New XTi owner with questions

This is my first digital camera. I held onto film like others before me
held on to vinyl music.

Now that I'm here I have a few questions:

Do filters that work with SLRs also work with DSLRs?

Do I need a UV filter as well as a circular polarizer? These were my
primary filters with film.

Is this self-cleansing mechanism of the sensor actually a useful tool
or marketing hype?

Thanks for any answers and any other advice with this camera.

In article .com,
wrote:

This is my first digital camera. I held onto film like others before me
held on to vinyl music.

Now that I'm here I have a few questions:

Do filters that work with SLRs also work with DSLRs?

Yes. You're only changing the medium used to record the image [digital
memory v. film emulsion], not how you take the image in the first
place.

Do I need a UV filter as well as a circular polarizer? These were my
primary filters with film.

IMO, no. Others will argue. I go with the polarizer 99% of the time,
unless I need the extra light, but most of those shots are done with a
tripod, so I can usually afford the light loss. I threw away my UV
filter years ago, long before digital, as I found the polarizer to be
much more effective in all circumstances than the UV filter ever
dreamed of being.

Is this self-cleansing mechanism of the sensor actually a useful tool
or marketing hype?

From my experience and some tests reported here, it's more marketing
hype. The final verdict is still out, but it seems to only dislodge a
small portion of any actual dust. If dust becomes a problem, learn to
clean your own sensor (be aware that this could void your warranty if
discovered). Here's a reference to help you learn to do so:
http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/


Thanks for any answers and any other advice with this camera.

On 22 Nov 2006 10:57:20 -0800, wrote:

Personal Opinion

This is my first digital camera. I held onto film like others before me
held on to vinyl music.

Now that I'm here I have a few questions:

Do filters that work with SLRs also work with DSLRs?

Yes. And they doo about the same things, too.

Do I need a UV filter as well as a circular polarizer? These were my
primary filters with film.

I use a UV filter on my 3 lenses. Not because trey filter out any UV
light (most DSLRs have a UV filter over ther sensor already) but
because they offer protection. (My favorite story about this is when
the filter got bashed by a turkey leg at the Renn Festival; the filter
wasn't damaged, but cleaning it was a mess.)
Many photographers don't go places or shoot things that can damage
their lenses; for them, UV filters are a bad thing. For many of us,
though, UV filters do perform a protective role.
UV filters do provide an extra glass piece that can reduce contrast
and add glare or reflections to the image.
It's up to you to determine if the peace of mind the protections
offers is worth any perceived loss to your pictures' quality.

Polarizing filters are great! I like mine for the effects it offers.
However, I do not understand why anyone would keep one on all the time
for the density it offers. A neutral-density filter would be much
better for this.

Is this self-cleansing mechanism of the sensor actually a useful tool
or marketing hype?

Not in my opinion. As I've posted before, dust does not act the way it
would need to for such a system to work. It's a marketing tool.
Cleaning the sensor is a maintenance task that needs to be done
periodically.

Thanks for any answers and any other advice with this camera.

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

"Ken Lucke" wrote in message
...

From my experience and some tests reported here, it's more marketing
hype. The final verdict is still out, but it seems to only dislodge a
small portion of any actual dust. If dust becomes a problem, learn to
clean your own sensor (be aware that this could void your warranty if
discovered....

My D70s has a "mirror lockup" mode specifically designed for sensor
cleaning, so I doubt it would void the warranty unless you started damaging
the sensor by using inappropiate cleaning gear.

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk

wrote:

Do filters that work with SLRs also work with DSLRs?

You can skip the 'color correction' filters since you can do this step
with the white balance controls when you convert from RAW.

Do I need a UV filter as well as a circular polarizer? These were my
primary filters with film.

You need a polarizer. You don't "need" a UV filter but it's a personal
choice so if you want it to protect the lens go ahead ...

Is this self-cleansing mechanism of the sensor actually a useful tool
or marketing hype?

The ASC (Auto Sensor Clean) doesn't seem to work well ... I've looked
at two XTi cameras that had a total of 42 dust specks when shipped by
Canon and the ASC function didn't remove a single one of them even
after repeated cycles. So this one appears to be hype.

The DDD (Dust Data Delete) software mapping does seem to work well
though, but you'll have to use the Canon RAW converter to take
advantage of it.

So 50-50 ...

Thanks for any answers and any other advice with this camera.

Two other bits of advice ... because the pixel pitch is tight it can
resolve pretty well, so getting a lens with good optics will pay off.
Also, I think the images look good at ISO 100 and 200 but at ISO 400
and higher you really start to see the noise, especially if you run
them thru any processing steps (shadow/highlight, USM etc). So it pays
to get faster lenses so you can shoot at lower ISO settings, I think.

Bill

"Bill Funk" wrote in message
...

I use a UV filter on my 3 lenses. Not because trey filter out any UV
light (most DSLRs have a UV filter over ther sensor already) but
because they offer protection. (My favorite story about this is when
the filter got bashed by a turkey leg at the Renn Festival; the filter
wasn't damaged, but cleaning it was a mess.)
Many photographers don't go places or shoot things that can damage
their lenses; for them, UV filters are a bad thing. For many of us,
though, UV filters do perform a protective role.
UV filters do provide an extra glass piece that can reduce contrast
and add glare or reflections to the image.

I prefer the protection that a decent hood offers. I started off using the
skylight filter but now prefer a hood. I particularly like the metal screw
in hood on my nikkor 85/1.4 lens as this hood cannot be knocked off like a
plastic bayonet hood, although i can't clip on the lens cap while the hood
is on.

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk

In article , Adrian Boliston
wrote:

"Ken Lucke" wrote in message
...

From my experience and some tests reported here, it's more marketing
hype. The final verdict is still out, but it seems to only dislodge a
small portion of any actual dust. If dust becomes a problem, learn to
clean your own sensor (be aware that this could void your warranty if
discovered....

My D70s has a "mirror lockup" mode specifically designed for sensor
cleaning, so I doubt it would void the warranty unless you started damaging
the sensor by using inappropiate cleaning gear.

Some manufacturers _will_ void your warranty if you clean the sensor at
all using any physical contact, or do it without using their "approved"
products and procedures.

A quote from http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/methods.html:

============================
Only Kodak, Leica and Fuji support the consumer in using the same
method that they themselves use for cleaning the low pass filter. All
the others manufacturers only support the non-physical contact use of a
hand blower. If Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax or Sigma, can tell that
you have touched the low pass filter, your warranty is void. On the
other hand, Photographic Solutions Inc., guarantees that you won't
damage your camera, if you use their SensorSwabs and Eclipse.

* Canon - Blower and a Kimwipe, held by tweezers. They do not like
to use fluid but when necessary they use either 90% isopropyl alcohol
or a 50/50 mixture of isopropyl alcohol and Windex.
* Fuji - Photographic Solutions SensorSwabs and Eclipse
* Kodak - Photographic Solutions SensorSwabs and Eclipse
* Leica - Photographic Solutions SensorSwabs and Eclipse
* Nikon - A commercial grade lens tissue wrapped around a chopstick
style piece of wood with medical grade methanol. Several forums have
posts where readers have been to Nikon Service outside the USA and
reported seeing the technicians using SensorsSwabs and Eclipse.
* Olympus - A Kimwipe held by tweezers and Olympus Proprietary
Solution (dries quickly without streaks and is bio-degradeable).
* Pentax - A special lint free cloth (provided from Japan) folded
into a small square and held with a pair of tweezers as a swab
moistened with a freon derivative.
* Sigma - Uses a special vacuum cleaner that was provided by Japan.
============================

In support of that data, they say:
============================
(Q) Where did you get the information used to developed this site?
(A) Over 150 sources were researched and it still isn't complete.

* Visited over 100 web sites
* Visited 14 different online sensor cleaning tutorials
* Visited over 20 Forums
* Talked with all 7 DSLR Manufacturer's repair departments
* Talked to many professional Camera Repairmen who clean multiple
brands of cameras on a daily basis
* Last but not least, our first hand knowledge on the subject
============================

Ken Lucke wrote:

Some manufacturers _will_ void your warranty if you clean the sensor at
all using any physical contact ...

A quote from http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/methods.html:

============================
... If Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax or Sigma, can tell that
you have touched the low pass filter, your warranty is void.

This is simply not true ... if you DAMAGE the sensor you are on your
own but it's nonsense to claim your warranty is void "if you clean the
sensor at all using any physical contact".

I'm certain of this because I recently received a Canon camera with
dust on the sensor and after using the Sensor Brush and then Eclipse
with Pec Pads there was still one blob that would not come clean. It
seemed obvious to me that it was under the filter.

I returned the camera with a photo of a screen dump showing the problem
and explaining that I had tried cleaning it with the brush and with Pec
Pads (which is full-body "physical contact") and asked them to either
fix it and return it or send me a new camera.

Far from voiding my warranty, they sent me a new camera as a
replacement.

Bill

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:06:46 -0000, "Adrian Boliston"
wrote:

"Bill Funk" wrote in message
.. .

I use a UV filter on my 3 lenses. Not because trey filter out any UV
light (most DSLRs have a UV filter over ther sensor already) but
because they offer protection. (My favorite story about this is when
the filter got bashed by a turkey leg at the Renn Festival; the filter
wasn't damaged, but cleaning it was a mess.)
Many photographers don't go places or shoot things that can damage
their lenses; for them, UV filters are a bad thing. For many of us,
though, UV filters do perform a protective role.
UV filters do provide an extra glass piece that can reduce contrast
and add glare or reflections to the image.

I prefer the protection that a decent hood offers. I started off using the
skylight filter but now prefer a hood. I particularly like the metal screw
in hood on my nikkor 85/1.4 lens as this hood cannot be knocked off like a
plastic bayonet hood, although i can't clip on the lens cap while the hood
is on.

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk


I would too, except that it makes for a much larger bag. :-(
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"