Looking at used 30D. Worth it?

[davideglasgow]

Currently shooting with a Rebel XS. Have never been really happy with the image quality of this body, even with a nice lens (EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS). Not exactly sure why, but I have even wondered if the body is faulty in some way, but not sure how I'd prove/figure that out.


At any rate, I the possibility exists for me to pick up a used 30D from a friend of mine. In holding it, I am very impressed with the build quality vs. the XS. My main question is, I know the 30D is somewhat outdated. That being said, being a higher-end body, would I expect better image quality from this body vs. the XS, even though it is an older model? I have seen some of the pictures my friend has taken with it, and I'm quite impressed. At least I know if I couldn't produce with this body and the glass I have, it must be me and my technique!

[Daniel Browning]

<span>Have never been really happy with the image quality of this body, even with a nice lens (EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS).Not exactly sure why, but I have even wondered if the body is faulty in some way, but not sure how I'd prove/figure that out.

Well, one way to start would be to describe what you mean by "image quality". Are the pictures too dark? Is there too much detail in the background so subjects don't stand out? Is the flash making subjects look like flat cardboard cutouts? Something else?

would I expect better image quality from this body vs. the XS, even though it is an older model?

No, the 30D is slightly worse.

[davideglasgow]

Hard to explain. Of course, I know all the basics of photography. I just seems I have trouble delivering images like this (a friend of mine)


www.flickr.com/.../set-72157621983256946


Mine look more like this:


www.flickr.com/.../photostream


Of course, you can look through my photostream (and hers for that matter). And maybe it's a question of technique...not sure. I know she shoots with an XTi, which is even older than the XS. Even her indoor shots are so crisp and well-defined (without flash).


Ideas, if not the body?

[Daniel Browning]

It's definitely technique, although you would probably benefit from a second lens. The biggest difference is light. Here are the differences I see between yours and your friends:

• Soft light vs hard light. Learn how to find natural soft light (e.g. time of day, location, position, etc.) or make your own with flash.
• Frontal vs side light. Nothing wrong with side light per se, but a lot of folks prefer frontal light for a typical portrait shot.
• Catchlights vs no catchlights. That sparkle gives a lot of life.
• High Angle vs level angle. Shooting down at a subject makes them feel removed, emotionally distant. Level shots like your friends have a feeling of closeness. Try getting on one knee for the kids.
• Focus falloff shown vs not-shown: Your friend doesn't have anything that is slightly in focus -- there is enough space between subject and background that it goes straight to strongly blurred background. In yours, the full background is shown.
• Background blur vs mostly in-focus: while yours does have some blur, it's not nearly as blurred as your the other.
• Background content: a busy street with lights and bokeh is more interesting than the everyday grass and cement.
• Depth of field is another factor here.

So I would suggest working on light and background. If you really want that diffuse background blur with pretty bokeh, an easy way to get it is with a long lens like one of the 70-200 L's.

[Sean Setters]

I think Depth of Field is the biggest difference between the two images, although lighting is an issue as well. It looks to me like your friend is using a lens with a very wide aperture (although there

[Sheiky]

Hard to explain. Of course, I know all the basics of photography. I just seems I have trouble delivering images like this (a friend of mine)


www.flickr.com/.../set-72157621983256946

Hi David,


I just looked trough her photostream and pretty much every photo is taken at f2.8. By reading the other EXIF data I think she's using the Tamron 28-75 and she's using it at pretty much any focal length, so you should be able to duplicate her settings without a problem.


With the camera and lens that you have, you should be perfectly fine to take similar shots so to say. At least with the same Depth of Field. Try walking around zoomed to 55mm and use AV or M-mode with a fixed aperture of f2.8. Then return with your findings. Even only the f2.8 will work, but at 55mm is has the most competence to work for you.


Good luck,


Jan

[bouwy]

Hi David


I'm still learning myself how to take good pix with all type of Canon Slrs and lenses, old and new. So take my rave on with a pinch of salt. [8-|]


Looking on the Flickr sites, yours and your friend I think your pix are OK.[Y] I certainly don't think there's anything wrong with the XS.[Y] As mentioned by Daniel, Sean and Jan, I too think you need to practice. [O] Try all settings on your XS (inclusive of RAW, JPEG, AV, TV, Manual etc) and do the same with your lens. Observe the subject for light, shadows, composition and try to use your flash even for outside shots. Down load pix with[co] Canon DPP and adjust (when shot in RAW) the pix to your liking.


Often I shoot outside, my always moving grand daughters with my old 400D + 17-55mm 2.8 in AV, RAW, pic style Faithful, ISO 100 &gt;200 pending on F stop which range from 2.8 &gt; 6.3. Then DDP. I'm happy with the results [], which are not that far behind using 5DMK2 + 24-70 2.8.


Bottom line: Know your camera settings and lenses by heart and practice like hell, as I'm still learning and I still pondering if my cameras and lenses are the culprit. [*-)]LOL.


Good Luck mate.


Wally

[davideglasgow]

Thanks all for the helpful advice. It just seems to me that her pictures are so much more well-defined and vibrant than mine. I will keep practicing!!

[davideglasgow]

Sean,


I do have the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 and the 50 mm f/1.4. So I have the glass, I guess I just need to learn how to use it.

[scalesusa]

A lot of the "POP" in photos comes from post production. Many use RAW and a editor like lightroom to adjust the image to look like it should. It can make a huge difference to add a little sharpness and vibrance.