Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S

"Annika1980" <annika1980.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191470754.403476.83600@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> My buddy, Ken Rockwell, did a recent comparison of high-ISO
> performance between DSLRs that can be found here:
> http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm
>
> Note what he says about the Point & Shoots near the end of the
> article:
>
> "I was too lazy to include a compact camera, which as I showed last
> year, is abysmal compared to any DSLR. A typical compact camera, like
> the Canon SD700 I use all the time, is ten times worse than any DSLR.
> My SD700 at its lowest ISO 80 looks about the same as any of these
> DSLRs at ISO 800! "
>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters !!!"
>

And this from the greatest fan he has??? LOL with that lot.
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

On Oct 4, 4:35 am, Bob Williams <mytbobnos....RemoveThis@cox.net> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, in this post, Rockwell does not SHOW any comparisons
> between P/S and DSLRs.
>I suspect the difference in
> image quality between a P/S and a DSLR at ISO 80 would be minuscule.


Roger Clark has posted a good comparison pic on his site.

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter/
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

Annika1980 wrote:
> My buddy, Ken Rockwell, did a recent comparison of high-ISO
> performance between DSLRs that can be found here:
> http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm
>
> Note what he says about the Point & Shoots near the end of the
> article:
>
> "I was too lazy to include a compact camera, which as I showed last
> year, is abysmal compared to any DSLR. A typical compact camera, like
> the Canon SD700 I use all the time, is ten times worse than any DSLR.
> My SD700 at its lowest ISO 80 looks about the same as any of these
> DSLRs at ISO 800! "
>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters
> !!!"

I read it differently - where you have enough light for ISO 80 you may be
able to get as good a picture with a more compact and cheaper camera.

David
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

"Annika1980" <annika1980 RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191470754.403476.83600@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> My buddy, Ken Rockwell, did a recent comparison of high-ISO
> performance between DSLRs that can be found here:
> http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm
>
> Note what he says about the Point & Shoots near the end of the
> article:
>
> "I was too lazy to include a compact camera, which as I showed last
> year, is abysmal compared to any DSLR. A typical compact camera, like
> the Canon SD700 I use all the time, is ten times worse than any DSLR.
> My SD700 at its lowest ISO 80 looks about the same as any of these
> DSLRs at ISO 800! "
>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters !!!"
>

As it turns out most of the real advancements in camera technology are going
on in the P&S and CameraPhone areas. Here Size Matters in camera and lens
technology. Sure there will always be a market for large format cameras and
sensors and they will always have an advantage just like the old 8x10 view
camera still has an advantage over most everything else today.

I recently bought a new Canon SX100is which is definitely at the leading
edge of P&S technology. Its speed, sensitivity, and resolution are not
comparable to some DSLRs or an 8x10 view camera. But, when it comes to Bang
for the Buck and Ergonomics there is no comparison, it is the
State-of-the-Art in photographic technology.

NM
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

On Oct 4, 2:05 pm, Annika1980 <annika1... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:

>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters !!!"

actually, that is one thing he most definitely
does NOT say. But no one like you to invent
another lie, isn't it?
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

Annika1980 wrote:
> On Oct 4, 4:35 am, Bob Williams <mytbobnos... RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
>> Unfortunately, in this post, Rockwell does not SHOW any comparisons
>> between P/S and DSLRs.
>> I suspect the difference in
>> image quality between a P/S and a DSLR at ISO 80 would be minuscule.
>
>
> Roger Clark has posted a good comparison pic on his site.
>
> http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter/

No fair! You said there'd be no math, and no facts in this thread.

--
john mcwilliam s
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

~~NoMad~~ wrote:
> As it turns out most of the real advancements in camera technology are going
> on in the P&S and CameraPhone areas. Here Size Matters in camera and lens
> technology. Sure there will always be a market for large format cameras and
> sensors and they will always have an advantage just like the old 8x10 view
> camera still has an advantage over most everything else today.
>
> I recently bought a new Canon SX100is which is definitely at the leading
> edge of P&S technology. Its speed, sensitivity, and resolution are not
> comparable to some DSLRs or an 8x10 view camera. But, when it comes to Bang
> for the Buck and Ergonomics there is no comparison, it is the
> State-of-the-Art in photographic technology.

For you! And millions of others, as far as bang for the buck goes, and
for technological development in P+S currently, it's tops.

But as you point out, other formats have distinct advantages, and I'd
add that there are always trade offs.

It's those who want to foist their choices off on others and make
ridiculous posts about them that get to be a waste of space.

--
john mcwilliams
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

On Oct 4, 12:05 am, Annika1980 <annika1....DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote:
> My buddy, Ken Rockwell, did a recent comparison of high-ISO
> performance between DSLRs that can be found here:http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm
>
> Note what he says about the Point & Shoots near the end of the
> article:
>
> "I was too lazy to include a compact camera, which as I showed last
> year, is abysmal compared to any DSLR. A typical compact camera, like
> the Canon SD700 I use all the time, is ten times worse than any DSLR.
> My SD700 at its lowest ISO 80 looks about the same as any of these
> DSLRs at ISO 800! "
>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters !!!"

I see Canon is still plagued by chroma noise. Canon should admit the
40D is nothing but a pixel upscaled 30D, which in-turn was a 20D.
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 21:05:54 -0700, Annika1980 wrote:

> My buddy, Ken Rockwell, did a recent comparison of high-ISO
> performance between DSLRs that can be found here:
> http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm
>
> Note what he says about the Point & Shoots near the end of the
> article:
>
> "I was too lazy to include a compact camera, which as I showed last
> year, is abysmal compared to any DSLR. A typical compact camera, like
> the Canon SD700 I use all the time, is ten times worse than any DSLR.
> My SD700 at its lowest ISO 80 looks about the same as any of these
> DSLRs at ISO 800! "
>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters !!!"

Possibly, but I can easily stick my Kodak P850 in my backpack and be off
on a 5 mile hike. Or snowshoeing. Or bicycling. All I need in one compact,
lightweight unit. Still use my film SLR for some other work. I may
consider a DSLR when the price comes down.
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

"David J Taylor" <david-taylor RemoveThis @blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in message news:iE%Mi.25500

> I read it differently - where you have enough light for ISO 80 you may be able to get as good a picture with a more compact and
> cheaper camera.
>
> David

Well, nearly as good, anyway... Having shot the same detailed
infinity-targets (a "busy" horizon line, including a bit of sky along
the image top) with a couple of different dSLRs (including a D1X)
and also with a Sony 707, I was surprised to find that the only
real difference was in edge effects (the larger sensor cameras didn't
show ringing on high contrast edges), but not in tonality or detail.
While I like my 707, the Fuji S7000 shows much less ringing while
also being sharp. As you say, *if* you have enough light (and can
deal with the occasional artifact that may not appear in dSLR
photos), and if you are not using high pixel count dSLRs to make
VERY large prints, a top-class smaller camera may suffice...
--
David Ruether
d_ruether RemoveThis @hotmail.com
http://www.donferrario.com/ruether
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

"Annika1980" <annika1980.DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191470754.403476.83600@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> My buddy, Ken Rockwell, did a recent comparison of high-ISO
> performance between DSLRs that can be found here:
> http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-10/index.htm
>
> Note what he says about the Point & Shoots near the end of the
> article:
>
> "I was too lazy to include a compact camera, which as I showed last
> year, is abysmal compared to any DSLR. A typical compact camera, like
> the Canon SD700 I use all the time, is ten times worse than any DSLR.
> My SD700 at its lowest ISO 80 looks about the same as any of these
> DSLRs at ISO 800! "
>
> LOL! Even Ken Rockwell says, "Sucks to be you, Point and Shitters !!!"

Is that the same Ken Rockwell who slated a Pentax DSLR without even touching
one?

Don't see how that helps your cause.

Deep.
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

Annika1980 wrote:
> On Oct 4, 4:35 am, Bob Williams <mytbobnos... RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
>> Unfortunately, in this post, Rockwell does not SHOW any comparisons
>> between P/S and DSLRs.
>> I suspect the difference in
>> image quality between a P/S and a DSLR at ISO 80 would be minuscule.
>
>
> Roger Clark has posted a good comparison pic on his site.
>
> http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter/
>


No one even remotely suggests that images from a 2.3 micron pixel pitch
camera can compare favorably with those from an 8.2 micron pixel pitch
camera at HIGH ISO settings. Such conditions test the small sensor at
its weakest point and the large sensor at its strongest point.

What I'd like to see.....Maybe Roger can do this for us.....Is to shoot
two identical subjects under BRIGHT conditions where both cameras
capture an image at about f=4.0 - 5.6, ISO = 80-100, speed 1/250-1/400 sec.
These conditions are fairly typical of outdoor lighting on a partly
cloudy day and utilize a camera parameters where BOTH cameras are
operating near their optimum conditions.
Bob
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S 

David Ruether wrote:
> "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor RemoveThis @blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
> message news:iE%Mi.25500
>> I read it differently - where you have enough light for ISO 80 you
>> may be able to get as good a picture with a more compact and cheaper
>> camera. David
>
> Well, nearly as good, anyway... Having shot the same detailed
> infinity-targets (a "busy" horizon line, including a bit of sky along
> the image top) with a couple of different dSLRs (including a D1X)
> and also with a Sony 707, I was surprised to find that the only
> real difference was in edge effects (the larger sensor cameras didn't
> show ringing on high contrast edges), but not in tonality or detail.
> While I like my 707, the Fuji S7000 shows much less ringing while
> also being sharp. As you say, *if* you have enough light (and can
> deal with the occasional artifact that may not appear in dSLR
> photos), and if you are not using high pixel count dSLRs to make
> VERY large prints, a top-class smaller camera may suffice...

The benefits I find with the DSLR include faster operation, and much
better low-light performance. I can shoot at ISO 1600 and have almost
noise-free pictures, whereas with the compact camera I needed to stick
with ISO 100 to keep the noise down. I also find the operation faster -
the focus is so much quicker that taking several shots in quick succession
is easy - getting the very moment of the action, and the ability to zoom
by twisting a ring on the lens is again much faster than push-buttons -
handy when photographing an air display with rapid changes in aircraft
position. On the other hand, with the DSLR focussing is /much/ more
critical, it's a little bigger and heavier, changing lenses takes time,
and dust can be an issue.

No, I don't do large prints - A4 (~10 x 8 inches) maximum, mainly display
on the computer or HDTV screen.

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: Rockwell on DSLR vs. P&S