Camera settings

[Freako]

I'm sure this is a bit basic for you experts, but what settings would I use on my 20d with a 100-400 is for the best results? Thanks Mick

[GYRob]

I'm sure this is a bit basic for you experts, but what settings would I use on my 20d with a 100-400 is for the best results? Thanks Mick

i would say set iso 200 use AV or TV and try and keep your shutter around 1/1000 sec if hand holding around the long end of the lens 1/500sec if below 300mm and Partial metering for a start.
on a tripod you can go a lot slower .

This is just a simple recomended start but you should learn from what you get and ajust as needed the apeture/ shutter / iso
Rob.

[Sandpiper]

When I started using the same combo I set the ISO to 400, command dial to P (Program AE) and metering mode to Evaluative. The camera then took charge of shutter speed, aperture and exposure allowing me to concentrate on taking some pictures.

Once you have had some practice with this setup you can then venture into Av or Tv adjustments. Today's cameras make photography much easier, so don't be afraid to experiment a little once you have gained some confidence.

Best of luck!

[JohnZ]

I would suggest definitely AV and then follow Robs instructions. I have tried TV but failed dismally. Probably because I am a muppet !

[condyk]

ISO 200 is a decent guess start but a lot depends on light and you need to adapt. I like as low as I can get away with, so 100 if possible! AV makes life easy and you just got to play with aperture and ISO to get 1/500 or so - try a few test shots in the light conditions and see what you get. It helps having a lens you can use wide open. If you're stuck at f8.0 to get a sharp shot you are gonna have to up the ISO to get shutter speed and then maybe noise impacts negatively. 400mm 5.6 L is fine wide open and great bang for your £. Modern DSLR's handle noise much better and that can help.

[Freako]

Thank you guy's, will have a play around.

[IanF]

Pretty standard settings for me as well whether with the 20D or 40D. AV mode, centre weighted metering (as near as the 20D can do to spot), ISO200 and all in camera adjustments off. For exposure adjustments for different lighting EV compensation. ISO400 can be useful but it's 'grainier' than the 40D. Just selecting the central focus point in the viewfinder helps with focus as well as long as it's placed over the bird.

At the 400mm end at least 1/400mm should be used though higher is preferable. The general guideline is that focal length should equate to minimum shutter speed e.g. 100mm 1/100, 200mm 1/200 etc. The Image Stabilisation gives a little more leeway but shouldn't be relied on too much as it's not a miracle worker. The only other thing is that I find the 100-400mm is better stopped down a little at longer focal lengths e.g. f6,3 or f7,1 or even f8 if light levels permit.

At the end of the day though I prefer a sharp noisy photo over a noiseless blurry one so don't be afraid to bump up the ISO. You can always use noise filtration software post processing if need be. After a bit of practice you can start reducing ISO.

Don't be afraid to find something to lean against or prop the camera on - I find camera shake is still the biggest issue. A monopod or a steady tripod really works wonders for improving image quality - though not always practical for bird photography.

[chewie]

i use the AV mode, ISO200-400, mainly because i like a lot of background blur on all my bird shots. the more light the faster the speed will be for whatever fstop im on, plus, if the light levels drop, the camera will still take the shot albeit at a slower speed, but thats then entering, "i hope the IS has kicked in/and subject hasnt moved too much" territory.

if the light drops when in TV mode. the camera will simply not take a shot as the aperture is as wide as it can be.

[HokkaidoStu]

I've had the 100-400 for the last 6 months and use it with the 400D. I'm a bit surprised people are recommending 1/400 (or 1/1000) sec as minimum shutter speeds when handholding at 400mm. I've just looked at the exif data on some of my 'better' photos and to be honest they're mostly around 1/250 sec and all handheld. Most of the keepers are in my gallery.

When I pixel-peeped at 100% size they weren't perfect of course but for web images, medium sized prints and even 50% cropped they still look pretty sharp. Well, sharp to my eyes at least. At 100% crop they are less forgiving but isn't that always (or mostly) the case anyway?

On the 400D I use AV at F8 and ISO at 400 as my 'default' settings. On sunny days I'll drop down to ISO 200. On darker days I'll use F6.3 or F7.1. ISO 800 on a budget DSLR like the 400D doesn't really cut it and at F5.6 I find the 100-400 too soft. The 20D is I imagine better at higher ISO settings.

[Tannin]

I'm amazed to see how many people here are recommending ISO 200 on a slow 400mm lens handheld, especially given the very good ISO performance of the 40D. Start with ISO 400; if you are not getting enough shutter speed (1/1000th or better) go to 500 or 640. Only drop to ISO 320 if you have masses of light.

Aperture priority is the way to go: stop down just a fraction from wide open for best results - about half a stop should be enough.

Use any metering more you please so long as you pick one and stick to it. Much easier to get your eye in for the right amount of exposure compensation to add or remove if you stick with a single metering method.

Plenty of examples of how clean Canon's higher ISOs are at on my website: http://tannin.net.au

[Roy C]

I rarely if ever go below ISO 400 with my 400mm lens even on a bright sunny day. Like Tanin indicates ISO 400 on the 40D is 'clean as a whistle'

[HokkaidoStu]

if you are not getting enough shutter speed (1/1000th or better)

http://tannin.net.au


Good luck with getting that in the UK! (The OP is in the UK).

Japan is sunnier than the UK but I only rarely get 1/1000th except on really bright sunny afternoons, even wide open and ISO at 400. Like I said I only have a 400D, not a 40D. The OP has a 20D.

Maybe in Australia or Spain..............I knew I should have moved to those places when I was younger.

[IanF]

The 20D is still usable at ISO400 but it's noticably grainy and needs noise filtration in post processing. ISO200 is very good on the 20D hence using it as standard. I agree though that on the 40D you can use ISO400 as standard - for me that's one of the main differences over the 20D.

[Tannin]

OK, I'll bite, Ian...... :)

Noise filtration should be regarded as a standard, routine part of post processing. You can use the in-camera filtration on many newer models (like the 40D), but why would you? The most powerful in-camera noise filtration engine in the heaviest, most expensive camera you can buy cannot go anywhere near the ability of even a very old, slow computer. That is the inevitable nature of things: a camera is a small box designed to take pictures which does a little light-duty calculation as a sideline: a computer is a large box designed expressly to make calculations, and is supremely good at them.

In-computer processing is, and probably always will be, more powerful, more subtle, and much more controllable.

Two other matters your post raises: first, ISO 400 on the 20D is not ISO 400 on the 40D. As we discussed in another thread last week, the "ISO 400" on the 20D is about ISO 500 on a 40D. Or, putting it the other way, a 20D would need to be set to ISO 320 to have the same sensitivity as a 40D set to ISO 400.

This, by and large, is how Canon managed to go from the 8MP sensor on the 20D/30D to the 10MP 40D and still hold the noise level down ....... they moved the goal posts closer. To get the same exposure of the same scene at the same shutter speed and the same aperture, you need "400 ISO" on the 20D and "500 ISO" on the 40D. Compare the output of the two keeping like with like, and the difference is very small. Opinions differ as to whether the 20D or the 40D produces the cleanest images in a fair test. On the whole, I think the 20D does a tiny bit better, but it's close enough that you may (quite reasonably) call it the other way.

Finally, a much more important point: the 40D has in-camera noise reduction which, if I remember correctly, is switched on as the factory default. Comparing noise-massaged 40D output with not-yet-processed 20D output will give you an entirely incorrect impression.

Turn the noise reduction OFF on the 40D; shoot at the same actual ISO, and compare results. Now run both pictures through Neat Image (or equivalent) and compare again. I don't think too many people would still regard the 40D as cleaner than the 20D.

(Am I 40D bashing? Not at all. It's a great camera and I own two of them. I have also owned two 20Ds and still have one of them, which I use regularly. The 40Ds are clearly better cameras (as they should be, being several years newer) but neither noise nor image quality contributes in any significant way to the 40D advantage: that lies in the better viewfinder, self-cleaning sensor, better controls, higher speed, and quieter shutter. Great camera, but the picture quality is about the same as the old 20D - which is nevertheless as good as it gets in APS-C.)

[666taz]

I have 20D and the 100-400mm i use 400iso alot but try to use lower iso if its brighter i have never used any sort of noise reduction and i think my photos aren't bad.My 100-400mm is sharp down to f5.6 .i also i use TV mode and center metering also you will find if you set custom function 16 to on you can get TV mode to alter the speed automaticly if the apature is at its maximum.Hope this helps Phill.

[Keith Reeder]

<SNIP>the 40D has in-camera noise reduction which, if I remember correctly, is switched on as the factory default. Comparing noise-massaged 40D output with not-yet-processed 20D output will give you an entirely incorrect impression. <SNIP>Absolute agreement with pretty much every word you've written on the thread so far Tony, with the possible exception of the above quote: I think it's off by default.

Certainly, the only time I tried it (playing with jpegs) I had to turn it High ISO NR on.

I use 400 ISO as my "baseline" ISO on the 40D, and have no qualms about doing so: if I NR, Neat Image does a fantastic job, and I use lower NR settings for my 40D than I did with my 30D.

I generally use Neat Image to blur the background rather than to deal with noise...

[Freako]

Some great replies Gent's for which I thank you very much. Mick:t: