Does the 40D have AF Super Powers?

I've had my 40D for a couple weeks now, and I'm impressed. The up-grades from the 30D are not just minor tweaks. When the 30D came out, a lot of us were disappointed as it was little more than a 20D with very minor improvements. This is not the case with the 40D. The improvements are significant and very noticeable.

Perhaps the biggest is the new AF system. On paper, it doesn't sound like it would be that much of an improvement over the 30D. In reality, it is a significant improvement over the 30D. In fact, the improvement is so significant that reports are coming in of photographers finding they can use lenses with their 40D that they couldn't previously use with their 30D or 20D due to focus issues.

I don't personally have any lenses that don't work with my 30D or 20D, but a close friend of mine has 5 lenses that had focus issues with his 30D that are now working perfectly with his 40D. Does the 40D have AF Super Powers? Who knows. I can say that it works wonderfully.

My 40D is paired with my Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS pretty much 100% of the time. My 30D, 20D, and XTi usually have a fast prime or longer zoom on them, depending what I'm shooting. The 40D / 17-55 f2.8 IS is a KILLER COMBO! More and more, I'm shooting almost entirely with it. Focus is very fast, images are sharp, and I have virtually no OOF (out of focus) shots.

Even in dim lighting, the 40D & 17-55 just kick butt. I shoot a lot of weddings, and most receptions end up with poor lighting by the time the dances get going (if not before). The 40D & 17-55 have been amazing in these situations. I'm getting shots that the 30D would not have got, and the focus accuracy is greatly improved in comparison to the 30D.

The AF improvements of the 40D are so significant, that I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I originally planned on adding only one 40D to my current camera line-up. After shooting with it for the last couple of weeks, including two weddings, I will be adding a second 40D, if not a third. The 40D is just that damn good!

That said... if anybody is interested in a 20D in excellent condition, send me an email. :-)

Sigma 70-200mm VS Nikon 70-200mm VR

A friend of mine recently asked me what the difference was between the Sigma AF 70-200mm f/2.8 EX HSM APO DG macro and the Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G IF-ED VR lenses.

I’ve owned and shot with both of these lenses, and aside from having some very different long names, there are some significant differences. First off, I’ll say that they’re both very good and capable lenses.

With that said, the Nikon is the clear winner. VR alone puts it over the edge. I've shot the Nikon at 1/20s at 200mm. Try that with the Sigma. There are so many times when you’ll get the shot because of the VR, and you would’ve missed the shot without it. Advantage Nikon. I can’t stress this enough. Image stabilization, or Vibration Reduction as Nikon calls it, is worth every penny in a zoom lens of this range.

Bear in mind that most DSLR’s these days are crop sensor format, that is to say they are 1.3 (Canon 1D series), 1.5 (most Nikons with the exception of the new D3), or 1.6 (most Canon’s with the exception of the 5D and 1Ds series). Cropped sensors will magnify the hand-holding rules. In other words, the old rule of setting your shutter speed to your lens focal length doesn’t hold true with these sensors. If you want to stay sharp while hand-holding, you’re best to set a higher shutter speed than your lens focal length. For example, when shooting at 50mm, I set my shutter speed to 80s or 60s.

A lot of folks feel that the higher mega pixel sensor adds to this rule yet again. In theory this has something to do with the higher pixel density, and while I’m not a math wizard, my brain can see how this would be. In practice, I have found this to be true, which is all that really matters. Hence, why I would usually set my shutter speed to 80s instead of 60s when shooting with a 50mm lens. Of course, the rules change and you can get away with slower shutter speeds when using flash, but that’s another story.

Back to our lens comparison, the Nikon is also sharper and has better color and contrast than the Sigma. The difference isn't drastic, but it is fairly significant. If you someone who uses teleconverters, you'll appreciate the added resolution you get with the Nikon (and again you’ll appreciate the VR).

Let me go back to what I said at the beginning… both of these lenses are very good and capable lenses. You make excellent photographs with either. The Sigma is significantly cheaper than the Nikon, but the Nikon offers some very significant advantages over the Sigma. You have to decide what your budget is, and if the advantages the Nikon offers are important to you.

I shot with the Sigma, and I made some great photos. I shot with the Nikon, and I made some great photos. Given a choice, I’d take the Nikon. YMMV.

Check out www.photozone.de for the MTF charts and reviews on both the Nikon and the Sigma.

Switching from Canon to Nikon

There has been a lot of talk on the internet from folks considering the switch from Canon to Nikon. Some of them are ex-Nikon shooters looking to come home, and some are Canon shooters intrigued by everything the new Nikon D3 has to offer.

Considering I used to shoot Nikon (switched to Canon in the Spring of 2006), obviously these new Nikons hold an appeal for me. I like my Canon's, and although I've never had any problems with them (touch wood), I don't have the same confidence in Canon QC and reliability as I did with my Nikons.

Case in point: the 30D vs the D200. Image quality aside, when you pick them both up, the 30D feels like a toy in comparison. The D200 is much better built and is much better stacked feature and ergonomic-wise.

That said, there is something missing in Nikon's lens line-up that may stop me from buying a D3 or a D300 (I wouldn’t switch back, but would shoot “bi” if I bought a new Nikon). They have no standard zoom with VR. Big problem! I was really surprised when they announced the 24-70 with no VR. What were they thinking? This would've been a huge thing for Canon and Nikon shooters alike.

Image stabilization (or VR or OS or whatever you want to call it) is something that should be pretty standard now. I like the idea of a body based system like the Pentax K10D or the new Sony A700, but so far these haven't panned out. The K10D doesn't even have pro lenses available yet, and the AF speed is an issue (maybe not once we can get a hold of the new Pentax lenses). The Sony A700 looks good on paper, but it's IS better be better than it's A100 little brother because the A100 wasn't all that. Also, A700 images I’ve seen so far look pretty bad at high ISO.

Then there’s the price. While this isn’t a consideration for some, it is for me. I like to get maximum value and a great bargain. As much as the D3 appeals to me on many levels, it's price tag does not. The D300 is more my speed. I'm not saying the D3's price isn't justified, just that it doesn't fit into my business model. So, the big question is how the D300 will do on image quality.

And of course, Nikon has yet to introduce a standard zoom with VR. Will they? This is something many will want to think about before considering a switch. With Canon you’ve got the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS and the Canon 24-105 f4L IS to choose from. With Nikon, you’ve got nothing in a PRO caliber.

And what if Pentax brings out a successor to the K10D that uses the new 12MP CMOS sensor that the D300 and A700 use? The K10D is one FULLY FEATURED camera! If the new lenses deliver good AF speed, I think I'll be adding a Pentax... not a Nikon.

Ahhh... so much to consider!

Nikon D3 and D300… Big News from Nikon! (Cont’d)

Picking up where I left off from looking at the new Nikon D3, the new Nikon D300 is almost impressive as the D3 for different reasons. The D300 is basically an up-dated D2Xs at a third of the D2Xs’ original price! I think D2Xs owners will really want to consider up-grading to the D300. That’s right, I said up-grading!

Consider that the D300 has the following (and the D2Xs doesn’t):

- the new CAM 3500 51 point auto-focus system that is in the D3 flagship

- a new 12 Mega Pixel sensor which is better than the D2Xs’ and the D200’s from all initial reports

- the same new 920,000 pixel 3” LCD that the D3 flagship has

- LiveView

- Nikon’s new Scene Recognition System (SRS)

- Nikon’s new Dynamic Dust Reduction System

Now, what would you buy? A D2Xs or a D300? For me, the answer is pretty obvious… the D300 wins. I’d love to hear the argument for buying the D2Xs over the D300 if there’s anyone that disagrees. Frankly, I’d be surprised if someone could make a valid argument for the D2Xs over the D300. Obviously if you already own a D2Xs, the situation is a little different. What to buy once the D300 is on store shelves shortly is a no-brainer for me, but I think current D2Xs owners may want to consider the D300 as well, either as an addition or as an up-grade.

Frankly, I’m impressed that Nikon has set another benchmark for DSLR excellence. They’ve put their top of the line AF system in their $2000 range entry. The D200 had a dummed-down AF system in comparison to the D2Xs. Now, the D300 shares the best of Nikon’s auto focus with its D3 big brother. Impressive! Not only is this excellent news for soon-to-be D300 owners, its great news for the industry in general. This puts pressure on Canon and the other players in the DSLR arena to offer more in their lower end as well, which is good for us, the consumers!

The big question for me is the sensor. Nikon has been playing second-fiddle to Canon in this area for a while now. The D200 and the D2Xs had poor high iso noise qualities, and many a low-light shooter has migrated to Canon as a result (case in point… me). With this new 12MP sensor in the D300, I hope Nikon has leveled the playing field, but I have my concerns. The Mk3 is phenomenal at high iso, and while I am reasonably certain the D3 will be it’s equal (if not its better), I’m not sure about the D300 with its 12MP crop sensor. I would’ve been happier if Nikon had kept the D300 at 10MP and improved the high iso. I am hopeful though. If they can at least hit 30D high iso quality, I think most folks will be happy. If they hit Mk3 / 40D high iso quality with the D300, I’ll be both impressed and blown away!

The rest of the new features are a great addition. The new LCD looks like another area that Nikon will be making the competition pull up their socks. LiveView sounds really cool, and I can’t wait to try it out. I can think of lots of times when it will come in handy, most specifically when I’m shooting weddings. SRS doesn’t really shake my tree like the other new features, but who knows… maybe I’ll change my mind once I’ve seen what it can do. Same with the Dust Reduction System… it’s a welcome addition, but so far, nobody but Olympus seems to have done it right. Come on Nikon! Blow me away with this one too.

Sony A700

Things are changing fast in the DSLR world again. The recent announcement by Sony of the new A700 DSLR brings with it many implications, not just for Sony, but for other manufacturers.

There are several major points of interest with the new A700. The A700's new 12MP CMOS sensor would seem to be the same one used in the new Nikon D300, or at least very similar. This can only bode well for Sony as its new flagship will be on the top of the pile sensor -wise. It will be interesting to see which camera makes the best use of this sensor, the Sony A700 or the Nikon D300. Sony has the advantage of being the manufacturer, so you would think they would be able to get the most out of their own product, but on the other hand, Nikon has more experience in the DSLR realm and tweaking DSLR's to get maximum output from the sensors. It'll be interesting to see who comes out on top.

The new A700 is quite an up-date to the Konica Minolta 7D and is basically a semi-pro featured camera. The A700 features an all new auto focus system with 11 wide area cross focus sensors, "including a center dual cross sensor comprised of two horizontal and two vertical line sensors for exceptional AF precision. An F2.8 line sensor leverages the brightness of fast aperture lenses for even greater precision." Sony claims "that extraordinary focusing speed has been realized through improved algorithms and a high-torque focusing drive motor." I can't wait to see some initial tests and user reports in the field to see how this new AF system fairs. On paper, it sounds good. Let's hope it holds up in real-world shooting!

The all new image stabilization in the new A700 is claiming to deliver up to four stops. If this pans out, it could be the best body-based IS system yet, which can only help sales. Testing and user reports of the A100 suggested that its IS system didn't quite live up to it's claims so hopefully Sony has made some improvements here.

The A700 also seems to share a new 3" 922,000 pixel LCD with the Nikon D300. The raves of how good it is on the D300 make this a welcome feature on the A700, not to mention futher adding to it's saleability (is that a word?). Dual storage formats (memory stick duo and compact flash) are another high-end feature that can only help the A700's sales. Additionally, claims of faster focussing, a new high speed shutter, an optical pentaprism in the viewfinder, an aluminum chasis and magnesium body, and enviromental sealing all add up to a very impressively featured DSLR.

Overall, the A700 looks great on paper. It's 7D predeccessor had a few bugs, but it would appear Sony has done a thorough over-haul with the A700. The only thing that appears to be missing is LiveView, which has debatable usefulness anyways. Regardless, the A700 can only make Canon, Nikon, and Pentax sit up and take note. The feature set on the A700 continues the on-going pressure on manufactureres to bring more to the table in their DSLR's, which can only be better for the consumer.

P.S. One caveat of note... after looking at the list prices on the Sony lenses, they appear to be a little over-priced. Here in Canada for example, Henry's currently lists the Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR at $2049.99. The Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS is currently listed at $2199.99 (although that may be a sale as the listing claims you save $400). The Sony 70-200 f2.8 is currently listed at $2599.99. Not only is the Sony significantly more expensive than the Canon or Nikon equivalents of this lens, it has no reason to be. The Canon and Nikon lenses feature IS and VR in the lens, thus contributing to their high price tag. The Sony obviously does not, as the IS is based in the body, so why is it so high priced? One would think the advantage of the Sony system would be high quality lenses at a better price due to the fact that the added cost of IS isn't a factor. I think Sony needs to look at it's pricing if it wants to be competitive here as I see no reason why this lens should be so high priced.

Canon EOS 40D: The Wait is Over!

Canon has announced the new 40D, successor to the venerable 30D! Basically we’re getting a "1D MkIII mini" which is good news! Here’s the main points worth noting…

- 10 megapixels – While some folks don’t want more, I’m happy to take them as long as it’s not at the expense of image quality and more high iso noise

- AF improvement over the 30D – This remains to be seen, but any improvement in auto-focus are always welcome.

- Very clean high iso images… as clean as the MK3 from what I’ve seen so far

- 6.5fps (30D was 5fps) - Not something that bothers me one way or the other. 5fps was fast enough for me, but hey… I’ll take 6.5 fps if you’re offering it.

- 14 bit / Digic III processor… The 30D was 12 bit and used the Digic II processor, so hopefully we’ll get a dynamic range advantage here in addition to the better high iso noise.

- sRAW (makes a 2.5MP file) – I’m not convinced how useful this is gonna be, but it’s a start. I’d like to see the ability to set your RAW size in ¼ or 1/3 increments. Apparently that’s not possible with current technology due to the way the pixels capture information (something to do with binning for you technology nuts)

- Dust Reduction – If it’s the same system as in the XTi, it’s pretty much useless. From the reviews I’ve read, the XTi’s dust reduction does virtually nothing. In fact, one review said the sensor was dirtier after the dust reduction process.

- 3” LCD – Bigger is welcome, although watch yourself as prolonged use of the LCD will really eat your batteries.

- LCD Liveview – Tres cool! We can now focus using the LCD, same as you can on a point & shoot. I like it!

- Weatherproof – The battery door and storage compartment have had some additional weather sealing added. Again, a welcome addition.

- Battery BP511 – Same as the 30D and 20D. Big bonus. These batteries work great… no need to change what ain’t broke. I’m happy Canon has made the smart decision to stay with the BP511 and not force me to buy yet another battery!

As I said, the 40D looks to be a “Mk3-mini” when you go over the specs. I like my 30D, so the 40D will be a welcome addition to the fold. I’ve never needed the additional features the 1D series offers, and the 40D will deliver the same image quality as the 1D MkIII at a third of the price. That’s what I call good value! I’d rather have three 40D’s than one Mk3.
Frankly, with the rate at which new DSLR’s are coming out, I’m much happier staying up to date with the current offerings than trying to get additional years out of a 1D series because of the HUGE additional investment. This way, my clients always get the best available image quality, and I can be more competitive in the marketplace because I haven’t spent more money than necessary on gear that doesn't offer me any advantages I need.

Nikon D3 and D300… Big News from Nikon!

Nikon set the photography world on fire this past week with their announcements for the new D3 and D300 DSLR’s. With the D3, Nikon has finally ventured into the world of full frame digital, a long awaited and much anticipated event for Nikon shooters. The D300 is a welcome surprise as well. The successor to the D200, it ups the ante and sports the same new auto-focus system that the D3 has.

The D3’s full frame, FX format, 12 Megapixel CMOS sensor is the real big news with this new DSLR from Nikon. Until now, Canon has been the only real player in the “full frame” DSLR arena. The development of a full frame Nikon DSLR has been rumoured for some time and has been the subject of many a heated online discussion. Now that it’s here, not only has Nikon done FF, it’s reported to be VERY good at high iso, something the D200 and D2Xs were not. To tease us even further, the D3 has a high iso setting of 25, 600!

Initial reports are even indicating that it’s better than Canon’s new 1D MkIII at high iso, something that, if it’s true, will make big waves in the world of wedding and sports photographers.

The D3 sports some other impressive specs besides its new sensor. It’s the first DSLR to have dual CF cards slots. Canon’s 1D series have had dual slots for a while now, but they were a CF & SD combination. With the D3, we now have the ability to use two CF cards, which remain the preferred digital media of choice for professional photographers. Those SD cards are just too darn small!

Nikon set the photography world on fire this past week with their announcements for the new D3 and D300 DSLR’s. With the D3, Nikon has finally ventured into the world of full frame digital, a long awaited and much anticipated event for Nikon shooters. The D300 is a welcome surprise as well. The successor to the D200, it ups the ante and sports the same new auto-focus system that the D3 has.

The D3’s full frame, FX format, 12 Megapixel CMOS sensor is the real big news with this new DSLR from Nikon. Until now, Canon has been the only real player in the “full frame” DSLR arena. The development of a full frame Nikon DSLR has been rumoured for some time and has been the subject of many a heated online discussion. Now that it’s here, not only has Nikon done FF, it’s reported to be VERY good at high iso, something the D200 and D2Xs were not. To tease us even further, the D3 has a high iso setting of 25, 600!

Initial reports are even indicating that it’s better than Canon’s new 1D MkIII at high iso, something that, if it’s true, will make big waves in the world of wedding and sports photographers.

The D3 sports some other impressive specs besides its new sensor. It’s the first DSLR to have dual CF cards slots. Canon’s 1D series have had dual slots for a while now, but they were a CF & SD combination. With the D3, we now have the ability to use two CF cards, which remain the preferred digital media of choice for professional photographers. Those SD cards are just too darn small!

Also new with the D3, and shared with it’s little brother the D300, is a new 920,000 pixel LCD. Initial testers and those lucky enough to get a hands-on play have said this new LCD is nothing short of incredible. It’s sharp and vivid, in fact Nikon has coined the phrase “stunning” to describe it. Featuring a 170 degree angle of viewing, I think D3 and D300 users will be in for a real treat when they first see an image on this new LCD!

The Auto Focus system has gotten an up-grade too! For a while now, many thought the D2X’s auto-focus was the best out there, and then the 1D MkIII came along and trumped it. It may well be a short-lived victory however, as the new 51 point Multi-Cam 3500 in the D3 (and D300 suprisingly enough) is reputed to take the lead in AF once again.

It’s interesting to note that this is another first for Nikon. Previously, the D2 series had the best AF Nikon had to offer, and the D200 had a simpler version that was good, but not as good. Now the new D300 shares the same top-of-the-line AF system as the D3. A good day for shooters everywhere as this pushes advancements down the line and will put pressure on Canon and other manufacturers to improve their lower end models.

And then there’s Liveview, a new feature that allows the user to focus with the new 920,000 pixel LCD instead of through the viewfinder. There’s two modes… a tripod mode and a hand-held mode, which is apparently necessary due to the complexity of this type of focusing and its inability to deal with motion. Regardless, it’s always nice to see progressive technology being introduced.

The D3 sports a new processing engine called Expeed. It works with 12 and 14 bit information to process an image, and Nikon has hinted at better sharpness and CA control, as well as increased dynamic range. All in all, it will be interesting to see just who much more advanced the D3’s image files are than the previous generation.

To top of my list of things that interest me on the D3, is a bigger and sharper viewfinder, always a welcome addition to any camera. Big and bright is beautiful in the realm of viewfinders. While I don’t mind shooting with some of the lower-end models that sport smaller and dimmer viewfinders, the difference is always noticeable when I pick up a higher-end model and I can see again!

And oh yeah… lest I forget, there’s a new piece of software called Nikon ViewNX. Sound familiar? Nikon View was always a personal favourite of mine, and like many, I was disappointed when Nikon discontinued it. Well, now it’s back in a new incarnation, and from initial reports, it sounds like an improvement over the old View which can only be good news!

Stay tuned as I’ll be looking at the D300 next...

Canon DPP - Digital Photo Professional for RAW & JPG

I'm sure a lot of folks haven't even tried, or considered trying, Canon's DPP (Digital Photo Professional) software that comes bundled with Canon DSLR's. I know I didn't until a photographer friend I respect a lot told me that's what he is using to process most of his Canon CR2 RAW files.

So I decided to check it out, and I quickly decided it wasn't for me. Like most things in life, change isn't usually welcome. We get set in our ways and used to the way we do things. DPP seemed slow, and the interface didn't appeal to me.

Almost a year later, another conversation with my same friend had me deciding to try DPP again. This time I decided to give it a more thorough testing, and actually process an entire wedding with it. My initial reaction was similar to the first time I tried it... I didn't care for it. BUT, I forced myself to experiment some more and give it a fair shot. Boy am I glad I did!

What I soon found was that DPP is the fastest way to get the best looking results from my Canon files. Whether from my 20D, 30D, 40D, or XTi, DPP wins every time for image quality. I tested it again and again against other RAW processors including ACR, Bibble, and Capture One. DPP kept producing the best image files with the best color.

Skin tones are awesome with DPP... better than anything I've been able to get using any other RAW converter. And the workflow is actually very fast once you get your head wrapped around it. Now that I've gotten used to using DPP and developed my own workflow with it, I can fly through a wedding of 1,000 to 2,000 images faster with DPP than I could with ACR, Lightroom, Bibble, or Capture One.

AND I GET THE BEST COLORS, SKIN TONES, AND FILE QUALITY!

This is the biggie folks. DPP is giving me the best quality images I've yet to see from Canon files, and once I forced myself to give it a fair chance, my workflow is faster than ever using DPP.

Another plus using DPP is that you can get the same look from a CR2 RAW file as you would've got shooting in-camera jpgs. How many times have you fiddled and fiddled with a RAW image trying to get it to look like it would've had it been an in-camera jpg? I know I have many, many times. Not now.

DPP recognizes your in-camera settings when it loads the CR2 RAW files and will give you the same jpg as you would've got shooting jpg with your camera. This alone is awesome! No need to shoot RAW + Jpg anymore! Just shoot RAW and let DPP do your conversions, without any adjustment if you want it to look as you shot it in-camera, or with adjustments if you want to make corrections.

The other BIG thing I've just recently noticed with DPP, is that it gives you a degree of highlight recovery for jpgs, not just RAW CR2 files. As you know, jpgs hold up pretty well to basic adjustment and exposure increases, BUT they don't offer any degree of high-light recovery. That's a big reason why most of us professional photographers shoot RAW. We're not always perfect, and it's nice to have some high-light recovery latitude if you've made a boo-boo.

Until now that is... DPP will give you some high-light recovery with jpgs. From my experiences, it's not nearly as significant as the degree of high-light recovery you'll get from a CR2 RAW file, but it does give you some, which is better than none.

Try it for yourself. Shoot some jpg images with varying degrees of over-exposure. Open them up in DPP and see how much high-light recovery you can get. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

While I'm on the subject of high-light recovery, I should mention that it is the one area where DPP does not beat the rest. Adobe's Lightroom, from my observations, is currently the best at high-light recovery from RAW files. DPP is good, just not as good as Lightroom. I'd say DPP will give you a full stop to 1 1/2 stops of highlight recovery, depending on the image, whereas Lightroom will usually give you 1 1/2 to 2 stops, depending on the image.

So, if you aren't using DPP, give it a try. If you've tried it before, and decided against it as I had, try it again. Give it a good chance. You may just change your RAW workflow for the better. :-)

Best of all... it's free!

(Update: Read my latest article on Lightroom vs Canon DPP here.)