photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
Wm. Bates | all galleries >> Picture a Day for a Year of Wanda Gallery >> Click here for Wanda In September Gallery > Wanda09_20_04.jpg
previous | next
20-SEP-2004

Wanda09_20_04.jpg

We were up late getting this photo done because we didn't get started until almost 10:00PM. I'm still learning the ins and outs of the Canon 20D. Also, I needed to alter my work flow a little. Overall I'm very impressed with the new camera. I think Canon has hit a solid home run with the 20D.

Canon EOS 20D ,Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
1/100s f/5.6 at 73.0mm iso400 with Flash full exif

other sizes: small medium original auto
comment | share
Wm. Bates02-Apr-2005 15:22
Oh I remember posing for this image! Bill had asked Me to put My make-up on just a bit heavier than usual for a dramatic "night time" look. I am no make-up artist so I had to just do the best I could. Then I was supposed to give the camera a "come hither" look. (lauging) I think I kind of did OK on that. I had to laugh though because the first comment posted on the image was from our famous "guest" and he had to say something about "too much make-up". Then he kept at it in his usual less than kind manner. Bill finally ended up deleting all those comments. All in all I think the image turned out fine, but it didn't make it to My list of favorites.

Wanda
manish.bansal@gmail.com 27-Dec-2004 00:52
This would make an excellent B & W image.
Greg 22-Sep-2004 13:46
Who cares about how much make-up Wanda has on, I can bet you that Wanda is just as lovely without it as she is with it, what a beautiful woman she is. Bill is such a lucky man to have Wanda... Keep up the Great Work and please post more of her. LOVE HER EYES!!!!!
Trey Turner 21-Sep-2004 19:17
God bless you both for having to read comments like the ones you received today. I also can take constructive criticism, but dealing with stupidity is another thing. I would have said, "if you don't like my pictures, then never look at them again!"

What makes people think they can say something so rude and not expect a response. They obviously are not happy with their own lives and "trying" to put others down is their way of making themselves feel better. Hang in there and keep up the great work.

By the way, when I start to take some photos, I will send them to you first and if you would like to post them, let me know. Thanks.

p.s. The picture looks great.
Wm. Bates21-Sep-2004 19:04
I need it for when I'm doing this type of photographyhttp://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill/image/26605232 taken at last years High School State Championship Hockey Game
Guest 21-Sep-2004 18:59
I think its a great shot... the choice of lens is fine, small break of the rules.. I think thrusting forward is a bad choice of words. I think the effect makes the face the subject and the body blends into the background.... however the tanline draws your eyes to ...errrr well draws your eyes...LOL. overall its a great pic with a sultry pose....

as for your comments on the 20d ... I think the sharpening is noticably better here, it looks sharp in the right doses if that makes sense!. why you need a huge buffer and frame rate to photograph your wife in bed is anyones guess...LOL.

Keep up the good work.....

G
Wm. Bates21-Sep-2004 14:53
I would have to say that the Canon 20D is better than the 10D in almost every way. I will say the 10D is a nice camera but the 20D is so much nicer. To start with the big question "Image Quality". The 20D is better than 10D. The 20D images are sharper, more detailed with more accurate color straight from the camera. The 10D images always need some post production work to correct color and required sharpening. I think many will find the images straight out of the 20D usable without tweaking in photoshop. At web size those differences don't much matter but with prints, and I do lots of large prints, to me that does matters. The other big improvement is less noise/grain at higher ISO. At 100 and 200ISO you won't see any difference between the 20D and 10D. Both cameras a really have no grain at that level. At 400ISO and up the 20D just is so much less noisy. I almost always shot the 10D at 200ISO because I just couldn't see any difference between 100 and 200ISO. With the 20D I may switch to shooting most things at 400ISO. It is that clean. The 20D's 800ISO has about as much grain as the 10D's 400ISO.

This reduction in grain/noise gives the 20D a huge advantage. I'm more of a wildlife photographer than anything else. That means I'm shooting animals that move at dawn and dusk. Being able to switch ISO without worrying about increase grain to much sure helps. With the 10D I avoided going to 800ISO as much as I could. With the 20D I feel I can go to 800ISO with no real image quality lose. What grain does appear will easily clean with NeatImage.

So image quality is improved in every way with the 20D when compared to the 300D or 10D. In some ways it is very minor and in some ways the improvements are very significant.

The other big improvement is speed. When shooting wildlife or sports the 20D's speed means getting shots that would be missed with the 10D. The 20D wakes up and turns on instantly. I mean like "turning on a light switch" instantly. I know I missed great shots with the 10D because I was waiting for it to wakeup. More often than not with a bird or elk you don't get but a split second to get the shot. With the 20D you can get the shot.

The other place the 20D just flat stomps the 10D is in write speed. That makes a difference outside and inside. I often over shot the buffer with my 10D. Nothing is more frustrating than missing action while the camera is writing from the buffer to the card. Again with the 20D there is virtually no waiting. Even in the studio with Wanda I often filled the buffer and missed moment or more, it interrupted the flow waiting for the 10D to write from the buffer to the card. So far that just hasn't been a problem with the 20D.

The first thing I did with the 20D after slipping in a Sandisk Ultra II card was just hold the shutter down. It ripped off some 30 plus shots before it hit the buffer. I backed off the shutter release and then just hit it again and it ripped off another 15 or 20 frames. The speed is amazing. I was worried about the buffer size when it comes to shooting raw. So I gave it a go. It ripped off six shots in a second or so and stopped. I lifted my finger for a second or so and hit it again and ripped off another 3 frames. Give it another second or two break and it will rip off another 3 or 4 frames. I'm sure I can easily double the RAW frame rate of the 10D when taking pictures over a 30 second period with the 20D.

I found myself very frustrated often with the speed of the 10D. Even if the 20D had the same image quality I would have upgraded for the added speed. I missed to many shots with the 10D waiting for it to either turn on or waiting for it to clear the buffer.

Now to what I find are the minor improvements. The 20D does focus faster with all my lenses except my Sigma 15-30 EX. No big problem I almost always manual focus that lens to the hyper-focal point. I will say the new focus screen, although small, is easier with my old eyes to manually focus. With my other lenses it just snaps into focus. I never had a problem with the focus accuracy of the 10D and the 20D seems as accurate. Changing focus points with the little thumb joystick on the 20D is fast and easy. I would call this a small but major improvement. So, I would say the focus screen, the focus speed and the little joy stick are minor improvements but the are the kind of little things that just make life easier. As far as size and feel in my fat little hands I don't find much difference between the two. Fit, finish and feel are pretty much the same. The shutter on the 20D is louder than the 10D. It sounds different than the 300D shutter. It sounds pretty much just like the shutter on the Canon 1DmkII which I have played with some. I had thought long and hard, since last year when I got my hands on a pre production 1DmkII at PMA trade show last February, about buying a 1DmkII. I knew then, some of what was in the Canon pipeline; so, I was putting off the purchase until Fall. I'm glad I did. The 20D addressed almost all the issues I had with the 10D and it cost less than half as much as the 1DmkII.

Plain and simple the 20D is more like a junior 1DmkII than it is an upgrade to the 10D.

Someone asked about work flow changes. I'm finding the amount of sharpening required is a little less. How I color correct and my curves and level adjustment are a bit different. Nothing major, just different.
Guest 21-Sep-2004 12:26
One more comment on the technical side -- Does the 20D buy you anything on this image over the 10D? I own a 10D, and I can't think that any of the proported features of the 20D would be an advantage here (except for the fun!) Higher res? Wouldn't think so, at web resoulution. iso400 noise levels are similar between the two cameras. The lenses are the same. And I woulnd't think the 20D's faster frame rate makes any difference here either.
What new things are you having to adjust to on the 20D over the 10D (espeically workflow-wise, which you mentioned)?
Guest 21-Sep-2004 12:22
Not sure what all the fuss is about the makeup here -- "Too thick" would be caked-on and obvious, and I don't see that here. Generally I like this image a lot, especially the lighting. I'm on the fence about the picture framing -- the slightly off-center Wanda maybe doesn't work because her left shoulder "weighs down" the right side of the picture a little. This is somewhat balanced by her hand, but maybe not quite enough. Leaving the space on the left is good in general, as it gives lean-to space... like I said, on the fence about it.
Another thing I noticed is that the lens isn't flattening the image quite enough. A longer lens (100mm?) might be very flattering to this type of image -- To my eye there seems to be too much depth between Wanda's head and chest, which makes her head appear a little thrust forward (which of course it was, given the pose.)
Good work for a late night, Bill!
Gary Blanchette21-Sep-2004 12:20
I have to agree with Bill. The choice in lipstick color (to me anyway) made for a softer look.
Lou Giroud21-Sep-2004 07:48
Canon has run a hit in the way that the 20D is a real good successor of the 300D. The disgusting thing is that the 300D is sold now 30% cheeper, what means that the 600 dollar camera they spoke about, possibly the 3000D, will come soon. Saying that a 20D is a good replacement for the 10D is not so sure. Both cameras perform well and it is not those 2mpix more that will turn a beggar into a lord. On the other side, it's just as you say, Bill, one needs first to find out all the secrets before one is able to get a real view of what is possible.