I see that "eccles" uses a Canon S3 and his results are far better than mine using the same camera. I got my S3 a few months ago and although it has some very good features - eg the image stabilization and zoom range - I struggle with the focus. He doesn't seem to have that problem.
I have experimented with manual, aperture priority, etc. I try to "save settings" (and then use the custom setting) but clearly I am doing something wrong as although I seem to be following the manual, it doesn't save and I find for example that the "focus bracket" or selected F/stop has become disabled without any apparent action on my part.
I wonder if "eccles" could find the time to explain exactly how he uses his S3. If it seems more appropriate, he can always write privately to: jack.harrison@gmail.com
Jack
Canon S3
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
Hi Jack. In case others use the S3 it makes sense to share my experiences with this camera here.
First and foremost, forget the two macro modes as these are the most disappointing aspects of the camera. Because the camera only operates at the wide angle end when in supermacro, you have to get ridiculously close to the subject to get a decent image size. For live subjects this is stupid as they will invariably fly or scuttle away.
Pretty soon after buying the camera last July, I bought the Canon addon adaptor plus the 500D close up lens. This enables a focussing range of around 12"-20" with maximum magnification at 12" distance and at the full tele end of the zoom range. This is exellent for butterflies down to small blue size. For even smaller stuff I have the DCR-250 lens by Raynox, but this is pretty difficult to use due to the narrow depth of field.
I almost always shoot Av mode with apertures between F5-F8 so long as shutter speed is useable. Sometimes using flash set to -1 fill-in helps but I don't use it as a rule, preferring natural light.
I used to use continuous A/F but worked out that it would often spook some insects so I've set it to 'single' mode, which helps.
I've been trying the same with IS, setting it recently to 'shoot mode' but haven't tried it for long enough to determine whether it's any better or not.
I never use iso greater than 200. At iso 200 I can run the image through the 'Neat Image' program and get reasonably clean and detailed results, although iso 80 or 100 is still preferrable.
When shooting, I aim at the insect's eyes to autofocus, hold the button halfway down to lock, then frame before shooting.
If the A/F won't lock, then release the button and try again. Sometimes you can point towards a piece of vegetation at the same distance to get the focus near enough then a refocus on the subject will lock on.
Some subjects 'buzz' with activity and need a high shutter speed to get them sharp. Silverwashed fritillaries do this when it's warm. You can sometimes forget that IS won't fix this.
Chromatic aberration is sometimes a problem at the edges of the image while at other times it isn't. I've worked out that it's always there but the in-camera processing fixes it - usually.
I recently got the HDK hack that allows shooting raw. You can get the info for this very worthwhile hack here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/sho ... p?t=305198
It is a benign hack; it doesn't alter the camera firmware, but loads from the SD card when you turn the camera on. When I shoot, it saves a raw image that is about 7 megs plus the original jpg.
I use a program called DNG for Powershot that converts the raw image to Photoshop format then use Photoshop to process the image. Occasionally, I can't get as good a result as the camera's JPG, but most of the time it's cleaner - Photoshop's jpg compression is less prone to halo effects and other jpg artifacts than the camera's firmware. This is simply because Photoshop can save a bigger jpg filesize with less compression. The program's lens correction tool is excellent for correcting chromatic aberration, and other tools for tweaking colour balance and adjusting shadow and highlight detail are very useful too.
I hope that helps.
First and foremost, forget the two macro modes as these are the most disappointing aspects of the camera. Because the camera only operates at the wide angle end when in supermacro, you have to get ridiculously close to the subject to get a decent image size. For live subjects this is stupid as they will invariably fly or scuttle away.
Pretty soon after buying the camera last July, I bought the Canon addon adaptor plus the 500D close up lens. This enables a focussing range of around 12"-20" with maximum magnification at 12" distance and at the full tele end of the zoom range. This is exellent for butterflies down to small blue size. For even smaller stuff I have the DCR-250 lens by Raynox, but this is pretty difficult to use due to the narrow depth of field.
I almost always shoot Av mode with apertures between F5-F8 so long as shutter speed is useable. Sometimes using flash set to -1 fill-in helps but I don't use it as a rule, preferring natural light.
I used to use continuous A/F but worked out that it would often spook some insects so I've set it to 'single' mode, which helps.
I've been trying the same with IS, setting it recently to 'shoot mode' but haven't tried it for long enough to determine whether it's any better or not.
I never use iso greater than 200. At iso 200 I can run the image through the 'Neat Image' program and get reasonably clean and detailed results, although iso 80 or 100 is still preferrable.
When shooting, I aim at the insect's eyes to autofocus, hold the button halfway down to lock, then frame before shooting.
If the A/F won't lock, then release the button and try again. Sometimes you can point towards a piece of vegetation at the same distance to get the focus near enough then a refocus on the subject will lock on.
Some subjects 'buzz' with activity and need a high shutter speed to get them sharp. Silverwashed fritillaries do this when it's warm. You can sometimes forget that IS won't fix this.
Chromatic aberration is sometimes a problem at the edges of the image while at other times it isn't. I've worked out that it's always there but the in-camera processing fixes it - usually.
I recently got the HDK hack that allows shooting raw. You can get the info for this very worthwhile hack here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/sho ... p?t=305198
It is a benign hack; it doesn't alter the camera firmware, but loads from the SD card when you turn the camera on. When I shoot, it saves a raw image that is about 7 megs plus the original jpg.
I use a program called DNG for Powershot that converts the raw image to Photoshop format then use Photoshop to process the image. Occasionally, I can't get as good a result as the camera's JPG, but most of the time it's cleaner - Photoshop's jpg compression is less prone to halo effects and other jpg artifacts than the camera's firmware. This is simply because Photoshop can save a bigger jpg filesize with less compression. The program's lens correction tool is excellent for correcting chromatic aberration, and other tools for tweaking colour balance and adjusting shadow and highlight detail are very useful too.
I hope that helps.
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
Many thanks,
That's all pretty much what I do although haven't looked at the RAW hack - will do that.
The minimum distance except at wide angle is 90 cms - that is a real pain and something I hadn't realised when I purchased. So I quickly saw the need for a supplementary lens. I don't use the same lens attachments but mine are pretty much the same spec , a +1 and a +2 diopter. I was unable to get the correct adaptor and was several times (by different suppliers) sent a part taht wouldn't fit. So I made my own which works fine.
The greatest difficulty I have is with "save settings". I meticulously follow the instructions but I only seem to have to look away and the C (custom) shooting mode has decided it knows best and set an aperture of F/3.5 instead of the one I had chosen.
I'm stuck with the camera now but in truth, although excellent for general use, I wouldn't recommend for butterflies. A friend, Nick Ballard showed me what he manages with his Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ50. You can see the individual scales on a Small Blue's wing. I can't t take pictures like that.
Now to try the RAW hack.
Jack
That's all pretty much what I do although haven't looked at the RAW hack - will do that.
The minimum distance except at wide angle is 90 cms - that is a real pain and something I hadn't realised when I purchased. So I quickly saw the need for a supplementary lens. I don't use the same lens attachments but mine are pretty much the same spec , a +1 and a +2 diopter. I was unable to get the correct adaptor and was several times (by different suppliers) sent a part taht wouldn't fit. So I made my own which works fine.
The greatest difficulty I have is with "save settings". I meticulously follow the instructions but I only seem to have to look away and the C (custom) shooting mode has decided it knows best and set an aperture of F/3.5 instead of the one I had chosen.
I'm stuck with the camera now but in truth, although excellent for general use, I wouldn't recommend for butterflies. A friend, Nick Ballard showed me what he manages with his Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ50. You can see the individual scales on a Small Blue's wing. I can't t take pictures like that.
Now to try the RAW hack.
Jack
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
Perhaps I aim too high. This taken today S Cambs. It's about 2/3 crop and then resized. This is pretty much as good as I can get with the S3
http://www.itadvice.co.uk/weatherjack/BrownArgus.jpg
Sorry to do it as a link but can't work out how to sumbit a photo direct.
Jack
http://www.itadvice.co.uk/weatherjack/BrownArgus.jpg
Sorry to do it as a link but can't work out how to sumbit a photo direct.
Jack
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6777
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
Hi Jack,
Cheers,
- Pete
See http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/phpBB2/faq.php#15jackharr wrote: Sorry to do it as a link but can't work out how to sumbit a photo direct.
Jack
Cheers,
- Pete
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6777
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
And now the test - I've followed Pete's instruction. Will it upload?
[url=http://upload8.postimage.org/673103/photo_hosting.html][img]http://upload8.postimage.org/673103/OrangeTip.jpg[/img][/url]
Jack
[url=http://upload8.postimage.org/673103/photo_hosting.html][img]http://upload8.postimage.org/673103/OrangeTip.jpg[/img][/url]
Jack
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6777
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6777
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
-
Pete Eeles
- Administrator & Stock Contributor
- Posts: 6777
- Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Thatcham, Berkshire
- Contact:
-
Tom Ottley
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 5:57 pm
- Location: East Sussex
Hi!
I too use this camera and also with the 500D supplementary lens. I have recently been experimenting with manual focus and the 'continuous' shooting mode. I can then press and release for a single shot or keep the shutter release held down for about 1 shot per second - this allows me to bracket the focus by simply moving the camera slightly towards and away from the subject. I might take 10 such shots and choose the best.
I was disappointed with the depth of field obtainable - i would have preferred f/16 or f/22 even but it limits at f/8.
I am not using RAW (yet!) but following the excellent discussion so far I may well do so.
I find no problem with the custom (C) settings - they seem to stick perfectly well.
If I could get an image as good as the orange tip that Jack uploaded I would be over the moon.
Tom
I too use this camera and also with the 500D supplementary lens. I have recently been experimenting with manual focus and the 'continuous' shooting mode. I can then press and release for a single shot or keep the shutter release held down for about 1 shot per second - this allows me to bracket the focus by simply moving the camera slightly towards and away from the subject. I might take 10 such shots and choose the best.
I was disappointed with the depth of field obtainable - i would have preferred f/16 or f/22 even but it limits at f/8.
I am not using RAW (yet!) but following the excellent discussion so far I may well do so.
I find no problem with the custom (C) settings - they seem to stick perfectly well.
If I could get an image as good as the orange tip that Jack uploaded I would be over the moon.
Tom
@Jack, looking at your images, the brown argus isn't really big enough to determine how detailed it is. The 100% crop of the speckled wood is similar to what I can get with the 500D although I may be able to squeeze a little more detail at the expense of a bit more noise using the raw image but it shows that your close up lens is pretty good. The crop of the orange tip shows some jpg artifacts that wouldn't be there in the raw image.
This is the advantage of 'raw' with the S3. It isn't a magic bullet but you can trade off sensor noise against detail using Photoshop so that your final image is optimised for display or for printout. Another advantage is the ability to manipulate shadow detail that you just cannot do once the image is encoded as a jpg.
Details of the HDK hack can still be had here:
http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK
Here's a 100% crop of a shot taken raw that I took yesterday shot at iso100. It's about the same detail as your speckled wood - look at the claws of the dragonfly - but there's a bit of noise in the background as well. I could probably have improved that by using the Neat Image program to despeckle it.
@Tom, the reason why F8 is the minimum aperture is that for such a small sensor as used on the Canon (1/2.5") there are diffraction problems for smaller apertures. The Panasonic uses a larger sensor (1/1.8") than the Canon so can get away with F11.
This is the advantage of 'raw' with the S3. It isn't a magic bullet but you can trade off sensor noise against detail using Photoshop so that your final image is optimised for display or for printout. Another advantage is the ability to manipulate shadow detail that you just cannot do once the image is encoded as a jpg.
Details of the HDK hack can still be had here:
http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK
Here's a 100% crop of a shot taken raw that I took yesterday shot at iso100. It's about the same detail as your speckled wood - look at the claws of the dragonfly - but there's a bit of noise in the background as well. I could probably have improved that by using the Neat Image program to despeckle it.
@Tom, the reason why F8 is the minimum aperture is that for such a small sensor as used on the Canon (1/2.5") there are diffraction problems for smaller apertures. The Panasonic uses a larger sensor (1/1.8") than the Canon so can get away with F11.
-
Jack Harrison
- Posts: 4634
- Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:55 pm
- Location: Nairn, Highland
- Contact:
Sure, there were artifacts as I had compressed for web use to reduce download time. I do have so-called broadband but it often grinds to a halt when people get home from work so I habitually compress before posting anything.
I have looked at the RAW hack but a in truth scared of going so deeply into the camera settings (that Alt mode frightens me) that I'm not sure I dare try it. It does look mightily complicated.
Jack
I have looked at the RAW hack but a in truth scared of going so deeply into the camera settings (that Alt mode frightens me) that I'm not sure I dare try it. It does look mightily complicated.
Jack