ipsofoto
newbie
Reged: 14/05/2007
Posts: 28
|
|
I have had a 5D for a year and I have been MASSIVELY disappointed. I have used Canon film SLRS for the last 10 years and at least 90% of my shots were sharp and quality. With my 5D I would say 90% are out of focus, soft or blurred. I thoroughly hate it - e.g.: it's a bright day and I take a pic of two smiling friends. The LCD is so pants it looks okay. But when I get home it is so blurred to be unusable (though the rubbish LCD makes everything look soft, and as I say, most shots are). This is so common with this camera. I am tempted to send the camera to be looked at by Canon because there is something very wrong with it. Medium format quality my backside.
One of the problems I have found is that the mirror slap is massive and is probably exacerbating the blurring problem. The weight of the camera with a 24-105mm lens doesn't help too. But I have taken shots on a tripod and the focus is wrong or the corners are soft or the shot is simply blurred.
So I am looking for a lighter, smaller DSLR camera. The Canon 40D is only marginally lighter than the 5D which is not helpful and the 450 may be too much of a downgrade, though at this stage I'll take anything that gives me something resembling sharpness. The Nikon D300 is also a bit on the heavy side.
I have a number of Canon lenses, but I am willing to trade them in for a different system if need be.
The Olympus 510 appeals with one caveat - the small viewfinder. Having a large viewfinder really helps as I wear glasses and I like to manually focus at times.
Nikon's D60 is another option, I fear the D300 may be on the heavy side, though I did find the shutter to be quicker and lighter than the 5Ds.
Any thoughts appreciated. Cheers.
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5188
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
Seems strange, there are a lot of satisfied users of the D5 and I have some some stunning images produced by them. You say that you have experience of other Canon cameras, what ones? Maybe you have a faulty one, maybe your technique is flawed.. certainly trying to evaulate image quality on a LCD preview screen is falwed anyway.
With most digital cameras you will need to learn new skills, including the use of photoshop or similar to get the best out of images.
Why not post a link to an image so that we can see what sort of problems you are having?
Quote:
Having a large viewfinder really helps as I wear glasses and I like to manually focus at times.
Manually focussing an AF camera can be awkward, as it doesn't have the focus aids that the old 35mm Manual focus SLRs have such as microprisms or split image, maybe this is a contributory factor.
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
Edited by Burgy (12/04/2008 23:47)
|
NorthernNikon
Bulls Hitter
Reged: 16/12/2005
Posts: 5660
Loc: Harrogate, North Yorks
|
|
Might sound obvious, but you are sharpening your images aren't you? If not, RAW straight out of camera will appear soft.
--------------------
www.BarneyAllen.com the new home of ComicShots.
|
ipsofoto
newbie
Reged: 14/05/2007
Posts: 28
|
|
Yes, I sharpen the pics in Photoshop if they are useable to start with, but I still cannot get the pin sharpness that I see with standard 5D pics online. But so many are just too soft with little detail.
I am not sure if viewing image quality in the LCD is flawed, I would at least hope to be able to assess whether or not a pic is sharp and the LCD on the Canon doesn't help me here. The Nikon D300 certainly does.
I used to use a Canon 30 and for a short time had a Canon 1V too. I never had any problem with the pics being sharp. I have some amazing prints. To be honest, I wouldn't say I have had more than 5 shots from the 5D that compare to the film shots out of my EOS 30.
Even if Canon fix the apparent problems with the 5D I am so disappointed with it I can't see myself using it again.
One other suggestion, what about the Pentx K20D? Again, a bit on the heavy side though.
|
jchrisc
Reged: 20/01/2003
Posts: 5568
Loc: Ampthill, Bedfordshire
|
|
Have had mine rather longer than you. Have taken thousands of pics with it and never had any of the difficulty that you describe, so it would certainly be worth getting yours looked at.
Here is a hand-held shot taken on a local building site earlier this week using the 5D with a 24-105 f/4 zoom lens
and here is a crop from it.
They are just record snap shots for a local web site, no special effort to keep them sharp, but they look OK to me and I have seen many as good or better from other 5D users
--------------------
Chris
My memory is getting worse . . . and my conscience clearer
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5188
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
Quote:
I am not sure if viewing image quality in the LCD is flawed, I would at least hope to be able to assess whether or not a pic is sharp and the LCD on the Canon doesn't help me here.
I disagree, the preview screen is simply to small to be able to preview the image sharpness, it also uses the embedded jpg thumbnail so even when you zoom in, there is not enough image quality to tell whether the image is sharp. it is useful for checking composition and to see if someone has closed their eyes when the photo was taken, it can also be used with the highlight settings and the histogram but other than that of limited value.
The fact that you cannot get a good quality image may imply that it is faulty it may not, however, junking a significant investment to swap brands is in my opinion madness, without at least trying to get it sorted. If it does turn out to be technique, no matter what you shoot with the problem will still be there.
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
Scphoto
Little Fruitbat
Reged: 13/11/2005
Posts: 2473
Loc: Birmingham, UK
|
|
You created a post last year about softness of the 5D images.
Did you attempt to get it repaired under warranty?
Quote:
Even if Canon fix the apparent problems with the 5D I am so disappointed with it I can't see myself using it again.
Fix what problems? It doesn't seem to be a general issue with the 5D. Both of mine are fine.
--------------------
Happiness is a Kebab call donor - Pictures/Blog
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4485
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
Seems strange, there are a lot of satisfied users of the D5 and I have some some stunning images produced by them.
Must say that I'm one of the satisfied users ... OK, the handling irritates me at times, but the image quality is first class. With the exception of the images I'm getting from a 50mm f/1.4 lens at full aperture, which really isn't acceptable, but I'm quite happy to put that down to my particular example of the lens, not the camera.
Quote:
maybe your technique is flawed.. certainly trying to evaulate image quality on a LCD preview screen is falwed anyway.
Must say that I do not use the preview screen for evaluating image quality. I can't see the point; how is a 0.23 megapixel display without even the facility to calibrate colour going to be any use at all for evaluating 12 megapixel images? I don't even use it for deleting duffers from the memory card, just upload everything to the computer (& remove the duffers there) and reformat the card after uploading everything when it's full.
In fact, when taking pictures, I use my 5D pretty much the same way I use a film camera. I don't even bother to check exposure, just bracket when I'm unsure (like I used to with film). And I always shoot RAW so white balance etc. is fixed in the raw converter software not by the camera setting. The more I think about this, the more I'm sure this is the right approach. For me, at any rate.
Quote:
With most digital cameras you will need to learn new skills, including the use of photoshop or similar to get the best out of images.
Especially if you're shooting RAW ... for a number of reasons (mostly the anti-aliasing filter in front of the sensor) a certain amount of sharpening really does need to be applied, and the in-camera software isn't always the best way of applying it. OK, it works, reasonably acceptably (certainly as well as any other digital camera I've tried), but the more specialized methods such as unsharp mask with tunable parameters (available in e.g. Photoshop) and wavelet processing (available in e.g. AIP4WIN and Registax) can sharpen more without introducing unwanted artifacts.
Quote:
Manually focussing an AF camera can be awkward, as it doesn't have the focus aids that the old 35mm Manual focus SLRs have such as microprisms or split image, maybe this is a contributory factor.
I changed the focusing screen on my 5D to a type S precision matte screen and found it improved manual focusing considerably. In fact with the angle viewfinder I find I can usually sharpen the viewfinder image a little by manual focusing starting from the AF left off. Now lots of the images I make are through a telescope which does not have AF capability, in any case the focal ratio is too slow for the AF mechanism to work, so I have to be good at focusing manually ... I won't say it's easy, certainly not practical for action photography unless you can pre-focus on where the action is going to be, but it's not impossible either.
IMO there is nothing wrong with the AF mechanism on the 5D. It's fast and accurate enough for all reasonable purposes when used within its design limits. And changing the standard focusing screen to a type S will not cure your problem if it is caused by poor manual focusing, though it may improve your hit rate and/or make things more comfortable.
|
welshwizard645
addict
Reged: 29/09/2006
Posts: 422
Loc: Out of my mind
|
|
Quote:
Yes, I sharpen the pics in Photoshop if they are useable to start with, but I still cannot get the pin sharpness that I see with standard 5D pics online. But so many are just too soft with little detail.
I am not sure if viewing image quality in the LCD is flawed, I would at least hope to be able to assess whether or not a pic is sharp and the LCD on the Canon doesn't help me here. The Nikon D300 certainly does.
I used to use a Canon 30 and for a short time had a Canon 1V too. I never had any problem with the pics being sharp. I have some amazing prints. To be honest, I wouldn't say I have had more than 5 shots from the 5D that compare to the film shots out of my EOS 30.
Even if Canon fix the apparent problems with the 5D I am so disappointed with it I can't see myself using it again.
One other suggestion, what about the Pentx K20D? Again, a bit on the heavy side though.
The K20D is a great camera... but it doesn't sound as if this will solve your problems if you get one of these... Either you have a duff camera, a duff lens or your focussing technique doesn't suit the camera..
Get Canon to look at the camera first, and the lens...
|
Bettina
Kein Titel
Reged: 12/02/2004
Posts: 4060
Loc: London
|
|
What lens (or rather lenses) are you using? I'm really puzzled. Do you see the focusing point in the viewfinder or have you disabled it? Maybe you have set an autofocus point that is way out of where you want to focus on. What kind of autofocus mode do you use? AI Servo or One Shot? Because if you use AI Servo and you recompose the shot, you lose focus. When setting your autofocus point to automatic and firing off shots in One Shot mode, you shouldn't have any problems whatsoever.
--------------------
Bettina
http://www.vibrantpictures.co.uk
Vibrant Pictures on Flickr
|
NorthernMonkey
enthusiast
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 271
|
|
If you used to get really sharp images with the Eos 1v, and liked the handling, can I suggest you use an EOS1v.  just get your film scanned
|
FujiSigmaNolta
I can pan!
Reged: 21/06/2005
Posts: 1393
|
|
Quote:
I have had a 5D for a year and I have been MASSIVELY disappointed. I have used Canon film SLRS for the last 10 years and at least 90% of my shots were sharp and quality. With my 5D I would say 90% are out of focus, soft or blurred. I thoroughly hate it - e.g.: it's a bright day and I take a pic of two smiling friends. The LCD is so pants it looks okay. But when I get home it is so blurred to be unusable (though the rubbish LCD makes everything look soft, and as I say, most shots are). This is so common with this camera. I am tempted to send the camera to be looked at by Canon because there is something very wrong with it. Medium format quality my backside.
One of the problems I have found is that the mirror slap is massive and is probably exacerbating the blurring problem. The weight of the camera with a 24-105mm lens doesn't help too. But I have taken shots on a tripod and the focus is wrong or the corners are soft or the shot is simply blurred.
So I am looking for a lighter, smaller DSLR camera. The Canon 40D is only marginally lighter than the 5D which is not helpful and the 450 may be too much of a downgrade, though at this stage I'll take anything that gives me something resembling sharpness. The Nikon D300 is also a bit on the heavy side.
I have a number of Canon lenses, but I am willing to trade them in for a different system if need be.
The Olympus 510 appeals with one caveat - the small viewfinder. Having a large viewfinder really helps as I wear glasses and I like to manually focus at times.
Nikon's D60 is another option, I fear the D300 may be on the heavy side, though I did find the shutter to be quicker and lighter than the 5Ds.
Any thoughts appreciated. Cheers.
I do not know what is your level of photography and without wanting to patronise or anything of the kind it may be down to you using a faulty camera for a year and not knowing the cause of the problem (i.e. you may need the camera AF re-calibrated) or your technique.
The reason why I say this is that coming from a 5D and even thinking of going to either an Olympus E510 or a Nikon D60 is a massive, massive step down, too much for an enthusiast much much more for a pro or someone considering going pro.
Also, it is common not only with the 5D but with many other cameras, that the pictures look sharp on the 2.0 - 2.5 in LCD and then they are not. There is only so much a small screen can show you. If you look at the pictures on a 17in screen then you will definately notice obliterated or blurred out detail.
Yeah the 5D may have a louder heavier mirror, but so is the size of the shutter and sensor it covers.It will always be louder than your regular DSLR, but I don't think is that bad or even that audible (I have heard 5Ds shooting right next to me and I would say they are quite well dampened).
Don't get me wrong I am not a Canon fan, but forgive me for saying this, I don't think the fault is directly with your system (ok, yes you may have got a dud that may need calibrating), but being one year with a camera which you say it's giving you blurry photos all the time, it makes me wonder at what level your photography is.
Sometimes, there is such a thing as too much a camera for you.
PS: I just noticed on your post that you wear glasses, you may have to adjust the dioptre which is something that I for example forget as in some cameras it can get accidentaly de-adjusted when you pack them in the bag.
I hope you sort it out.
--------------------
Regards,
FujiSigmaNolta
My Flickr mess
My Blog
|
ipsofoto
newbie
Reged: 14/05/2007
Posts: 28
|
|
I have had the Canon 5D sent to Canon and they say they have recalibrated the camera and the 24-05 lens. The pics in general have looked better.
But I did a test this weekend of a nearby building against my Fuijifilm F30.
Here is the picture of the building taken with my 150 pound Fuji. The centre point is actually the top of the black drainpipe on the left hand side (the pic has been edited):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ipsofoto/2484325886/
Here is a 100% closeup of the window to the far right (note the vent in the top right):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ipsofoto/2483512173/
This is the same shot with the Canon 5D, 17-40L lens, at 40mm, on a tripod (again, focus on the top of the black drainpipe on the left side):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ipsofoto/2484326464/
Here is a close up view of the main shot taken with my 1500 pound 5D with a 500 pound 17-40L lens, taken at 40mm focal length (note the vent and vines on right side):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ipsofoto/2483512629/
Here is a close-up using the 24-105 kit lens:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ipsofoto/2483512455/
Overall, the 17-40 lens is massively soft and out of focus outside of the very centre of the lens. I may have to send this off to Canon to be fixed - or are such poor results standard with this lens? And yes, I do appreciate this is a wide angle lens and I have to expect it to be soft in the corners, but this is a joke, outside of the centre it is awful. The sharpness and detail from my 150 pound F30 is better edge to edge!!
The 24-105 is better than the 17-40, but "medium format" quality? It is marginally better than the 6mp F30 if at all.
I'm interested in your views on the comparison.
I will process and post other examples in due course for comment.
Edited by divertenta (11/05/2008 22:02)
|
bob58
old hand
Reged: 27/11/2005
Posts: 890
Loc: devon
|
|
Hi cant view pics think you need to make them public?not everyone will have flickr account
|
ipsofoto
newbie
Reged: 14/05/2007
Posts: 28
|
|
Thanks, I have made them all visible (damn flickr filters!)
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4485
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Well ---- the F30 close up is coarse and shows evidence of severe "fringing" which is absent from the Canon shots.
I take it that you are aware that DSLR images need some post production work ... the detail is there. The lighting is very different for the 24-105 shot so I'm not sure we're comparing the same thing.
|
ipsofoto
newbie
Reged: 14/05/2007
Posts: 28
|
|
"Well ---- the F30 close up is coarse and shows evidence of severe "fringing" which is absent from the Canon shots.
I take it that you are aware that DSLR images need some post production work ... the detail is there. The lighting is very different for the 24-105 shot so I'm not sure we're comparing the same thing."
The Canon shots have been sharpened so they match the sharpening of the Fuji which obviously has sharper jpegs out of the box. But IMHO the detail of the vent is not sharp and will not match the Fuji inspite of post-production.
I agree that the white of the window frame has fringing which is not there with the Canon and the dynamic range is more impressive with the Canon, but I am surprised at the lack of edge to edge sharpness. Maybe I'll go back to film...
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4485
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
The Canon shots have been sharpened so they match the sharpening of the Fuji which obviously has sharper jpegs out of the box. But IMHO the detail of the vent is not sharp and will not match the Fuji inspite of post-production.
OK, I loaded your image off Flickr & spent 30 secs with Registax (which prefers to have a 16 bit image rather than a jpeg to work with). Did nothing except wavelet sharpening, level 1 = 9.9, level 2 = 5.1, levels 3 to 6 disabled.
Your copyright... 
Seems to me to be as sharp as any of the others now, and to contain a lot more detail than the Fuji snap.
Edit: Just to point out that I reckon I could have got a very similar result by applying unsharp masking in Photoshop Elements, but it would have taken longer to load PSE than to do the whole job in Registax, & I'm lazy! 
Also reviewing the other images again ... my sharpened version has lots of fine detail in the net curtains which is invisible on your "fine detail" shots (and I didn't work on it, just the grille).
I honestly think you should review your sharpening technique before rubbishing kit. I don't think Registax, USM in PSE or anything else could do much to pull more detail out of the Fuji snap but there's probably a way to go yet on the Canon snaps above what I've already pulled out of the bag.
Edited by beejaybee (13/05/2008 10:43)
|
ipsofoto
newbie
Reged: 14/05/2007
Posts: 28
|
|
Point taken! Thanks for working on the pic to make your point.
|
PhilW
Blue Peter Badge Winner
Reged: 14/03/2007
Posts: 922
Loc: Near Wakefield, Yorkshire
|
|
A bit late in on this thread, but I am another satisfied 5D user. Have a look on my Pbase site in my sig for many examples of perfectly sharp 5D pics
--------------------
Phil Winterbourne
http://www.pbase.com/calis
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
