Re: Help with automatic white balance
- From: The Bailey <mcgratmj@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 04:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 2, 12:42 pm, The Bailey <mcgra...@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 1, 9:29 pm, Des <desotuat...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Still feeling my way around my Sony alpha 200. This is my first DSLR.
With help from you guys I have been weaned of using all the wheel with
all the automatic settings like portrait. I thought I would experiment
with white balance.
I have low energy bulbs in my room (Live in the UK), so I thought that
the fluorescent setting would work. Tungsten turns the image blue. My
problem is that the image is whiter than AWB and that AWB seems
Should I not be using these settings instead of letting the camera
The Sony Alpha 230 has the best auto white balance of any digital , so
I presume that your 200 is similar.
These little Sonys can be surprising , although a Canon man I have the
230. And the only things that the Canon 40D has ahead of my Sony Alpha
230 is that it has much better frame rate ( 6.5 frames per second ) ,
metal alloy frame, so sturdiness , and the availabilty of L lenses, as
well as the fact that the 40D looks more professional and
businessllike. The 40D also has the best kit lens in the business, the
Canon EFS 18-55 IS , a truly wonderful lens. But the 'new' 18-50 SAM
on the Sony is no slouch eithe, the little Sony is a joy for
portability , fabulous walkaround camera, light as a feather in
comparison, better sensor, better Auto white balance , Antishake body,
And it's space-age in looks if you like that , much admired by the
younger generation when they see it.
So best leave that Sony of yours on Auto white balance as it knows
better than any of us!
Also the Sony/Minolta lenses tend towards the green/blue in my
experience, The 'new' Sony kit lens really saturates colour
beautifully, though the 'new' Canon kit lens beats it , but then it
beats every other Canon crop lens except the ten-times more expensive
Canon EF 17-55 /2.8. It easily beats the 17-85 IS , the 18-135 IS ,
the 28-136 IS, the 18-200 IS, virtually everything in sight . And it
looks so puny and fragile ( which it is ) on my 40D .
One thing I've noticed , as I still use film regularly , is that
Digital demands much better lenses. To get anywhere neat the same out
of a Canonon DSLR as film , you need the L lenses - and on IS too.
But then again my cheap Makinon 400/6.3 ( made by Tokina) on my Nikon
N90S beats the hell out of Canon L telephotos on Digital, so does my
Zeiss Jenazoom 80-200 , built especially for Nikon by Sigma under
licence from Carl Zeiss Jena back in the Eighties, on a Nikon crop
frame ( I had it on a Nikon D70) leave the Canon EF 70-200 on a Canon
I captured both that Makinon and Zeiss secondhand in one fell swoop on
my local camera shop for 80 Euro all told, and this is Nikons
strength , the vast availability of so many great lenses from across
the years as compared to any other make, and even the humble Nikkor
35-70 /3.3-4.5 that I had ( and sillily sold) is up there for IQ with
a vastly more expensive Canon L , you get that little Nikkor sleeper
for 50 Euro! But then there are so many Nikkor sleepers with good
third-parties from all manufacturers . You're stuck with Canon EOS ,
especially when it comes to manual lenses , there are none that I know
of except maybe a specialist.
But I digress.
Leave that Sony of yours on auto!
I have just sold the Sigma AF 28-105f2.8-40, the worst lens ever
made, for a hundred Euro - a woman bought it for its looks even after
I told her that it's no darned good . But she's right , it looks
better than any Canon L !
What did they say about looks - it seems that they are equally as
deceptive in the camera world.
The Makinon and Zeiss had been traded in a quarter of an hour
previously , shows that you have to be ready to pounce like a hawk all
the time . BTW that Zeiss Jenazoom comes from a series built
especially for Nikon in the late Eighties by Sigma under licence from
Carl Zeiss Jena just as the Berlin Wall began to collapse. There are
autofocus Jenazooms in tat series too , all built like tanks , full
metal jacket. One of them I saw actually has a Canon L-like ring ! And
I'm sure from my capture that it desrerves that red ring more than any
Canon L . People , like me, get wrapped up in L fever, we forget we
have comparable , and even better Nikkor , Zenzanon, Mamiya, Zuiko and
Zeiss lenses, just begging for adaptors , I'll be on the bay for a
half dozen different adaptors to Canon during the coming week.
BTW from my experience of the Sony Alpha 230 the best way is to leave
a Sony on auto white balance all the time , it knows better than we
do, and use flash indoors.
- Re: Help with automatic white balance
- From: Charles E Hardwidge
- Re: Help with automatic white balance
- Prev by Date: Re: Help with automatic white balance
- Next by Date: Re: Cokin filters
- Previous by thread: Re: Help with automatic white balance
- Next by thread: Re: Help with automatic white balance