Canon Rebel XT - Can't get good pictures.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by emrlaw@att.net, Oct 24, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look too
    dark and lack any vivid color. I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    I'm really disappointed in this one. (My previous camera was a G6,
    which I sold to get the XT). Any advice would really be appreciated!
    , Oct 24, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mark² Guest

    wrote:
    > I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    > it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    > built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look
    > too dark and lack any vivid color. I've always been a huge Canon
    > fan, so I'm really disappointed in this one. (My previous camera was
    > a G6, which I sold to get the XT). Any advice would really be
    > appreciated!


    I think what you are saying is that the XT isn't handing perfect pictures to
    you on a silver platter...rather, it expects YOU to DIRECT it in how to get
    the pictures you want from it.

    Most likely, you're underexposing and/or suffering from improper white
    balance that is common under artificial indoor lighting. Most indoor
    lighting is a mixture of light types...meaning most cameras will struggle
    unless directed a bit.

    It sounds like you're using a DSLR and expecting it to work like a
    point-and-shoot. There is definitely a learning curve involved in getting
    the results you want...and there are reasons for the way the images are
    captured as you're seeing.

    Perhaps if you post some of these images, you'll get more specific
    suggestions.

    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
    Mark², Oct 24, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    "" <> wrote:

    > I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    > it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    > built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look too
    > dark and lack any vivid color. I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    > I'm really disappointed in this one. (My previous camera was a G6,
    > which I sold to get the XT). Any advice would really be appreciated!


    You bought an external flash without knowing how to use the camera yet?
    I'd bet that you're using the flash for direct lighting, which always
    makes terrible photos. Show us samples.
    Kevin McMurtrie, Oct 24, 2006
    #3
  4. > I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    > I'm really disappointed in this one.


    You should be disappointed in yourself. Don't blame the tool because you
    don't know how to use it.
    Derek Fountain, Oct 24, 2006
    #4
  5. Tony Rice Guest

    "" <> wrote in news:1161661271.751549.279290
    @b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

    > I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    > it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    > built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look too
    > dark and lack any vivid color. I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    > I'm really disappointed in this one. (My previous camera was a G6,
    > which I sold to get the XT). Any advice would really be appreciated!


    It's a camera, not a magic wand.

    Post some samples, you'll get plenty of helpful suggestions.

    If the external flash can tilt upward, try doing that so that the flash
    will bounch off walls and ceiling creating a less harsh, more scene filling
    light.

    Try taking some without the flash, at least put the camera in P mode and
    select the fastest shutter speed it offers (it will select the apropriate
    aperture value for you) and see if the results aren't better.

    Better yet, learn about aperture and shutter speed and use all of the
    camera you bought, nut just the auto mode. It's not an instamatic.
    Tony Rice, Oct 24, 2006
    #5
  6. Jack Mac Guest

    On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 06:36:43 -0500, Tony Rice <> wrote:

    >"" <> wrote in news:1161661271.751549.279290
    >@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
    >
    >> I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    >> it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    >> built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look too
    >> dark and lack any vivid color. I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    >> I'm really disappointed in this one. (My previous camera was a G6,
    >> which I sold to get the XT). Any advice would really be appreciated!

    >
    >It's a camera, not a magic wand.
    >
    >Post some samples, you'll get plenty of helpful suggestions.
    >
    >If the external flash can tilt upward, try doing that so that the flash
    >will bounch off walls and ceiling creating a less harsh, more scene filling
    >light.
    >
    >Try taking some without the flash, at least put the camera in P mode and
    >select the fastest shutter speed it offers (it will select the apropriate
    >aperture value for you) and see if the results aren't better.
    >
    >Better yet, learn about aperture and shutter speed and use all of the
    >camera you bought, nut just the auto mode. It's not an instamatic.


    All of these have been good suggestions BUT....
    the OP said he'd "only used it on 'automatic'"
    One would think that if his G6 made satisfactory photos on "automatic"
    he should .... as a brand new owner of a DSLR..... expect be able
    to get satisfactory (I didn't say good) photos on "automatic" with
    his Rebel XT. I don't think it's going to happen.
    As the previous owner of a G5, I seldom used it on "automatic"
    because I could do better with other settings.... even RAW.
    (I don't get satisfactory photos on my Rebel XT/350D on
    "automatic".)
    The camera is brand new to OP so he has a lot to learn about it.
    The learning curve for a DSLR is much steeper and more involved
    than most P&S cameras. Many of us are still learning!

    Jack Mac
    Jack Mac, Oct 24, 2006
    #6
  7. Jim Townsend Guest

    wrote:

    > I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    > it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    > built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look too
    > dark and lack any vivid color.


    Point and shoot cameras usually apply more default saturation and contrast
    than DSLR's.

    If you look through your camera manual, you'll see you can increase the
    saturation, contrast, sharpness etc through the camera menu. You can also
    apply various picture styles to enhance your shots in different ways.

    I think most people who use DSLR cameras use editing software to post process
    their images. Many people use the RAW format. Post processing gives you the
    the most control in how the images turn out.
    Jim Townsend, Oct 24, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest

    I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.
    , Oct 24, 2006
    #8
  9. Tony Rice Guest

    "" <> wrote in news:1161697716.020391.306560
    @i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

    > I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    > will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    > That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    > automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    > flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    > off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    > wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    > should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    > auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.


    I agree that auto mode shouldn't exist, if just for this reason. Moving
    from a point and shoot to a SLR takes some getting used to.

    If you bought a SLR solely because "it takes better photos" I'd suggest
    considering taking it back and looking at a high end point and shoot
    instead.

    If you bought it to explore more creative photography and getting into
    capturing the scene the way you want by making use of adjustment of
    shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and different lenses (and that's a
    reasonable order to explore these things in), then you made a good
    choice.

    I moved from a Canon G3 to a Canon Rebel XT and couldn't be happier. I
    had some previous SLR experience but had been using a point and shoot for
    many years. I learn a little more with every memory card I fill up. I
    learn alot more with every photo I share with peers and ask for feedback.

    It's possible that you have a lemon but not very likely. Take the camera
    back to the store where you bought it and ask them to take a look. Take
    some photos in a controlled environment and then compare them to reality.
    Are the colors acurate? How is the exposure? Look at the histogram
    (press the info button when viewing the photo), what is it telling you
    about exposure? To understand what this graph is telling you take a look
    at this:

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-
    series/understanding-histograms.shtml
    Tony Rice, Oct 24, 2006
    #9
  10. Celcius Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    > will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    > That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    > automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    > flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    > off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    > wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    > should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    > auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.
    >


    Try to put your camera on "P" (to take the photo with flash, you have to
    open the flash by pressing the flash button on the left had side of the
    flash), then the white balance (WB) at "automatic", try also white balance
    on "Flash". Try taking the flash with ISO 100, then 200... Remember that on
    the XT, once you've chose the WB, or the ISO... you have to hit the "Enter"
    key, otherwise it remains as it was. You didn't say how far you were from
    the subject or whether the room was dark or partially lit... Just a few
    ideas. Marcel.
    Celcius, Oct 24, 2006
    #10
  11. Tony Rice Guest

    "" <> wrote in news:1161697716.020391.306560
    @i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

    > I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    > will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    > That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    > automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    > flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    > off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    > wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    > should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    > auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.


    Something else to consider...

    Taking the same photo of the same scene with similar settings with a SLR
    and a point and shoot camera can produce surprisingly different results.
    Straight out of the camera, you may even find the point and shoot produces
    "better" results than the SLR.

    This is because many point and shoot cameras do some sharpening of the jpg
    in camera. SLRs dont. SLRs are designed to provide maximum flexibility to
    the photographer.
    Tony Rice, Oct 24, 2006
    #11
  12. Bill Funk Guest

    On 24 Oct 2006 06:48:36 -0700, "" <>
    wrote:

    >I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    >will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    >That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    >automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    >flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    >off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    >wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    >should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    >auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.


    it seems evident that you are getting satisfactory results in
    situations other than indoors, right?
    If so, the camera is probably working right, you just aren't getting
    enough light.
    The EXIF info will tell you a lot about what's going on. Check it to
    see what parameters the camera's using, and post it here, along with a
    link to the photo it's from.
    learn how to sett he optional parameters, and use thr P setting; Auto
    often gets it wrong in less than ideal conditions, like indoors where
    light is marginal.
    We don't know what external flash you're using; it could be it's not
    up to the job.
    Post links to some examples, and include EXIF info, and we'll be able
    to help much better.
    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
    Bill Funk, Oct 24, 2006
    #12
  13. JC Dill Guest

    On 24 Oct 2006 06:48:36 -0700, "" <>
    wrote:

    >I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    >will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.


    I bet you played with buttons and dials and in the process you set the
    exposure compensation to under expose the images. You need to learn
    what every button and dial does, and when and why you would want to
    use each one. That's the only way to get the tool to work for you.

    >I think a camera this expensive should take good photos in auto mode.
    >Otherwise, it shouldn't have an auto mode.


    This sounds like a driver who expect the car to drive itself when the
    driver sets the cruise control.

    jc

    --

    "The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
    of different horses without having to own that many."
    ~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA
    JC Dill, Oct 24, 2006
    #13
  14. Paul J Gans Guest

    Derek Fountain <> wrote:
    >> I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    >> I'm really disappointed in this one.


    >You should be disappointed in yourself. Don't blame the tool because you
    >don't know how to use it.


    Why do you folks assume that. In any of the "automatic"
    modes, the camera takes care of everything, including
    white balance and popping the flash.

    The resulting photos, if the subject is not too far away,
    should be reasonable. If they are very unreasonable, something
    strange is going on.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Oct 25, 2006
    #14
  15. Paul J Gans Guest

    <> wrote:
    >I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    >will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    >That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    >automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    >flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    >off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    >wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    >should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    >auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.


    I happen to agree with you.

    What I'd do is take some daylight shots on automatic outside.
    See how they come out.

    If they are no good, you have a problem.

    If they are, try taking a photo of something that won't move
    such as a chair. Do this from about three feet away. The image
    should not be dark and even may be washed out.

    Do it again from six feet away. Compare. Then try nine feet.
    Let us know what happens.

    And don't pay any attention to the folks who like heaping scorn.
    Canon did not make the XT so that "green zone" pictures would be
    lousy. That negates the entire purpose of the camera.

    It is, as some have said, true that you can do *better* with
    more manual control, but you should be able to get usable pics
    on automatic.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Oct 25, 2006
    #15
  16. Paul J Gans Guest

    Celcius <> wrote:

    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR and I
    >> will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual mode.
    >> That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos in
    >> automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    >> flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    >> off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    >> wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    >> should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have an
    >> auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.
    >>


    >Try to put your camera on "P" (to take the photo with flash, you have to
    >open the flash by pressing the flash button on the left had side of the
    >flash), then the white balance (WB) at "automatic", try also white balance
    >on "Flash". Try taking the flash with ISO 100, then 200... Remember that on
    >the XT, once you've chose the WB, or the ISO... you have to hit the "Enter"
    >key, otherwise it remains as it was. You didn't say how far you were from
    >the subject or whether the room was dark or partially lit... Just a few
    >ideas. Marcel.


    NO. The camera should take a reasonable picture when set to
    the "green zone".

    The camera then takes care of white balance, iso number, and the
    flash. If that produces lousy pictures, there is something wrong
    with the camera. Taht you might be able to compensate for it
    in other ways is quite beside the point.

    ---- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Oct 25, 2006
    #16
  17. DHB Guest

    On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:42:45 +0000 (UTC), Paul J Gans <>
    wrote:

    >Derek Fountain <> wrote:
    >>> I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    >>> I'm really disappointed in this one.

    >
    >>You should be disappointed in yourself. Don't blame the tool because you
    >>don't know how to use it.

    >
    >Why do you folks assume that?


    <1> Many people are very quick to judge &/or prejudge.
    <2> Many never have used "AUTO" on their SLR or DSLR.
    <3> Some answering may not even own or use a SLR or DSLR.

    In either case <2> or <3>, they likely do not know this:

    >In any of the "automatic" modes, the camera takes care of
    >everything, including white balance and popping the flash.


    Well said & true, in this mode there are very few things that
    the operator can change, even with this mode on a P&S.

    >The resulting photos, if the subject is not too far away,
    >should be reasonable. If they are very unreasonable, something
    >strange is going on.
    >
    > ---- Paul J. Gans


    Quite likely, but as some have pointed out there are a few
    things in the user defined firmware that could be causing problems
    compared to what might be expected by somebody migrating from a P&S to
    a DSLR. Default settings for in-camera processing are overall
    considerably lower with most DSLR cameras than P&S. This may be part
    of the problem & if the individual is not yet ready or wants to do
    post processing, theses settings should be adjusted to the
    individual's preference.

    Let us not forgot that many of us who buy a DSLR also have a
    SLR background to draw from or we put in the time to learn what we
    needed to do, but that's not always a luxury we *all* have. Just as
    "L" glass is not the *only* type of lens *needed* to take a good
    picture, nor may it even be a financial options for some.

    Test your DSLR *&* the external flash as suggested, at various
    distances from the subject. Make sure that the flash is a fully
    compatible 1 with your DSLR also.

    Last point is to not be intimidated by those quick to judge
    without knowing "your" circumstances but keep in mind that the more
    specific information you can provide, the more likely you are to get
    somebody motivated to try to help you, rather than just criticize.

    Respectfully, DHB



    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
    DHB, Oct 25, 2006
    #17
  18. Mark² Guest

    Paul J Gans wrote:
    > <> wrote:
    >> I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR
    >> and I will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual
    >> mode. That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos
    >> in automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    >> flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    >> off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    >> wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    >> should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have
    >> an auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.

    >
    > I happen to agree with you.
    >
    > What I'd do is take some daylight shots on automatic outside.
    > See how they come out.
    >
    > If they are no good, you have a problem.
    >
    > If they are, try taking a photo of something that won't move
    > such as a chair. Do this from about three feet away. The image
    > should not be dark and even may be washed out.
    >
    > Do it again from six feet away. Compare. Then try nine feet.
    > Let us know what happens.
    >
    > And don't pay any attention to the folks who like heaping scorn.
    > Canon did not make the XT so that "green zone" pictures would be
    > lousy. That negates the entire purpose of the camera.
    >
    > It is, as some have said, true that you can do *better* with
    > more manual control, but you should be able to get usable pics
    > on automatic.


    That's only true if you're shooting a scene that is a neutral tone...like
    blue jeans, or green grass.
    If you're shooting something predominantly dark or light, the meter will be
    thrown off.


    --
    Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
    www.pbase.com/markuson
    Mark², Oct 25, 2006
    #18
  19. Rich Guest

    wrote:
    > I just bought a Rebel XT and I just cannot get good indoor photos from
    > it. I've only used it on "automatic", but I've used it with the
    > built-in flash and with an external flash. All of my pictures look too
    > dark and lack any vivid color. I've always been a huge Canon fan, so
    > I'm really disappointed in this one. (My previous camera was a G6,
    > which I sold to get the XT). Any advice would really be appreciated!


    Canon is know for it's neutral (flat, washed out looking) image
    renditions. The vividness produced by some other cameras is considered
    cartoony by some Canon shooters who prefer a more natural image.
    Nothing preventing "revamping" those images in PS though.
    Rich, Oct 25, 2006
    #19
  20. Paul J Gans Guest

    "Mark?" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote:
    >Paul J Gans wrote:
    >> <> wrote:
    >>> I'm not naive. I understand there's a learning curve with a dSLR
    >>> and I will eventually take the time to learn how to use it in manual
    >>> mode. That said, I still think I should be able to get decent photos
    >>> in automatic mode as well. I've tried it with the built-in flash, no
    >>> flash, the external flash straight-on, and the external flash bounced
    >>> off the wall. None of the photos have been properly exposed. I just
    >>> wonder if I somehow got a lemon. I think a camera this expensive
    >>> should take good photos in auto mode. Otherwise, it shouldn't have
    >>> an auto mode. Anyway, I appreciate all of your comments.

    >>
    >> I happen to agree with you.
    >>
    >> What I'd do is take some daylight shots on automatic outside.
    >> See how they come out.
    >>
    >> If they are no good, you have a problem.
    >>
    >> If they are, try taking a photo of something that won't move
    >> such as a chair. Do this from about three feet away. The image
    >> should not be dark and even may be washed out.
    >>
    >> Do it again from six feet away. Compare. Then try nine feet.
    >> Let us know what happens.
    >>
    >> And don't pay any attention to the folks who like heaping scorn.
    >> Canon did not make the XT so that "green zone" pictures would be
    >> lousy. That negates the entire purpose of the camera.
    >>
    >> It is, as some have said, true that you can do *better* with
    >> more manual control, but you should be able to get usable pics
    >> on automatic.


    >That's only true if you're shooting a scene that is a neutral tone...like
    >blue jeans, or green grass.
    >If you're shooting something predominantly dark or light, the meter will be
    >thrown off.


    No. The camera will take the scene and make it (subject
    to the current color balance) make it a neutral gray.

    In other words, the XT in "green zone" mode should do
    what a P&S would do.

    It may not be the best exposure but it should be usable.

    --- Paul J. Gans
    Paul J Gans, Oct 25, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Steve m...
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    630
    Guest
    Dec 9, 2003
  2. BPO
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    6,121
  3. ^____^

    get Canon D60 or Canon Rebel digital?

    ^____^, Feb 26, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    545
    Hans Kruse
    Feb 27, 2004
  4. Siddhartha Jain

    Canon Rebel 350D/Rebel XT vs Nikon D70

    Siddhartha Jain, Feb 18, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    48
    Views:
    967
  5. Wayne J. Cosshall

    Canon 350D/Rebel XT and 400D/Rebel XTi comparison and review

    Wayne J. Cosshall, Oct 18, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    401
Loading...

Share This Page