good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s?

On Oct 22, 8:59 pm, "The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss
Muffet" <muf....TakeThisOut@spider.com> wrote:
> Apparently you know about as much about cameras as your sister.

No need to be insulting. I know more about cameras than you think. I
also knowmy sister.

There are
> many reasons why someone would want a dSLR over a point and shoot, advanced
> controls, interchangable lenses, etc. aren't on the list. However, about
> better low light capability even in full auto mode, less noise, higher ISO
> with less noise.

Most decent p&s cameras have low noise. My parents use a 5 MP p&s, and
they get very nice photos that enlarge nicely. I think it would work
fine for my sister. Just because it is a p&s, doesn't make it junk.


Better quality pictures overall since most dSLR's have
> better focusing and metering. The ability to get blurred backgrounds even in
> full auto mode making shots of flowers and such look nicer with little
> effort.

To get a blurred background, you have to overide the camera. They are
designed to stick with a medium aperature to get good sharp images all
around.


RAW, better memory buffer for both RAW and JPG so you can shoot more
> shots in rapid fire mode. Actual optical viewfinder. Better response for
> fast moving subjects.

True, SLRs are typically better at this. But, honestly, does it make
that much difference to the average person who isn't serious about
photography? The people who are just looking for snapshots?


>
> As for your prime lens, not everyone wants to waste time changing lenses.
> The fact that you liked the prime lenses doesn't mean your sister does.

Just last weekend, they loaned it to her to photograph our niece in
for homecoming. She opted to use her film camera because she was
afraid to use the digital camera. She ended up with dark photos
because she insists on using slow film with her slow lens. Now she
wants me to scan them and fix them. Had she changed the lens to the
50mm f/1.4 lens that I bought for her, she would have some nice
photos. But she insisted on using her slow f/5.6 lens in program
mode.

The reason I bought that lens for her was that we went to an indoor
horse show, and she insisted on shooting 100 speed film with her f/5.6
lens for black horses. I tried to warn her. I offered her some of my
film. She insisted she was fine since her camera gave her a green
light. She did not realize that it was slowing down the shutter speed
to get enough light. She ended up with a ton of blurry photos. I
photographed the same event with 800 speed film and an f/1.2 lens.

The problem I see is that she doesn't know what her camera's
limitations are, so she doesn't know how to work within the limits or
change the settings. Why spend $200 on an older 3.1 MP camera plus
more for a lens that would honestly be no better than a 5 MP p&s when
you compare the actual settings that she will use. She isn't going to
use any of the various settings. It doesn't record video. The buffer
is not large and takes awhile to clear.

I upgraded because the buffer was too slow for action work, there were
only 3 focusing points, and the files weren't high enough resolution
to get a good 8x10 if I had to crop very much. After having the new
camera, I am thrilled with the better features. I can take more photos
before the buffer fills, and it clears much faster. I have not had to
wait once for it to be ready since I got it. I also discovered that it
has a shorter shutter delay than the older camera and focuses faster.

As
> for selling yours out from under her, no biggy. If she really wants one she
> can get a good new one for about $600. What you should be telling her is she
> wants one of the entry level models. Instead of coming on here talking about
> her like she is an photographic idiot, when it is you that don't have a very
> good grip of the subject.
>


She hasn't got $600. If she had $200, I would have sold her my camera
already. What I am trying to do is help her find the best camera for
her for less than $200.

For the same amount of money, she can buy a low resolution dSLR with
features she will never use. Or she can buy a higher resolution camera
without those features.

Feel free to go back to your insults. I am doing well in my
photography business, so I guess my lack of a "good grip" on the
subject isn't holding me back. I seem to be able to shoot in manual
mode just fine. I supposed I could have gone down the list of all the
features of each type of camera, but I didn't think that it was
necessary to give a full scale review.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

friesian.TakeThisOut@zoocrewphoto.com wrote:
> On Oct 22, 8:59 pm, "The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss
> Muffet" <muf....TakeThisOut@spider.com> wrote:
>> Apparently you know about as much about cameras as your sister.
>
> No need to be insulting. I know more about cameras than you think. I
> also knowmy sister.
>
> There are
>> many reasons why someone would want a dSLR over a point and shoot, advanced
>> controls, interchangable lenses, etc. aren't on the list. However, about
>> better low light capability even in full auto mode, less noise, higher ISO
>> with less noise.
>
> Most decent p&s cameras have low noise. My parents use a 5 MP p&s, and
> they get very nice photos that enlarge nicely. I think it would work
> fine for my sister. Just because it is a p&s, doesn't make it junk.

Spider gave some very good advice. There is a large difference
in performance, even if used on program mode. Larger pixels
collect more light. From small pixel cameras to large, the
factor can be 16x or more in light gathering ability. So
a small pixel camera at ISO 100 is like the large pixel camera
at ISO 1600. This is what Spider was referring to.

See:
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter
>
>
> Better quality pictures overall since most dSLR's have
>> better focusing and metering. The ability to get blurred backgrounds even in
>> full auto mode making shots of flowers and such look nicer with little
>> effort.
>
> To get a blurred background, you have to overide the camera. They are
> designed to stick with a medium aperature to get good sharp images all
> around.

Blurred background is due to the physical aperture.
On a DSLR, with a larger sensor and larger lenses, the aperture
diameter of the lens is larger and allows for a more narrow
depth of field. Many better cameras have a program shift
so you can work in program mode but shift it to what you need.
Perhaps your sister needs a good teacher, and take little steps
at a time (like learning program shift rather than everything at once).
And even at "medium" aperture, the small sensor camera will have
a different depth of field than a larger sensor camera.
>
> RAW, better memory buffer for both RAW and JPG so you can shoot more
>> shots in rapid fire mode. Actual optical viewfinder. Better response for
>> fast moving subjects.
>
> True, SLRs are typically better at this. But, honestly, does it make
> that much difference to the average person who isn't serious about
> photography? The people who are just looking for snapshots?

Yes!

Roger
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

On Oct 22, 11:02 pm, Alex Barnes <nos... DeleteThis @noaddress.org> wrote:

> Just ignore its reply. This newsgroup is crawling to the rafters with doubtful
> DSLR owners that use every chance they can get to try to justify why they spent
> so much money on their own DSLRs. If they can convince everyone to follow them
> down that money pit for the same quality of image as good P&S cameras, then they
> can feel better about their own choices. Misery does indeed love company. If
> they can convince you that they made the right choice then THEY must have made
> the right choice. It's why they do it.
>

I figured I would get some replies from die-hard SLR people. I've seen
a lot of that in this group over the years. There are always people
who believe you have to have top of the line equipment to get a good
photo.

I've had people tell me it is impossible to get good photos of action
in a dark arena without flash. But I do it just fine. I simply went
another route. Instead of a flash or fancy lighting in the rafters, I
went with a super fast lens, fast film, and a good knowledge of depth
of field. I was able to accept jobs that many photographers couldn't
because flash wasn't allowed for some events. I saw a photographer
having a horrible show because flash wasn't allowed during competition
the first day. Then, the second day, she couldn't get her flash to
fire. It was a new camera and flash, and she hadn't used it in that
type of situation yet. The next year, they hired me instead.

I also believe that there is a good reason for pro vs consumer
equipment. Not everybody needs pro equipment. Yes, I want pro lenses.
I love my L lenses. But my parents don't need them. My sister doesn't
need them. Most of the population will be satisfied without them.

When I helped my dad buy a new camera, I did not push him toward a
dSLR. He looked at cameras that looked nice in the photo and had a
price he liked. Then I looked up the reviews and told him no until he
found one that looked good. I looked for features that would be good
for my parents. AA batteries so that he could find batteries anywhere
in a pinch. CF card so that they could borrow mine for trips. No need
to download files during the trip. Good review on photo quality,
buffer speed, fast focusing, etc. Good size screen on the back for
them. Both have trouble with viewing smaller images.

Different people have different needs and for family and travel
photos, they don't need the highest quality available.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 07:41:42 GMT, Alex Barnes <nospam.TakeThisOut@noaddress.org>
wrote:


>So I agree with all you say. But try a challenge sometime. Try shooting with
>nothing but P&S cameras for one month. Force yourself into what you think would
>be a constricting discipline. See if you don't find ways to get the same image
>quality and effects for all the same things you've used DSLRs all these years.
>Under some circumstances, like macro photography especially, you'll get even
>better results than what you could ever get with a larger sensor system. It's a
>rewarding challenge. One that I'm glad I tried long long ago.

I use a p&s at home for quick photos, like photographing something I
want to sell on ebay or getting a quick photo of my cat doing
something cute.

But I would be extremely relunctant to use it for my professional
work. My own p&s is much older. It is a 1.5 MP camera, but has some
features that I really like. It has a great buffer and a really nice
precapture feature eliminating shutter delay. I have used it at fun
events if the lighting was good.

My parents' p&s is higher resoloution, better than my old dSLR, but
not nearly as good as my new dSLR. So, I would have a hard time going
backwards, and I have no need for a newer p&s.

Anyway, most of my professional work is studio style, and I need to
bounce the flash. I also need to be able to use a better lens. I
haven't seen any p&s cameras that come with f/2.8 lenses. Some of my
clients prefer I don't use flash, so I have to be able to shoot both
ways.

If it wasn't for sale, I would probably be satisfied with it. But I
have to do my best when I am shooting for money. And that means using
the best equipment that I have for the job.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:07:29 -0700, "friesian@zoocrewphoto.com"
<friesian.TakeThisOut@zoocrewphoto.com> wrote:

>Most decent p&s cameras have low noise. My parents use a 5 MP p&s, and
>they get very nice photos that enlarge nicely. I think it would work
>fine for my sister. Just because it is a p&s, doesn't make it junk.
>

Just ignore its reply. This newsgroup is crawling to the rafters with doubtful
DSLR owners that use every chance they can get to try to justify why they spent
so much money on their own DSLRs. If they can convince everyone to follow them
down that money pit for the same quality of image as good P&S cameras, then they
can feel better about their own choices. Misery does indeed love company. If
they can convince you that they made the right choice then THEY must have made
the right choice. It's why they do it.

Sorry that I can't help you with a P&S vs DSLR website, I never needed to find
one. I compared the images from the main review sites, their resolution tests,
etc. That was more than enough to convince me to use superzoom P&S cameras vs.
interchangeable lens DSLRs.

If low-light, high-ISO capability is important in a P&S for your sister, do
check into the Fuji line of P&S cameras. They excel. It also sounds like her
enjoying the convenience of using just one lens would lean toward any of the
superzoom models. I've seen some images recently done by the new Panasonic FZ18
that totally beat the resolution and quality of a Canon Mk II with
near-equivalent prime lens L-glass. On the other hand, if she wants excellent
video and audio recording included, then check into the Canon superzooms, like
the S5 (but the S3 with the CHDK add-on even gives her motion-detection
triggering fast enough to even capture lightning with it, and so much more
including RAW). If she wants to get into IR photography, then the Sony H9
superzoom. Those give some starting directions to narrow down choices on what
you think will be the most important to her.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

Meghan Noecker wrote:
[]
> Any suggestions? She is good creatively, but she will never be good at
> the technical aspects of a camera.

If the best low-light or action shot photography are not that important,
the compact camera is likely to be a good choice. Taking pictures of
children or pets, animals or sports, may benefit from the faster response
of the DSLR.

For a DSLR, I would look at the Nikon D40 or D40X. These work well up to
ISO 800 or 1600, and don't cost the earth.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40x/

For a compact camera something in the Panasonic range (although my
choice - the TZ3 - costs more than US $150). They have excellent lenses
beating others in a comparable price range, but the sensors produce their
best image when used at low ISO settings.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/

D R Review is a reasonable site to compare cameras, and Roger Clark's site
has more of the physics background to comparing large-sensor (DSLR) and
small-sensor (compact) cameras:

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter2/

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 07:06:26 GMT, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor RemoveThis @blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:

>Meghan Noecker wrote:
>[]
>> Any suggestions? She is good creatively, but she will never be good at
>> the technical aspects of a camera.
>
>If the best low-light or action shot photography are not that important,
>the compact camera is likely to be a good choice. Taking pictures of
>children or pets, animals or sports, may benefit from the faster response
>of the DSLR.
>

She is mostly into photographing people (friends and family at events)
and landscape, flowers, etc. She does photograph her cats, but she has
been using her cell phone for that. In the past 3 years, I know of
only one time she has used her film camera, and that was a couple
weeks ago for photographing our niece in her homecoming outfit. She
has borrowed my p&s to photograph stuff she wants to sell. But
otherwise, she isn't doing much these days.


>
>D R Review is a reasonable site to compare cameras, and Roger Clark's site
>has more of the physics background to comparing large-sensor (DSLR) and
>small-sensor (compact) cameras:
>

I've used dpreview many times, and I think it is great. And I think a
nice used camera would be perfect for her. Just not a spendy one with
a ton of features she will never use. I'll buy the camera for
Christmas for her. I've seen several on craigslist that would be fine
for her in the $100-150 range. I just want to get her happy with that
idea so that she doesn't get mad at me for not waiting 6 months for
her to buy my old camera or giving her that one for Christmas. That
would cost me more in the longrun, and still wouldn't include a lens.
And I'm not loaning her my lenses.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:42:48 -0700, "friesian@zoocrewphoto.com"
<friesian.RemoveThis@zoocrewphoto.com> wrote:

>
>I also believe that there is a good reason for pro vs consumer
>equipment. Not everybody needs pro equipment. Yes, I want pro lenses.
>I love my L lenses. But my parents don't need them. My sister doesn't
>need them. Most of the population will be satisfied without them.

Not just the general population either. Going the P&S route I've managed to
capture photos that no DSLR toting person could have ever captured in their
lifetimes. Just because the speed of not having to change lenses to compose a
chance shot, or taking my camera places that I wouldn't dare take a more fragile
and fussy DSLR system. Not to mention the silence they provide. Ah the silence,
that alone is worth having and using one. All your subjects (human or animal)
don't become alerted to and self-conscious of that overtly recognizable sound
going on all the time.

It's not the price of the equipment, it's the talent and intellect of the
photographer that in the end will decide what that camera can and cannot do. I
sold off all my DSLR equipment when I found ways to do the same things using the
best quality P&S cameras, for 1/10th the cost and 10 times the convenience. You
just have to rethink, relearn, reinvent, and unlearn old habits and conditioning
for the last 4 decades. UNlearning, that's always the hard part. The advantages
of having that skill are like going from a qwerty to dvorak keyboard, few can do
it. But if you can you can type faster with fewer mistakes. The same thing I
found with unlearning the (d)SLR methods that I grew up on and going to
superzoom P&S's. Creativity applies to how the equipment is used too, not just
the results between the borders of your viewfinder.

So I agree with all you say. But try a challenge sometime. Try shooting with
nothing but P&S cameras for one month. Force yourself into what you think would
be a constricting discipline. See if you don't find ways to get the same image
quality and effects for all the same things you've used DSLRs all these years.
Under some circumstances, like macro photography especially, you'll get even
better results than what you could ever get with a larger sensor system. It's a
rewarding challenge. One that I'm glad I tried long long ago.

I wish I could help with advice on that price-point that you are aiming for, but
I buy P&S cameras on their quality and adaptability so I rarely look at models
that might be that low in cost. I know the camera you are looking for is out
there. Your sister doesn't seem interested in the more complex abilities that
cameras can provide. Otherwise I would strongly suggest that Canon S3 with the
free CHDK firmware enhancement. It's got to be the most adaptable and
inexpensive deal on the planet right now. You can get a new one for well under
$300, more like $200. I even saw them selling for $100 not long ago just after
the S5 was released. Now they are in hot demand due to CHDK so prices went back
up. It can do things that only the top of the line $8000 DSLR bodies can do
today (not even as well as the S3). But due to the complexity of all that that
combo can do (camera + CHDK), I doubt its something your sister would find
useful, and eventually only frustrating. If you can find a used Fuji within that
price range that might be your best bet of all. If she wants something with an
exceptional lens with very good bokeh, then see if you can't find a used Sony
F707 or F717. They might be available for that low of a price now. They also
include the IR shooting capability. If she still wants something DSLR-like, then
one of the earlier Panasonic FZ models might suffice. I have a friend that does
pro nature photography in very challenging environments and is very happy with
his FZ20. Lots of options in the used market for that price, I'm sure. Find one
that looks like a DSLR and she'll never know.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

Alex Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:07:29 -0700, "friesian@zoocrewphoto.com"
> <friesian.DeleteThis@zoocrewphoto.com> wrote:
>
>> Most decent p&s cameras have low noise. My parents use a 5 MP p&s, and
>> they get very nice photos that enlarge nicely. I think it would work
>> fine for my sister. Just because it is a p&s, doesn't make it junk.
>>
>
> Just ignore its reply. This newsgroup is crawling to the rafters with doubtful
> DSLR owners that use every chance they can get to try to justify why they spent

<< Snipped bits out >>

Just ignore those making sweeping statements to try to fan flames.

--
lsmft
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

Meghan Noecker wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 07:41:42 GMT, Alex Barnes <nospam RemoveThis @noaddress.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>> So I agree with all you say. But try a challenge sometime. Try shooting with
>> nothing but P&S cameras for one month. Force yourself into what you think would
>> be a constricting discipline. See if you don't find ways to get the same image
>> quality and effects for all the same things you've used DSLRs all these years.
>> Under some circumstances, like macro photography especially, you'll get even
>> better results than what you could ever get with a larger sensor system. It's a
>> rewarding challenge. One that I'm glad I tried long long ago.
>
> I use a p&s at home for quick photos, like photographing something I
> want to sell on ebay or getting a quick photo of my cat doing
> something cute.
>
> But I would be extremely relunctant to use it for my professional
> work. My own p&s is much older. It is a 1.5 MP camera, but has some
> features that I really like. It has a great buffer and a really nice
> precapture feature eliminating shutter delay. I have used it at fun
> events if the lighting was good.
>
> My parents' p&s is higher resoloution, better than my old dSLR, but
> not nearly as good as my new dSLR. So, I would have a hard time going
> backwards, and I have no need for a newer p&s.
>
> Anyway, most of my professional work is studio style, and I need to
> bounce the flash. I also need to be able to use a better lens. I
> haven't seen any p&s cameras that come with f/2.8 lenses. Some of my
> clients prefer I don't use flash, so I have to be able to shoot both
> ways.
>
> If it wasn't for sale, I would probably be satisfied with it. But I
> have to do my best when I am shooting for money. And that means using
> the best equipment that I have for the job.
>
>
Meghan,

This thread is being poisoned by the P&S troll, so be careful.
The P&S troll is in the form of Alex Barnes but it changes its name
often to make it look like more people support its position
(check full headers and the troll's origin is easy to locate)
and to prevent filters.

P&S cameras can take great pictures and it is better in my opinion
to have a small P&S camera than none at all (I've traveled most
of this month with only a P&S). But there are real performance
differences.

Major factors like low light performance is basic
physics: the larger the sensitive area of each pixel, the more light
it gathers. Small P&S cameras have pixels smaller than 2 microns,
while some DSLRs are more than 8 microns. Area goes as the
square, so the area ratio is like 8*8/2*2 = 16 times difference
in sensitivity. That means that the small pixel P&S camera at
ISO 100 collects the same amount of light (number of photons)
as the large pixel camera at ISO 1600! Another way to look at it
is the DSLR with an f/4 lens collects the same amount of light
as the P&S camera with an f/1 lens (which does not exist).
Its like putting a larger bucket out in a rainstorm: larger
buckets collect more raindrops.
Again, this is basic physics and there is no way around it,
regardless of what the P&S troll says, nor marketing hype by camera
manufacturers.

So a low-end DSLR with a zoom lens produces great images under
more light conditions, having faster response with higher dynamic
range and better low light performance than P&S cameras. The
low end DSLRs are similar in size to the better P&S superzooms,
and costs are similar. But P&S cameras can be smaller and more
convenient, take great pictures in good lighting conditions, as
long as your willing to accept the lower performance in less than
ideal situations.

Roger
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

Meghan Noecker wrote:
[]
> She is mostly into photographing people (friends and family at events)
> and landscape, flowers, etc. She does photograph her cats, but she has
> been using her cell phone for that. In the past 3 years, I know of
> only one time she has used her film camera, and that was a couple
> weeks ago for photographing our niece in her homecoming outfit. She
> has borrowed my p&s to photograph stuff she wants to sell. But
> otherwise, she isn't doing much these days.
[]
> I've used dpreview many times, and I think it is great. And I think a
> nice used camera would be perfect for her. Just not a spendy one with
> a ton of features she will never use. I'll buy the camera for
> Christmas for her. I've seen several on craigslist that would be fine
> for her in the $100-150 range. I just want to get her happy with that
> idea so that she doesn't get mad at me for not waiting 6 months for
> her to buy my old camera or giving her that one for Christmas. That
> would cost me more in the longrun, and still wouldn't include a lens.
> And I'm not loaning her my lenses.

I'm inclined to agree with you - a friend needed a relatively simple
camera to replace a 35mm compact and got the Canon A630.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06082404canona630640.asp

He seems happy enough with it, and the swivel LCD eases his low-level
shots of flowers for his wife. I belive that replaced the A610/A620:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a610.asp

but those may be a little long in the tooth now!

Cheers,
David
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

Meghan Noecker wrote:
> Here's the deal.
>
> I recently upgraded my dslr, and my sister wants to buy my old one. I
> know that she'll want a deal, and she doesn't have any money anyway.
> So, selling the camera to her means waiting months and months for
> money when I can just go ahead and sell it. I went ahead and listed it
> on ebay and sold it, but I haven't told her yet.
>
> I also know from experience that she does not need a dslr. She has had
> a 35mm film camera for over 15 years, and she has never used more than
> the stanard zoom kit lens even though I bought her a nice prime lens
> for Christmas once. She also shoots in program mode all the time since
> she does not understand aperature, depth of field, etc. She has asked
> a few times, but always gets frazzled when I try to explain it.
>
> Since she will never change lenses and doesn't use any of the features
> of an SLR camera, a good point & shoot camera would meet her needs
> just fine. And she could get one with higher resoilution than my old
> dSLR for a lower price.
>
> I have mentioned this, but she doesn't seem interested. I am hoping to
> find a good website that will explain the pros and cons of the
> different types of cameras. Then she can see that she would do better
> with the point & shoot camera and give up wanting mine.
>
> My old camera was a 3.1 MP camera, and I'm sure she could find a used
> 5MP camera for less than $150. I might even be willing to buy her one
> for Christmas if I can find a used one for less than $100. But I want
> her to be happy with the idea.
>
> Any suggestions? She is good creatively, but she will never be good at
> the technical aspects of a camera.

For many people a point and shoot is going to be the best camera, but
you did miss some of the reasons someone might want a DSLR, even if they
only shoot in program mode and never changes lenses.

A DSLR has a much faster focus system, which means a shorter shutter lag
when using auto focus.

A DSLR is also much better at taking image with available light.

You said you upgraded you DSLR, if it takes the sames lenses as your old
camera then I assume you kept all your lenses, this by itself would make
buying your old camera not too attractive to her I would think.

Scott
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 

Alex Barnes wrote:
[]
> No doubt some will display that effect in response to this post.
> Watch ...

Many, if not all, DSLR owners use compact cameras as well as DSLRs. They
can choose the best tool for the job in hand.

David
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s?