dslr vs p&s for family stuff

[NicoleScraps]

I have a Canon T1i and it takes awesome photos in av, tv and manual if I have it set correctly. I also have a P&S which is one of the Kodak Z models, kind of high end for that type of camera, has all the bells and whistles.
After several months of using the Canon, I have come to realize something and I wanted to see if anyone agrees with me.
If I have the Canon set to auto, it takes crappy photos. So for family stuff, like birthday parties, visiting the pumpkin patch and stuff like that, I believe that the Kodak take better photos in these types of situations.
For example, we went to the pumpkin farm last weekend. I decided that I was going to just enjoy the day and not stress myself out with getting stellar photos of the day so I set the Canon to auto. Later when I looked at the photos, they were okay, but not nearly as good as the photos I had taken in previous years with the kodak. Same goes for when we were at the beach. My Kodak has a beach setting and the photos turned out just amazing with that camera. Wonderful color and detail. When we went to the beach earlier this year, I had just gotten the Canon a week before and didn't really know how to use it yet, so I had left it set on auto. The photos were crappy as far as color, detail and all that.
So my theory is that these dslr camera are meant to be used on the manual or semi manual modes to get the best results, but the p&s are set up to take great photos on the various auto modes.
Does this make sense? Does anyone agree with me on this?
I am really glad that I kept that Kodak when I got the new camera, because I might just go back to carrying it around to get candid shots of my kids in situations like this.
No sense in lugging that 10 pound camera bag around when I can get photos that are just as good if not better with a tiny camera.
Now this does not apply to when I am purposely posing the kids or taking photos of a situation where more attention to the details are required. I am only speaking of very candid moments, family stuff, personal photos that will never be bragged about, just popped into a photo album or something like that.

[Izzy]

My daughter got a Canon XSI last year for Christmas. Ever since she has wanted for a point and shoot. As she puts it, "there are times I just don't want to lug the monster around". She really wants a camera that fits in her purse for time with friends and family.

For this year we are getting her a Kodak M530. I think it is a nice camera for the money. I think I want one because I too am getting sick of lugging the monster slr everywhere I go.

Point and shoots are marketed to the masses so unlike a DSLR they live and die on their auto mode. If their "auto mode" is not stellar people simply will not buy them. People expect them to take acceptable images most of the time. DSLR's on the other hand it is accepted that it will not take a truly great picture unless you adjust it properly.

[inkista]

Actually, to my mind, P&S cameras take just as crap photos on full green-box auto as dSLRs do, they just process the hell out of the image to try and make it look better, while Canon dSLRS, by default, tend to leave well enough alone.

What P&S cameras do is substitute twenty gazillion scene modes for the adjustments you make in manual on a dSLR. The problem with the twenty gazillion scene modes is that there isn't one for EVERY possible situation, and you have no idea what it's doing, so whether they're the right adjustments for the scene you want to shoot can be an unknown. I prefer to do the thinking. Cameras are dumb. I'm smarter.

To me, a dSLR is actually simpler, because I only have to worry about three things: iso, aperture, and shutter speed. (If I'm wussy and shooting RAW, white balance doesn't matter. If I'm being all confident and going JPEG, then add white balance to the list). I don't have to know all those different scene modes. I have never bought a digital P&S camera without RAW and without full manual mode; I use my S90 pretty much the way I use my dSLRs.

I will agree, however, that a P&S is a helluva lot more convenient for hauling around and quick snapshots than a dSLR, but I have so much less control over DoF and timing, and a much smaller dynamic range, that I still prefer taking the dSLR with me most of the time. But then, I shot with a film SLR for 20+ years, so I don't think anything about hauling an SLR with me everywhere.

[AnonymousKiwi1]

I'm with you, Nicole.
Last week we took the kids on holiday. Most day's I carted the D90 with me, and got some lovely shots I'm really pleased with. But on the day we went to DreamWorld (theme park), I did not want the Big Clunker getting in the way, and stopping me from going on the rides.
I took along my trusty little Canon Ixus, which was my first digital that I bought about three years ago.
I am just thrilled with the pictures I took with it. I don't use it on full auto, the manual setting gives me a bit of control, and it still takes great pictures. And what I've learned in the past months using the D90 enables me to take better shots with the Canon. So all-in-all I think there is definitely a place for both.