[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Digital SLR vs. Compact Cameras? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 5/17/2009 3:02:30 PM EDT
|
I am looking to replace my Canon Powershot SD700IS point n shoot, will getting an SLR make my pictures look more professional?
Or is good photography really based on good set-up with lighting, aperture, iso etc? I am considering a Canon SLR possibly. 
|
|
Quoted:
I am looking to replace my Canon Powershot SD700IS point n shoot, will getting an SLR make my pictures look more professional? Or is good photography really based on good set-up with lighting, aperture, iso etc? Your pictures will look better...but you will still be the limiting factor in any photo you take. Similarly...when shooting a gun, the accuracy of the gun means nothing if you can't control the trigger, or your sight picture is bad. |
|
Quoted:
Pics will probably be better, if you do your part. Most people don't want to lug around a DSLR long enough to get the good photo ops. I am interested as well and would like one that could serve a duel role as a casual video camera. Let me know if this is too much of a hijack saint. |
|
if you can't make them look professional with a compact, you won't be able to with a SLR either.
if you had to ask that question then I know you can't. practice up before getting an SLR or you will be wasting your money. right now you have a compact camera that has less features than normal but is more expensive because it is very compact. get an A590IS, it's a little bigger, cheaper, and has more features to learn on. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pics will probably be better, if you do your part. Most people don't want to lug around a DSLR long enough to get the good photo ops. I am interested as well and would like one that could serve a duel role as a casual video camera. Let me know if this is too much of a hijack saint. dude, not at all - ask away, i am here to learn also  you brought up a good point, i think i saw an SLR that shoot's HD video too - that would be sweet and $$$
|
|
Quoted:
if you can't make them look professional with a compact, you won't be able to with a SLR either. if you had to ask that question then I know you can't. practice up before getting an SLR or you will be wasitng your money. i was comparing it to drivers, a good calloway versus some cheap driver will make you hit the ball further and truer. |
| There are options available that are between an SLR and a basic point and shoot. I have a Lumix (Panasonic) DMC FZ-28 That takes fantastic pics with 18X zoom and will also do video footage. If you want to, you can make all the manual adjustments like an SLR, or it has presets for a huge variety of scenarios. |
|
Quoted:
if you can't make them look professional with a compact, you won't be able to with a SLR either. if you had to ask that question then I know you can't. practice up before getting an SLR or you will be wasitng your money. So I true, I have seen people shoot the most amazing pics with a point and shoot. I have seen those with $1600 SLRs and $8000 in lenses take horrible pictures. I say buy an SLR, your picture taking will improve as you master light, f-stop and shutter speed. The beauty about an SLR is the ability to accept a wide variety of lenses (wide angles, fast lenses for low light i.e. f2.8, etc.) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
if you can't make them look professional with a compact, you won't be able to with a SLR either. if you had to ask that question then I know you can't. practice up before getting an SLR or you will be wasitng your money. i was comparing it to drivers, a good calloway versus some cheap driver will make you hit the ball further and truer. then to answer your question: no it won't make you take better pictures. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: if you can't make them look professional with a compact, you won't be able to with a SLR either. if you had to ask that question then I know you can't. practice up before getting an SLR or you will be wasitng your money. i was comparing it to drivers, a good calloway versus some cheap driver will make you hit the ball further and truer. If you do buy a DSLR, the Canons are a good choice! Photography is fun.
|
|
An SLR will give you access to options a point and shoot doesn't have but ONLY if you know how to use them. I would recommend taking some basic photography classes before you run out and buy an SLR. I have seen some people with zero experience make absolutely amazing photos without even trying. By the same token I have seen more than a few "professional" photographers with tons of cameras, meters, and lighting equipment make absolute garbage. Obviously those aren't the norm, but they illustrate my point that equipment won't necessarily make you a better photographer.
For most of us average folk it really pays off to take a course or two if only to show us how to best use the technology to photograph things as we see/ want to see them. |
You can get good shots with a Canon G series P&S. Small, handy, movie mode, shoot in RAW, full manual control, IS, etc...: These were taken with last generation's G9:    These aren't mine, but you can see more here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=493680 The benefits to a DSLR is not so much in the Image Quality (referred to as IQ), but the ability to craft a more creative capture using a selection of detachable lenses. The DSLR opens up the creativity with a higher usable ISO, faster shutter speed, and wider apertures. Trade off is the size of the kit you're going to lug around. If there's a camera shop nearby, try renting both formats and see what works best for your shooting needs. |
|
I have both, a Canon Digital Rebel XT SLR and Canon SD770IS. I'm no professional, but the SLR takes noticeably better pictures when in point and shoot mode than the SD. The bigger, better lens on the SLR seems to help a bunch. And when I use the more advanced settings on the SLR (what little I know so far about using them, that is) the pictures get even better.
One thing about the SLR that is nice is when you push the shutter button, the camera takes the picture NOW. No half second+ or so delay like on the SD. Makes taking pictures of active 3 year olds easier, as they don't seem to be able to hold still for more than about a half second anyway :). The quick shot mode of the SLR (takes up to 9 rapid shots in a row on the Rebel XT) is nice for catching just the right shot of stuff in action. The SLR with a nice macro lens and a tripod will let you take very nice closeups of your guns and other small still-life type obects when you start learning how to use the f-stop settings and shutter speeds and such. Canon has some free online tutorials on how to use these that'll get you started. The SD is nice for just putting in your pocket when going out somewhere and you don't want to drag a bulky SLR around. My wife usually insists we take both cameras around when we go out somewhere fun with the kids, she likes the photo quality of the SLR better, but wants the video mode of the SD (the Rebel XT doesn't have a video mode like the newest Rebels do). She usually sticks the SD in a pocket while I have to lug around the SLR. To sum it all up: get both! |
|
Panasonic is coming out with a GH1 It should be pretty epic at HD video and ok a still shooting. There are some benefits to DSLRs that are major. The first and most important is the flash. You can get bigger better off camera flashes. This allows you to take better pictures in all situations. A nice bounce flash off the ceiling and ttl metering will be years ahead in picture quality then a flash firing straight on right next to the lens of the camera. Alot of the DSLRS don't offer video some of the newer ones do but the chips are different than the old DSLRs that are still only. This photo is just a simple flash bounce of a ceiling. ie point the flash straight up but it is also a D200 and a nice lens. I do this alot and just a dslr and that one tip can make your photos a thousand times better. This shot was a rush job and I should have cropped it a bit tight instead of shooting the whole window but with a 12MP camera you can always crop later and be ok. This shot hasn't been retouched just straight off the camera and compressed a couple time or two to get it on the web   |
|
Quoted:
You can get good shots with a Canon G series P&S. Small, handy, movie mode, shoot in RAW, full manual control, IS, etc...: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3084/2342592830_19a81a0524_o.jpg These were taken with last generation's G9: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3005/2728412098_a03ba9e1d0_b.jpg http://www.ambrosiabbs.com/gallery/photo/medium/Mauritius_Jan_2009IMG_1202.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3388/3212751801_df8181ea97.jpg These aren't mine, but you can see more here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=493680 The benefits to a DSLR is not so much in the Image Quality (referred to as IQ), but the ability to craft a more creative capture using a selection of detachable lenses. The DSLR opens up the creativity with a higher usable ISO, faster shutter speed, and wider apertures. Trade off is the size of the kit you're going to lug around. If there's a camera shop nearby, try renting both formats and see what works best for your shooting needs. The G10 is a sweet camera. If I wanted to go the non-DSLR route, that's what I would get. They are rather expensive, about the same price range as a Nikon D40. Like everyone has said, having a nice camera doesn't make you a photographer. But, that doesn't mean you can't get something to learn and grow into. Personally, I have a Nikon D40 with the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses. It's my first SLR and easy to use and I'm always getting better with it. ETA I believe the Canon G10 will accept external flashes as well. |
|
we have an active forum for this.
regardless, as an owner of a Nikon D90 (which does video and still), I suggest you forgo the video portion. It doesn't work well enough to be worthwhile. Also, I suggest you buy a Nikon D40 with a kit (18-55) lens and an SB600 or SB800 flash. Furthermore, I suggest you buy my rifle.
|
|
The SLR will give you more flexibility than a point and shoot. Although the point and shoot models these days give you lots of options to control settings, you're still limited by the glass.
I have both, and the SLR gives me better shots, if I'm paying attention to what I'm doing. I'm sure someone with more knowledge/skill than I will be along shortly to explain better than I can, but as was said above - you are the real limiting factor. A good photographer can get good shots from a "lesser" camera. (I am not one of them.  )
|
|
regardless, as an owner of a Nikon D90 (which does video and still), I suggest you forgo the video portion. It doesn't work well enough to be worthwhile. This they are just working video out on DSLRS. the point and shoots are better for this. Though I am interested to see what the GH1 will do. The videos I have seen are sick. But DSLR HD video is not for the beginner. Not yet. But it is bad ass when it is done right. Here are some shots from the GH1 it hasn't been released in the states yet. I might have to beg borrow and steal for one. http://www.vimeo.com/4461799 |
|
Quoted:
regardless, as an owner of a Nikon D90 (which does video andstill), I suggest you forgo the video portion. It doesn't work wellenough to be worthwhile. This they are just working video out on DSLRS. the point and shoots are better for this. Though I am interested to see what the GH1 will do. The videos I have seen are sick. But DSLR HD video is not for the beginner. Not yet. http://www.vimeo.com/4461799 I understand that; my position is buy a video camera for video and a still for still. The video from P&S cameras lacks in so many ways, and the stills from video are the same. The couple high-end that mix both are basically party tricks. |
|
The answer is:
GET BOTH!!! Seriously, get a low end point and shoot for throwing in your pocket and taking snap shots of family, friends, drinkin', etc. And a good SLR. They each have their place, and regardless of what most will say here, if you take each, side by side, put on the "auto" setting, the SLR will do a much better job. My wife is a photographer, and gets GREAT shots from her SLR and complains when it doesn't turn out right on the point and shoot. The SLR is quicker, more versatile, lens variations a plus, etc. DON'T spend a bunch of money on a point and shoot. |
| Its really a question of how much you enjoy photography really. Do you envision yourself going out with your camera just to take pictures, or is a camera a way to capture special occasions and the like? If you're more the former than the latter, then an SLR is probably a good idea. Yeah, there's a learning curve, but you'll be fine. Force yourself to shoot in manual mode or shutter priority and you'll learn quickly what works and what doesn't. |
|
I've seen lots and lots of simply jaw-dropping photos from $200 point-and-shoots, and ten times as many terribly shitty photos from DSLRs.
It's entirely the photographer and not the camera. A DSLR simply gives the photographer more control. That said, yes, your images will have an "SLR" feel to them. Without post processing, it's not difficult to see what type of camera an image came from at a glance (and I'm not talking exif data). |
|
Ry - I agree. I was directing my comments at the OP. Just trying to make him aware that he shouldn't get a dslr thinking that it is going to do video easy. I think the GH1 will be more than a party trick. We will see. I haven't jumped in yet. I do a bunch of timelapses with my D200 and they are pretty impressive. but that is the extent of my HD DSLR filmmaking. For now. I have shot a lot of HD on a cannon xha1. I like that camera but don't get a lot of chances to compare it to others. |
|
Quoted: The answer is: GET BOTH!!! This is what I did. I had a pair of 12.8mp Canon EOS 5D's for my pro bodies ($5k-ish for the pair), and an SX110 IS for a compact ($200). Here's what I could do with my SLR (I did wedding photography mostly):         Enjoy whichever you choose.
|
|
As in a lot of things, I'd get the best camera I could comfortably afford. The Canon DSLR's are great, and all I used were Canons when I was shooting film.
The reason I recommend a higher-end camera is it will do anything a point-n-shoot will, but once you hit the limits and flexibility of a P/S, that's it. You can grow into a DSLR and probably never reach it's potential. Although the glass in P/S cameras is pretty damn good, the bigger lenses of a quality SLR are always going to be better and give you great flexibility. Zoom capabilities are important, too. Most of the P/S cameras I've seen (which is far from them all, though) rely heavily on digital zoom, where DSLR's have better optical zoom. Kinda in-between is the mini-DSLRS. I have a little Fuji that I keep in my truck, and that little sucker takes really good pictures. It's about 2/3 the size of my Cannons, looks just like, and the controls are in the same place as a full-size DSLR, fits in the palm of my hand, has lots of manual controls and is real reasonable. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: The answer is: GET BOTH!!! This is what I did. I had a pair of 12.8mp Canon EOS 5D's for my pro bodies ($5k-ish for the pair), and an SX110 IS for a compact ($200). Here's what I could do with my SLR (I did wedding photography mostly): Enjoy whichever you choose. I really like that last pic! |
|
You'll be the limiting factor with all but the cheapest cameras. A good SLR-like camera will let you learn while awaiting your skills to rise to the level of better equipment. Just like every other hobby in the world most people try to buy themselves to the talent and skill level required to be good.
Have a look at cameras like the Nikon P90 which will cost you less than one lens for the Nikon D90. When you get good enough in a few thousand pictures there will be new cameras out and you'll have a better understanding of your talent for seeing photographs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The answer is: GET BOTH!!! This is what I did. I had a pair of 12.8mp Canon EOS 5D's for my pro bodies ($5k-ish for the pair), and an SX110 IS for a compact ($200). Here's what I could do with my SLR (I did wedding photography mostly): Enjoy whichever you choose. winner!!! awesome pics - what's the most important factor in a good camera setting? |
| I really like the IDEA of the prosumer cameras. For so many things the zoom range a good point-and-shoot (like a Canon G10) is all you need. The problem with these cameras though, is that they all seem to have pretty significant shutter lag. It is almost impossible to predictably capture moments with a point and shoot. Pre-focusing helps, but not enough. For the shutter lag situation alone, the SLR is much more conducive to good photography. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
bah, all ya really need is a pinhole camera If you know what you are doing, yes. I don't and rely on tech. Pinhole camera pic I found on google. pretty damn amazing |
|
Quoted:
Kinda in-between is the mini-DSLRS. I have a little Fuji that I keep in my truck, and that little sucker takes really good pictures. It's about 2/3 the size of my Cannons, looks just like, and the controls are in the same place as a full-size DSLR, fits in the palm of my hand, has lots of manual controls and is real reasonable. Actual SLR, or are you referring to the "superzoom" class? The superzooms - like the Canon SX10 IS and the Panasonic FZ28 - feature smaller bodies that exhibit some DSLR-like styling (more like a "real camera"). They are absolutely NOT SLRs, though. Superzooms bridge the gap between typical consumer P&S's and lower-end DSLR's. They tend to offer a wide range of manual controls coupled with good IQ & internal processing mated to a nice lens with a large zoom range and decent apertures. Some (mostly Canon's) offer standard hotshoes for the use of external flashguns as well. I ended up buying a FZ28, and am very pleased. I decided against a DSLR simply because I know I'm not going to get enough into photography that I could justify the massive $$$ to be spent on extra lenses, flashguns, etc. So I wanted something that would get me almost there in most situations. Personally, I think that if the FZ28 was made bigger to accomodate a larger maximum aperture size and had a hotshoe added (for the added flexibility), it would be absolutely perfect as a general-use camera for all but the most dedicated amateur photographers. |
| Get both!! I have a Point and Shoot(Canon Powershot A75) I take, I also have a Canon 20D I take, It all depends on what I am doing. Quality of the photos is obvious between those two. The cool thing about the dslr's is you can tailor your lens choice for any situation, especially LOW light! But sometimes I dont wanna have all that weight hanging off me...I take the little guy. |
|
I bought an S2IS a couple years ago. Yeah, it takes great pics, but there's some serious lag between evaluation and getting the picture. When milliseconds count, that camera was only seconds away from taking the shot. Most point-and-shoots (even near-SLR models) suffer from this. My Dad's S4IS from last year is an upgraded camera, but is no faster.
I got a Nikon D60 through work this year. Light years ahead, and it's an entry-level SLR. Getting action shots of my kid (passing facial expressions, etc) was impossible before, but are easily had now if I do my part. Get an external flash too. Not having one is like having a gun with a magazine capacity of one that only shoots north. Bounce lighting for interior shots produces some of the most natural looking pictures you'll ever get. |
|
Quoted:
There are options available that are between an SLR and a basic point and shoot. I have a Lumix (Panasonic) DMC FZ-28 That takes fantastic pics with 18X zoom and will also do video footage. If you want to, you can make all the manual adjustments like an SLR, or it has presets for a huge variety of scenarios. I almost bought one of these. They look like a great camera. But then I came across a sale at a Ritz Camera that was going out of business (brick and mortar). A Pentax K100D Super with kit lens for $259. Cheaper than the FZ28, and it's a DSLR that takes nearly every lens Pentax ever made. |
|
My wife needed a new P&S camera a few weeks ago.
We looked around and she decided on the Canon PowerShot SX10 IS and it is a nice 'little' camera. It is a little larger than most 'small' P&S cameras but it has features on it that she wanted. I have a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ7 that I carry everywhere I go because it small enough to keep with me and big enough to do most everything I need a P&S to do. If I need a bigger camera I grab my Canon EOS 30D which is nice but to big for most applications as someone has already mentioned. I don't shoot video very often so that doesn't figure into my thoughts on cameras. If I need to I grab my video camera to do that. BigDozer66 |
|
Quoted:
I am looking to replace my Canon Powershot SD700IS point n shoot, will getting an SLR make my pictures look more professional? Or is good photography really based on good set-up with lighting, aperture, iso etc? You can shoot absolutely horrible images with a dSLR, you can, if you try a bit, to let the camera teach you how to take great images Tecnical photography is about light, exposure, aperture, focus, then later about color, contrast, presentation Creative photography is about getting the image composed and snapping the shutter at the exact right moment Good images have aspects of both Great mages alway have aspects of both. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I am looking to replace my Canon Powershot SD700IS point n shoot, will getting an SLR make my pictures look more professional? Or is good photography really based on good set-up with lighting, aperture, iso etc? You can shoot absolutely horrible images with a dSLR, you can, if you try a bit, to let the camera teach you how to take great images Tecnical photography is about light, exposure, aperture, focus, then later about color, contrast, presentation Creative photography is about getting the image composed and snapping the shutter at the exact right moment Good images have aspects of both Great mages alway have aspects of both. I am more into this. Pics are a relaxing hobby for me, working at it sucks, and there are tons of photographers who do.
|
|
I'm not a camera guy, I know nothing about the subject except how to push a button. That said, a friend just got a Nikon D60 and it is freaking awesome and without a doubt take better quality pictures than my Canon PowerShot SD900 (10mp).
IMHO the flash and the better lenses are what are a winner on the DSLR, also the fact that the eye piece looks through the lens, not above/beside it, the best point was how fast/no lag it had... I'm always missing pictures because of the lag (or I haven't figured out the settings). Great cameras, I'm going to buy one about a week before a class starts. |
|
I have shot some decent pictures with a ancient 127 Kodak Brownie fixed focus film camera. They were shot at night at a high school pep rallye. The high school's photog had a 35mm Pentax Spotmatic with a 50mm F/2 lense. But the problem is that the only light was that of a bon fire, and their was hardly any light to focus the Spotmatic. His shots ended up blurred and out of focus. Long story short, some of my pics that I shot with a Brownie ended up in the year book, whereas my friend's didn't.
But if you are hankering for DSLR, then either Canon or Nikon will be fine. They are last of the genuine photographic compnies. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
if you can't make them look professional with a compact, you won't be able to with a SLR either. if you had to ask that question then I know you can't. practice up before getting an SLR or you will be wasitng your money. i was comparing it to drivers, a good calloway versus some cheap driver will make you hit the ball further and truer. then to answer your question: no it won't make you take better pictures. it will allow you to take better pictures once you learn how to use it. If you aren't going to experiment and practice (which is a hell of a lot cheaper than slides were.) then you might as well stick with the point and shoot. Because if you know what you're doing and keep it within the sweet spot, you will get good pictures. The SLR helps you get composition and perspective right on. A viewfinder camera of any kind is going to have some parallax, and what you see is not going to match with the size and shape of the picture. An slr will help you get lighting right, shadows right and backlighting spot on. But somebody that is very familiar with his viewfinder camera can get damn close. If all you are going to do is rely on all the automatic features without really learning how to exploit them a viewfindere is better, because you can throw a really good viewfinder in almost any pocket and still get great pix. |