• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

XTi not as "poppy" as D40 - Help please

S

SuperjetMatt

Senior member
I while back I bought a Nikon D40 as my first DSLR.
I had it for about a week before I found someone selling a used XTi with a few extras that made it a better deal than the D40.
So I returned the D40 and went with said XTi.

I love the Canon, no question about it.
However: When I look at pictures from both cameras, the D40 consistently took better looking pictures. They looked sharper, had more pop, and more color saturation.
I have tried playing around with Canon RAW's in Lightroom 2 and can get them to look very good.
But the Nikon was better at this without all post-processing.
Both cameras used the respective kit lenses.
I used mostly auto-modes on the D40, and all modes on the XTi, including full manual.
Am I missing some settings in the camera itself?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.
 
Check your settings in the menu. There are customizations involving contrast, sharpness, etc that can all impact on "pop." The Canon default is often set at a soft picture.
 
The D40's default settings are geared toward a well-saturated picture with lots of "pop"...which is good, given that its intended market consists of newcomers moving up from point and shoot cameras. The default settings of higher end DSLRs are set towards a more neutral image instead of the oversaturated and oversharpened (in comparison) image of the D40.

With the XTi, go into the menu and set saturation and sharpness up a couple of notches. That should get you results identical to the D40's factory defaults.
 
Thanks.
I'll create a custom profile for my wife to use it in auto (she's the one missing the Nikon's sharp auto pictures), as I shoot in the manual modes and like to do post-processing.
 
If post-processing is a bother then SLR photography simply isn't for you, sad to say. But happily from your last comment you have seen the light 🙂
 
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
If post-processing is a bother then SLR photography simply isn't for you, sad to say. But happily from your last comment you have seen the light 🙂
Click to expand...

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. Personally, I enjoy taking the photos more. Post-processing is the necessary chore before I perfect that 1-in-1000 photo that I'm proud enough of to hang on my wall.
 
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer If post-processing is a bother then SLR photography simply isn't for you, sad to say. But happily from your last comment you have seen the light 🙂
Click to expand...
Like SoyDios, I cannot agree with that premise. One of the hallmarks of a DSLR is to be able to take good pictures using photographic skills and knowledge - and not have to rely on post processing artwork.

 
I highly recommend Canons DPP for post, and to shoot in RAW. DPP lets you make "recipes" that you can apply to all the pictures you select. Thus you can do neat things like take a pic of your grey or white card for that particular set - in that lighting - set the white balance and apply it and maybe some sharpening and contrast to every photo in the set.
 
Originally posted by: corkyg
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer If post-processing is a bother then SLR photography simply isn't for you, sad to say. But happily from your last comment you have seen the light 🙂
Click to expand...
Like SoyDios, I cannot agree with that premise. One of the hallmarks of a DSLR is to be able to take good pictures using photographic skills and knowledge - and not have to rely on post processing artwork.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you as well. When I shot film, I always preferred slides because there was no need to work any darkroom adjustments.

However, I also have to say that I've been able to save a few shots that I would otherwise have never gotten at all by post-processing the RAW file to bring things out. It's important to remember that post processing with a DSLR needn't be "artwork". After all, changing the type of film in a camera would change the whole look and that wasn't thought of as "artwork".

ZV
 
This is mostly to appease my wife. She really liked the D40, and I went and returned it for the XTi. She doesn't use anything but Auto mode, so she sees the D40 pictures that just came out "looking better" than her current XTi photos.
I, on the other hand, enjoy using the full manual and semi-manual modes with RAW (drives her nuts). I then spend a nice amount of time with Lightroom in post processing. I like the process, as there are so many things to tweak and try.
I haven't tried Canon's DDP. I am pretty happy with Lightroom's capabilities (and the SmugMug plugin). The "recipes" that bobdole369 spoke of are also availabe in Lightroom.
 
Update: The Picture Style settings took care of the color saturation issues for her.
Sharpness still isn't there. So we took the camera to a couple of stores and tried out different lenses.
Tried a couple of cheaper zooms that weren't that great, and then the new Canon 18-200 IS lens (3.5-5.6) and a Canon 18-134.
Both of those got nice sharpness.
I am thinking the kit lens on that XTi is just crap.
 
is the XTi kit lens the 18-55 IS or non-IS? The non-IS is known for being pretty blah. The IS... worlds different... so long as you know it's limitations.
 
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: corkyg
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer If post-processing is a bother then SLR photography simply isn't for you, sad to say. But happily from your last comment you have seen the light 🙂
Click to expand...
Like SoyDios, I cannot agree with that premise. One of the hallmarks of a DSLR is to be able to take good pictures using photographic skills and knowledge - and not have to rely on post processing artwork.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you as well. When I shot film, I always preferred slides because there was no need to work any darkroom adjustments.

However, I also have to say that I've been able to save a few shots that I would otherwise have never gotten at all by post-processing the RAW file to bring things out. It's important to remember that post processing with a DSLR needn't be "artwork". After all, changing the type of film in a camera would change the whole look and that wasn't thought of as "artwork".

ZV
Click to expand...

Whatever tool gets the job done the easiest is my rule. No professional photographer who relies on shooting and selling in any kind of quantity is going to post process every shot if they can get the job done with in camera processing and careful lighting/exposure. I see too many young pros killing their fledgling business by shooting RAW and processing every image when learning to light and expose properly in the first place would allow them to do twice the business.

It's kind of the same old argument of slide film vs. print.
 
Originally posted by: randomlinh
is the XTi kit lens the 18-55 IS or non-IS? The non-IS is known for being pretty blah. The IS... worlds different... so long as you know it's limitations.
Click to expand...

It's the older non-IS lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top