Welcome to DigiForumz.com!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s?

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
   Digital Camera Community (Home) -> Digital SLR RSS
Next:  Where the F--- ARE the 8.5" x 11" FRAME..  
Author Message
John Ortt

External


Since: Sep 02, 2005
Posts: 151



(Msg. 31) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:53 am
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: rec>photo>digital (more info?)

>
> Hey idiot, which part of Meghan's words:
>
>>I also know from experience that she does not need a dslr.
>
> did you fail to understand?

It is you who has failed to understand. She DOES want an SLR. Her Brother
does not think she needs one.

As I said earlier regardless of the opinions of others if someone does not
get what they want they can be disapointed, even if it is better.

 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Alex Barnes

External


Since: Oct 23, 2007
Posts: 5



(Msg. 32) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:40 pm
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:44:33 -0700, Meghan Noecker <friesian DeleteThis @zoocrewphoto.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:39:59 GMT, Alex Barnes <nospam DeleteThis @noaddress.org>
>wrote:
>
>
>>The Sony F707, F717, F818, and other models all come standard with f/2.0-f/2.4
>>throughout their zoom range. They even have a 1/1.8 or 2/3 sensor.
>
<snippage>
>Is it somewhat newer? I have never seen a p&s camera with a zoom that
>was better than f/4.5. And even the SLR cameras often come with a kit
>lens that is f/4.5-5.6. Fast lenses usually aren't standard equipment.

The Sony F717 was released in Sept of 2002, the 707 a year earlier than that.
Many of the better quality P&S cameras have all had zoom lenses with f-stops
starting below f/3.x. It's why most P&S people aren't all that fired up over
high-ISO availability on some of them. Cleaner high-ISOs would be nicer, and
indeed some cameras like the Fuji P&S have them as clean as large sensor DSLRs,
but it's not a make or break deal. We already have the light-grasp needed right
in the lens instead of the sensor. All the other cameras I mentioned I took from
online reviews from newer cameras.

You must not have been looking too hard. Smile

(Most people who have been "pro" oriented just automatically dismiss all P&S
cameras so they never bothered looking. I've never been one to follow the blind
foolishness of others, whether I'm making money from my interests or not. I
can't tell you how many fellow "pros" I've run into who were some of the most
stupid people I've ever met in life. Now when I hear the phrase "recommended by
Pros", I only laugh.)

>
>Would you like me to photograph the p&s camera in this house and send
>you the photo? I would like to know how I can use my flash (which
>weighs a lot more than the camera) on a tiny camera with no hot shoe.
>

My Sony P&S has a hot-shoe, so I just use that. Some of the newer P&S cameras
also have a hot-shoe, like the Canon S5 IS, among many others. For my other P&S
cameras I just use a small bracket that came with my IR floods for my Sony, and
mount this on it: http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html (though you can use any
tiny flash bracket that you like, even one you make) This slave-trigger turns
all my flash units into a bounce and swiveling flash unit and accommodates all
pre-flash modes in all my cameras. For red-eye reduction of very distant
subjects then I just use the slave-trigger with the flash attached as a
hand-held flash and point it in the general direction, holding it an
arm's-length away from the axis of the camera's lens. This would be the simplest
way to use it with any camera that is too small to even have a tripod socket to
which you would attach a flash bracket. If using flash with my hot-shoe'ed
cameras, then I have a coiled extension cable that connects hot-shoe to hot-shoe
to achieve the same red-eye reduction on distant subjects by holding it an arm's
length away. For macro photography I use the flash on a bracket with the coiled
extension cable with the hot-shoe camera. The bracket affording enough side-step
and tilted forward to the front of the lens to get around the front of the lens
(diffuser on the flash of course). On non-hot-shoe cameras then I use the
slave-trigger. (The extension cable only for the convenience if I already have
hot-shoe access, then I don't have to be concerned if I'm choosing a pre-flash
mode or not and dealing with a slightly more bulky item, the slave-trigger.)

A 100% adaptable system that can be used on any camera in existence. Any flash
unit + any good slave trigger + any hotshoe cable + any accessory bracket
(mounted into the tripod socket). It works on anything and can be used in any
photography situation. No need to send a photo, it'll work with any of your
cameras.

I despise using flash in all situations where I can get away without it. But for
those times that I need it, I also need a 100% adaptable system for any camera.
From SLR to Digital. I never know what the next new unique situation is going to
require.

If you must have a hot-shoe or other available external flash system built into
your camera, try going here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp

Input "Format" -- SLR-like or Compact (but even one discontinued ultra-compact
also has a hotshoe)

Input "External Flash" -- Yes

Then hit "compare". You'll have to put in some other limiting options, because
you'll always get the "Too many results, only first 10 shown, please try to be
more specific." alert.

If you want to see even more just change the "Only Current" option at the bottom
from "yes" to "don't mind". That's a great way to find used cameras that fit
what you need.

People who push DSLR's swear they never even knew this search feature existed or
that any of those options don't exist on non-DSLR cameras. They love putting on
their blinders to justify their purchases, then proudly display their ignorance
in this newsgroup and everywhere else by incessantly proclaiming that non-DSLRs
can't do what they can do. Smile

 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Daniel Silevitch

External


Since: Oct 07, 2005
Posts: 442



(Msg. 33) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:40 pm
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:50:00 -0700, Meghan Noecker <friesian.RemoveThis@zoocrewphoto.com> wrote:
>
> What I want to do is convince my sister that she doesn't need a dSLR
> and would be better off with a p&s. I think she wants the dSLR since
> they are fancier and look more professional.

You could go with one of the larger superzoom cameras that have been
suggested. They look like shrunken-down SLRs, usually are available in
"professional" black, and some models even come with lens hoods...

Something like the Canon S5IS or Panasonic FZ18 (or FZ50 for something
that's nearly as big as the smaller DSLRs).

-dms
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Alex Barnes

External


Since: Oct 23, 2007
Posts: 5



(Msg. 34) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:19 pm
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:46:37 +0100, "John Ortt"
<johnortt RemoveThis @noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:

>
>I don't fully understand the science behind it but my SLR somehow gets nicer
>shots.
>
>It might be down to the compromises on a 12x zoom, I don't know
>
>Having said that the S3IS is still an awesome camera.
>

Part of that, I believe, is due to the sensor (or in film the media) size giving
a shallower depth of field on nearly all subjects with the same f/stops as used
on P&S cameras. Having just small sections of their subject being in focus gives
them the illusion that their images are sharper or better somehow. When in
reality it's just because so much of the rest of their image and subject is
horrendously out of focus. No different than the fake effect caused by using
unsharp mask techniques. It tricks the mind into seeing that contrast of light
and dark into being a sharper edge. When you have such shallow (and subject
damaging) DOF then it tricks the mind. The contrast between all that blur in the
rest of the photo makes the parts in focus "appear" all that much sharper, but
in reality are not.

It's psychological, not real. The same effects can be created in any P&S camera
by just extending the focal length of the lens with a tele-extender to decrease
the DOF to the same as those afforded by any DSLR on the exact same subjects.

Aside: Yes, shallow DOF should be used to compose in the 3rd dimension of your
subject, I use that often just for that purpose. When I first switched to small
sensor P&S cameras I was disheartened at first, thinking I lost that important
aspect of photography. It wasn't until I started using P&S cameras enough,
getting more creative with long-zoom focal lengths, tele-macro modes, learning
to keep more distance from a subject than I was used to, that I realized I
hadn't lost a thing. Imagine if you grew up on smaller sensor cameras and had to
use the same techniques I use today for shallow DOF. Then someone handed you a
DSLR with its glaring shallow DOF. You'd complain that you had to move so close
to a subject all the time to get the same effect and use wider-angle lenses all
the time, making it much more difficult to isolate your subject from a busy
background, all backgrounds being more busy the wider the angle you use. It's
just a matter of what you grew up on and were accustomed to. But as far as
always having a shallow DOF, if you can't get all of your subject in focus and
only blur out the foreground and background then you've gone way too far. Too
much blur and you have so successfully removed your subject from its environment
that you might as well have staged your photography in a studio, making all your
images fake and lifeless. All that you are also managing to do is prove to
everyone the unusable and unneeded extreme in your camera. No different than
trying to prove to someone how much noise you can create in your image. Shallow
DOF is important, all cameras can create that. (D)SLR, P&S, full-frame, 1/2.5
sensor, it matters not. Shallow DOF to the point of blurring out important parts
of your subject as well as the background is just excess noise and a major
defect, if not in the camera then in your ability and reputability as
photographer. I find it funny how DSLR proponents proudly claim how blurred they
can make everything as a major selling point of their chosen tools. The blatant
irony of that line is worth at least a 24 hour long laugh fest. Smile
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
John McWilliams

External


Since: Aug 25, 2005
Posts: 1476



(Msg. 35) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:19 pm
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Harvey Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, 24 O

nasty little man, nym shifting coward, pusillanimous pontificater.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
"Roger N. Clark

External


Since: Oct 04, 2005
Posts: 833



(Msg. 36) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:19 pm
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Alex Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:46:37 +0100, "John Ortt"
> <johnortt DeleteThis @noemailsuppliedasdontwantspam.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't fully understand the science behind it but my SLR somehow gets nicer
>> shots.
>>
>> It might be down to the compromises on a 12x zoom, I don't know
>>
>> Having said that the S3IS is still an awesome camera.
>>
>
> Part of that, I believe, is due to the sensor (or in film the media) size giving
> a shallower depth of field on nearly all subjects with the same f/stops as used
> on P&S cameras.

NO, it has to do with noise. Small pixels collects less light
and images are noisier than cameras having larger pixels.

< lots of BS deleted >

> It's psychological, not real. The same effects can be created in any P&S camera
> by just extending the focal length of the lens with a tele-extender to decrease
> the DOF to the same as those afforded by any DSLR on the exact same subjects.

Of course then you don't have the field of view. If you need
a certain field of view to get the image you want, zooming in is
not an option. You small format camera has less options and you
have less ability to get a needed image.

< lots of BS deleted >

> No different than
> trying to prove to someone how much noise you can create in your image.

That main noise source in this thread is what you write.

> Shallow
> DOF is important, all cameras can create that. (D)SLR, P&S, full-frame, 1/2.5
> sensor, it matters not.

This is completely wrong.

Noise that was being discussed here is noise due to gathering too little
light in each pixel. Pixels in a digital camera collect light
in proportion to their area, even when compared between different
format sizes using the same f/ratio. That is illustrated here:
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/does.pixel.size.matter2

There is a huge difference in depth of field with format size.
Each larger format can get the same large depth-of-field but
the larger format can do shallower depth of field. For example,
no P&S small sensor camera could get this image:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/c01.14.2003.img_...3.egret
A small sensor camera would show the background in focus which would
amount to a lot of clutter and the bird would not stand out. And increasing
focal length would not be an option as you would not get the entire bird
in the frame.

So if someone wants a camera with better high ISO and low light
performance (e.g. taking pictures of people in a room with available
light), choose a camera with the largest pixels you can afford and
carry.

Roger
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
SMS

External


Since: Sep 08, 2005
Posts: 954



(Msg. 37) Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:01 pm
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
> Apparently you know about as much about cameras as your 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.

You missed one of the biggies---much shorter shutter lag.
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
John Turco

External


Since: Jul 10, 2006
Posts: 1086



(Msg. 38) Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:05 am
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Meghan Noecker wrote:

<edited, for brevity>

> What I want to do is convince my sister that she doesn't need a dSLR
> and would be better off with a p&s. I think she wants the dSLR since
> they are fancier and look more professional.
>
> I am amazed at how many people go by looks. Until 2 years, I was
> shooting with an older manual focus camera. People would see my system
> and tell me it must be nice to have such a fancy camera. They didn't
> know that the camera in their own hand was fancier than mine.


Hello, Meghan:

The best, overall digital camera - price, performance, build quality,
features, size, aesthetic appeal - is the Kodak P850, in my opinion.
Although, discontinued (less than year ago), it's still available, at
a quite reasonable cost (i.e., in the range of $250 USD).

The P850 offers a choice between P&S simplicity and advanced, DSLR-like
functionality. Check out these specifications, taken from its user's
guide:

* CCD: 1/2.5 in. CCD, 5.1 MP, 4:3 aspect ratio

* 12X optical zoom, f/2.8–f/8.0 (wide), f/3.7–f/8.0 (tele) with image
stabilization; 6.0–72.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 36–432 mm)

* LCD and EVF (electronic viewfinder)
Optical, 237 K pixels

* Capture modes: Auto, 16 Scene modes, PASM, & C1, C2, C3, Video

* Video modes: VGA (640 x 480) @ 30 fps
QVGA (320 x 240) @ 30 fps

* Image file format Still JPEG: EXIF 2.2 (fine, standard, & basic
compression); file organization DCF
Still RAW: file organization Kodak
original Still TIFF: TIFF format
Video: QuickTime format; (Motion–JPEG)
* Hot shoe

Incidentally, I've owned a P850, for nearly a year and a half. It's a
very fine digicam, despite what many anti-Kodak snobs would have you
believe.

Good luck!


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur.RemoveThis@concentric.net>
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
John Turco

External


Since: Jul 10, 2006
Posts: 1086



(Msg. 39) Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:05 am
Post subject: Re: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Alex Barnes wrote:

<heavily edited, for brevity>

> It's psychological, not real. The same effects can be created in any P&S camera
> by just extending the focal length of the lens with a tele-extender to decrease
> the DOF to the same as those afforded by any DSLR on the exact same subjects.

<edited>

Hello, Alex:

Damned right! Actually, with my two Kodak "super zoom" cameras (P850,
12x and DX6490, 10x), I can achieve extremely shallow DOF, without
resorting to any "tele-extenders."

Yes, indeed..."bokeh" that would impress, even the most rabid of DSLR
mongers! <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur.TakeThisOut@concentric.net>
 >> Stay informed about: good websites for choosing between dslr and p&s? 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
good DSLR forum ? - Beside dpreview, anyone knows a good DSLR forum ? tx

is a refurb dslr/advanced p&s as good as a new one? - like,,,i buy my computers refurbed because they get the same warrantee and with computers is only a matter of replacing bad parts with good. are dslr's and advanced point and shoot the same way? aside from cosmetics, are you comfortable with a refurbed....

Recommend a Good Manual Mode non-DSLR? - I'm interested in learning to use manual mode effectively and would appreciate recommendations for a good non-DSLR camera for this purpose. Features I'm looking for are built-in optical zoom and large, clear LCD. I'm not interested in a DSLR at this...

Article on websites for photographers and other creatives - Hi all, In response to various queries on several lists about issues revolving around designing websites for photographers, artists, designers and other creatives, I have written a fairly long article on this topic and my advice about approaches:..

Choosing a school: art or technology? - I've been looking at schools of photography, and it has become apparent that there is a difference among schools that may be most easily deliniated as between art and technology. For instance, if you look at the classes offered by the Rochester..
   Digital Camera Community (Home) -> Digital SLR All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]