Digital Photography

Equipment Reviews

[CANON EOS 20D] - Functionality and quality feel powerful enough to cover even professional tasks. The predictive AF works flawless and low light autofocus as well as improved white balance are striking from a 2005 perspective (in this price range). Size is relative and the housing is not the smallest ever, in fact, it's kind of big, but fits my hands perfectly. Further, it's not like you will fit the smaller XT in your pocket either. Once you carry a 'big block' with you, the difference is relatively insignificant. It feels well balanced despite the extra weight over the Digital Rebel. Often the lens is heavier than the body and obsoletes the weight advantage even of the XT. The housing itself is relatively traditional, but still well formed to blend in with the professional crowd. It's mostly the buttons that are a little uninspiring to me.
Especially the functionally excellent dial sticks out as a design glitch. Having the control LCD on top is also traditional but in normal operation not immediately accessible without turning the camera. Upon shooting the first pictures I was surprised how the 20D goes to business. I mean the shutter sounds potent and professional but also very loud. Upon closer examination it turns out that the flip-up mirror seems to have a great part in it. The shutter noise is relatively low compared to that.
Other than that there is little to complain about the 20D in 2005 and possibly all the way to 2006. Speed is great, resolution is quite adequate for letter sized photo prints and tonal accuracy well defined. The natural interpolation of the Beyer sensor is well compensated by the included "Digital Photo Professional" software -- but not eliminated. I am somewhat missing the "old" Depth-of-field mode (i.e. EOS IX) where one can sequentially define the closest and the farthest point in focus and the camera attempts to set the parameters accordingly. Just like the Digital Rebel and most modern EOS cameras the A-DEP mode is a fully automated version of that, but it doesn't allow the control of the older DEP mode as described above. A-DEP is best for group pictures but useless for something more specific. Click here for full review ...

[CANON EF-S 17-85mm IS USM] - Given that this lens alone costs almost as much as the street price for a Digital Rebel body, I had high expectations. Almost every single one of them was met or exceeded (extended zoom range, sharper images, quieter operation, resilient filter mount). That sure helped to cope with the expense as it was justified by the results. Hey and think of the more professional looks of this lens compared to the toy character of the (not that bad) EF-S 18-55mm. A little bit short of expectations fell the close-up capability (macro).
Beyond that I am having trouble to find other negatives. (Hard-core professionals might find more than that, like the slightly soft rendering typical for a midrange zoom.) Sure, power consumption goes up, but I have yet to find out that it really matters in my applications. Well, I will need a set of 67mm wide-angle filters (after I just got a set for 58mm) and that adds to the cost, but that's hardly the fault of this lens.
While speed is relative and IS compensates well for the f4 to f5.6 maximum aperture, portrait photography most likely require an additional (faster) lens for more shallow depth of focus -- to better isolate object from background especially when they're close. For those cases you may look into the 3rd EF-S lens to be released in April 2005: the EF-S 60mm f2.8 USM. It should fix the remaining issues of the 17-85mm IS lens, but will set you back another $400. However, the 1:1 macro capability and improved picture sharpness may be worth it. To take things even further, check out the (pricey) EF 70-300mm f4.5-f5.6 IS DO USM for excellent long-distance performance. Note: The f4 maximum aperture is not enough to enable the precision focus in the EOS 20D which requires a f2.8 or better to be enabled. Overall, the EF-S 17-85mm IS USM f4/5.6 is a great multipurpose lens for the upcoming years and due to it's performance take the place of my primary lens. Right now, I can only recommend this lens. Of course keep in mind that the added expense should fit your needs rather than wants. Click here for the full review ...

[CANON EF 70-300mm IS DO USM] - This lens is a tempting mix of modern technology and overall useful features: Three diffractive optics keep size relatively small. Image stabilization turns the relatively slow lens into a near f2.8 lens. Chromatic aberration is low (long distance) and similar to more expensive 'L' lenses (low dispersion) from Canon. The ultrasonic drive moves the internal focus rather quickly and without much noise. The distance readout for E-TTL II may be less of importance since your target may be well outside the reach of any flash anyway.
If it was just for picture sharpness (contrast) while using a tripod, the EF 70-300mm IS DO USM appears too expensive compared to the "Sigma APO" while gaining almost similar picture quality -- on average. The scale tilts in favor of the Canon lens when attempting handheld shots and quick focus is essential. For moving objects, (i.e. sports photography) both lenses are at a disadvantage to a speedier lens (f2.8 or better) -- especially in low light conditions. However, looking at a "f2.8 L" zoom lens brings cost and size up significantly.
The next best thing might as well be the EF 70-300mm IS DO USM. In applications where more depth of field is needed, a faster lens typically is stopped down to a slow aperture (i.e. f8) anyway and looses all of it's advantage. (A big aperture rating like f1.4 or f2 produces very shallow depth of field in telephoto lenses.) This is exactly the point where Image Stabilization has no match since it still allows to shoot at f8 while following the shutter speed rules of roughly f4. The EF 70-300mm IS DO USM has a purpose and if you remember my intentions for this lens, this is exactly what I got out of it. A great telephoto lens with excellent far-field performance! For everything else, well I still have the other lenses which may be better fits in certain applications. (i.e. macro and portrait are better left to the Canon EF-S 60mm f2.8 USM lens. Click here for the full review ...

[CANON EF-S 60mm f2.8 USM] - It takes some time to get over the fact that this lens will put you back another $400 (best offer) if you only got the EF-S 17-85mm f4-f5.6 IS USM and maybe a telephoto EF 70-300mm f4.5-f5.6 IS DO USM lens yet. In fact, unless you're serious about it (as that investment in an EOS 20D might demonstrate) this lens is a gimmick for many photographers especially when you're praying to the god of point-and-shoot. However, the EF-S 60 mm f2.8 USM does offer some nice features that other digitally optimized EF-S lenses cannot match. To name two, the macro capability and maximum aperture should be the main factors. If you're into close-up and portrait photography, the EF-S 60 mm will soon emerge as an essential buy for the EOS 20D due to Macro, DOF and precision focus. The 60mm focal length translates into 96 mm full-frame equivalent, a flattering portrait lens. For some that may be worth the extra $440 (street). This lens has a purpose and it's the first true Macro lens in the digital lineup specifically for Canon EOS cameras (EF-S mount). But it also works great as a portrait lens. The picture quality bests the relatively pricey EF-S 17-85mm f4-f5.6 IS USM lens and even the professional EF 70-300mm f4.5-f5.6 IS DO USM lens. This is mainly due to the fixed design and optics, rather than the f2.8 maximum aperture. Pictures are more detailed and it turns out that the EOS 20D can produce even sharper images than the IS achieved. Of course you have to be able to move around and have to choose your perspective based on a fixed FOV rather than picking one and adjusting the FOV to your needs (zoom). I have to admit that it took me some time to get over the sticker shock after just having invested in the most versatile lens for digital EOS cameras, the EF-S 17-85mm f4-f5.6 IS USM. Once I crossed that bridge, I was happy to have done it. Picture sharpness, DOF and support for E-TTL II as well as great close-up capability are great arguments. Being somewhat of a perfectionist, the improved sharpness is a welcome fact to visibly justify the expense. However, Canon really could have thrown a lens bag in for that price! Click here for the full review ...

[CANON Powershot SD800 IS] - When size and ease of use matter, the SD800 IS (or IXUS 850 IS) is a solid performer that fits in most pockets. The wide angle lens, image stabilization, face tracking and a plethora of customer level features make for a great little 7.1 MPx camera. (Higher pixel count in such a small sensor is mostly driven by marketing reasons than actual gain in picture quality.) Typical for a tiny sensor as found in this class, the noise level under dim conditions and sharpness compromises are the main drawbacks compared to enthusiast cameras like the also recently introduced Powershot G7. Technically a close cousin of the 10 MPx SD900, the 7 MPx SD800 IS is much closer in function to the predecessor SD700 IS. This is mostly due to the integrated Image Stabilization which the SD900 lacks. Tiny in size, either camera packs a serious punch for photographers that don't care much for control over every technical aspect of shooting photos. The advantage of the SD800 IS over the SD900 is a practical Image Stabilization (IS) and a wider angle objective (28mm in 35mm equivalent). The lower resolution of the sensor is relatively insignificant due to the optical and physical limitations of such tiny photo cells in the equally tiny sensor. Realistically, despite the 3 MPx difference, overall print quality is about the same, and noise levels are slightly lower in the SD800 due to bigger photo cells. Yet both are basically unacceptable at ISO 1600. The SD900 also allows to capture higher resolution movies, but the size of commercially available SD cards and the maximum file size of 4 GB realistically don't provide much advantage over the standard VGA video (640x480). Another argument for the SD900 is only skin deep -- namely the titanium cladding that not only makes the camera slightly more robust but also gives it a nice satin finish (for those of you looking for a fashionable design). And of course not to forget another significant difference: The SD800 IS is $100 cheaper than the SD900. Both SD800 IS and SD900 sport the new DIGIC III processor and the 2.5" high resolution display. Most functions and overall usage are the same too. Click here for the full review ...