Canon camera out-the-box picture quality

[sincere]

What exactly gives you better picture quality? i understand that lenses play a huge part but how about the cameras? The reason why i am asking is because i have a 400D and i wonder if my money would be better spent on a 17-40 /4L with that camera or if i should consider getting a new one alltogether (Canon 7D most likely).

 

[Overread]

Stick a good photographer behind and some good glass infront and even a low end camera body like a 400D or a 350D (as in the examples below) can give some outstanding results

Juza Nature Photography

350D standing up very well to other camera bodies - note the pro lenses in use


It's certainly my thinking which is why I sink my money into lenses first and bodies second. I'd only change that advice if you're looking to change your sensor/film size - eg going to a fullframe, meduim or even large formate setup.

 

[Big Mike]

The differences in camera bodies (from 400D to 7D for example) is more in the features and ergonomics, than it is in picture quality.

For example, the 7D has a much more advanced AF system and the controls/ergonomics are very different...but I doubt that many people could actually tell the difference in final results, if they were looking at 8x10 prints side by side.

 

[sincere]

Thanks for the input. I was wondering if all Canon EOS lenses are compatible with my 400D and if there are cheaper alternatives than your Canon L series from other manufacturers?

 

[Big Mike]

EOS are the cameras. The lenses are EF or EF-S.

Any EF lens is compatible with any EOS camera. The EF-S lenses are compatible with most digital bodies, just not the ones with larger sensors (1D, 1Ds, 5D).

Canon's 'L' series lenses are the same format as all the other EF lenses...they are just the 'top of the line' "Luxury" lenses. There are alternatives, both in the canon line up and outside of it. For example, Canon has the 50mm F1.2 L....but Canon also has the 50mm F1.4 and the 50mm F1.8 (not to mention the 50mm Macro). You could also get a 50mm lens from Sigma etc.

You could get a 'top of the line' lens from another manufacturer, and it may or may not be as good as the Canon L lens. You really have to compare it on a lens to lens basis.
For example, I've heard that the Sigma 50mm F1.4 is a very good lens, maybe as good or better than the Canon 50mm F1.2. The Canon is very expensive, so the Sigma looks like a good option...however, the Canon 50mm F1.4 (not L) is also a pretty good lens, and much cheaper than the L version.

Another example...I believe that the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L (IS or not) is a very good lens. Sigma and Tamron both have 70-200mm F2.8 lenses...but I don't think they are quite as good as the Canon model....but they are cheaper.

As a generalization, I usually tell people that the best you get from Sigma/Tamron, is probably 80-90% as good as the Canon L equivalent...but about half the price. For some people (probably most), it would be a good option to get the cheaper lens....but some people need that extra 10-20% of quality...and many more people just want the feel/prestige of having the best lens.

So if you are looking to get the most quality for your money...the top of the line Sigma/Tamron etc. lenses are a good bargain.

I'm not sure if those companies have a designation for the top lenses, like Canon's L...but it's usually easy to tell the best one because they cost more. :er:

 

[Overread]

All canon EOS lenses are compatable with the 400D and also all EFS lenses (the same is also true of the 40D, 50D, 7D - basically any 1.6 crop sensor camera from canon).

As for alternatives there are some, but you have to go on a lens by lens basis to find out if there are any good alternatives. Good will also be dependant upon your budget as well.

 

[KmH]

People try to improve their photos by buying camera gear, though the limiting factor is the knowledge and skill of the photographer.

Your question indicates you've not yet maximized the capabilities of your 400D.

I would bet the fastest and least expensive way you can get "better picture quality" is by improving your understanding of how your 400D and a lens work, how to do photography, and how to make a photograph.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

...and how to post process.

 

[sincere]

People try to improve their photos by buying camera gear, though the limiting factor is the knowledge and skill of the photographer.

Your question indicates you've not yet maximized the capabilities of your 400D.

I would bet the fastest and least expensive way you can get "better picture quality" is by improving your understanding of how your 400D and a lens work, how to do photography, and how to make a photograph.

You know, if someone else posted this, i would really think that somebody here is trying to tell me something but then i realized it was you.

I dont post much on here but whenever i do, you turn out to be a complete asshole. Stay away from my posts, nobody has asked YOU anything and while were at it, stop pretending to be a moderator

*edit*

i just looked into my inbox and yep, here it is..even there i have messages from you that will confirm the above.

funny.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

People try to improve their photos by buying camera gear, though the limiting factor is the knowledge and skill of the photographer.

Your question indicates you've not yet maximized the capabilities of your 400D.

I would bet the fastest and least expensive way you can get "better picture quality" is by improving your understanding of how your 400D and a lens work, how to do photography, and how to make a photograph.

You know, if someone else posted this, i would really think that somebody here is trying to tell me something but then i realized it was you.

I dont post much on here but whenever i do, you turn out to be a complete asshole. Stay away from my posts, nobody has asked YOU anything and while were at it, stop pretending to be a moderator

*edit*

i just looked into my inbox and yep, here it is..even there i have messages from you that will confirm the above.

funny.

:shock:

 

[Dao]

People try to improve their photos by buying camera gear, though the limiting factor is the knowledge and skill of the photographer.

Your question indicates you've not yet maximized the capabilities of your 400D.

I would bet the fastest and least expensive way you can get "better picture quality" is by improving your understanding of how your 400D and a lens work, how to do photography, and how to make a photograph.

You know, if someone else posted this, i would really think that somebody here is trying to tell me something but then i realized it was you.

I dont post much on here but whenever i do, you turn out to be a complete asshole. Stay away from my posts, nobody has asked YOU anything and while were at it, stop pretending to be a moderator

*edit*

i just looked into my inbox and yep, here it is..even there i have messages from you that will confirm the above.

funny.

I do not think the above post was really necessary. He was just giving you his opinion. Of course, he could have phrased it differently, but still a honest opinion.


As for your question. Once you know more about photography gears as well as photography in general, you may find limitations regarding your photography. And at that time, you may need to find a way to solve/improve and upgrading equipments is one of the way.

The key is knowing the limitations. Good luck!

 

[KmH]

You know, if someone else posted this, i would really think that somebody here is trying to tell me something but then i realized it was you.

I dont post much on here but whenever i do, you turn out to be a complete asshole. Stay away from my posts, nobody has asked YOU anything and while were at it, stop pretending to be a moderator

*edit*

i just looked into my inbox and yep, here it is..even there i have messages from you that will confirm the above.

funny.

If you would like, you can add me to your Ignore list.

There is no doubt that from time to time I rub some people the wrong way. However, calling me names is beyond the pale and reflects very poorly on you.

You don't own the threads you start, TPF does, so if I feel it's appropriate, I will continue to post in threads you start. What I conveyed may or may not be useful to some other forum member.

I am sorry if you got the impression I was communicating as a moderator. I certainly have not 'pretended to be', nor have I ever stated that I was. Towards that, moderator/admin screen names have a different color from regular members. I can't help that you're not perceptive enough to figure that out on your own.

 

[dallasimagery]

This is an interesting question, I have some thoughts on it.

As big mike said, the difference between, say, a 400d and a 7d is mostly just features and AF performance. I don't use a 1ds2 because I think it'll make me a better photographer, I use it because it has features I like - world class AF, 45 AF points, full frame beauty and dynamic range, etc etc. it's more that, because I'm not an amateur and I know how to push my equipment, that I look for certain things in a camera - not the other way around, per se.

Also, a prime will typically yield better image "quality" than even an L zoom lense. But, what the L series gives us is very, very nice autofocus performance! The difference is big IMHO. I will usually use a prime if i'm in the studio, but when things are fast and footlose, I'll use an L zoom, for like weddings and events, and babies and children.

Now, when it comes to bodies, I prefer full frame. I'd rather have a used 5d than a 7d for the type of shooting I do. Noise performance is also a factor for me. I can shoot pretty good with the 1ds2 up to at least 800 and even 1000 and things look great especially the parts that are properly exposed (the shadow areas are sometimes a bit noisy, but can be cleaned up and smoothed out in post).

If I were someone starting out, if I had more than enough money, I'd get a used 5d. If I were someone who didn't have much money, I'd get a used 20d. either way, I'd spend most of my time reading books and improving myself as a photographer, and not worry much about the equipment until at least a couple of years.

Another thing is that, LIGHTING equipment means more than anything - the best camera in the world doesn't help if the lighting sucks