Camera recommendations

I think a tripod is also very important, I notice that even with a point and shoot my shots are much better if I adjust the shutter speed and have it resting on something steady.
 
I own a DSLR, two P&S and two 35mm film models. The DSLR is a Nikon D40 and the film systems cameras are Olympus OM1 & OM4. My P&S are a Konica/Minolta Z6 and an Olympus SP570UZ.



I can honestly say I can take as good or better pictures with my Olympus as any camera I own. For one thing, the lens is always instantly ready whether I want a 26mm wide angle or a 520 mm long telephoto. It also has macro ability which is another (expensive) discrete lens on my DSLR and film system cameras. The optical quality is better than the sensor can record with either digital.



I can go from shooting a bird in a tree at 520mm to shooting a butterfly in macro mode as close as 1cm in less than a second. No heavy lenses to lug. This was my big issue with my DSLR and film system cameras. Too darn much to lug around and it takes too long to switch to the right lens for the shot I suddenly come across. The P&S also has a the advantage with depth of field over my DSLR or film system cameras due to it's smaller sensor size.



I do mostly nature photography, BTW, so the P&S is just a better fit for that purpose. When I was doing portraits I'd use my film cameras and the DSLR just never gave as good an image as film for portraits IMO.



I also do some astro-photography. I like the DSLR for that purpose. It's easy to hook a DSLR up to a telescope.



After all is said and done, if I could only have one camera it would be my Olympus SP570. It has full manual control just like the DSLR. It has very good optics and it is always ready for whatever shot I come upon. It is my most used camera by far.



Another comment on photographer skill and camera quality. If Ansel Adams were alive today he would kill to have any of our digital cameras. Even the lowliest P&S camera would have outperformed his camera yet look at the pictures he took. He didn't have the luxury of instantly seeing his shots. He didn't have ISO up to 6400 and image stabilization. He didn't have white balance control. He shot B&W. Yet his photography is considered fine art today.



IMVHO, it is best not to get to hung up on the hardware. Unless you are a pro or very seasoned amateur, you will likely not get better shots with a DSLR than with a P&S in most of your shooting. Way too many think a better camera will make them a better photographer. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just like a $10,000 wax won't make you a better detailer if you don't understand the process.



To take good pictures you don't need a good camera, you need to learn about what makes a good picture and how to see things as a photographer.
 
comarison p&s vs dslr



costco deal $549 for camera with two removable lenses and bonus 20GB CARD! Bummer part is no case, you will have to buy one. I added it to "my cart" and it came up $499, even better.



I will say the one issue I have with my DSLR is sometimes the file is too large for the webhost. Other than that, I'm completely satisfied. Besides, you will want those extra pixels if you ever want to print a large photo. It's kindof cool to know if I mess up a lense, all I have to do is replace it as opposed to junking the camera.
 
D&D Auto Detail said:
SLR is definitely the way to go, especially for detailing pictures where manual focus is so important.
Click to expand...



$99 P&S don't have full manual controls, but the better ones sure do.
 
As you asked for some examples, take a look at the photo's in my MR2 gallery linked in my sig. They were all taken with a P&S.



Yes, any of the long zoom P&S cameras I suggested have full manual control. I can control every aspect of the image on my P&S models just as well as on my Nikon D40.



I also will re-stress the fact that the P&S models have a huge advantage in the DOF. Much more of the image is in focus with a P&S than is possible with any DSLR. This is due to the use of smaller sensors in the P&S models. When shooting vehicles the DOF is a significant point of concern.
 
D&D Auto Detail said:
How much does ones like those cost?
Click to expand...



You can find a Canon S5IS for about $300. Full manual controls, 12x zoom with super macro and IS.
 
D&D Auto Detail said:
How much does ones like those cost?
Click to expand...



Here are a number of models with full manual control in the $220 - $360 range, listed alphabetically.



Canon SX10 IS ($335),

Canon PowerShot S5 IS ($290)

Fujifilm FinePix S2000HD ($220)

Fujifilm FinePix S8100fd ($249)

Kodak EasyShare Z712 IS ($266)

Kodak EasyShare Z1015 IS ($237)

Nikon P80 ($269)

Olympus SP565UZ ($304)

Olympus SP570UZ ($357)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 ($284)

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H50 ($316)



I recently chose the Olympus SP570UZ, FWIW.
 
jfelbab said:
As you asked for some examples, take a look at the photo's in my MR2 gallery linked in my sig. They were all taken with a P&S.



Yes, any of the long zoom P&S cameras I suggested have full manual control. I can control every aspect of the image on my P&S models just as well as on my Nikon D40.



I also will re-stress the fact that the P&S models have a huge advantage in the DOF. Much more of the image is in focus with a P&S than is possible with any DSLR. This is due to the use of smaller sensors in the P&S models. When shooting vehicles the DOF is a significant point of concern.
Click to expand...





You know, if you took the pictures in your gallery with a DSLR, the towels would have appeared more neatly folded :har:
 
I think for novices you can easily take worse photos with a DLSR than a P&S if you have no idea what you are doing. They offer so much flexibility and once you get out of program mode they can really get out of adjustment (wb, exposure compensation, spot metering, etc) if you mess with controls and then get bad shots. You need to pay attention to what the camera is doing.



Most p&s like Canon add "pop" to images to make them look great out of camera. Some DLSR's (like Nikon) tend to favor more accuracy than eye candy jpg appeal so OOC they may not seem a "colorful". The in camera jpgs can be so so looking...



Unless you shoot raw, you will not really see that much difference between an DLSR and decent P&S when shooting in decent light since the jpgs are not significantly better if you are just posting pics to web. Raw should show a major difference. The "great" shots are usually shot raw with post processing to make them look great.



If you find yourself shooting where high iso requirements are needed (less light available and no flash), the noise in p&s is much worse at isos above 200 to 400 so this would push you to DSLR. This is the real trade-off. I also think DSLR tend to use proprietary batteries to really crank out the shots over aa's, etc. That can be a disadvantage to some.



I am have been looking at the Panasonic FZ28 (a super zoom).
 
jfelbab said:
As you asked for some examples, take a look at the photo's in my MR2 gallery linked in my sig. They were all taken with a P&S.



Yes, any of the long zoom P&S cameras I suggested have full manual control. I can control every aspect of the image on my P&S models just as well as on my Nikon D40.



I also will re-stress the fact that the P&S models have a huge advantage in the DOF. Much more of the image is in focus with a P&S than is possible with any DSLR. This is due to the use of smaller sensors in the P&S models. When shooting vehicles the DOF is a significant point of concern.
Click to expand...



I use to think that, but now that I know how to adjust all my settings correctly, I find I can get more DOF with my dslr then with any of the other "m" mode p&s's I have had.



I do agree that with a p&s it is easier to just point and shoot and get a decent picture with good depth of field. With a DSLR if you keep it in auto mode it will focus on the subject while distorting out everything out of focus sometimes.



If you want more DOF just set to A mode or M mode and put your f-stop in the 20's.
 
rydawg said:
I use to think that, but now that I know how to adjust all my settings correctly, I find I can get more DOF with my dslr then with any of the other "m" mode p&s's I have had.



I do agree that with a p&s it is easier to just point and shoot and get a decent picture with good depth of field. With a DSLR if you keep it in auto mode it will focus on the subject while distorting out everything out of focus sometimes.



If you want more DOF just set to A mode or M mode and put your f-stop in the 20's.
Click to expand...



You can do manual settings with the P&S too, that's not the issue. What you are missing is the physics of the design of these two camera types. The smaller sensor size in the P&S means that it will always be able to achieve a greater DOF given identical settings in both types of cameras. It's a matter of design physics, not settings.



For example:



DOF is related to the physical aperture so f/4 is different for DOF purposes. Most P&S long zooms have a crop factor of about 5.6 while a dSLR has a crop factor of about 1.5.



f1 (for P&S) = 10 mm

f2 (for dSLR) = f1*5.6/1.5 = 37 mm

f1/4 = 2.5 mm

f2/4 = 9.25 mm

In order to have the same aperture the dSLR would need to stop down to 37/2.5=14.8.



IOW, for similar DOF, f4 on the P&S would require nearly f16 on the dslr, a point where defraction issues are evident.

--
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top