Slr Vrs. Point & Shoot Digital

[JimmyTheMook]

It is worth lugging around an SLR body these days to get truly sharp pics?

With 10 mp point shoots out there I am wondering if there is a major difference.......

[hughden]

One of the major advantages of a point and shoot is indeed that you don't need to feel you are lugging it around! However, the small size inevitably means a small sensor; and sadly the marketing men think they can sell more cameras if they increase the pixel count; which inevitably degrades the quality of the image. In particular it means you will probably get unacceptable noise at quite low ISOs; and the dynamic range of the photo will be much lower than with an SLR; meaning you will lose detail in both shadows and highlights.

You can still get stunning shots with a P&S under the right circumstances. But if you are prepared to carry it around, and spend more money; you will get better shots in a wider range of conditions with an SLR and a selection of lenses.

[canuckamuck]

IMO the main difference with SLR's is that you can be very specific about what lens you want to use. Generally speaking the larger diameter of the lenses on an SLR means that you will have a brighter faster lens, and almost always a shaper lens. And yes a larger sensor is always better.

However a great many shooting situations can be handled well with a P&S camera (PHD camera: press here dummy) I have a friend who consistently gets excellent and unique shots with his fixed lens camera, and he has the advantage of being inconspicuous at the same time.

When I pull out the big Canon, everybody sees me right away, and candids are much more difficult.

When push comes to shove though, the SLR is ready for all situations and gets a much higher percentage of good shots. I would only have a PHD camera as a backup or for unimportant situations.

[JimmyTheMook]

One of the major advantages of a point and shoot is indeed that you don't need to feel you are lugging it around! However, the small size inevitably means a small sensor; and sadly the marketing men think they can sell more cameras if they increase the pixel count; which inevitably degrades the quality of the image.

With that consideration , what do you consider a good point and shoot option on the current market.

[hughden]

The Leica M8 is very good.

It is also US$4500.....!!

I have an SLR and have the same problem as Canuckamuck, it is hard to take candid shots on the street with several kilos of camera gear being waved around. I am looking for a decent P&S. I am tempted by the Panasonics which have Leica lenses and are essentially the same as their Leica. The LX2 gives you lots of control and you can shoot in RAW, from which you can manage noise better than accepting the jpegs from the camera. Then of course I am tempted to pay more and get the Leica version, the D-Lux 3; for which you pay a premium for the badge.

It's an expensive hobby if you get carried away with all the gear!

[Goshawk]

try the fuji finepix f30.

a bloody good little camera.. won numerous awards last year and although i don't think its still in current production, i'm sure it's probably available in many outlets in Thailand. Failing that, eBay..

it goes to ISO 3200.. remarkable quality in low light

[JimmyTheMook]

Anyone use this ?

waterproof Olympus 720 SW

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/...sp?product=1225

[hughden]

The Finepix F31 (only a small change to the F30) is still listed for sale on Fotofile's site in BKK.

[Goshawk]

The Finepix F31 (only a small change to the F30) is still listed for sale on Fotofile's site in BKK.

the f31 is actually inferior to the f30..

There is, i believe, a new f40 just on the market.. reviews of it i've read don't indicate any improvements over the f30, except for the irrellevent pastime of megapixel counting. Anything over 5mp is ample for your ordinary joe

[percy2]

If you are wondering around taking happy snaps, P&S has many advantages.

Cheers

[hughden]

The Finepix F31 (only a small change to the F30) is still listed for sale on Fotofile's site in BKK.

the f31 is actually inferior to the f30..

There is, i believe, a new f40 just on the market.. reviews of it i've read don't indicate any improvements over the f30, except for the irrellevent pastime of megapixel counting. Anything over 5mp is ample for your ordinary joe

They are now up to the F50; with 12 megapixels.....! So stupid.

[Goshawk]

f50.. 12mp..

i agree, it's ridiculous.. they're just attempting to cash in on the 'oh, more megapixel = better camera' crowd

i still have an old f610, the 'upright' model, and would still recommend this pensioner to anyone.

[UnknownPoster]

The point/shoot cameras do a decent job.

Get an SLR if you like to tweak the settings and do creative photography.

[johnong]

The Finepix F31 (only a small change to the F30) is still listed for sale on Fotofile's site in BKK.

the f31 is actually inferior to the f30..

There is, i believe, a new f40 just on the market.. reviews of it i've read don't indicate any improvements over the f30, except for the irrellevent pastime of megapixel counting. Anything over 5mp is ample for your ordinary joe

I think the f31 is the same camera as the f30, just with face detection... Some people say that the f40 is inferior as you lose the manual controls and have to rely on scene modes. They are a great camera although the shots look a bit too over processed compared to an SLR. But you can change the settings...

[technocracy]

It is worth lugging around an SLR body these days to get truly sharp pics?

With 10 mp point shoots out there I am wondering if there is a major difference.......

I think quite a few people posting on here don't fully understand or maybe not appreciate the major differences between SLRs and P&Ss.

The idea of people who use an SLR being able to do more 'creative' things is very odd! On many higher end digital P&S you can do pretty much everything an SLR can. So the creativity bit isn't really anything to do with it!

The major reason for using SLRs (be it digital or 35mm) is the ability to be able to put on a superior quality lens - to get the perfect photographs. The body of the cameras is frequently the cheap bit! The lens are where the money is spent. Sure you're 10mp P&S with it's built in lens doesn't do a bad job but it can't compare to a high quality lens - especially a prime. On note of lens they also allow for lower f settings so allowing for lower light shooting without the need for flashes.

On of the other major differences is the speed of an SLR - 8fps is pretty much a requirement when shooting fast motion - be it nature or sports. P&S don't in general have the processing power in digitals to do this and 35mm never did.

Ruggedness and toughness - most high-end SLRs are alloy bodied and in case of Canon 1D range and white lens are weather sealed, pretty much a must of you're shooting in harsh conditions.

The last and probably most important reason is more serious news and photo agencies will only accept photos in RAW 24bit TIFF format and from a certain cameras (you've guessed it - all high range SLRs), so if want to get paid by the bigger agencies you need the right equipment.

Also this mad pixel race that is taking place with 10+mp P&S is just rediculous the more pixels they squeeze on to the tiny sensors in P&S is actually affecting the quality (more hot pixels).

So in short if it's your job you NEED an SLR if you just want to take snaps then a P&S will do the job amply. If photography is your hobby and you want to get great pictures then the decision normally comes down to how much money you have and how frequently you will use the camera.

One more thing note on the pixel race is printing people take this HUGE photo with 10mp then print it on 6x4 photo paper - a 1mp image would give you exactly the same result (well infact less than 1mp would!)!

Edited August 27, 2007 by technocracy

[hughden]

It is worth lugging around an SLR body these days to get truly sharp pics?

With 10 mp point shoots out there I am wondering if there is a major difference.......

I think quite a few people posting on here don't fully understand or maybe not appreciate the major differences between SLRs and P&Ss.

The idea of people who use an SLR being able to do more 'creative' things is very odd! On many higher end digital P&S you can do pretty much everything an SLR can. So the creativity bit isn't really anything to do with it!

The major reason for using SLRs (be it digital or 35mm) is the ability to be able to put on a superior quality lens - to get the perfect photographs. The body of the cameras is frequently the cheap bit! The lens are where the money is spent. Sure you're 10mp P&S with it's built in lens doesn't do a bad job but it can't compare to a high quality lens - especially a prime. On note of lens they also allow for lower f settings so allowing for lower light shooting without the need for flashes.

On of the other major differences is the speed of an SLR - 8fps is pretty much a requirement when shooting fast motion - be it nature or sports. P&S don't in general have the processing power in digitals to do this and 35mm never did.

Ruggedness and toughness - most high-end SLRs are alloy bodied and in case of Canon 1D range and white lens are weather sealed, pretty much a must of you're shooting in harsh conditions.

The last and probably most important reason is more serious news and photo agencies will only accept photos in RAW 24bit TIFF format and from a certain cameras (you've guessed it - all high range SLRs), so if want to get paid by the bigger agencies you need the right equipment.

Also this mad pixel race that is taking place with 10+mp P&S is just rediculous the more pixels they squeeze on to the tiny sensors in P&S is actually affecting the quality (more hot pixels).

So in short if it's your job you NEED an SLR if you just want to take snaps then a P&S will do the job amply. If photography is your hobby and you want to get great pictures then the decision normally comes down to how much money you have and how frequently you will use the camera.

One more thing note on the pixel race is printing people take this HUGE photo with 10mp then print it on 6x4 photo paper - a 1mp image would give you exactly the same result (well infact less than 1mp would!)!

Agree, plus with an SLR you are also paying for a better and bigger sensor (better image quality, more dynamic range, less noise at higher ISOs) and quicker and more accurate auto-focus facilities; especially if you want to focus track moving objects.

[tigerbeer]

It is worth lugging around an SLR body these days to get truly sharp pics?

With 10 mp point shoots out there I am wondering if there is a major difference.......

I think quite a few people posting on here don't fully understand or maybe not appreciate the major differences between SLRs and P&Ss.

The idea of people who use an SLR being able to do more 'creative' things is very odd! On many higher end digital P&S you can do pretty much everything an SLR can. So the creativity bit isn't really anything to do with it!

The major reason for using SLRs (be it digital or 35mm) is the ability to be able to put on a superior quality lens - to get the perfect photographs. The body of the cameras is frequently the cheap bit! The lens are where the money is spent. Sure you're 10mp P&S with it's built in lens doesn't do a bad job but it can't compare to a high quality lens - especially a prime. On note of lens they also allow for lower f settings so allowing for lower light shooting without the need for flashes.

On of the other major differences is the speed of an SLR - 8fps is pretty much a requirement when shooting fast motion - be it nature or sports. P&S don't in general have the processing power in digitals to do this and 35mm never did.

Ruggedness and toughness - most high-end SLRs are alloy bodied and in case of Canon 1D range and white lens are weather sealed, pretty much a must of you're shooting in harsh conditions.

The last and probably most important reason is more serious news and photo agencies will only accept photos in RAW 24bit TIFF format and from a certain cameras (you've guessed it - all high range SLRs), so if want to get paid by the bigger agencies you need the right equipment.

Also this mad pixel race that is taking place with 10+mp P&S is just rediculous the more pixels they squeeze on to the tiny sensors in P&S is actually affecting the quality (more hot pixels).

So in short if it's your job you NEED an SLR if you just want to take snaps then a P&S will do the job amply. If photography is your hobby and you want to get great pictures then the decision normally comes down to how much money you have and how frequently you will use the camera.

One more thing note on the pixel race is printing people take this HUGE photo with 10mp then print it on 6x4 photo paper - a 1mp image would give you exactly the same result (well infact less than 1mp would!)!

Agree, plus with an SLR you are also paying for a better and bigger sensor (better image quality, more dynamic range, less noise at higher ISOs) and quicker and more accurate auto-focus facilities; especially if you want to focus track moving objects.

i have a fuji f30 and it takes wonderful pictures. very usable pictures in low light conditions at 1600iso. i have seen fuji f40fd selling at below 10,000 and its really a bargain. panasonic lumix range also are much sought after with its Optical Image Stabiliser lens. but noise at higher iso.

But at 19,900, the Canon 350 SLR is an attractive buy for some of us with not much cash to make photography a hobby. It does take superior pictures as compared to P&S cameras. for the obvious fact of faster lens and bigger sensors. better dynamic range. you can't go wrong. prices have come down quite a bit from when i was shopping for cameras. sadly at this point of time, i have no budget for a new cam. i am happy with my Fuji f30 and perhaps save enough to buy a decent SLR when the time comes. nevertheless, i do not agree that buying an SLR means spending hundreds of thousands of baht to have nice pictures. you can go on and on with lens and accesories but i think the kit out of a box can do the job just fine .

ultra zooms such a fuji s9600, canon s5is, pana fz50 are some nice cameras. bargain for the zoom you can get on them as compared to spending a bundle for lenses to use with dSLR. worth a look if you are into nature photography.

have fun taking pictures people. the more the better. good moments never come by again and i cant iterate enough how much that means to some people.

TB

ps: keep the pixels below 8MP. can't understand why you need more. like everyone knows, its dumb to just compact so many pixels into a small sensor especially on P&S cameras.

[Tywais]

ultra zooms such a fuji s9600, canon s5is, pana fz50 are some nice cameras. bargain for the zoom you can get on them as compared to spending a bundle for lenses to use with dSLR. worth a look if you are into nature photography.

I just got a Canon S5 IS yesterday (details in My New Camera topic). So far it has proven to be quite impressive. Of course will take a while to figure out all the features, the manual is big.