
IS USM, a wide angle prime and a longer tele prime. I'd be
interested to know what you're using.

I also hope that you carry on posting often to this forum because
you're one of the most valuable contributors by far, always helpful
and knowledgable and never offensive.

Thanks

H

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

HWStone said:

Olga - Thanks for the reply, those were the very 3 lenses I was
thinking of going for, the 50mm for the sharpness of a prime at
such an amazing price - is it significantly better than the 28-135
IS USM in this respect?

Click to expand...

I think it is. I had first bought a 50mm f1.4 but there was something about it (and I can't say what it was) that didn't make me believe it was worth the money. But for $69 I couldn't resist the f1.8 and for some reason it has turned out great.

HWStone said:

Is it the aperture range that makes it
necessary for you?

Click to expand...

I have no idea. Sorry, but I can't describe it other than to say that the out of camera shots are much better, contrast and color wise in addition to sharpness, than the other shots.

HWStone said:

Otherwise I'd forego it for a wider angle lens
perhaps (especially with the 1.6 conversion issue). Are you happy
with the sharpness of the lenses (particularly the big zoom)? In
terms of results, as I say, I'm definitely impressed, but then
again I know you're an exceedingly capable photographer and
skillful post-processor so you might be doing some magic! I'm with
you on the Fred Miranda actions BTW, easily worth the money.

Click to expand...

One thing that I want to make clear. I am not an exceedingly capable photographer. I'm just a grandmother who would like to be a fair amateur. I have no artistic talent although sometimes I like to take a stab at it; most times I fail. I just don't show my failures.

The 75-300 IS sharpness is something that has amazed me. I think I get more successful shots with that lens than all the others. Again, there is no way for me to explain it. Of course I'm not taking pictures of fast sports in low light with it, so it works for the types of subjects and conditions I've used so far.

As to post-processing, I think that we all see a different vision of what we want to have as an end result. Perhaps our visions are the same and therefore you consider me "skillful", but others may disagree with us both. An example of this is the contest on Outback,

http://www.outbackphoto.com/contest/contest_03/all.html

Different rendition (which is what I call a vision) of the end result. Different strokes for different folks. That's one reason I have fun with the camera and pictures. I can do it for me .

Good luck with your decision and I'm sure you will have lots of fun with it!

Olga