P&S Cameras

"Ed Mullikin" <edmull2.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote in message
news:a0dOh.194$A53.37@newsfe13.lga...

> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other cameras. I
> have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens 28 to 200. How
> would you classify it? Are there three general classifications?

Although this is quite an expensive camera it would still be classified as a
"point & shoot" I'm afraid.

I'd say the main 3 (digi) categories are:

1) Point and Shoot - Small sensor (although the Sony has a slightly bigger
sensor than some P&S cameras) & fixed zoom lens
2) DSLR - Large sensor & swappable lenses
3) Digital Rangefinder - Large Sensor & Swappable lenses but very expensive
yet very compact.

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

Thank you for your replies. My camera has some faults but I like the fact
that I don't have to carry a lot of lenses.

"Adrian Boliston" <adrian RemoveThis @boliston.co.uk> wrote in message
news:56t8taF2ar83qU1@mid.individual.net...
> "Ed Mullikin" <edmull2 RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote in message
> news:a0dOh.194$A53.37@newsfe13.lga...
>
>> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other cameras.
>> I have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens 28 to 200.
>> How would you classify it? Are there three general classifications?
>
> Although this is quite an expensive camera it would still be classified as
> a "point & shoot" I'm afraid.
>
> I'd say the main 3 (digi) categories are:
>
> 1) Point and Shoot - Small sensor (although the Sony has a slightly bigger
> sensor than some P&S cameras) & fixed zoom lens
> 2) DSLR - Large sensor & swappable lenses
> 3) Digital Rangefinder - Large Sensor & Swappable lenses but very
> expensive yet very compact.
>
> cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk
>
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

Ed Mullikin wrote:
> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other
> cameras. I have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens
> 28 to 200. How would you classify it? Are there three general
> classifications?

You can sometimes distinguish between full-control cameras (where the
aperture, shutter speed and perhaps focus can be manually controlled)
which tend to have electronic viewfinders (EVF), and cameras missing that
degree of control which are literally point-and-shoot and offer less
creative control. The former are sometimes called ZLR cameras and have
their own newsgroup:

rec.photo.digital.zlr

and the latter:

rec.photo.digital.point+shoot

Cameras with interchangeable main lenses are covered in the digital-SLR
group:

rec.photo.digital.slr-systems

I would classify your camera as a ZLR.

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

"Ed Mullikin" <edmull2 DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote in message
news:a0dOh.194$A53.37@newsfe13.lga...
> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other cameras. I
> have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens 28 to 200. How
> would you classify it? Are there three general classifications?

Probably more than that, depending on the inclinations of who's classifying
them.

In any case, "P&S" is usually a misnomer, IMO. Especially when it's used, as
many people use it, to mean ANY digital camera that's not an SLR.

The term "point and shoot" was coined originally to describe those compact,
auto-everything 35mm cameras which offered the user no controls over
exposure at all, apart from a few flash modes. The term was literally
correct -- all the user could do with the camera was point it and shoot.

There are virtually NO digital cameras like that. Yes, with most
compact/ultracompact digital cameras you can put the thing in "green camera"
mode and use it as a point-and-shoot, but you can do the same thing with
most digital SLRs too, and no one calls those "P&S." Typically the compact
digicams today offer many kinds of control over the photo result that
full-featured 35s a decade or so ago never did, some of which may be less
convenient than they were on 35s (e.g., manual focus) or even missing
altogether (manual mode or shutter priority in many ultracompacts), but on
the other hand 35s never offered the user control over white balance,
various kinds of special effects, histograms, features like Best Shot
Selector, etc.

Some really elaborate and sophisticated high-end digital cameras like the
Nikon 8800 are often called "P&S" also, which is utterly ridiculous. Such
cameras are comparable to digital SLRs in their capabilities and in fact can
do some things that no DSLR can do, such as video, or using the articulated
LCD monitor for low-angle or other physically awkward kinds of shooting.

Neil
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

"Adrian Boliston" <adrian.TakeThisOut@boliston.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I'd say the main 3 (digi) categories are:
>
> 1) Point and Shoot - Small sensor (although the Sony has a slightly bigger
> sensor than some P&S cameras) & fixed zoom lens
> 2) DSLR - Large sensor & swappable lenses
> 3) Digital Rangefinder - Large Sensor & Swappable lenses but very
> expensive yet very compact.

Both the digital rangefinders (Epson (620 gm x 142mm) and Leica (591 gm x
139mm)) are larger* and heavier than the entry level dSLR models from Nikon
(522gm x 126mm), Canon (556gm x 127mm), and Olympus (435gm x 130mm).

Once you get into midrange cameras, the RF camera fare a bit better: 5D =
895 gm x 152mm.

*: I've listed the long dimension of the camera.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

"Ed Mullikin" <edmull2.RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote in message
news:a0dOh.194$A53.37@newsfe13.lga...
> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other cameras. I
> have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens 28 to 200. How
> would you classify it? Are there three general classifications?
>

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2dig.htm
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

David J Taylor wrote:
> Ed Mullikin wrote:
>> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other
>> cameras. I have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens
>> 28 to 200. How would you classify it? Are there three general
>> classifications?
>
> You can sometimes distinguish between full-control cameras (where the
> aperture, shutter speed and perhaps focus can be manually controlled)
> which tend to have electronic viewfinders (EVF), and cameras missing that
> degree of control which are literally point-and-shoot and offer less
> creative control. The former are sometimes called ZLR cameras and have
> their own newsgroup:
>

But some "digital compacts" have all those controls,
notably members of the Canon PowerShot series.

In truth (of course) there's a wide spectrum
of cameras, with some "clumps" big enough to
be usefully labelled.

BugBear
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

bugbear wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Ed Mullikin wrote:
>>> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other
>>> cameras. I have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens
>>> 28 to 200. How would you classify it? Are there three general
>>> classifications?
>>
>> You can sometimes distinguish between full-control cameras (where the
>> aperture, shutter speed and perhaps focus can be manually controlled)
>> which tend to have electronic viewfinders (EVF), and cameras missing
>> that degree of control which are literally point-and-shoot and offer
>> less creative control. The former are sometimes called ZLR cameras
>> and have their own newsgroup:
>>
>
> But some "digital compacts" have all those controls,
> notably members of the Canon PowerShot series.
>
> In truth (of course) there's a wide spectrum
> of cameras, with some "clumps" big enough to
> be usefully labelled.
>
> BugBear

I think the real division now is between cameras that optimize size and
weight vs cameras that optimize image quality.
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

Ed Mullikin wrote:
> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other
> cameras. I have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens
> 28 to 200. How would you classify it? Are there three general
> classifications?

I don't regard my Panasonic FZ30 with it's superb Leica 12-times zoom lens
as a point-and-shoot. I use it in preference to my heavy Nikon D70s DSLR
when weight and bulk are important factors in deciding which camera to
carry. Most of the functions the Nikon has are duplicated in the Panasonic,
and the results are superlative. If you don't believe me, take a scan
through the pictures at
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033

Sure, the Nikon has interchangeable lenses (which add to the weight and
bulk), but the lens on the FZ30 is more than adequate at all focal lengths
other than extra wide angle. You can't use the LCD screen to compose and
focus on the Nilkon, and the tiny reflex viewfinder is inadequate for
focussing, so you have to rely on the AF system, which is not always
accurate.

I'm not knocking Nikon, or DSLR's in general, but merely saying there is a
third system, known in some quarters as "bridge" cameras, which have many
advantages to commend them.

Since much of the work in producing a good picture these days takes place
outside the camera, common sense should prevail in the choice of what to use
to create the basic image, and factors such as convenience and weight should
not be overlooked.


Dennis.
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

"Dennis Pogson" <dennis_nospampogson DeleteThis @ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:8cqOh.19619$7l1.15393@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Ed Mullikin wrote:
>> I'm a little confused on the demarcation between P&S and other
>> cameras. I have a Sony DSC-F828 8meg with a Zeis non-detachable lens
>> 28 to 200. How would you classify it? Are there three general
>> classifications?
>
> I don't regard my Panasonic FZ30 with it's superb Leica 12-times zoom lens
> as a point-and-shoot. I use it in preference to my heavy Nikon D70s DSLR
> when weight and bulk are important factors in deciding which camera to
> carry. Most of the functions the Nikon has are duplicated in the
> Panasonic,
> and the results are superlative. If you don't believe me, take a scan
> through the pictures at
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1033
>
> Sure, the Nikon has interchangeable lenses (which add to the weight and
> bulk), but the lens on the FZ30 is more than adequate at all focal lengths
> other than extra wide angle. You can't use the LCD screen to compose and
> focus on the Nilkon, and the tiny reflex viewfinder is inadequate for
> focussing, so you have to rely on the AF system, which is not always
> accurate.
>
> I'm not knocking Nikon, or DSLR's in general, but merely saying there is a
> third system, known in some quarters as "bridge" cameras, which have many
> advantages to commend them.
>
> Since much of the work in producing a good picture these days takes place
> outside the camera, common sense should prevail in the choice of what to
> use
> to create the basic image, and factors such as convenience and weight
> should
> not be overlooked.
>
>
> Dennis.
>
>
I agree, it's not quite as black and white as simply DSLR or P&S, although
many DSLR owners would like you to think so. There's a bit more to it than
simply sensor size. The middle ground is surely the 'prosumer' or 'bridge'
camera. While most of these will still admittedly have small sensors, they
can hardly be described as simple P&S cameras, due to their large high
quality lenses (in the main) and the vast range of controls, which mirror
the capability of a DSLR in this respect. Although my Panasonic FZ5 and
Kodak P880 do not have the large sensor size of a DSLR, they are both
capable of producing very good pictures within their own limitations, and
both can produce excellent images at low ISO settings, the colour
reproduction on the Kodak being extremely accurate, even when compared to
many DSLRs.
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras 

bugbear wrote:
[]
> But some "digital compacts" have all those controls,
> notably members of the Canon PowerShot series.
>
> In truth (of course) there's a wide spectrum
> of cameras, with some "clumps" big enough to
> be usefully labelled.
>
> BugBear

Yes. Things have moved on and I tend to think more of SLR (larger sensor)
and non-SLR (smaller-sensor) cameras these days. There are a few large
sensor, non-SLR cameras as well, but not enough nor enough in common to
form a recognisable individual category.

David
 >> Stay informed about: P&S Cameras