Rebel SL1 image quality issues

[MotoArts]

Hello,
Since receiving my Rebel kit for Christmas when it came out years ago, I have been rather unimpressed with its still image quality. Generally speaking, all shots appear to be out of focus along with random color saturation issues. Admittedly, my knowledge of DSLR is very miniscule, having only shot 35mm (an A-1 purchased new in the 80's, LOL) and medium format many years ago. I enjoy motorsports photography mainly, but use this camera for standard family snapshots where quality isn't front and center to me.
I've dabbled only a little in the quest to clean up the (what I'll call latent) images with settings in the camera body, but have had little to no luck.
I next to never use it for video.

Images are not short or long focused. They can be somewhat cleaned up with a photo editor, but seemingly every one needs done and have never had an image that totally impressed me even afterwards. Same/similar results come from either the 18-55 and 75-300 Canon brand lenses, although the short one is generally better. I believe that I did not edit either of the 2 bottom pics shown that were taken with the long lens. Top one may have been edited, short lens used along with a little bit of fill flash. All 3 pics were shot ISO 100, 1/60sec. shutter priority. I've tried all of the basics carried over from my A-1 days... program, shutter priority, aperture priority, full manual exposure, manual focus, ISO change... no discernible difference. Sharpness, color balance, brightness and contrast are issues.

My guess is that I'm missing something in basic setup of the body. I understand focal speak, but the electronic part has me lost.
Is there a software update available?
I haven't ruled out the "need" for a more professional, more advanced, newer body to get what I'm looking for.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks.

[Waddizzle]

In a previous replay you mentioned that you come from the film world, and that you are not familiar with digital photography.  Digital photography was designed to emulate the film photography experience.

Your camera can save digital images that it captures in one of two formats RAW or JPG.  The JPG file is a standard format that was created before the rise of digital cameras.  The RAW file format is unique to each camera manufacturer.  

A RAW file is the digital equivalent of film negative.  A JPG file is the digital equivalent of a film print, similar to what would a Kodak Instamatic might eject, which would develop in a minute or two.  

This difference between JPG and RAW files is crucial to understanding post process of a digital image.  You can do a LOT with a film negative (RAW) in a darkroom to create a hard copy print (JPG).  

You were very limited in what you do with a hard copy print to improve the image quality.  Working with digital images is not all that different.  You have many available options when working with a RAW to create a digital JPG.  Your options are very limited when working with a JPG to create a cleaner or shaper looking JPG.

I suggest that you set your camera to save as RAW+JPG until you become more familiar with working with RAW files and converting them to JPG files using an app like Canon’s Digital Photo Professional 4.

If you want to take a deep dive into learning digital photography, then I suggest that you set the top dial to P mode.  Once set, find the menu item that resets the camera back to factory defaults.  You want to begin with all the camera settings in a known state.

[Waddizzle]

At first glance there are two sore thumbs that stand out in your sample photos.  If your shutter speed is 1/100 or slower, then that could explain your soft images.  The other issue is what others have pointed out, the EF 75-300mm is not Canon’s best effort.  But with careful planning you can still capture good images with the lens.

[MotoArts]

Thanks Waddizzle, I do believe my next step will be to do just that, a reset with change to RAW/JPG.

I'll keep the lens issue in mind as I proceed, too. Hopefully I can get in some situations where I can swap both lenses and compare back to back in RAW. I really do like the general handling of this whole setup and would love to see it work out.

[amfoto1]

While there is room for improvement in the camera itself, the biggest issues are the lenses you got in kit with it.

For better image quality... replace that EF 75-300 III. Both EF-S 55-250mm IS STM and EF 70-300mm IS USM II have been recommended and would be good choices (actually any of the Canon 70-300mm with IS and USM would help, if you shop used). I also recommend you get the matched lens hood for whatever lens you choose. That will help with flare (as seen in one of your images).

You mention sports photography, which can require fast focusing with responsive cameras and lenses. Faster frame rates help, too, but I would say are less necessary than higher performance autofocus. There are three primary types of AF drive in Canon lenses. The EF 75-300mm you have uses the slowest (and noisiest) which is called "micro motor". You can tell this type by the lack of either "STM" or "USM" markings on the lens. Those are the other two types of autofocus drive. STM is "stepper motor" and is faster, quieter and smoother than micro motor. USM is "ultrasonic motor" and is the fastest, but not the quietest type. The only lens that I know of that's been offered with all three is the EF-S 18-135mm. The first version used a micro motor. It was revised optically and got upgraded to STM. I don't know how much this improved focus performance. But still later it was upgraded again to USM (appears to use the same optics) and Canon claimed that made it 2X to 4X faster focusing than the STM version. 

Actually the EF-S 18-135mm IS USM was the first lens to get a new version called "Nano" USM. This is both fast like USM and quiet like STM... best of both worlds! Most higher performance lenses that followed use Nano USM (including the EF 70-300mm IS USM "II").

Of course, another part of the AF performance equation is the camera.... The SL1 (also called an EOS 100D) is pretty basic in that respect. It's 9-point AF system dates back to the early days of digital. It shares this with Canon's even more entry-level models. In this system, only the center point is a higher performance "dual axis" type. To get the best out of the camera shooting active sports, restrict it to use only that center AF point. (Also set the AF to "AI Servo" and maybe consider using "back button focusing".) 

Of course, for stationary subjects all this is less of a concern. You are probably less likely to use the EF-S 18-55mm for action photography, so may not need to upgrade that lens. Its image quality is probably more consistent than the telephoto zoom's. (There have been a bunch of different versions of 18-55mm... most seem pretty good optically.)

***********

Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7DII (x2), 7D(x2), EOS M5, some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR

[rs-eos]

I personally use RAW+JPEG (but a note on that below).  Gives best of both worlds where you have the original image data (RAW) with maximum flexibility to edit.  Along with a JPEG image in case you need to share your photos immediately after an event.

RAW+JPEG can lead to slowdowns, especially for cameras with only a single card slot.  Since the camera needs to save two files and a single card can only write so fast.   So if you're planning on using continuous shooting often, your best bet is just to choose one format (RAW would definitely have my highest recommendation).  Though if your SD card is slow and you really need to maximize continuous shooting, you may need to switch to JPEG (smaller files so the card can keep up better when having to save all those images).

One final note on RAW... it requires software to view (e.g. Canon's own DPP or Adobe Lightroom to name a couple).

For my setup, I use Adobe Lightroom to manage all my photos and to perform any basic edits to the RAW images.  The edits though are not saved to the file, so you always have the original RAW image.   You can then output from Lightroom, DPP, etc to say JPEG for sharing to others, putting up on a web site, etc.   For more complicated edits, I rely upon Photoshop.  Same workflow though; RAW file stays unchanged and when done with the editing, I now export to JPEG for publishing.