loudtiger wrote:
on the digital picture, it says that the 400D has less vignetting. how can this even be?
Digital sensors, unlike film, are sensitive to the angle of the incoming light. Light near the edge of the image circle may be coming in at an angle the sensor doesn't like. If this happens, the sensor just won't pick up that particular bit of incoming light. This is vignetting. Potentially, the XTi sensor is less sensitive to the angle at which light is coming in, which would reduce the vignetting.
There may be other explanations, but this is the first one that occurs to me. I don't have any actual knowledge how it is done, just my guess.
It seems like the 400D studio shots are being used in the new DP Review write-up of the Nikon D80...
As I recall the 400D preview didn't have these shots included... The final 400D review must be near...
Edit: I re-checked the 400D "preview" at DP Review and these standard test shots were not included... This compares 350D, 400D and D80... Detail and noise at different ISO settings, etc... Very telling...
If you aren't waiting for Phil's written blurb and pronouncements, this might provide enough visual stuff to interest you...
Roy NN7DX wrote:
It seems like the 400D studio shots are being used in the new DP Review write-up of the Nikon D80...
As I recall the 400D preview didn't have these shots included... The final 400D review must be near...
Edit: I re-checked the 400D "preview" at DP Review and these standard test shots were not included... This compares 350D, 400D and D80... Detail and noise at different ISO settings, etc... Very telling...
If you aren't waiting for Phil's written blurb and pronouncements, this might provide enough visual stuff to interest you... Comparison Photos/graphs start here
I picked up a XTi and grip this week. A very noticable improvement from the original Rebel I had been using. For me the grip makes a big difference in the ergonomics of the camera.
loudtiger wrote:
on the digital picture, it says that the 400D has less vignetting. how can this even be?
Vignetting occurs more with digital sensors than film ones because the individual sensors are recessed, so light coming from an angle to the corner sensors is shaded (another source of light falloff is of course the lens). There could be less vignetting because the sensor sites are shallower. Zeiss mentioned that they are tilting the microlenses towards the edges of the sensor, so there could be something like that going on. Or Canon could be automatically correcting for some vignetting in camera, without telling anyone.
I just got my Xti last Wednesday. I shot and so far have enjoyed it but I noticed possibly a grouping of bad pixels. Tell me if I'm being to picky but tell me if you see a red dot upper middle left side.
it's in every shot. Mainly noticable if there is dark are where the pixel is. Is this something I should be concerned about?
cecknight wrote:
I just got my Xti last Wednesday. I shot and so far have enjoyed it but I noticed possibly a grouping of bad pixels. Tell me if I'm being to picky but tell me if you see a red dot upper middle left side.
I see it. Since the camera is new, I would return it with a clear description of the problem so someone else doesn't end up with the camera. The only thing that I would do is possibly clean the sensor before returning it just in case there is a minor problem with dust that is causing the problem.
Obviously, the sensor has a hot red subpixel. While hotpixels are quite common at exposures with a shutter time >30 secs at iso 100, it should not be visible at every exposure. I would not accept this with a new camera.
i get a red pixil on my 5d every now an then at iso1600 or higher, not as common at lower ISOs. If it isnt repeatable at all ISOs I wouldnt worry too much about it. Processing in DPP does seem to help some.
MikeBinOKlahom wrote:
Digital sensors, unlike film, are sensitive to the angle of the incoming light. Light near the edge of the image circle may be coming in at an angle the sensor doesn't like. If this happens, the sensor just won't pick up that particular bit of incoming light. This is vignetting. Potentially, the XTi sensor is less sensitive to the angle at which light is coming in, which would reduce the vignetting.
There may be other explanations, but this is the first one that occurs to me. I don't have any actual knowledge how it is done, just my guess.
Your guess is the same as the explanation given in the review--the sensor is less sensitive to the angle of the light, so the corners collect more light than previous models.
First of all the only real negative thing I've found in the first few hundred shots that I have taken. The battery grip( an extra as you know) is not the same as my D60,20D,5D. The battery holder comes out from the end of the camera, when in place and the palm of you left hand touches it you can feel a slight movement in the door which is a shame.
I'm just looking for a casual camera for walkabout that is lighter than my others and cheaper to get mugged with:-)
On to the camera! I went out last evening when it was really getting to dull for decent comparisons, to the local churchyard and came back with sort of dull greyish shots that weren't very pleasing( but at least it gave me a chance to get to know the beast)
So today with brighter skies I did a comparison against my 20D using the 24-105 lens, on a tripod with mirror up. There really wasn't an awful lot to choose between them other than the slightly larger file size from the 400. If anything I think the 400 produced just slightly more detail(shot in raw with sharpening turned off) So that was good news because I was always happy with the results from the 20D in general. BTW the 10-22 works great on the 400 and I'm glad I bought that lens now. So I stuck (what I consider the bench mark lens onto the 400( 135 f2) and boy did that sensor come to life(which is a bit dissapointing really because I was looking forward to just a couple of zooms but after seeing the results from the L lens I will be forced to take that and the 1.4 along maybe in place of the 75-300 iS zoom) I can't remember seeing such a jump in quality from fitting this lens to any camera( I will have to do some more testing maybe) perhaps it's the tight pixels that are allowing the 135 to shine.
Noise is definately slightly more on the 400D over the 20D (more testing needed) it's not a big problem but after using the 20D and 5D you do notice it(if you start to peep)
The thing that few people have mentioned is the superbly quiet and controlled shutter and mirror noise( almost like using a fixed lens prosumer) It really is a well controlled action that might have Leica users(M's that is) getting interested. I find the viewfinder quite OK( not like a FF but good never the less) with dioptre adjustment that jumps in and out of sharpness( I wear specs BTW)
I knew I wasn't going to like the big change from not having the large scroll wheel on the back and that was as expected untill as the more and more I used it I became hooked on some of the one push buttons on the back, it really seems to have been well thought out giving access to everything you need except the hidden mirror up feature that we all complain about. The AF system(taken from the 30D I believe) is fast and as far as I can see is on the button so far) Getting used to the full size display in place of the small lcd takes 5 minutes to get used to and the eye control that turns it of works every time.( I don't need to look through the reading section of my specs to read it.)
So far I haven't seen any dust on the sensor( can I really believe it!!!)(maybe it will become more of a problem after more lens changes)
If you have fairly large hands like me you will need the grip but with those smaller batteries that can't be a bad thing.(you can now pick up good copies of the battery for £5.99)
The bigger lenses seem to be a little like the tail wagging the dog but you will certainly notice how much lighter the combo of a 70-200iS and the 400 is. The preview screen is superb and I have the brightness turned down one from the top. With regards the slight under exposure that has been mentioned( slightly less sensitive) I can confirm that but each digital camera has it's own character so just bend with it.
I have found the DPP software to be really good for a change and my latest copy of Breeze Browser pro supports it.
So what is it about this small DSLR that gives so much enjoyment then?? for under £500.
1. good wide angle shots with the 10-22 without the edge problems of FF and the 17-40.(DOF to die for but slightly less control for shallow DOF)
2. At least the beginning of dust control.
3.Much easier to carry around for a few hours.
4. Almost 500mm of image stabilised shooting with the 70-300 lens.
5. A really well controlled shutter and mirror noise level and feel(OK a top speed of 4,000 rather than 8,000 but when did you last use 1/8000?)
To sum up, when I look back at the 5D that I paid over £2k for, the 20D that I paid over £1K for this has got to be the best entry level camera around(more so if you have a couple of Canon lenses) add to this enough controls and features for an old time semi pro like me to not be found wanting and I reckon Canon have a best selling camera on their hands again. Lets hope the bubble doesn't burst as more different photo opportunities present themselves. It won't replace my FF cameras completely of course with only 3 F per Second and no spot metering but it might come close as my dodgy elbow starts to act up to the impending cold weather.
That's a very encouraging post Dave, thank you!
I am lured by the nice weight of this camera and the better noise handling compared to the D80 that I'm also considering. Looking at both of these cameras, for someone like me who is just starting out with dSLR, I'm assuming you'd recomment the XTi? I'm planning to skip the kit lens and go with something like a 50mm 1.4 or something in the range of 17-50 @ 2.8f (maybe from Tamron or Sigma).
I spent 10 days in jellystone and grand teton parks. I bouught the 400x1 right before I left and I also took the 20D. I did nmot do any detailed comparisons but I got a few observations:
1. I did not realize that the remote cord from my 20D would not fit the 400xi--so I bought a cord in Jackson. I quickly noticed that the cord kept falling off the camera even though I had a RRS L-bracket for the camera. It took about 5 days for me to lose the cord. I'll need to duck tape the next cord on.
2. The LCD screen is a deal maker--it allows old people like me the opportunity to clearly see iso and all the other info clearly and brightly in all light conditions. I quickly was able to make sure that I had av turned on and the right iso for each shot. This LCD screen is worth the price of admission for this camera.
3. The 400xi is light and it is plastic. It took one day for me to get over the plastic and I never thought about it again. However, I noticed the light weight every time I picked up the 20D and big glass.
4. I used the 400xi with the 600mm, 500mm, and 300mm and took about 80gbs of photos. Once I noticed the LCD screen feature it made it difficult for me to use the 20D--so I did not take comparison shots. But I found using a large tripod and mirror lockup with a 10 pound sandbag on top made the slow fps of the 400xi ot an issue.
The combination of the 400xi and big glass is a dream because it is so light. Also, using the 300 2.8IS was much easier with the light 400xi.
5. Going from 8 to 10mp does matter--at least my pictures show more resolution period.
6. I got dust on the sensor at it even has shown up in my photos. I even got a giant piece in my viewfinder the second day I owned it. However, I have less dust bunnies on my pictures with the 400xi.
7. The DPP software is actually pretty good for me. I do not do much post processing and I probably wont be using CS2 much again.
8. My pictures have more pop with the comb of the DPP and the 400xi. I dont know why but my pictures this year look much better than my set from 2005.
9. The newness aspect of the camera wore off in a day and I started to use the 400xi as any other tool I have. Eventually I quit using the 20D because of its weight and no LCD. In fact I sold the 20D this Sunday.
I dont want to get into a shouting match of which camera is better. My choice was obvious your mileage may vary.
monsterdeer wrote:
I dont want to get into a shouting match of which camera is better. My choice was obvious your mileage may vary.
I think yours is a very fair assessment on the usability of the XTi. Many people complained about the loss of the b/w LCD screen. But I find it rather useless since ISO is not shown. For me, the only drawbacks of the XTi include: (i) shortened battery life (ii) reduced sensitivity.
The biggest disappointment of the 400D is the lack of an image stabiliser on the body. They could have put it in but simply do not want to. Sure Canon has got lenses with IS built in but there are lots of lenses and even more budget conscious people who have lenses with no IS. It makes good commercial sense to do so but then they may be feeling complacent. Even it gives a two-stop advantage it would be good enough. The other big disappointment is that 70-200 F with IS. Think of those who bought those with no IS. How can Canon do such a thing to their users? Put an IS in the body system and it would be a perfect match for the non-IS 70-200F4 and 400 5.6 L. but then their kind of economic thinking do not permit it.
Wild Lens wrote:
The biggest disappointment of the 400D is the lack of an image stabiliser on the body. They could have put it in but simply do not want to.
.
And it is quite obviousely - why. In-body IS would remove the edge with competition who do not have optical IS: Tamron, Tokina and (partially) Sigma.
It would easily kill or dramatically decrease the sales of 17-55/2.8 since its most attractive feature is a combination of its 2.8 + IS (for low-light, indoors etc.) with very good high-ISO of Canon EOS-digital...
thw2 wrote:
For me, the only drawbacks of the XTi include: (i) shortened battery life (ii) reduced sensitivity.
(i) is partially compensated by small and cheap batteries - I always have 3 with me; and also BG-E3 adds much to battery life without making camera too bilky.
(ii) as for ISO3200 on 20D/30D - it is not "true", but rather "digital push" instead. You can easily simulate it on 350/400D at ISO1600 by puting EV-1 during taking a shot and than making +1EV adjustment in PP.
