60d Producing Soft Images

[Vtec44]

@ Vtech - I just noticed that the name column was missing. Sorry about that. I'll repost it.

I'm not sure if it would show in Canon EXIF data, but it shows the contrast/sharpness/saturation level on my Nikon. That's why I was going through and notice that it's missing the name column.

 

[dandaluzphotography]

Those settings are called picture styles by Canon. I have seen this and never touched it on either camera. I just left it at standard. Now if the standard style is different from XSI to 60d, I don't know for sure.

 

[Kerbouchard]

Those settings are called picture styles by Canon. I have seen this and never touched it on either camera. I just left it at standard. Now if the standard style is different from XSI to 60d, I don't know for sure.

I couldn't say for sure, but in the Nikon line up, they are different. Typically, towards the lower end cameras, you get more in camera sharpening, higher saturation, higher contrast, etc. In the higher end, Nikon assumes you want to process it the way you want to and doesn't do all of that stuff for you.

In any case, I'm not sure how Adobe deals with Canon picture settings or if they even apply. Might try adjusting some settings and see if it makes a difference. Also, the 60D has more megapixels, so looking at your images at 100% is different. It will require better lenses and better technique to get the same level of sharpness at 100% on the 60D than it would have on the XSI.

 

[Edsport]

With my canon i can choose picture styles but also i can set saturation, contrast and brightness etc but if you shot this in raw than those settings is not applied to the photo and a raw file is naturally soft and needs sharpening because no sharpening is applied to a raw file in camera. I sharpened it and it seems fine...

 

[KmH]

The sample you posted should be noisy, because most of it is under exposed.

 

[gsgary]

Was there any wind ? 1/15 shutter speed is asking a lot even on a tripod i would use a higher speed

 

[KmH]

With my canon i can choose picture styles but also i can set saturation, contrast and brightness etc but if you shot this in raw than those settings is not applied to the photo and a raw file is naturally soft and needs sharpening because no sharpening is applied to a raw file in camera. I sharpened it and it seems fine...

Those settings are applied to the JPEG Basic that is embedded in the Raw file. That edited JPEG Basic is what is dislayed on the camera LCD.

A Raw file has to be converted outside the camera to be seen as an image. Each conversion application uses slightly different algorithms to convert the Raw file, so a Raw file converted using DPP will look different than a Raw file converted using ACR, which will look different from a Raw file converted using Aperture.

Another factor that relates to the sharpness one sees when pixel peeping is differences in the low-pass filter (anti-alias filter) that is in front of each camera models image sensor.

So there is little doubt the sharpeness would look somewhat different when comparing images made with a XSi to images made with a 60D.

 

[Kerbouchard]

With my canon i can choose picture styles but also i can set saturation, contrast and brightness etc but if you shot this in raw than those settings is not applied to the photo and a raw file is naturally soft and needs sharpening because no sharpening is applied to a raw file in camera. I sharpened it and it seems fine...

Those settings are applied to the JPEG Basic that is embedded in the Raw file. That edited JPEG Basic is what is dislayed on the camera LCD.

It's also what the histogram is based off of. Lots of reasons to use those settings, even when shooting in RAW.

 

[Derrel]

Not sure what's going on, but earlier this AM, edsport's reworked image was MUCH larger, and I looked at it and thought the sharpness was satisfactorily high. Honestly, I am thinking that what the OP is seeing is just softer output from the 60D than he's used to with the Rebel body...maybe a difference in the realtive strengths of the anti-aliasing filters between the two bodies, and/or a pretty substantial difference between sharpening that's been or being applied somewhere within the Rebel's imaging chain.

I think it's absolutely normal to need to apply something along the lines of 300 to 500 percent sharpening at a very small radius, like somewhere between .20 and .35 pixel radius, on EVERY image coming off of a d-slr sensor, to counteract the blurring of the anti-aliasing filter; it is true, MANY d-slr cameras do output "soft images", in order to prevent aliasing. And many entry-level bodies often produce crisper, more-sharpened images than the more advanced or pro-level bodies. I think this might be the case here.

 

[Drake]

2 things to remember about:

The 60D is 18MP, the XSi is 12MP. Your lens captures a certain amount of details. When you use the 18MP sensor, all the details spread across more pixels. When you compare the 12MP and 18MP photos on a monitor, the 18MP one has bigger dimensions, which with the same amount of detail should result in a bit softer photo. So, in theory, when you resize your 18MP photo to 12MP and compare it to the photo from XSi, it should be of about the same sharpness. But that's just theory. In reality, the 18MP sensor will capture a little bit more details. However, if you view both pictures at 100%, the 18MP one has to be a little softer compared to the 12MP one.

Also, remember that the Rebel is an entry level camera. Camera manufacturers are known to be messing with RAW shots on these, so they are not exactly 100% RAW. Images are usually sharpened in camera. Often also the anti-aliasing filter is being weakened. Something to remember about when comparing images from the Rebel and a 60D.

 

[dandaluzphotography]

OK...

So i thought I had this figured out. Maybe.

One definite difference I noticed was in the "standard" picture style. The XSI's standard picture style was set by default to 3 out a possible 7 and the 60D's was set to 0 out of a possible 7 (I never touched either camera's). I took several test shots with the sharpening bumped up at different settings and saw noticeable improvements in what the LCD was showing me. I also played around with the contrast and saturation and the pictures definitely looked better... on the LCD.

I think it was KMH that mentioned that this only only applies to JPEGs the camera produces and to the jpeg version of the RAW file. I am in the process of downloading my pictures from the test. Let's see.

Thanks for all the feedback on this Guys!

Danny

 

[dandaluzphotography]

Was there any wind ? 1/15 shutter speed is asking a lot even on a tripod i would use a higher speed

Zero wind, Gary. What I do to see if there is camera shake is magnify the image on the LCD. If there is any wind, the magnified image shakes on the LCD. This has always worked for me.

Danny

 

[dandaluzphotography]

So... The first pic looks nothing like what it looked like on the LCD. It looks really flat with no life; the colors are bland with almost no contrast. I would say the sharpness is the same as what I have been seeing.

 

[dandaluzphotography]

With my canon i can choose picture styles but also i can set saturation, contrast and brightness etc but if you shot this in raw than those settings is not applied to the photo and a raw file is naturally soft and needs sharpening because no sharpening is applied to a raw file in camera. I sharpened it and it seems fine...

Maybe my sharpening technique sucks. I usually use a radius of about 1 to 1.5 and sharpen until it looks good. I saw a post Derrel made about bringing down the radius to about .3 to .5 and applying between 300 to 500 percent sharpening. I'll try this.

Thanks,
Danny

 

[Big Mike]

I'll echo what Derrel and Keith are saying. It's pretty normal for all DSLR images to need some sharpening because of the anti-aliasing filter.

And if you are concerned about how the camera preview, and even the RAW preview looks, remember that this is only a JPEG that is embedded into the RAW file for previewing. Your Picture Style settings will probably change how that preview looks, but not the RAW file. Also, with little or no tweaks in the processing stage, images from RAW can look a little bland, especially when you're used to seeing images from P&S cameras or maybe even entry level DSLR cameras.