Should you buy a DSLR or Point and Shoot Digital Camera?

“I’m using a compact point and shoot digital camera and i would like to ask it is worth it to upgrade to a DSLR camera? How huge a difference do DSLR cameras make compared to compact point and shoot digital camera?”
Thanks for the question – I’ll attempt to keep my answer brief and not too technical. This is a question that I’m regularly asked, increasingly so as the price of DSLRs have dropped and become much more in the reach of the average digital photographer’s budget.
Before I start this post you might like to check out two posts looking at the Top DSLR Models and Top Point and Shoot Cameras as voted by our readers.
Let me declare up front that I own both a Point and Shoot digital camera (a Fujifilm FinePix F30) and a DSLR (a Canon EOS 5D). I like having both because I do feel they compliment each other and are each suited for different situations. My preference in terms of quality of shots is with the DSLR but for convenience the point and shoot sometimes wins out.
I also want to say up front that the digital camera industry is constantly evolving and changing. The lines between DSLRs and point and shoots are blurring (or at least this seems to be the intention of manufacturers). What I write below unfortunately will have elements of generalizations in it as I classify hundreds of cameras (each with their own distinctive features) into two camps.
Are Megapixels Everything?
Before I get into the Pros and Cons of DSLRs vs Point and Shoot digital cameras I want to address a common misconception that I regularly hear among digital camera owners – that a cameras megapixel rating is the main thing to consider when determining a camera’s quality.
The fact is that megapixels are NOT everything. Despite point and shoot cameras now coming with up to 10 megapixels (Casio released one last month) their quality level is not necessarily has good as a DSLR with only 8 or so.
The main reason for this (and there are many as we’ll see below) is that the image sensor used in point and shoot digital cameras is generally much smaller than the image sensor used in a DSLR (the difference is often as much as 25 times). This means that the pixels on a point and shoot camera have to be much smaller and (without getting too technical) collect fewer photons (ok I lied about the technicalities). The long and short of it is that because of this point and shoot cameras need to work at slower ISO levels which means that they produce ‘noisier’ (or more grainy) shots.
A lot more could be said on sensor size – but trust me, smaller sensors significantly reduce the quality of an image. I’d much rather have a camera with less megapixels and a larger image sensor than the other way around.
This is one factor that needs to be considered when choosing between a DSLR and point and shoot – but let me run through some more:
DSLRs
A quick definition - unfortunately some camera manufacturers in recent months have released cameras with the DSLR label that technically are not. For the purposes of this article I’ll define DSLR’s as cameras that have removable lenses, that have a reflex mirror which allows live optical viewing through the lens taking the image. ie DSLR’s use a mirror that allows you to see the image you’re about to shoot through the view finder – when you take the shot the mirror flips up allowing the image sensor to capture the image.
Some cameras these days are being touted as DSLRs because you have ‘through lens viewing’ but they are not true DSLR’s – (Digital, Single, Lens, Reflex). This does not necessarily make them a bad camera – but in my opinion it there is a distinction between them.
DSLR Strengths
- Image Quality - I’ve already covered this above in my discussion on megapixels and image sensors – but due to the larger size of image sensors in DSLRs which allows for larger pixel sizes – DSLRs are generally able to be used at a faster ISO which will lead to faster shutter speeds and less grain.
- Adaptability – DSLR’s ability to change lenses opens up a world of possibilities for photographers. While my point and shoot has a nice little 3x Optical Zoom (and many these days have longer ones) my DSLR can be fitted with many high quality lenses ranging from wide angle to super long focal lengths depending upon what I’m photographing (and of course my budget). Add to this a large range of other accessories (flashes, filters etc) and a DSLR can be adapted to many different situations. It should be noted that when it comes to lenses that the diversity in quality of lenses is great. Image quality is impacted greatly by the quality of the lens you use.
- Speed – DSLR’s are generally pretty fast pieces of machinery when it comes to things like start up, focussing and shutter lag.
- Optical Viewfinder – due to the reflex mirror DSLR’s are very much a what you see is what you get operation.
- large ISO range - this varies between cameras but generally DSLRs offer a wide array of ISO settings which lends itself to their flexibility in shooting in different conditions.
- Manual Controls – while many point and shoots come with the ability to shoot in manual mode, a DSLR is designed in such a way that it is assumed that the photographer using it will want to control their own settings. While they do come with good auto modes the manual controls are generally built in in such a way that they are at the photographers finger tips as they are shooting.
- Hold it’s value – some argue that a DSLR will hold it’s value longer than a point and shoot. There is probably some truth in this. DSLR models do not get updated quite as often as point and shoot models (which can be updated twice a year at times). The other factor in favor of DSLRs is that the lenses you buy for them are compatible with other camera bodies if you do choose to upgrade later on (as long as you stay with your brand). This means your investment in lenses is not a waste over the years.
- Depth of Field – one of the things I love about my DSLR is the versatility that it gives me in many areas, especially depth of field. I guess this is really an extension of it’s manual controls and ability to use a variety of lenses but a DSLR can give you depth of field that puts everything from forground to background in focus through to nice blurry backgrounds.
- Quality Optics – I hesitate to add this point as there is a large degree of difference in quality between DSLR lenses (and point and shoot cameras are always improving) but in general the lenses that you’ll find on a DSLR are superior to a point and shoot camera. DSLR lenses are larger (more glass can add to the quality) and many of them have many hours of time put into their manufacture (especially when you get into higher end lenses). I strongly advise DSLR buyers to buy the best quality lenses that they can afford. It it’s the difference between a high end lens on a medium range camera or a medium range lens on a high end camera I’d go for quality lenses every time as they add so much to photos.
DSLR Weaknesses
- Price – while they are coming down in price (especially at the lower end) DSLR’s are generally more expensive than point and shoot digital cameras. Also consider that you might want to upgrade your lens (as kit lenses are generally not of a super high quality) or you may wish to add more lenses later and that this adds to the cost of a DSLR.
- Size and Weight – the only reason I take my point and shoot out with me is on those occasions when I don’t want to lug my DSLR (and it’s lenses) around with me. DSLRs are heavy and sizable and when you add a lens or two to your kit bag you can end up with quite the load!
- Maintenance – a factor well worth considering if you’re going to use a DSLR with more than one lens is that every time you change lenses you run the risk of letting dust into your camera. Dust on an image sensor is a real annoyance as it will leave your images looking blotchy. Cleaning your image sensor is not a job for the faint hearted and most recommend that you get it done professionally (which of course costs). This is a problem that is being rectified in many new DSLRs which are being released with self cleaning sensors.
- Noise – DSLRs are generally more noisy to use than point and shoots. This will vary depending upon the lens you use but while point and shoots can be almost silent when taking a shot a DSLR will generally have a ‘clunk’ as the mechanisms inside it do their thing. I personally quite like this sound – but it’s something that is a factor for some.
- Complexity – while DSLRs are designed for manual use this of course means you need to know how to use the tools that they give you. Some friends that have bought DSLRs in the past few months have told me that they were a little overwhelmed at first by the array of settings and features. The learning curve can be quite steep. Having said this – all DSLRs have fully Automatic mode and many have the normal array of semi-auto modes that point and shoot digital cameras have.
- No live LCD – in many DSLRs the only way to frame your shot is via the optical viewfinder. Some photographers prefer to use a camera’s LCD for this task. This is another thing that is changing with more and more new DSLRs having a ‘Live View’ LCD which enables you to frame your shots without looking through the view finder (update: please note that Live View isn’t perfect – check out the comments of NormMonkey below who shares more.
So what DSLR do I recommend?
Let me point you to a recent post here at DPS listing the Top 20 DSLRs as owned by our community members. I am a Canon fan myself but the Nikon DSLRs on the list get great reviews as do the others. Also check out the new Canon EOS 40D that’s just been announced (available now for preorder at Amazon).
Point and Shoots
While some people write off all non DSLR’s as inferior I think they’ve got a lot going for them and would highly recommend them depending upon the level of photography that you engage in, your budget, the things that you’ll want to do with your photos and the subject matter that you will be shooting. You’ll also notice below that I note that the Point and Shoot market options available are improving. Some of the weaknesses I note are being improved by manufacturers lately on some of their models. Here’s some Pros and Cons of point and shoot digital cameras.:
Point and Shoot Digital Camera Strengths
- Size and Weight - to be able to slip a camera in a pocket as you dash out the door to a party is a wonderful thing. These days point and shoot cameras can be slim and light – to the point of not even knowing you’ve got them with you. This is great for parties, travel and all manner of situations. Of course some point and shoots can be quite bulky too (especially some of the super zoom models on the market).
- Quiet Operation – this was the thing I noticed about my new point and shoot the most. Not only didn’t my subjects not notice I’d taken shots of them at times, once or twice it was so quiet that even I didn’t notice I’d taken a shot.
- Auto Mode – the quality of images produced in point and shoots varies greatly, but in general they shoot quite well in auto mode. I guess manufacturers presume that this style of camera will be used in auto mode (or one of the other preset modes) mostly and as a result they generally come pretty well optimized for this type of shooting (as do many DSLRs these days).
- Price – in general point and shoot digital cameras are cheaper. Of course you can go to the top of the range and spend as much as you would on a cheaper DSLR, but most are in a much more affordable price bracket.
- LCD Framing – as I mentioned above, many digital camera users prefer to frame their shots using LCDs. Point and Shoots always come with this ability and some even come with ‘flip out’ screens that enable their users to take shots from different angles and still see what they’re shooting.
Point and Shoot Digital Camera Weaknesses
- Image Quality – point and shoots generally have small image sensors which means that the quality that they produce is generally lower. This is slowly changing in some point and shoots but in comparison to DSLRs they still have a way to go. It’s worth saying however – that if you’re not planning on using your images for major enlargements or in professional applications that the quality of point and shoot cameras can be more than enough for the average user. Manufacturers are making improvements all the time in their technology and even in the last year or two I’ve noticed significant image quality improvements.
- Smaller ISO range – once again this is changing slowly (my point and shoot has the ability to shoot to 1600 ISO) but in general ISO ranges are more limited in point and shoot cameras – this limits them in different shooting conditions.
- Speed – point and shoot digital cameras were always notorious for their slowness, particularly their ’shutter lag’ (the time between pressing the shutter and when the image is taken. This is constantly being improved but the instantaneous feel of many DSLRs is still not there with point and shoots when it comes to shutter lag, start up and even focusing time.
- Reliance upon LCD - most point and shoot digital camera rely almost completely upon their LCD for framing. While some enjoy this others like to use a viewfinder. Most point and shoot cameras have view finders but they are generally so small that they are almost useless. Some models don’t have viewfinders at all (increasingly a trend).
- Manual Controls Limited – many point and shoot cameras do have the ability to play with a full array of manual settings and controls (or at least make it difficult to do so). They often come with ‘aperture priority’ and ’shutter priority’ modes which are great – but quite often the manual controls are hidden in menu systems and are not as accessible as on a DSLR (if they are there at all).
- Less Adaptable - while they are highly portable point and shoot cameras are generally not very adaptable. What you buy when you first get them is what you are stuck with using for years. Some do have lens adapters to give you wider angles or longer zooms but generally most people don’t go for these accessories.
Which Point and Shoot digital cameras do I recommend?
Once again let me point you to the Top 10 Point and Shoot Digital Cameras as used by the DPS community. There are some fantastic cameras in the list including the Canon PowerShot Pro Series S3 IS.
Should You Buy a DSLR or a Point and Shoot Digital Camera?
This is ultimately a question that you need to answer for yourself. My answer is to have both (I’m fortunate to be able to do so) but if I had to choose between one or the other I’d get a DSLR based upon my experience level, the type of photos I take, my desire to use manual settings and the quality of image that I’m after.
If your situation is different to mine however and you want a portable camera that takes good pictures that you’ll mainly use for small prints and emailing that you’ll mainly shoot in auto mode – you’ll probably be quite happy with a cheaper point and shoot.
Further Reading on DSLRs:




269 Responses to “Should you buy a DSLR or Point and Shoot Digital Camera?” - Add Yours
August 24th, 2007 at 1:55 am
Not actually answering the question, I would suggest a camera that occupies the middle ground between P&S and DSLR. I’m very pleased with our Canon S3IS and Lumix DMC_FZ7. Not the superior quality of a DSLR but both have manual controls that a P&S usually lacks.
August 24th, 2007 at 2:13 am
One big disadvantage of point and shoots which should be mentioned is that they tend to have large depth of field at every f/stop. The article mentions depth of field flexibility in terms of lenses and settings for a DSLR, but the issue is really more a function of the camera formats.
Even shooting wide open (at the lowest f/stop) it can be quite hard to get the nice blurred background with the very small sensor of a point and shoot (I have seen it said that at normal focal length, the depth of field of a point and shoot at f/2.8 is about the same as a DSLR at f/13). This can be great for things like macro photography, but makes it quite difficult with many point and shoots to get nice blurred backgrounds.
I learned this the hard way when I bought a long-zoom point and shoot a couple of years back — the biggest frustration I had was the enormous and inflexible depth of field.
EL
August 24th, 2007 at 2:44 am
Another drawback of P&S cameras is that they tend not to save RAW file formats. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that many of them did do RAW several years ago. Now, I think the only Canon P&S camera that supports RAW is thier G9, and that was re-added since the G8 didn’t have it. Don’t know if they’re still making the S70, but that one has RAW too. Personally, I would love to buy the SD870 IS, but without RAW, I don’t think I’m gonna.
A friend just referred me to your site, by the way; good work!
Shawn
August 24th, 2007 at 3:37 am
When people ask me this, I usually ask if they like to use all the settings on their point and shoot. If they are the sort of person that tends to be happy with auto & “night”, they’re probably not going to enjoy the myriad settings on a DSLR, and the quality improvement of pictures is going to be minimal i.e. not worth the cost and size.
I say this having shot with a point and shoot for two years before my DSLR, and I tried about every single setting and trick I could with that little camera before I decided I’d hit the limits of what it could do technically.
I do agree with EL about depth of field. It is the first thing one notices about using an SLR compared to a point and shoot and it’s a beautiful thing.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Well, personally I find quite convenient to have one of each as you cannot always carry your DSLR with you.
I’m quite happy with Ricoh Caplio R6 but new shock and water proof Olympus SW 790/795 might be the perfect companion of a DSLR too as it they get access where DSLR’s can hardly go.
Regrettably RAW format is only available on the Panasonic LX-2 / Leica D-Lux 3.
August 24th, 2007 at 6:45 am
Most people will “upgrade” from point and shoot to DSLR. so in that case, they too have best of both worlds
August 24th, 2007 at 8:07 am
I agree with Cedric. Best to have both.. I find my canon digital elph stuck in my pocket going everywhere with me, while my DSLR gets left behind for many events either from fear of theft or damage..
August 24th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Another great article and observant responses too.
I say both as Cedric noted! The dSLR for the creativity, flexibility, high shutter rate, etc, etc and the P+S for the small size, have it with me all the time convinience.
Also as Shawn said, I would love RAW in my P+S. Most though have antiquated implimentations which renders it too slow to be usable.
August 24th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
May I say that the DSLR’s are not noisier than compact camera’s?
Because of the small sensor in a compact cam, the pixels stand very close to each other and create so more noise.
And the DSLR’s do have most of the time a better noise reduction. Look at a picture made with an 350D at ISO 1600, and a picture with an compact cam at ISO 1600.
In my opinion is the compact cam more noisy than you ever want.
Or am I wrong?
August 24th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
Since I use my photos only for collection purpose, and for sending them via email, I find P&S camera very good. I have got a Canon Powershot SD1000, and it is much much better than what I had expected. :-)
August 24th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Christel, the noise referred to was mechanical, not image. By their very nature a DSLR has a lot of mechanics to operate the mirror and shutter, and make a satisfying, if noisy, shutter clunk.
P&S cameras can be almost silent, even if the manufacturer has added a “fake” shutter sound for psychological reasons.
:o)
August 25th, 2007 at 12:57 am
I have a Nikon D50 and I am looking into purchasing a P&S camera as well. I don’t carry my DSLR with me for the reason of I have so much additional equipment (Lensbabies, extra lenses, batteries, filters, etc…) and I don’t like half done shots. Needless to say I can’t just whip it out like you can with a P&S so for those “moments” you just want to catch right then and there I think a P&S is a smart addition. I think it is very beneficial to have one of each and each one have strengths and weakness that can compliment each other.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:30 am
A quick note about Live View on dSLRs: this feature is not designed to work the same way it does on P&S cameras. Users planning to jump from P&S to a dSLR with LV, who plan to use it to frame their shots the same way they do with their P&S, will be sorely disappointed.
The Live View in a dSLR helps the photog deal with situations like ground-level or above-head shooting, when you can’t see through the viewfinder. You pay a price, though: there’s a shutter lag when using LV (the mirror snaps down and then back up), and the LV can’t focus well. As well, the displayed histogram on the LV may be off from the actual shot, especially for edge cases (long exposures, IR photography).
–
Technical details: dSLRs have their AE and AF sensors behind the mirror. While the mirror is up out of the way for Live View, the camera can’t focus nor can it get exposure info (beyond adjusting the sensor’s sensitivity). When the user wants to take a shot, the mirror snaps back down so the AE and AF sensors can do their thing. As well, the shutter must close and the sensor must be cleared and reset. Then the mirror snaps back up and the exposure proceeds as normal.
More technical details: In a P&S camera, the AE and AF can be done using data right from the sensor. The much larger sensors (smaller DoF) and finer optics in a dSLR require using the traditional AF methods.
August 25th, 2007 at 3:49 am
I’ve thought off-and-on about getting a P&S for the pocket-size convenience for a long time.
I keep deciding not to. I figure
(a) if an image is worth taking, it’s worth taking with the best equipment;
(b) why buy an expensive camera and leave it on the shelf?
(c) I can take just my camera and one attached lens in a smaller pouch to specific events, if I want less weight (not quite the same as P&S, but less weight than my full kit);
(d) I could the P&S money towards some quality optics.
It’s true there’s no dSLR substitute for having a tiny camera in-pocket, available at all times. I’d just rather get in the habit of bringing my good camera with me everywhere, instead.
August 25th, 2007 at 6:01 am
I bought a $1900. DSLR but took it back and got a SILENT camera; the shutter sound scared away the big game I was shooting.
August 25th, 2007 at 6:55 am
Here’s another subtle point: P&S cameras are usually designed to produce “snappier” pictures right off the bat, while dSLRs are usually calibrated for a more neutral output. Those moving from a P&S to a dSLR will see this and wonder why the dSLR picture doesn’t always look any better. I have both types of cameras and I find I must frequently sharpen and enhance my dSLR pictures to give them a bit more zip.
August 25th, 2007 at 8:17 am
Thanks Norm Monkey – great commments on Live View!
August 25th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Er, what cameras are being marketed as dSLRs when they’re not? If you mean the new “live view” feature on some models, note that they *all* also can operate in normal mirror-to-viewfinder mode.
August 25th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
I have a higher end P&S Sony R1 and I love it for what I shoot. Altho it looks like a dslr and has the RAW capability, manual settings, scene modes etc…for me it works the best because of shooting in so much dust. My biggest fear of moving into a dslr is dust along with the expense of various lenses. I may not have a choice as there are few cameras coming out that will fill the footprints of the R1. The combination of limited budgets, small end user groups, desired results, ease of operation, and total expense, make for a niche market that few cameras manufactures care to fill.
August 26th, 2007 at 5:48 am
Lizzy — Pentax K10D (and presumably its successors) will give you a dust-sealed dSLR at a relatively affordable price. Probably better-sealed than the Sony R1, actually.
August 26th, 2007 at 9:23 am
I got similar questions from my friends many times. My standard reply to them is “what do you want to get from the digital photos”
It looks nice to carry a DSLR with big lens running around but it is heavier and most likely more expensive. It requires some level of technical skill and most important – the work after taking the photo.
I usually recommend the beginner to have a simple pocket size point and shoot camera first. The new P&S camera product reasonable quality pictures. I always stress that photography is largely depends on the mood, the time you take the photo. The more you do, the better picture you can make. Carry a big camera may hinter the creativity for ordinary people
August 27th, 2007 at 4:11 am
I have a Canon Ixus 40 (elph in the US) and a Canon powershot s3is. The Ixus fits in my shirt pocket – and therefore I can use it everywhere. The s3is was my “upgrade” to a real camera – and I love it – I use all the manual settings – but I have to admit that the DOF and the noise are problematic. To ensure a decent picture – I need an ISO of less that 200 (I normally only use 100 or 80) or else… And I can only get a narrow DOF with macro – or when I use max zoom. And it has a 12x zoom – so to take a good portrait I need a great distance…
I sometimes wonder why no one builds a “non-DSLR” with a large sensor – exchangeable lenses? The mirror with its mechanic parts we don’t need and therefore it will be cheaper than a real dSLR – and I will be able to afford it ;-) Okay there’s probably some technical reason why..
August 29th, 2007 at 2:46 am
Heather Kay: Thanks for the explanation.
August 29th, 2007 at 5:55 am
I have both. The reasons I have the DSLR are all mentioned above. The P&S, mostly covered. The other reasons are:
1) Theft. P&S in my pocket is way less obvious and less appealing of a target than my Lumix. Especially relevant for travelers.
2) Video. No, it’s not professional quality, but if a picture is worth a thousand words, a video could be worth a thousand images. Scenario: The palm trees swaying in a hurricane.
3) Underwater. DSLR underwater cases are like 1000 USD. I got a bag for my Lumix for 15 USD. Again, not pro, but fun at the pool or snorkeling.
4) Sturdiness. Just like beetles survive greater falls than people, small cameras survive greater falls than big’uns. (with exceptions).
My Panasonic Lumix (DMC-FX9) is ALWAYS with me. Leica optics guarantee quality images, and the size is just right. It also does great macro without requiring another 300 USD lens. ;)
August 29th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
in my case, i would prefer having both. but since i dont have the budget, i only have a point and shoot.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:52 am
As these type of questions are asked for new photography enthusiast, as like my self, I certainly suggest to start with P&S. I just bought a Canon IXUS70 and am happy with it. To a certain extend I can learn to use different ‘manual’ setting thats available with the camera. Since I am stil learning how to get good pictures, I have not concentrate on detail tecnicalities. Until I feel I am able to get good decent pictures with my P&S I wll then later consider looking at DSLR.
September 1st, 2007 at 7:07 pm
My Canon 300D has been stolen. Together with all three lenses. That camera just was fantastic. However, I couldn’t spent all theta money again to instanstly buy another DSLR.
I decided to give a P&S camera a shot and got the Canon IXUS 60. I am really positively surprised. And I love the video feature, which I never could do with the DSLR before. Of course another DSLR is still on my shopping list. But I do not want to miss my IXUS anymore.
Yes, both systems complement each other
September 5th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Recently I was searching for a point and shoot camera and I decided on the Fujifilm F31fd. The camera provides manual functions such as the aperture or shutter priority. The night shots was fantastic!
I feel DSLR is a good investment only if you are thinking of becoming a serious photographer. For the start I will go for a good digital point and shoot camera. If my photography develops into next level of interest and I do not mind carrying a DSLR when I travel, I guess I really do not mind getting a DSLR.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:32 am
Like most people who post messages in places like this, I suffer from sporadic bouts of gearhead-ism. It’s easy to forget that taking great photos is (give or take) 80% setting up a great shot, 15% knowing how to use your camera, 4% the camera itself, and the last 1% is just plain stupid luck.
Case in point: I won a Backpacker Magazine photo contest a couple years back. Aperture? Film speed? No idea. The photo worked because the sunset over the Alaskan ocean cast the icebergs in surreal shades of orange and pink. The camera was a 2mp Canon A40. 2mp, right.
Get out there and take some pictures.
September 26th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
I think the decision would primarily depend upon the user’s interest. a casual photographer doesnt need a DSLR. and if a newbie is interested then i think he must initially start with a gud PnS cam like the S3 IS, etc. Once you know how to work on some manual functions and the technicalities, then move onto the DSLRs.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:11 am
I bought the Canon s3, and I’ve yet to be disappointed with the quality of the pictures. It got the best reviews of a point and shoot camera within a price range even 200-300$ more then it costs. I strongly recommend this camera to anyone who wants an advanced point and shoot with the ability to take great “off the cuff” auto mode photos as well as a great deal of control over settings in manual mode.
October 14th, 2007 at 4:52 am
I am off to buy the casio ex-v8sr for the sole purpose of macro photography in the operating room. I have a DSLR but used my sony cyber shot with 10x lens for years with great success until it died and then my nikon S10 also with great success until it was stolen. I have tried all P&S, including leica etc and found the focusing capability of the casio the best to get into a small space of 1″ wide and 1″ deep with perfect focus the best…multiple AF modes. Not sure though technically advantage of 3x versus 7x lens helping me with macro but I have found that works even though I believe it helps zoom principally. I have found that I can get a sharper image with a smaller size file with the better lens.
Hope this helps.
October 14th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
I completely agree with Carl.
As on today one may really wonder if it is really worth the effort for a hobbyist (PS) to getting toward Pro-hobbyist(cheap DLSR). The advancement in normal ps and bridge cameras are really fast paced. It may really not be as pleasant an experience initally considering the effort. For layman better keep patience and persistence (chewing gum) as the learning curve is pretty steep from novice and amateur to pro-hobbyist to pro.
Better anyone buy Bridge SLR like S5IS Canon or Kodak Z series with very good chromatics and optics.
For Pro-hobbyists like me, the Pentax K100D (i like that) or Nikon D40, D50 is the choice to make.
For Pros no limits..
October 22nd, 2007 at 11:51 pm
I just bought the Olympus E-500 on clearance, and I have been playing with it for the last two days. I am very happy with the quality of the photos, and the auto-mode suits most of my purposes very well. Perhaps the only thing I regret about getting a dSLR is the lack of video mode, plus the size of the camera. I am travelling for a year in Canada, and I indend to spend weeks in the Rockys taking photos, but I also would like to spend ages partying with a smaller, more versatile camera with a video setting. Thus, the expenditure of another $250-400 seems justified, considering that it will be for a year.
In short:
dSLR pros- high image quality, manual zoom, manual f-stop, iso, shutter, etc, but still with very good Auto mode, can get very good lenses.
dSLR cons- no video, bulky, expensive (lenses cost more)
So on the whole, a dSLR’s pros far outweigh the cons unless you are desperate for video or pocket-shooting.
On the other hand, I could just remember things!
November 30th, 2007 at 3:57 am
I have both. I have the nikon d50 which is my primary camera because I am a person who loves to shoot in all manual (it gives me the feeling I truly own a picture and the camera was only a tool not a crutch). I also own a olympus stylus 720 SW. This was for my social life. Its shock, water, heat, and cold proof. Perfect for those spontaneous things that happens with friends.
Now here comes the cons of each since u have already heard the pros
Con’s Dslr- heavy and expensive. One thing that most people don’t take into consideration is looks. People give u very strange looks when u have a large lens like the sigma 10-24mm lense on it. (Personally I love it because they ask stupid questions like how many mega pixels that thing has. When that is a very ignorant question in many cases because Mega-pixels are nothing if there is no room to put them on a sensor.)
Con’s P&S- bad image quality, far less control, no viewfinder is a big one for me, and no looks :p
Unless you know how to control iso, Shutter speed, and Aperture stay with P&S. Because there is no point in buying a 500 guitar if you can’t play a cord.
Then when you know how these elements affect a frame move up and and enjoy the fun of a DSLR
December 18th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
I would like to by a point-shoot camera.
Pixels is 6 mp enough. So, i go for Canon S3IS, what u recommend as above.
But i want to know about the lens.
I am instrested in Potrait, Wildlife & Birds Photography (ZOO) actualy my expection is to cover more than 400-600mtrs.
Even i dont know hot to calculate the between distance to lens.
How to consider the lens for my photography.
So, Please guide me to reach my aim.
Thank,
Nandha.
January 8th, 2008 at 5:19 am
THANKYOU for this post. So useful. Explained things in clear terms.
June 1st, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Wow! 6 mo’s since the last comment. OK..well I guess I’m the perfect candidate to post a reply. I have been shooting for the last couple of years on a Canon S3IS P&S. That is an excellent camera with a very long zoom-12x optical which is the equvalent to around a 400-500 mm telephoto lens. However when you get to the 6x’s plus end of that the quality goes bye bye. I just purchased a Canon 40D dslr with a couple of good lenses. It is amazing how much more you can do with this camera. The 2 bottom lines are;
1. $$$$ …Are you committed and serious enough to spend thousands of dollars for a good camera body, 2-3 good lenses (that will cost more than all but the very top of the line SLR’s), filters-each lens takes a different sized filter, bag, tripod-good one’s are expensive, multiple memory cards, battery, lens hood’s), Adobe Photoshop.
2. Are you willing to carry around the extra weight of everything you need to take with you including a tripod if you are into landscape/wildlife?
If you don’t plan on becoming serious about photography either as a hobby or profession, if you plan on making 4×6 or 5×7 prints, and if you don’t like a heavy/large load with you then I highly suggest you get a good point & shoot like the Canon S5IS, Canon SD series-most are 10 mp’s, or the highly recommended (by pro’s) Canon G9; 12 mp P&S. important note; megapixels are definately not everything to look for in any camera.
June 7th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
I think one important issue is public safety. Walking around questionable areas with expensive DSLR equipment, especially when you are travelling, might not be the wisest idea. Unfortunately, some of the most interesting and grandest objects to take photographs of sometimes are near areas where the staff at the hotel you are staying at warn you to be careful. Just a thought.
June 14th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
The greatest deciding factor in the DSLR upgrade decision isnot the abilities of the camera but the ability of YOU. Only go for a DSLR if you understand fully and completely what is going on inside. There is so much more that can go wrong with a DSLR than a compact and if you don’t know what you’re doing properly then simply don’t bother. A DSLR will not make you a better photographer. Most likely it will complicate the process.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:14 am
I could use some help. I bought a Kodak Z1012 IS and I’ve been trying to decide whether to return it or not. Even when I’m not zooming, it takes pictures which appear either grainy or blended upon any close inspection. Blow it up to real size on a computer and the colors begin to bleed together, like in a watercolor. Is this a failing of the model? I’ve tampered with the manual settings, and while they allow me to capture daylight more accurately than the Auto setting, they don’t help this “watercolor” problem. Can anyone help with some advice?
July 6th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Dan-you definately should not see what you are seeing. I would return it and get a new one or a different camera all together-for $300 you should be able to pick up a Canon S5IS. It is the same type of camera that you have-body style. It doesn’t have 10 mp’s like the one you got but it is a very good p&s camera. It also has the same zoom range as the one you got-12x. The image quality is very good. If you have another $200 you can get the Canon G9 which is one of the best P&S camera’s on the market. Good luck.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
hi!
I’m an amature photographer.
Well…i’m about to buy a new DSLR, and on the top of the list was Sony ALPHA series. I think i’m getting Sony Alpha350. First of all, it has 14.2 megapixel, got liveview function with 2.5fps burst mode.
And the price of it was only US$ 799 including 18-70 lens. Can anyone of you tell me why shouldn’t i buy that camera? ANd if so, which camera should i be gettin with reasonable price like sony and that price depreciation last longer?
thanks
October 2nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Actually, my view on the whole subject is a lil different from everything i’ve read thus far…
it basically comes down to owning two cameras… first and foremost, if you’re reading this, you’re probably going to want to get a dslr anyways, so get one where you can upgrade to FULL FRAME later… meaning, either canon, or the new sony alpha line… the reason for this is that, well, full frame has many more advantages, the biggest for me would be the much larger viewfinder (thus far easier manual focusing).
That shouldn’t be a big purchase though, as the entry level cameras for either sony or canon are around $500. if you can, get JUST the body without the lens, and put the money you saved from not buying the lens kit towards buying a higher quality lens. (you’ll have to do research on that one, but key things to look for is the quality of the glass itself [i.e., APO]).
also, avoid the super zoom lenses for SLR’s at all costs… if you want a lens that can go from 20mm – 300mm, you’re better off not owning the lens at all… as you’ll get very poor quality for the tradeoff of less lens changes (and besides, you didn’t just buy a DSLR so you could keep the same lens on it all the time, did you? 0:-) )
anyways… my suggestion would be get two lenses off the bat, one that can do a range of approx 20-70, and another that can do the range of 70-300… (those are approximate values, you’ll probably find the ranges to be smaller, but you get the idea).
okay, having said all that (eesh, that was long, sorry folks!), lets move onto the second camera that in my opinion, you should get…
well, the idea everyone shares is to get a point and shoot… i’d like to take that one step furthur… the whole reason one would get a point and shoot would be for convenience, but what can be more convenient then… a camera phone…
that’s right… instead of buying a good point and shoot… just put that money towards a good camera phone and you’ll be set =)… this offers several advantages, but primarily… you’ll have your camera with you… always…
and then you can take your dslr with you whenever you actually expect to take a photo… and use the camera phone when you don’t expect to take a photo…
just my two cents… er… more like two hundred cents o.O
–Dan @ School
October 30th, 2008 at 5:17 am
hi, i want to know that what is the maximum possible optical zoom possible in DSLRs today? which is this lens and which DSLR it fits? Can you give an idea of the maximum possible zoom by providing a picture at no zoom and then the same picture at maximum zoom??
October 30th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
You need to do a little research on slr’s it seems. The fact that your question asks what it does tells me that you are just starting to consider getting one. A dslr body is just a very good base for your photography tools. The lenses available to use with a dslr are where your big decisions will come. To answer your ? though…the longest telephoto (zoom) lens that I know of would be a Canon 1200mm. If you use it on a 1.6x crop body you will be at 1920mm. You can use a 2x extender with it to make it 3840mm. The cost for this monstrous beast is astronomical. You could put a down payment on a very nice house (in some states you could buy a house for less)for about the same amount you would pay to own a 1200 mm lens…about $90,000. It weighs 36 lbs, it’s almost 3 ft long and the tripod that you need to use it would require you to join a gym. I don’t even know if you can get one anymore. There aren’t even that many that actually get used…Sports Illustrated owns 2 of the few in existence.
So as you can see, your question is really not appropriate being that you are at the beggining stages. I must say though …it is kind of a fun question…you need to ask yourself, what do you want to do with your interest.
October 31st, 2008 at 4:07 am
Let me first thank you for the prompt reply. However, I do not agree that my query is inappropriate and funny. Money is not a problem here. The reason I asked you this question was that it has not been answered anywhere on the internet. Atleast what I know of. Sometimes I want to capture something that is perched high on a mountain or a building but quite far away. For example, an eagle on a highrise building which i have mananged to locate. Now without a powerful zoom lens, i cannot take a close detail of just its head, if i wanted too. I could give you many more examples like these but I suppose you must have got my point. It does not matter if I am about to begin to explore DSLRs.
Can you also tell me how much zoom is 1200mm in terms of X for example 2X, 3x, 5x or 10x or more optical zoom?
October 31st, 2008 at 12:10 pm
12x optical is 432mm. That is the best comparison I can get. Most p & s cameras don’t go past 12x optical zoom. It is not a good comparison though because when you get past about 5 or 6x optical zoom on a p & s the quality is gone. But with a good super telephoto lens attached to a dslr you will achieve good quality right to the end of the zoom range. Or if you are using a prime (fixed focal length) lens even better quality can be achieved. And actually I was wrong about the longest lens. The absolute longest still camera lens on the planet is made by Nikon. It is 4500 mm. I don’t know if it is compatible with tele extenders or not but I do know that there are only 4 in existence and they are approximately 1.2 million dollars. Excuse me if I offended you with my answer but I did not realize that you were so fortunate to be able to say that $ is no issue. I wish I could say that. Anyway ….if you are looking for serious focal length to shoot close ups of birds or dangerous wildlife or anything small that you can’t get close to, you will be fine with 500-600mm’s along with a tele-extender. The bottom line is….camera’s are not telescopes and no matter how long your focal lenth is…you will always want more. Happy shooting.
November 1st, 2008 at 5:33 am
I am so fortunate to have found you that you have answered all my queries so well. thank you. don’t worry, you did not offend me, its just that i felt strange that you found my initial query inappropriate and funny. anyway forget it.
what you think about olympus 570-uz’s 20x optical zoom? Olympus claim that “the SP-570 UZ provides a wealth of creative control without the expense of an SLR”. Do you agree? do you think that their 20x optical zoom along with TCON-17 (1.7x) Tele Conversion Lens + Lens Adapter Tube (CLA-10) will give me great results even though the 570-uz is NOT a DSLR?
I totally agree that i would always want longer and longer focal lengths. i want such a focal length that i should be able to click the black pupil of a bird a mile away. At the same time i am a huge fan of macro photography.
November 3rd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Shaheen, there is really no comparison between a long optical zoom (like the one you are referring to) and a dslr with a long telephoto lens. The differencene between the 2 will be noticably different right away. Not only in the final results but in the options you will have when shooting. If you want you could do a comparison on your own. Go to a camera shop where they rent camera’s and lenses; Rent a good dslr like a Canon 40d or if they have it a 50d. Along with a 300mm or 400mm lens and tele extender. Of course you will need a tripod for truly sharp results. To answer your other ? about the results from the tele converter and lens adapter tube….You will not get great results….the more adapters and extenders you add, the more quality you will loose…even with a dslr. It really depends on what you are going to be using your photos for. If it is purely for enjoyment and the final result will not be a large print to put in a portfolio or in a frame on a wall somewhere then you will be fine with the stuff you are considering. I have tried the p & s with long optical zoom and the results did not satisfy me. I invested in a dslr and have grown as an amatuer photographer quite a bit. Just the fact that you have a dslr will send you on your way to learning more about photography and will open up a lot more doors as far as what you are able to do. But remember this….just because you have a great expensive camera and the best lenses that money can buy will not make you a better photographer. The most important piece of equipment is what’s behind the camera…you. If you gave Art Wolfe a $9.99 disposable camera from the grocery store and gave an amatuer the best equipment possible and had them shoot the same thing, I bet Art Wolfe would walk away with pictures worthy of gracing the pages of National Geographic. The other guy…he may get lucky and come out with 1 keeper out of 500 shots.
December 26th, 2008 at 3:12 am
Hi, My daughter had a Sony Cybershot DSC P-150 stolen from her. She liked the camera but now wants a digital SLR. Does not take many pictures and size is of course different. What is better? She originally paid close to $500.00 for Cybershot but I don’t want to spend even that much to replace camera. What to do?
January 1st, 2009 at 1:50 am
Wow this is a great post!
I feel that I am a pretty good ameteur photographer with my P&S, mostly with my compositions- but I know I have a LOT to learn! I was contemplating buying a DSLR but wondered if I should and if I was ready? Thanks to everyone here sharing their expertise it helped me make my decision.
Oh, in case you are wondering, I realized that I really NEED to learn the inner workings better of a camera before I can put a DSLR to good use- SO I will be purchasing a high-end ($800) P&S before moving up.
January 21st, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Hi What a fantastic way to gain knowledge from an expert. I have just purchased a 2nd hand Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ5 and by looking at your website I got a number of excellent tips.
Great work team.
Peter Harker Bowen Nth Queensland
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Hai Shaheen,
Once I was in same confusion, ( u can check above Nandh says: December 18th, 2007 at 5:31)
So I keep trying to find out a way, how to find out a right lens according to distance.
And finally I got the formula for that in the website only. Actually this different from your question, but I like to share here.
Now, what you said about (Olympus 570 UZ- 20x) it is a bridge camera.
And it’s also good for under any kind of situation for beginners.
First how to calculate the zoom, which is mentioned in ‘X’.
If, a camera has 10x zoom (i.e. is tele) Then, think what about the wide angel ?
Suppose wide zoom has 26mm / 27mm / 28mm. According to this, it might differs.
E.x. for Zoom ‘ X ’ calculation:
If, Wide angle 26mm, Tele 10x zoom (26 x 10 = 260mm) The lens is 260mm.
If, Wide angle 27mm, Tele 10x zoom (27 x 10 = 270mm) The lens is 270mm.
If, Wide angle 28mm, Tele 10x zoom (28 x 10 = 270mm) The lens is 280mm.
Olympuz 570 UZ -20x (this camera wide 26mm, tele 20x (26 x 20 = 520mm) so, this is 520mm lens.
New launch: (Olympus 590 uz – 26xzoom) (wide 26mm x tele26x = 676mm lens)
Distance in Feet (X) : 20
Subject Size in Feet (Y) : 1
Distance in inches (A) = X * 12 = 20 *12 = 240 inches
Subject size in inches (B) = Y * 12 = 1 * 12 = 12 inches
Magnification (Z) = 1.5 / B = 0.125
(1.5” std. 35mm film camera)
Lens Focal Length in Inches = A / ((1/Z)+1)
=240/((1/0.125)+1)
=240/(8+1)=240/9=26.6667 inches
Lens Focal Length in mm =26.667* 25.4=677.164
Lens Focal Length in mm=677 mm
677mm lens, it will cover the distance & subject.
Thanks & Regards,
Nandhagopal from India.
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Hai Shaheen,
Once I was in same confusion, ( u can check above Nandh says: December 18th, 2007 at 5:31)
So I keep trying to find out a way, how to find out a right lens according to distance.
And finally I got the formula for that in the website only. Actually this different from your question, but I like to share here.
Now, what you said about (Olympus 570 UZ- 20x) it is a bridge camera.
And it’s also good for under any kind of situation for beginners.
First how to calculate the zoom, which is mentioned in ‘X’.
If, a camera has 10x zoom (i.e. is tele) Then, think what about the wide angel ?
Suppose wide zoom has 26mm / 27mm / 28mm. According to this, it might differs.
E.x. for Zoom ‘ X ’ calculation:
If, Wide angle 26mm, Tele 10x zoom (26 x 10 = 260mm) The lens is 260mm.
If, Wide angle 27mm, Tele 10x zoom (27 x 10 = 270mm) The lens is 270mm.
If, Wide angle 28mm, Tele 10x zoom (28 x 10 = 270mm) The lens is 280mm.
Olympuz 570 UZ -20x (this camera wide 26mm, tele 20x (26 x 20 = 520mm) so, this is 520mm lens.
New launch: (Olympus 590 uz – 26xzoom) (wide 26mm x tele26x = 676mm lens)
Try below formula for considering a lens according the distance & subject.
Distance in Feet (X) : 20
Subject Size in Feet (Y) : 1
Distance in inches (A) = X * 12 = 20 *12 = 240 inches
Subject size in inches (B) = Y * 12 = 1 * 12 = 12 inches
Magnification (Z) = 1.5 / B = 0.125
(1.5” std. 35mm film camera)
Lens Focal Length in Inches = A / ((1/Z)+1)
=240/((1/0.125)+1)
=240/(8+1)=240/9=26.6667 inches
Lens Focal Length in mm =26.667* 25.4=677.164
Lens Focal Length in mm=677 mm
677mm lens, it will cover the distance & subject.
Thanks & Regards,
Nandhagopal from India.
January 29th, 2009 at 6:30 am
Great webite Darren – I stumbled across it looking for an answer to a question I had.
For a long time I had a Canon S2-IS, and I grew in interest and ability to where it could no longer do what I wanted to do. But when I had it I was able to make some nice pictures as my knowledge grew. I’ve had my eye on a SLR (Canon 50D), but came across a deal that I absolutely could not refuse on a lightly used Fuji S9100. Nope, it’s not a SLR, but it allows a lot of control over the shots. It’s been fun learning how to adjust things more in-depth to get the shots right, and it’s nice step up from what I was using and still gives me room to grow. I’d have to agree with one of the above posts – in many cases it’s more about your knowledge than your equipment. For example, just because someone can afford a Ferrari doesn’t mean that they’ll be able to outrun BMW’s on a track if they don’t know how to drive it. The point is, keep growing in knowledge and practice, practice, practice. That will do more for your enjoyment of this hobby than dropping a lot of money, discovering you’re not sure (or have no interest in) of how to take full advantage of all the controls to make spectacular pictures. Once you get a feel for what you like to shoot and where you can improve, you can make a solidly educated decision on what equipment to get on the next go around.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Great web site. Lots of good info. I have a Lumix DMC FZ7 that has been a wonderful camera. It replaced my Pentax MZ50 film SLR. It has been wonderful to point and shoot with gay abandon and not worry about processing costs. I have just recently upgraded to the Pentax K20 DSLR. Now I have the best of both worlds. Lots of work ahead for me to refamiliarise myself with a true SLR but I look forward to the challange. Despite this, the Lumix will not be too far from hand has it has brilliant manual capabilities but best of all, it will do video…low quality but better than nothing.
February 15th, 2009 at 11:07 am
thank you very much for the very informative article on buyers guide to cameras both point and shoot and dslr. I hope i can start taking good pictures with my dslr. thanks again
April 1st, 2009 at 12:29 am
really enjoy this piece – as I am moving on to my first DSLR soon. :)
April 18th, 2009 at 12:06 am
Thank you very much, I have learned a lot.
So, what do you think about the SONY DSC-HX1 ?
May 25th, 2009 at 7:32 am
Hello there,
I am looking for advice on a camera purchase. I am a mom that loves to take pictures of her kids. My children are in sports and I can’t get enough photos of them. I am still using an old film camera ( it is a Minolta Maxxium 300si) but the pictures come out much clearer and brighter than if I use my son’s digital camera which is a Nikon with 7megapixels and I believe a 5 optical zoom lens. The pictures from his camera tend to turn out either blury or very grainy. Yes, I am well aware this could be my fault. I am not looking to become a pro, I would just like a great camera that will help me to take fantastic pictures of my kids. Maybe have a great shot turned into a poster for their room. Anyway, I don’t know a thing about what to look for so any advice would be greatly appreciated. I would like to learn more about cameras but reading some of your posts, well, it just seems confusing! Help please! Thank you!
May 25th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
First thing….what are you willing to spend on a camera? If your budget is $200-$300 you will want to buy a decent point and shoot digital camera with a good optical zoom range (digital zoom doesn’t matter-once you’re in the digital zoom the quality goes bye-bye) and one with around 10 megapixels so you can print large poster sizes. Also consider the size that you would feel most comfortable with….larger cameras feel more like a camera you can put your hands around…smaller ones are more convenient-you can put it in your purse or pocket. also…get something with a good sized lcd-2.5 or 3 inches. The Canon powershot SX10 IS is 10 megapixels and has a very long 20x optical zoom …but the more you zoom the more you give up in quality with these cameras.
If you’re not too tight on money and you are considering getting a bit more serious (without becoming a pro) then consider buying a DSLR. This takes some learning and practice to know what you’re doing but the capabilities you will have are greater. The cost of a decent DSLR is going to be around $500-$1500 depending on if you buy new or used….check out Craigslist. Look into the Canon Rebel series. Most DSLR’s come with a lens. you will also want to buy a small bag & a memory card or 2…they’re cheap-around $20-$40 for a 2 or 4 gigabyte card. Also…if you are going to be shooting your kids playing sports, a DSLR is going to be a lot more cooperative when it comes to catching action compared to most point and shoots…you usually have to click the shutter and hold the camera for a second or so….with a DSLR you push the shutter button and it is recorded instantly…no shutter lag whatsoever. I hope this helps somewhat….oh…you can always rent a DSLR for a couple days to really be sure you want to spend the money.
Read more: “Should you buy a DSLR or Point and Shoot Digital Camera?#comments#comments” – http://digital-photography-school.com/should-you-buy-a-dslr-or-point-and-shoot-digital-camera#comments#ixzz0GVSuDIGE&A
May 26th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Hello Ab,
Thank you so much for your reply. I would love to look into purchasing a DSLR camera. I really would not want to lose picture quality due to the zoom on a point and shoot. So if I could bother you one more time, I’d like to ask which DSLR you would recommend for a beginner with room to grow. I know I probably shouldn’t worry much about advanced options seeing as how i don’t really know what I am doing but I would like a camera that is a step or two above average in case I am able to catch on quickly. I would like to be able to hang on to this camera for a long time if I will be spending more money . Thank you again for your time, Sue
May 27th, 2009 at 4:44 am
One thing that I didn’t see in this article was the importance of batteries and making sure that one uses Lithium Ion batteries instead of NiCads. The other thing I didn’t see mentioned is the importance of carrying extra battery packs on location, not just for extra power when a battery runs out of juice, but also if a battery suddenly decides to die on location. There’s nothing worse than losing your battery power without a backup.
Nathan
May 27th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Hello Sue,
Well…as far as reccomendations on a DSLR you are going to be choosing between Nikon and Canon most likely. There are of course other brands but none have as many lenses to choose from or better image quality…and it’s really all about the lenses…2nd only to the person behind them. When I made my choice from a point and shoot to a DSLR I chose Canon….mainly because I was already familiar with their cameras. For you the choice is up to you…you can’t go wrong with either. The only area that Nikon has that will make any difference to you being that you will be taking pictures of kids in sports is the auto focus system…Nikon has a slight edge over Canon. There are a few other differences but none are much to make a difference. I belong to a photography club and I would say that it is pretty equal as far as Canon users and Nikon. The better images don’t come from the one’s with the better cameras…they come from the better photographers.
So…as far as particular models go….there are a couple of new models just released that are good for video capture as well. The Nikon D5000 (and the Nikon D90)…and the Canon Rebel T1i. They are both a step above entry level DSLR’s and are priced reasonably..around $1,000 with a lens. If you don’t care about video then consider the Canon Rebel XSI; entry level …or the Canon 40D or Canon 50D; both a step above entry level…I recently upgraded from a Canon 40D to a 50D and both are great cameras…the 50D has 15 megapixels compared to 10 for the 40D. If you would like to see some of the images I took with my 40D and my 50D visit my webpage http://lenzfreak.smugmug.com/?preview=1.
Just be sure you pick a lens that has IS …Canon (Image Stabilization) or VR-Nikon…(Vibration Reduction) which will allow you to shoot handheld without worrying too much about a blurry photo result. Also…get somethng with a good zoom range…Canon makes a 55-250mm or a 70-300mm…both have IS. I am not as familiar with Nikon lenses but here is a place you can check them out. I hope this helps you. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/6222/Digital_Cameras_SLR_Digital_Cameras.html
May 27th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Hi Ab,
Thank you, thank you, thank you for sharing your opinion. I looked at your pictures and I am in awe (and way out of my league)! What a great trip that must have been. My husbands car just died so I will be car searching instead of camera searching for the next week or so. I really appreciate you pointing me in the right direction. Can’t wait to get started! Well, good luck with your future pictures and watch your back around those bears! Thanks again, Sue
June 6th, 2009 at 7:09 am
This is a great article, but I have some questions. Most of my camera hunting will have to be online as I live in the middle of nowhere, but it would be nice to have some questions answered by someone knowledgeable (aka you guys :)) I am mainly interested in shooting macro stuff. I have used just a little Kodak p&s as well as my little sister’s Nikon dslr ( I don’t know the model number, but I know it wasn’t one of the expensive ones as she didn’t spend more than $500 on it). I have trouble getting the crispyness and focus that I want with the p&s, and I found the Nikon to be easy to use and more “camera”ish. I don’t completely suck at photography, but I am not even a real good amateur (think good shots on flickr). I was initially looking for a lower level dslr to have the option of changing lenses, but I wonder if I might be better off spending my money on a nice p&s. I would like some control as I have no problem with learning and experimentation. Any help out there camera people? :)
June 17th, 2009 at 10:12 am
I’ve been looking for a camera and trying to decide between a dSLR and a megazoom. This article and discussion has been very helpful in clarifying the choice. Despite concern that I may be giving up something as to the quality of the images, I think a point and shoot with a long zoom is the better option for me because I don’t want to deal with carrying around and changing lenses and will use the camera far more if I can just pick it up and shoot. I’m interested in the long zoom in anticipation of photographing wildlife on an upcoming trip, and for sports photography. I’ve think I’ve narrowed down the options to the Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ28 (18X zoom, small, light, easy to use — from what I read); the Olympus SP-590 (slightly bigger and heavier but with a 24X zoom that’s reportedly hard to focus when fully extended– but it’s new and there aren’t many reviews out there), and the Canon SX10 IS. I want the camera to be easy to use — but I do want to get good photographs out of it. Can anyone help me figure out which of these three is the best choice? And are there other similar cameras I should be considering? Thanks!
June 17th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Hello Elaine. I would love to help you but I need to know a few things 1st.
1. What is your budget?
2. What do you plan on doing with your wildlife/sports photographs? Will you be printing and at what size?
3. how much quality are you willing to give up? (this goes along with #2)
June 17th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Thanks for the quick response!
1. I am planning to spend $300-$500. I’d be willing to spend more if it would get me good quality photos and still meet my other criteria.
2. I will be traveling to Africa later this summer and want a good camera for the trip, with a good zoom so I don’t have to actually walk up close to, say, a lion. As for sports, I plan to use it to photograph family members surfing, playing baseball, basketball. Mostly, I’ll print small photos (4×6 or 5×7), though it’d be great to be able to occasionally print an 8×10. Nothing bigger.
3. As for giving up quality, though, I’m not sure how to answer that. If there were a camera that was as compact, light, and easy to use as a megazoom seems to be, but produced as good quality photographs as a dSLR, that’d be ideal. But I’m strictly an amateur, and mostly, I’d like a camera that makes me look like a better photographer than I am.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Hmmmmm. Interesting challenge. Check out the Canon powershot SX10 IS as a p&s suggestion. It has 20x zoom and 10 megapixels and is around $300. But……..
Oh my god! You are going to Africa!!!!!! Wow…I am jealous. And please, don’t walk up to A LION !
My first thought is to strongly urge you to get an inexpensive DSLR package with a wide to telephoto lens such as a Canon Rebel xsi with 18-55mm lens and also a 55-250mm lens and deal with the heavier camera. (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0029X64QU/ref=asc_df_B0029X64QU827077?smid=A163DSNSCVE8H3&tag=shopzilla_rev_1340-20&linkCode=asn) very good deal by the way with the $200 instant rebate. The quality of your images will be much better and you will be able to print a large image of let’s say….A LION. A trip to Africa does not come around too often and photography ops are plentiful for wildlife. However…you will have to deal with more weight (which is not really that heavy considering you will be in Africa) and I know you don’t want that (you should really trade the extra weight for better quality images)
I would say that image quality and sharpness are extremely important factors that you must weigh before making your decision. If you do get a P & S chances are you will not get a hi quality shot zoomed in at 10x, 15x etc. shooting lions in Africa or a head first slide in to 3rd base.
Both of the lenses in the package above have IS-Image stabilization which you definately want. You also need to consider that purchasing a DSLR also means you need to buy memory cards, an extra battery and a bag…which they have for an extra $40 bucks…it’s a photo backpack. You probably wouldn’t have to change lenses too much-you would mainly be shooting with the 55-250mm…if you did want to shoot a landscape or wider angle shot you have your other lens too. You will definately spend over $1,000 on the DSLR package with accessories. I could write all night on the topic….it’s coming down to having to carry more equipment and a heavier camera that costs 3 x’s as much vs. one smaller and lighter camera that still can get you good images if you are not too far away. …but you will definately see a large difference in the DSLR. You will also have a lot more options if you plan to grow as an amatuer photographer. If you have any other ?’s I am happy to give my input.
August 14th, 2009 at 4:54 am
I brought my 1st P/S in 06, then up graded to the Kodak z712 is. which I still use. it’s a good cam, has the pasm functions that gives me the opportunity to create a photo more to my liking. Am in the market for Dslr, for better quality.
August 18th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
This was very helpful. Thanks for scaling down the technical terms. I’m currently camera shopping and have been searching many online guides. This has been the most helpful and objective article I’ve found. Thank y ou.
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:25 am
The comments here have been great!!! I am also looking for a really good camera to take pics of my son playing sports and general fun stuff. I have been looking at the p&s’s, since I do not think I am ready for a dslr. I am willing to spend about $200-$400. Any good suggestions—and anyone know of any good deals, or where I should purchase the camera?
September 7th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
I own an Olympus C750 UZ. This has been a perfect company for me untill now because it can operate as a simple point and shoot camera in auto mode, but it also allows completly manual handling. I’m now ready to take the next step and get a DSLR. The only problem is the price…
However, I do feel the need of improving the quality of my shots, and have more options on things like aperture, iso and so on.
thank you for this post, it was inlighting.
October 2nd, 2009 at 4:12 am
Having owned a Canon PowerShot A620 and a PowerShot S3is (both having PASM and scene modes), I discovered that the maximum shutter speeds of 1/2500sec and 1/3200sec respectively cannot be achieved at certain focal lengths and larger apertures.
I first thought Canon deliberately restricted the maximum shutter speeds as not to compete with their dSLR models, and then I read that it turned out to be more of a design constraint in its iris and electronic shutter combo.
After five years of experience with P&S digicams (even using manual exposure settings sometimes), I finally saw the difference with dSLRs – their constant maximum shutter speed across all apertures and the higher quality bokeh in portraits. It was something none of my PowerShots could achieve (except for my S3is being able to blur out backgrounds but only at long focal lengths) and I decided to explore dSLR territory.
I’m happy with my EOS 450D, recently bought in July 2009 and was amazed at the difference it made with portrait shots. The only thing that I’m not happy is that unlike fixed lens digicams, sooner or later I got tempted with the thought of buying more and more lenses.
Although a extremely rewarding pastime, dSLR photography can turn into a very expensive hobby. With fixed lens compacts, once you buy one – that’s pretty much about it. Aside from the Lensmate 52mm adapter I got for my S3is (for fitting a circular PL filter), I was never tempted to buy Canon’s optional wide angle or teleconverters.
The S3is lacks a hot shoe, so there wasn’t a need to buy a proper flash unit. Canon does have a slave flash unit for its PowerShot A and S-series compacts, but it requires to be mounted on a bracket. It’s too much of a hassle to attach the slave flash and it’s a fixed, forward firing type – no tilt or swivel capability.
That said, I’m glad that I decided to buy a dSLR for the sheer experience and true enjoyment of photography – at the same time having compacts digicams for ease of carrying around. :-)
October 21st, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Thanks for a great forum and great information. I am a caterer/consultant. I have a lot of handy and talented friends with great equipment who have taken great photos for me but friends are gonna help so much ’til soon their interest in my entrepreneurship will wear out. I am a complete novice. I’d like to be self sufficient and I have said photography friends willing to give me lessons. If I buy my own camera and learn I won’t be at the mercy of favours or hiring out!
Needs:
Stills predominately
print worthy for posters, promo cards, business cards, tags, event decor, advertisements
web shots including:
details as big as a banquet hall decked out or, a room full of party goers enjoying my luscious foods, to as fine a detail as the edge of that all natural, whole grain, vegan pie crust I finally perfect into a light and flaky masterpiece or the swarovski I’ve hand sewn into a bride’s bouquet.
I don’t necessarily have a budget but I need to be realistic (no i don’t have 90K or 1.2M burning a hole in my pocket! eek), catering has a lot of expenses and I’m expanding currently but I know I’ll save in the long run because photo shoots and buying pics from photographers at events I do are costly!
If I can use it on exciting moments in life as well, great!
What should I get?
October 26th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
I have 5 ultra zooms (18x or higher). I call them tweener cameras (in between point and shoot compacts and DSLRs). In my opinion, in that category of camera, Panasonic produces the best quality images. Nikon’s vibration reduction is not as good as Panasonic’s image stabilization and I have shaky hands and tend to sway a little when trying to stand perfectly still. Olympus ultra zooms produce soft images. Kodak has an extra step change some settings and the color isn’t that good. I can’t remember why I didn’t try a Canon. It could just be they were the last to go ultra zoom or it could be people were complaining about some feature when I was ready to buy. I do not use the movie making feature of my cameras. Ultra zooms have a sports preset if you need to take a quick action photo and cut out motion blur. I use the sports preset for fidgety birds but it would probably work just as well with fidgety kids. Otherwise, I mostly use aperture priority. I almost never use Auto. The Auto setting with any ultrazoom always seems to produce overexposed photos and crazy depth of field. I play with exposure a lot. All of my ultra zooms have viewfinders or I wouldn’t have purchased them. I only use the LCD to review and discard photos at the end of the day and I have to take my glasses off to do it. For me, it’s the lug factor with DSLRs. I’m not lugging around a few lenses and a tripod. Also, with finding birds in their natural environment, there’s no time to change lenses. The bird is on the ground one second, in a distant tree the next and then he’s taking off – running, flying or swimming. My photogtaphy improved over my rookie year, not because of the camera, but because I got out more and used the Panasonic FZ 28 and 35, consistently. It reduced my “think before you press” time. Whatever you decide, just get out and use the camera a lot so steps/decisions are automatic and you can change some settings without looking.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:59 am
Hi,
I am a mother of two (one tolder and one infant) kids. I want to be able to capture great pics, fast even then they are moving in almost any condition or location. I do not want to spend a fortune (or half of their colleget tuition, lol). Can someone help me find a camera that will help me capture my kids every action and still stay within the price range of $160-$200. I hope this is not unrealistic.
Thanks
October 31st, 2009 at 8:46 am
@Lemonginger,
Firstly, my disclaimer: I don’t work for Canon and neither am I a professional photographer or professional reviewer. :-)
After reading your interesting comments and prerequisites for your first digicam, may I strongly suggest that you consider Canon’s latest PowerShot G11 (I’ve just bought one two days ago and am extremely pleased with it).
Here’s why:
1. The Canon G11 is neither bulky nor expensive like a dSLR. Of course, dSLRs when you are proficient with handling them, yield much more superior picture quality than the average compact or ultra compact. Of course, size is relative – so if you’re comparing the G11 to say, the PowerShot A590is or the SX200is the G11 is obviously bigger by comparison.
2. The swivel-out LCD screen can be useful when taking photos of your dishes or people from odd angles which is hard to do with fixed LCD screens. If you don’t like photographing with the LCD jutting out, you can easily fold it back, flush with the camera’s back – just like with a fixed LCD monitor. The G11’s 2.8″ screen is adequately large for composing photos and its 400,000 dot resolution is tack sharp for playback viewing.
3. Photographing food is best accomplished in natural ambient light or indirect flash. The G11 has a more sensitive sensor compared to most compact P&S cameras and can take surprisingly good photos in low light. Of course, dSLRs are a lot better when coupled with “fast” lenses, but such high performance lenses are heavy, bulky and often cost more than the G11 itself!
4. The G11 has a “Smart Auto” mode specially tailored for novice users. It can evaluate not less than 22 photographic “situations” in real time and automatically adjust the camera’s settings depending on the situation. As you get more proficient with the camera (and photography), you can explore the “Creative Modes”, including aperture, shutter priority and manual modes. All G-series Canons (with the exception of the discontinued G7 model) permits you to capture in RAW format in addition to the standard JPG picture format. You can start off with shooting in the normal JPG format and progress to RAW as you get more experienced. :-)
5. Don’t like how the built-in flash makes pics of your culinary work appear “flat”? You buy the inexpensive Canon Speedlite EX270 external flash. With its vertical bounce capability and more powerful flash output, you can experiment with bounce flash techniques (indirect flash) that can give a more natural looking image than with direct flash. Of course, Canon’s better 430 EX II and 580 EX II strobe units are more powerful and flexible than the 270EX, but they are expensive, heavy and can make handling the G11 a bit tricky. There’s also Canon’s specialized flash units for serious close up flash photography, like the MT42EX ring light (requires a separately sold adapter for the G11), but I doubt you’ll want to get into that. But it’s nice to know that several accessories meant for Canon’s digital SLRs can be used on the G11.
6. Should you someday decide to upgrade to a Canon dSLR such as the EOS series, the Speedlite EX270 flash can still be used with your future EOS/Digital Rebel series. Of course, by this time you may be already buying a 430EX II or 580EX II flash. As a minor side note, I am pleased to learn that the RC60-E3 wired remote control switch I bought for my EOS 450D is also compatible with my new Canon G11. :-)
7. The Canon G-series cameras are renowned for their image quality and features by many professional and serious amateur photographers alike (most likely they’re existing Canon dSLR users) as a smaller and lightweight back up camera. The G-series is also a boon when they don’t feel like lugging their heavy dSLR equipment around. Canon dSLR users are likely to own the better Speedlite flash strobes, therefore they can use their existing Canon flash units on a G-series camera. The G-lineup (except for the G7) can shoot pictures in RAW format (as I mentioned earlier), a format favored by pros and advanced amateur dSLR users.
Price-wise, the G11 is slotted in between Canon’s entry level dSLR (the Rebel XS or EOS 1000D) and the cheaper A-series PowerShots. It’s also priced (strangely) similarly to Canon’s PowerShot SX20is, which is a “bridge” or ultra-zoom camera, but in my opinion the G11 should fit your requirements better than the heavy and bulky SX20is.
I was also pleasantly surprised by the G11’s affordable introduction price – I initially expected it to cost the same as Canon’s EOS 1000D (Rebel XS) with the bundled (cheap) 18-55mm kit lens. People who opine that the G11 (or the recent G10)’s price is expensive don’t realize that the G11 is actually a lot cheaper than the old (but still formidable) Canon G6 from 2004 and is also cheaper than the PowerShot SX1is ultra-zoom.
Admittedly I’m a huge Canon camera fan. I’ve owned several digital and film cameras in the past – a Canon AV-1 (film), EOS 620 (film), PowerShot A80, A620, S2is and presently, an old Nikon EM (film), S3is, G11, EOS 450D and a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W150 ultra-compact.
My views of the new G11 are based on the literally tens of thousands of photos I’ve taken since 2004 using all those digicams combined. Through personal experience I have learned the pros and cons of each model that I’ve owned – not just features and performance-wise but their image quality characteristics too.
Personally I would rate the G11’s image quality somewhat in between my former PowerShot A620 and my EOS 450D dSLR (but I think it’s a bit closer to the EOS’s image quality).
The G11 is by no means a perfect compact digicam (there’s no such thing as a perfect digital camera). Continuous shooting is at a disappointing snail’s pace (about 1.1 frames/sec max) and is not a suitable camera for photographing sporting events or action packed scenes. While its competition may offer HD or full-HD video recording, the G11 could only muster the old standard, 640×480 pixel video resolution.
Canon could have designed the G11 with full HD video recording, but I guess the company targeted this model for advanced still photographers who don’t really care about video recording (like me) rather than the casual user who prefer full HD video capability at the expense of image quality (as with the slightly pricier PowerShot SX1is ultrazoom). It’s also possible that if the G11 had full HD recording (like the PowerShot SX1is), the eventual price of the G11 would be a lot higher making it less affordable.
As for the sheer bulky appearance of the G11, the camera actually feels lighter than its looks suggest. Casual and first-time users are apt to make the bulk/weight as an issue, but seasoned dSLR photographers will tell you that actually prefer a bit of heft in a camera. A compact digicam that is too light doesn’t feel solid in your hands and a bit of extra weight helps to steady the camera for hand held shooting.
I’ve read some users’ reviews as saying that the G11 is “complicated to use”, but in actuality it’s not. In all likelihood, they graduated from a basic point-and-shoot model therefore all the myriad features in the G11 look like they have to learn rocket science. :-D
Size-wise, the G11 won’t fit into your pants pocket easily, but it makes an ideal all-around general purpose travel camera. So there you have it – the G11 can be used casually using its easy “Smart Auto” mode or as creatively with its other modes (like manual mode). You decide how “complicated” or “simple” the G11 is going to be for you, not the other way around!
There’s no such thing as “one size fits all” digital camera.
Small and stylish ultracompacts are pocketable but they generally don’t yield exceptional image quality. dSLRs are the exact opposite – they take the best photos (especially mated to really expensive lenses) but are expensive and large. Bridge cameras (ultrazooms) offer you the convenience of one single long zoom lens, but their image quality still cannot surpass that of dSLRs. Ultrazooms are generally bigger than compact digicams, but smaller than dSLRs.
Therefore based on the scenarios and requirements you’ve posted, it seems like the G11 should fit your bill nicely.
Lastly – don’t just take my word for it. Sure, there are many other excellent competing point-and-shoot digicams, like Panasonic for instance but if you need to have just one camera (for now), I implore you to check out the online reviews on the G11 first and perhaps, try one out at a local store.
Hope this helps and I apologize for the very long read! :-)
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:52 am
I am looking to get a DSLR in the near future. I have been an avid (although ametuer) photographer for about ten years and want to move up from a point and shoot. My dad had SLR cameras/lenses before digital came around and thinks I should get a camera body and skip the kit lense and just get one really good lense. I am interested in taking pictures of wildlife (Yellowstone National Park is coming up this summer as a vacation), but at the same time my husband and I are starting a family, so I want a camera that will be great for family and home pictures. I am looking at a Tamron 18-270mm lense instead of getting the kit lense, but wasn’t sure if that was going to work for everything I am looking at. I know I have lots of research to do still, but was hoping for some input into what the best DSLR might be and what you thought about single lense versus kit and additional lenses. Thank you so much for the help…your articles have already helped a great deal!
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:44 pm
I am an amateur hobbyist with dreams of someday taking it further. People have told me I have a creative eye and should quit my day job. I know I’m not ready for that. Which is why I love this website.
I have owned the Canon S5 IS for nearly two years. (Actually, some of the information on this site helped me choose this camera as my step up from a Kodak compact digital that worked very well).
Although I enjoy using my S5, I find that the digital zoom does not meet my needs. The camera occasionally chooses to auto focus on something other than my subject, and every picture seems to need adjusting. It does very, very well outdoors, but it’s sometimes too slow to capture birds in motion or wildlife running by. I have shot two weddings for friends, and other than the occasional out-of-focus subject or grainy, pixelated zoomed-in candid picture, it’s done fairly well. Ironically, it seems to work very well in Portrait setting, even for things not considered portraits!
However, I am planning to upgrade soon. I LOVE outdoor photography, seem to be getting into weddings (just got another request), and like spontaneous, candid, zoomed-in shots. The Canon S5 IS limits me, particularly in zooming. It just isn’t good enough, and after cropping, the quality is horrible. Perhaps I’m doing something wrong?
I’m considering the Nikon D90 or the Nikon D5000 (both with lens kits). I have a lot of older SLR equipment that I’m hoping might work, as well, such as Cokin filters, various lenses, and other toys I’ve collected prior to the digital camera frenzy.
Can’t make up my mind, and I still have a lot to learn! But, for what I need from a camera, I DO KNOW that my P&S — even with all the manual controls — is limiting my style of photography.
If anyone has any suggestions for me, I’m all ears. My budget is approximately is no more than $1,500 including lens.
This website has been very helpful, and I’m anxious to keep reading. Thanks to all for their suggestions and dedication to providing real answers for real users.
November 4th, 2009 at 6:18 am
Hi Cheryl,
I have the same problem as you do.
I own a PowerShot S3is and it’s served me well since mid 2006. It was an upgrade
from my previous S2is and I got the S3is because its sleek black color looked more like a
dSLR rather than a toy. :-)
Your S5is has the newer DiGiC III image processor (vs DiGiC II in the S2/S3), a larger 2.5″ LCD, a hotshoe for external flash units, a bigger 8MP sensor, face detection AF and had its ISO extended one stop further to ISO 1600. However it shares the same zoom lens from the old S2is.
All the three Canon ultrazooms had one common bane: the use of a tiny 1/2.5″ CCD sensor.
In the S5is, the sensor has a pixel density of 32MP per square centimeter. That’s pretty crowded and meant that less light reaches the tightly packed individual
photodiodes.
Why did Canon retain the same 1/2.5″ sensor instead of increasing its size? The answer
is: to achieve the same maximum effective focal length of 432mm without having to
redesign and fit a larger and heavier zoom lens.
Since the camera’s 12x zoom is 72mm at the telephoto end, the field-of-View “crop factor”
of the camera is 6x (432mm divided by 72mm). That’s how Canon managed to achieve a (then)
whopping max focal length of 432mm (35mm film equiv). Now you know why compact P&S
cameras can achieve 140mm focal lengths with relatively small lenses! :-)
You didn’t mention the S5is AF modes you used to shoot wildlife, but your camera’s AF has three modes: Face Detect AF, FlexiZone and Center AF. I’m guessing that you didn’t use the Center AF mode, which meant that your S5is often focused on other objects, perhaps the nearest ones – that you didn’t want.
To switch to Center AF mode, press your Set button until the center rectangle turns white instead of green (green means FlexiZone AF). Once your S5is is set to Center AF, it should only focus on whatever’s at the center of your viewfinder or LCD display. If it can’t lock onto your desired subject, it usually means there’s not enough contrast or light for the camera to focus properly.
Digital zoom is found in most, if not all non-dSLR cameras. It’s a cheap means of getting a tighter shot at the expense of image quality. You won’t find digital zoom in dSLRs because of this.
What digital zoom does is amplifying the individual pixels that your sensor receives, therefore images will look blurry and pixelated. Your S5is however, has a “safety zoom” feature which warns you the point where your images will start to degrade. Whatever you do, don’t exceed that limit (it’s indicated in your viewfinder). Another option is NOT to use digital zoom at all. Instead, shoot with the largest resolution available using just the optical zoom. Crop the part that you want in your computer and discard the rest of the picture.
All zoom lenses tend to yield softer images and suffer from focusing difficulties at the telephoto end. Zoom lenses are handy because you don’t need to switch lenses (in a dSLR) but there’s a price to be paid: less-than-sharp images. That’s why prime (fixed focal length) telephoto lenses are often favored by professional photogaphers – they are much sharper because prime lenses aren’t complex like zoom lenses. The catch is that you’re stuck at that focal length and you have to move closer to or farther from the subject to compose.
Stepping into dSLR territory for the first time is usually a headache for the novice. I’d suggest that you start off with a decent (not necessarily fancy) dSLR body and invest in a good, sharp lens instead of the other way around.
I prefer Canon myself because even their basic models (e.g. Rebel XS, XSi and T1i) are made in Japan. Except for the upscale models, lower end Nikons like the D90 are made in Thailand to help lower their end prices.
While it’s not necessarily a bad thing, but as far as dSLRs are concerned, I would expect dSLR bodies to be made in Japan. Low cost P&S cameras are another story, Canon, Nikon and Sony all have overseas factories in China, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand to take advantage of cheaper labor.
If you like Canon, the Rebel XSi (aka EOS 450D) delivers a lot of camera for the beginner. Don’t bother with the slightly cheaper Rebel XS (EOS 1000D), for just USD100 more (or thereabouts), the XSi gives more bang for the buck. Although the entry level Rebel XS was introduced after the XSi, the latter is still more popular amongst novices and seasoned dSLR photographers alike.
(And if you buy a Canon Speedlite flash, you’ll be pleased to know that you can also use it on your present S5is!) :-)
I’d suggest that you read up the many professional reviews on budget dSLRs. Pay attention to the image quality, especially taken at high ISO speeds. Some cameras are sharper, some noisier, some have too agressive Noise Reduction that details get smudged, etc.
Wishing you happy dSLR hunting! :-)
November 4th, 2009 at 7:57 am
Hi Jen,
I was initially intrigued by Tamron’s super wide ratio (15x) 28-270mm zoom lens (hey, they have an even longer version now: 28-300mm!).
I’ve read mixed reviews of the Tamron – some say it’s a godsend while others aren’t optimistic with its image quality at certain focal lengths, especially on the extreme telephoto side. AF performance is also rather slow due to the complexity of the zoom.
Furthermore, at 270mm the largest aperture you’ll get is a rather slow f/6.3, which means your viewfinder will be darker at that point, you’ll also have to boost your ISO (increased noise), need to use higher shutter speeds and you get less shallow depth of field.
I did consider the Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS zoom lens for my Rebel XSi but when I found out its price (and balked at it), I ended up with the much more affordable EF-S 55-250mm IS lens instead with a lots of change to spare. Obviously, the 18-200mm option alleviates the need to swap lenses – so it’s very convenient for traveling light and you’re less likely to get dust into your sensor as you’re not changing lenses.
Coupled with my 18-55mm IS kit lens, the total focal length range I have now is 18-250mm. The EF-S 55-250mm is actually a light lens, it’s not much of a back breaker to carry it along in my camera bag. I find that for general photography, I use my 18-55mm more often than the 55-250mm.
I’ve read articles that narrower zoom ratio lenses generally give sharper images than super-wide ratios. Perhaps it might be prudent to buy a decent and affordable short ratio tele zoom, e.g. 70-300mm and see if the performance and results please you. Upgrade only when you feel it’s money well spent on a much better telephoto zoom lens.
Anyway, a random check on Amazon shows the average price of a brand new Tamron 28-270mm DI II VC lens hovers around USD1,300. Might be a a good idea to buy a pre-owned one for a few hundred bucks and try it out. If you don’t like it, at least your losses would be minimal.
Just my two cents. :-)
November 12th, 2009 at 1:46 am
Thanks, I think that I will be going with a SLR. Great article
November 12th, 2009 at 7:41 am
Thanks Stratman…I am still looking at lens and cameras, but am hoping to at least get a DSLR for Christmas…just trying to decide if I should ask for just the body and save the extra $100 towards a lens, or just get a kit lens on the camera and save for more later.
Any ideas?!? Also, what are people’s opinions/feelings about the Canon XSi (which is my favorite thus far in my research and hands on tests)?
November 12th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Jen,
As Canon dSLRs bodies go, if you need video recording capability (I don’t!), the Rebel T1i has it (along with Face Detect AF, DiGIC 4, an extra 3 Megapixels more) but currently being the flagship model in the budget Canon dSLR range, it’s more expensive. On the opposite end the Rebel XS is slightly cheaper than the XSi, but IMHO the Rebel XSi gives you better value in the long run.
Usually people who buy just the body alone have the higher quality (and more expensive) lenses in mind or that they already own such lenses. (Same-brand lenses are generally superior to third party brands). The EF-S 18-55mm kit lens is quite OK for its build and optical quality, if you don’t mind starting off with a kit lens. Its image quality is neither terribly soft nor terribly sharp either.
I’d suggest that you also pick up a Canon EF 50mm 1.8 II prime lens as it is the cheapest in the entire range of Canon lenses. While it’s not particularly sharp at wide open apertures but stopped down a bit, it gives amazingly sharp images for its low price. It’s very lightweight and affordable, about 3.5 times cheaper than the next-in-line EF 50mm 1.4 USM.
I know a few guys who have the EF 50mm 1.8 II despite owning Canon’s costly L-series lenses. I asked them why they bought it: It’s cheap, yields surprisingly good images (at middle apertures), doesn’t bog them down with weight and if it accidentally breaks, well…the financial loss isn’t that bad. Of course there are much sharper portrait lenses from Canon (the modestly priced EF-S 60mm USM macro is a good choice) but for the low price of the EF 50mm 1.8 II, one can’t complain of its shortcomings. Great for low light shootings and casual portraits.
Canon also offers the Rebel XSi (EOS 450D) with the bundled with the 18-200mm IS kit zoom for certain markets in Asia (not sure if this bundle is available in the U.S.) but due to the lens’ high price this kit version actually costs more than the more upscale EOS 40D with the 18-55mm IS lens. The camera store where I bought my EOS 450D said that most of his customers who could afford the the 18-200mm IS kit bundle preferred the EOS 40D.
If you prefer to buy the XSi body alone and select the lens individually, AND you’re on a budgetary restraint, I’d recommend that you look into the focal lengths that you’re more likely to use and spend more on such lenses.
For example, if you’re into landscape or indoor photography , choose a better wide angle zoom lens with larger apertures.
For people shots (portraits), spend more on a better standard-to-short telephoto zoom or prime lens. If wildlife photography is your reason for buying a dSLR, look for a very good zoom lens in the 70-300mm focal range.
When I browse the photo equipment classifieds, I find that people who are selling their lenses cite severely under-utilized them as the #1 reason, with upgrading to better lenses the #2 motive, while switching brands or to Canon full frame bodies (if they’re selling EF-S lenses) third. Many people rush into buying their (often expensive) dream lens and end up selling them later.
BTW, if you’re still interested in a single general purpose travel zoom lens, the Canon EF-S 18-200mm IS is still a decent all-rounder. I wouldn’t buy it brand new, but would look for a used one in good shape. It’s handy when I just want to sling my top-loading case and not the entire backpack, but the 18-200mm’s not my immediate priority now.
On the subject of user’s comments, you can check out Canon’s site here: http://tinyurl.com/4r4knh.
Good luck with your purchase! :-)
December 7th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Being a complete newbie in the DSLR arena I just recently purchased the Nikon D3000 after retiring my faithful Canon IXUS 850 IS. I have found much satisfaction while using the DSLR even though it is a little bit more larger to carry around. This site has been a great inspiration actually and I also penned my 2 cents in a recent blog post as well: http://preview.tinyurl.com/yebcqnb
Thanks! :)
December 23rd, 2009 at 9:53 pm
i was really confused before reading this article. actually i was planning to buy point and shoot camera but in my mind some confusion was there about these 2 different categories, but now i m sure that i will buy DSLR only…
thanx a lot for these informations.
December 24th, 2009 at 1:37 am
@ Tejendra:
Your choice whether to buy a dSLR or P&S camera depends on your needs and how often you take photos. DSLRs give the best image quality with the right lens combination, but they’re bulky, heavy and conspicuous. In public places like shopping malls for instance, security guards are very quick to spot someone toting a big, black dSLR with a long lens.
Before 9/11, security personnel wouldn’t bother with tourists and hobbyist photographers shooting with dSLRs. Nowadays, in certain places anyone being seen taking photos with a dSLR is viewed with utmost suspicion. You’re less likely to be spotted if you use a compact P&S instead. In a crowd of non-photographers, people take photos with their cellphones and compact cameras. Anyone with a dSLR will certainly stand out from the crowd.
If you’re at Starbucks and take pics with a small and stealthy P&S compact, nobody will pay much attention unless you use flash. Using a dSLR automatically invites undue attention to you. If the store manager or staff don’t know you personally, they may chase you out of the premises.
Security and paranoia issues aside, many owners of dSLRs also own a prosumer compact, such as the Canon PowerShot G10/G11 or S90 as their second camera. Not everyone relishes the idea of lugging their dSLR and lenses around, e.g. for hiking or light travel – so they would bring their compacts instead.
DSLRs are expensive equipment. When the situation doesn’t demand it, I’d rather leave my EOS 450D at home and take my G11 with me. If I don’t bring my G11, my Sony Cyber-shot W150 is always with me for unexpected photographic opportunities (it’s much smaller than the G11).
When it comes to cameras, I discovered that there’s no such thing as “one size fits all”. There’s a proper time and place for big, bulky dSLRs and small ultra-compacts. :-)
December 25th, 2009 at 11:26 am
I’ve got a point and shoot, and the main favourite about is that you can film videos with it on the double. Its very excellent for security purposes, catching it in the blue. The picture quality of something is based on how knowlegable the user is.
Point and shoot is exactly what it is, point and shoot. You’ll never be able to do that with a DSLR without holding your camera like a bazooka. On top of that, you don’t need an expensive tripod for point and shoots because of how lightweight they are.
December 26th, 2009 at 3:27 am
Hi All!
I got a brand new Canon XSi for Christmas this morning. I have already starting taking pictures. I love the new camera. My birthday is in less than two weeks and my husband offered to buy me a lens to go with my camera for my birthday present. I have been researching for quite some time and am now looking at additional input from others on what lens I should look into. I want a great lens with a long zoom range as I will be heading out west this summer for vacation and plan to take pictures of everything. I also want a great Macro lens for taking close up pictures of flowers, insects and small animals as we live on a farm and have a huge selection of interesting things to photograph. I have a pretty good idea of what I want for a long range lens (looking at the Tamrom 28-270mm or the Canon 18-200mm). No idea what I really should be looking at for a Macro lens. Any input or ideas? I would love to hear it…thanks so much! Happy Holidays to all!
December 26th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
@ Jen,
Congratulations on your Rebel XSi! :-)
I presume your XSi kit comes with the EF-S 18-55mm IS zoom, which is a pretty standard kit zoom. The other kit comes with the EF-S 18-200mm IS, which is actually cheaper than buying the body + 18-200mm separately, which is an option for certain markets. In Japan, the XSi (aka Kiss X2) comes with two lenses – the EF-S 18-55mm IS and EF-S 55-250mm IS.
I got the EF-S 55-250mm IS separately on eBay and it’s a decent piece of glass despite its low price. It won win any awards, but many Rebel XSi and T1i owners have this very affordable lens as their beginner’s zoom. The other lens in the same price range is the old EF 75-300mm III USM, which lacks image stabilization.
Between the two, I’d recommend the 55-250mm for its IS feature. You’ll find the image stabilization useful with the lens zoomed out and shooting with low shutter speeds, without needing a tripod. You’ll lose just 50mm worth of focal length compared to the 75-300mm, but at the telephoto end it’s hard to frame pictures hand held.
I haven’t tested the Tamron 18-270mm VC lens but I’ve read mixed opinions about it. Generally you’ll be sacrificing sharpness and fast apertures with long zoom ratio lenses for convenience. They’re complex to build and cost more than shorter ratio zooms. Professional wildlife and sports photographers don’t use such 15x zoom ratios for this reason. At 270mm, the Tamron will give you a maximum aperture of f/6.3, which means your viewfinder will be a bit dark and you’ll need high shutter speeds and/or high ISOs.
When it comes to resale value, same-brand lenses sell for a better price than third party brands. Canon EF L-series lenses hold their value best compared to non-L EF lenses while EF-S (“S” stands for short backfocus) lenses usually have low resale values.
A good idea is to resort to lens rental services such as LensRentals. This way you can try out the EF-S 18-200mm or any other zoom and macro lenses that you like for a few days.
As for macro lenses, go for lenses that offer a true 1:1 magnification. The EF 100mm 2.8 macro USM comes with pretty good reviews from owners and reviewers like. It’s good for taking pics of butterflies and small animals that scurry away (or dangerous animals like snakes) if you get too close.
Another alternative is the new Tamron 60mm 2.0 macro, which is priced competitively against Canon’s EF-S 60mm 2.8 USM macro. The EF-S doubles as an excellent portraiture lens and is ideal for product photography where you don’t need a longer working distance.
Remember that when it comes to lenses, you get exactly what you pay for. Buying brand new, quality lenses is a big commitment. Many beginners opt for used lenses to minimize the risk of buyer’s remorse in case they find their purchase becomes the proverbial white elephant.
Hope this helps and happy holidays to you too! :-)
January 29th, 2010 at 4:13 am
@ kat.
A decent bridge or ultrazoom camera will serve nicely if you’re not into serious photography. Bear in mind that EVF ultrazooms generally don’t yield better results than true dSLRs, especially for low light, high ISO shots as they use tiny CCD or CMOS sensors found in P&S pocket cameras.
I’ve been using Canon PowerShot S2 and S3 IS since 2005 and I can tell you for a fact that apart from the built-in telephoto zoom lens, ultrazoom cameras don’t give you better image quality compared to the Panasonic Lumix LX3, PowerShot S90 or PowerShot G11 for low light, high ISO shots. I found the S3 IS optically limiting in some situations and decided to try a dSLR for a change.
That said, I stil keep my old S3 IS. As it has tiny dimensions, it’s useful when I need the telephoto power in good lighting when my 450D is too conspicuous and bulky to bring along.
And contrary to popular belief, dSLRs are not just for “professionals”.
Many novice shutterbugs are happy with affordable, entry level dSLRs from Nikon, Canon and Sony for that matter. You can tell serious amateurs and professional photographers from beginners and hobbyists on a tight budget from their shooting techniques and the dSLR model, lens and gear that they use.
(It is highly unlikely you will spot a professional photographer using a Canon Rebel XS with a kit lens for a wedding photo shoot OR a novice with a Canon 1Ds Mk III mated to an EF 24-105mm 4L zoom lens)
For your budget, I would suggest that you consider the excellent Panasonic Lumix FZ35 if you want RAW shooting capability but won’t be using a hot shoe mounted, external flash or the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS for its versatility (supports external flash but no RAW image format).
Be sure to follow the video tours at the end, they’ll help you visualize how the cameras handle and function in real life. Both are on more-or-less equal terms as far as fixed lens, ultrazoom cameras are concerned – and around your expected price range.
Good luck!
February 1st, 2010 at 10:43 am
Hi ya’ll,
Sooo, I read through all of the comments and now I’m super confused. Please help.
I am currently camera-less so I really need help. A quick rundown of my experience and all that:
I started off with a Kodak Advantix LONG ago. (Yea, I know..those were lame). Then around 2005, I got my first P&S; the Casio Exilim, mostly because at that time, it was the first flat, slim, cute one. After that got stolen in 2008, I got another Casio..I think the Vx7 or Ex7.. That one was an ok camera, although I loved all the different settings it had. (ebay, food, and pets especially)
I travel A LOT because of my husband’s job. In the past year or so, we’ve been to over 6 countries. We also get moved around a lot…so I have a lot of stuff to photograph. A couple of months ago while in Bali, my camera died. I don’t know what happened; it made an odd whirring sound and then just quit on me. Right in the middle of vacation. :( Luckily the hubby has a pretty good camera on his cellphone (N97)…so it wasn’t TOO bad.
Anyhow, I’ve been wanting to get a DSLR for a while now. I’ve really been looking at the Canon EOS 1000D, or in America, I think its called the Rebel XS. But, the thing is, I’ve never really used one, and have no idea where to begin.
I would like to take nice photographs when I travel/move to new and exciting places. Also, I’m an artist and I sell my paintings, so I need better pictures of them. One more thing I would use the camera for is my sister’s bakery. Taking pics of cookies, cupcakes, and wedding cakes…etc. <–but not so much, since I only go home every 3-4 months.
My budget is around $650. For now, at least. I can spend another 2-300ish in a few months if need be. Should I get the Rebel/EOS 1000d??
Thanks in advance for all ya'lls help.
February 2nd, 2010 at 4:20 am
@amna,
The EOS 1000D is a good entry level Canon dSLR (you may also want to consider the EOS 450D for its bigger 3″ LCD screen and it’s not much more expensive than the 1000D) but you have to weigh some issues with any dSLR.
If you are an avid photographer and enjoy the experience of taking photos with a dSLR, get one by all means. If dSLR photography is going to be your new hobby, it can get very expensive. You start off with the kit lens, outgrow it and then start looking for better optics. You’ll soon realize that high quality lenses don’t come cheap and some cost more than the 1000D starter kit itself!
However, if your aim is to get a decent camera without the bulk and weight of dSLRs, there are quite a few high end P&S cameras that can take awesome images. Consider for example, the Panasonic Lumix LX3, Canon G10/G11 compacts which take better images than the average point-and-shoots with some dSLR-like flexibility.
There’s no point in buying a dSLR only to realize that taking it with you is a cumbersome and worrisome thing.
Have a look at the Flickr photo pools and browse their discussion groups. To participate in discussions you need to sign up as a Flickr user (it’s free) first.
- Canon dSLR Group
- Canon EOS 1000D
- Canon PowerShot G11
- Panasonic Lumix LX3
A camera is nothing more than a box that captures light and processes images. You are the artist and your photos depend on your imagination and technique. An experienced amateur or professional photographer can take more inspiring images with a Canon G11 compact than an inexperienced person with a high end professional grade dSLR.
Hope this is of some help!
February 2nd, 2010 at 7:51 pm
I have shot all my pictures till date with a canon S3 IS and am quite happy but now I get handicapped with speed and response time and DOF…
http://www.captivecaptures.blogspot.com/
http://www.wow-wonderworks.blogspot.com/
February 11th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
@bo_ :
There are SOME compact cameras with large sensors. Unfortunately, they are NOT inexpensive… yet. (examples: Leica X1, Sigma DP2.)
There are huge advantages to these, primarily NO MIRROR SLAP– so the camera does not shake, and it is not attention-getting like a machine-gun dSLR. Also, there is less potential for mechanical failure, and the cameras are smaller. (This may be a disadvantage for macho-men like me! ;))
Also, as far as my brain works, this could allow for faster burst shooting.
SOME day I do believe the SLR will die. My neck is sore from straining into an OVF… for serious fast photography (sports), I basically need at least one of my eyes wide open looking at the scene, not the blasted tiny window of the camera. With a live-view, we can even compose the general area using our peripheral vision, and keep both eyes on the action. If “real-time optical” view is the only reason for SLR, then it’s irrelevant to me, and to anyone who would rather see the entire field to anticipate action. Not to mention, the view displays are becoming faster.
I want a large sensor with a fixed 50mm/1.4 lens in a compact camera… and I want the LCD to tilt. A portrait photographer would hardly need anything else! (Even though he would not look like a professional!!!)
Paul
February 12th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
@ stratman
Thanks sooo much for your quick reply! Our internet was down at home so it took me forever to get back to this page and reply. I joined flickr per your suggestion and will be reading into it before making a decision.
I’m starting to lean towards the g11 or Lumix instead of the dSLR. I don’t want to carry around the cam and lenses.
Thanks agan!
February 18th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Stratman et al:
Thank you so much all of you for asking and answering questions. I had to read every comment posted in the last 3 years.
When choosing between dSLR and point/shoot, think also about how carefully you frame your shots. If you’re the type who prints directly from the memory chip, you may prefer a good p&s because many have in-camera editing with fun features. I don’t like using digital zoom; I’d say don’t use it unless you are a straight-to-the-printer photographer. You lose too much quality, and won’t be able to enlarge your work as far.
I have some notes on super-zooms farther down.
So Strat, I had been searching for a few weeks online for a good viewfinder camera. I ended up a few days ago fixated on the G11, which you described so carefully. Your review has solidified my choice. My current box is a Kodak EasyShare Z730. It’s a 5 Mp, 4x zoom equivalent to a 33-132 mm (35 mm camera). I found the pictures to be somewhat flat in detail, contrast and color. Further, it just didn’t give me clean enlargements via PhotoShop or the simple EasyShare software. I hope the Canon G11 will be a good step up.
I’m glad you noted that it’s probably better than some p&s compacts with longer lenses because of the quality of the sensor. I also read that the 10 Mp sensor produces visibly better pix than the 12.2 it replaces. Between that and a sharp 5x lens, I’m going to get a vast improvement over my fairly adequate but limited Kodak. And, it has a low-light shooting mode that combines multiple quick exposures to layer up a detailed, lower-noise image than standard exposures.
My first and only SLR was for film, a 1973 Mamiya. I bought a (for the time and for an enlisted Coast Guardsman) fairly expensive Vivitar Series 1 70-210 mm macro-zoom. Between that, a tripler, and a stock 55 mm lens, I was a happy camper. Of course, I was in my 20s, and had the endurance to lug all that steel and crown glass in a massive camera bag. It was loads of fun to use, but I just don’t wanna hump it around anymore. And, as good as that was in its time, which was above average, it doesn’t compare with good zooms in SLRs today.
I’m going to Alaska, and would rather have a camera I can pack into a coat pocket. Sure, my work won’t be as sharp, and I can’t get as zoomed-in on critters, but I’m entering old-fartdom, and would rather tweak shots in PhotoShop than try to get perfect composition in the viewfinder. I only print about one in 10 or 20 shots now that I can take hundreds per trip.
I got some good mentoring from a Pulitzer Prize-winning photographer when I worked at one of the first newspapers to routinely publish digital photos (Thanks, Kim Komenich!). Plus, I’ve lost opportunities trying to set f-stop, shutter speed, focus, zoom and compose — when I could get them with a p&s preset for expected conditions.
For you who want 20x zooms or giant telephoto lenses, here are the problems:
1. Each lens element absorbs some light, and not in all wavelengths — no matter how hard the designers try. And you need more glass in front of the sensor (or film). And the more you want to stretch the lens’ focal length, the more elements and thickness the light must traverse. Less light, slower shot.
2. Some of the unabsorbed light is refracted and reflected by flaws, washing out detail and softening the photo. More random light, less contrast.
3. That big tube full of quartz and silica (and the rare earths and heavy metals that are added to the glass to vary the refraction, or balance the color transmission of the whole lens system) and the sturdy rings and brackets that hold things in place or allow them to shift for zoom/focus can be pretty heavy. That’s going to put strain on the lens mount and you. Pointing that mass can be slow (compare aiming a pencil vs a vacuum. And as you tire from holding it, you start to shake a bit.
4. At long telephoto, all motion is amplified — both in the subject and the lens/camera/photographer system. To rectify this, you need to get more light to the focal plane (film or sensor). Slower shutter speed? More motion problem. Faster ISO? More electronic noise. Wider aperture? You can’t go very wide with a long lens — it’s a function of length vs. smallest opening in the system. Anyway, if you go wide, you lose depth of field (which can be a good thing for separating your subject from background) but magnifies even minor focal misadjustments.
5. The bigger the zoom ratio, the more all these problems combine to reduce the quality of your image. I’ve had better luck with good exposures that I’ve had to crop and enhance in PhotoShop Elements (and even in Kodak’s free software) than with really long shots.
6. This and and a couple other numbers are for things I’ve forgotten to add.
So search the web for data on your camera choices (I like cnet.com), and test, test, test those long lenses and huge arrays. I recognize that a powerful zoom in an SLR with a large sensor and properly balanced imaging chip will provide better shots than a similarly long shot in a compact, with its smaller sensor. The sensor in SLR vs. many compacts and subcompacts is like the difference between shooting with a 35 mm vs. a 110 (which has a negative about the same as 8 mm).
Okay, it’s late, I wrote about 500 words too many, and too many topics. But if it helps, it’s worth my time.
February 19th, 2010 at 1:48 am
@Vandy
Well said, I couldn’t agree more.
Ultra-zoom bridge cameras use much smaller image circle lenses that suit their equally tiny imaging sensors. There’s a price to be paid for their lightweight construction and compactness – their light gathering properties are not as good as dSLR lenses.
And as you said, long focal length ratio telephoto zooms have its shortcomings. They’re convenient for travel (you need just one lens) but absolute IQ will always be compromised, especially in the areas of barrel distortion, chromatic aberration, vignetting and corner sharpness.
Just to correct you – the G11 (congrats on your purchase!) sports 10MP while its predecessor, the G10 had 14.7MP to be precise. Some people argue that the higher resolution in the G10 offsets its noisy CCD sensor and there’s more detail to be had.
I’d rather settle for a scaled down 10MP high sensitivity sensor in the G11. Its 2-stop advantage over the G10 is worth its price of admission.
And do join the Flickr G11 group – we have about 1,000 members to date and there’s plenty to learn from veterans who are into off-shoe flash photography and add-on accessories. :-)
February 24th, 2010 at 8:25 am
I love my Canon s90 Powershot point and click! I had a Powershot IS1200 and bought a s90a month or so ago. I talk about the difference here:
http://alisontravelsblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/does-size-matter-cannon-powershot-1200.html
I have yet to get a DSLR, but I am really happy with my pictures from the s90
February 24th, 2010 at 11:45 pm
@Alison,
Congrats on your new PowerShot S90 and thanks for sharing your excellent images on your blog! As the great photographer of the 1930s – Ansel Adams once remarked, “the single most important component in a camera is the twelve inches behind it”.
Of course by “twelve inches” Adams was referring to the person taking the photos and based on the huge, large format film cameras in his era. Someone else in recent times mentioned rather bluntly, “if you can’t take decent photos with Canon’s cheapest gear, the most expensive (gear) won’t help you.” I couldn’t agree more!
If you already taking splendid images with your old Digital ELPH 1200, your new S90 will open you up to more shooting possibilities.
Both the S90 and G11 share the same 10MP low noise sensor – one’s personal choice boils down to whether one needs external flash capability, remote trigger, a swivel screen, slightly larger LCD screen, optical viewfinder, higher shutter speeds, a bigger maximum aperture, a longer zoom and of course, compactness.
February 25th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
what do you guys think of the sony h20?
February 27th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
I am planning to buy an olympus sp 800uz 30x,14 mp or 590 26x,12 mp. wthats your opinion about these models compare to dslr cameras ?is it possible to take water drops , moving objects without any shake with sp superzoom models??xpecting a fast reply………………..
February 28th, 2010 at 5:23 am
@Sudheesh:
Although I don’t know those cameras, I did a lot of research on superzooms before deciding against them for myself. Your needs and interests may well differ. Some superzooms (10x and above) use digital zoom to reach their total telephoto power; make sure that the value is all “optical zoom” when comparing. (When you zoom digitally, it’s the same as cropping the negative; you get fewer pixels, thus less detail.)
Also, all-in-one cameras (I don’t like the term point-and-shoot because it only applies to the simplest models) don’t have the light-gathering capability of dSLRs because of smaller lenses and apertures, smaller chips. If you want to take lots of indoor or evening shots, or switch lenses for closeups, macro, or sports, dSLR is your best choice. Seems, though, that you’ve already considered those factors. And compacts are, well, compact! I quit the SLR path because I got tired of lugging a big bag of lenses, film, filters, cleaning gear… and missing shots setting up.
The big benefit for long lenses is in being able to print shots without cropping them with software. The disadvantage is that long shots are hard to hold steady, and lenses lose their resolution at long focal lengths.
See my post from Feb. 18 for more on zoom lenses. Also, for more info on your camera choices, compare them on sites such as (my favorite) cnet.com, which has video as well as extensive reviews written by editors and owners. You can compare your finalists from Olympus side by side.
If you’re buying online, you provide financial support for the service (like this one, or cnet) when you click on the seller’s icon on the service’s web page. Just a thought, if you appreciate what you see here or there.
But the main thing is that you choose something that seems right for you. Photographers do better with cameras they are comfortable with than those they aren’t. And to paraphrase Stratman, who posts here, “The most important factor in a good camera is the carbon-based element behind the lens.”
Best wishes.
February 28th, 2010 at 5:49 am
IF AM PLANNING TO TAKE A PICTURE OF SPLASHING OF WATER DROPS …WHAT R THE SPECIFICATION FOR THE CAMERA?
February 28th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Dear 4×7: A very challenging subject. If you’re thinking of those drops that splash up into crown-shaped uh– splashes, that’s a very specialized technique. I saw it written up in a popular magazine in the 1960s, and it took a lot of equipment and preparation.
However, if you want something that’ll stop the motion of splashes by kids jumping in puddles, many cameras have the potential. It boils down to a fast shutter, which also requires that either the lens or the image sensor catch a lot of light. So minimum: The camera must be designed to let you lock in a fast shutter speed.
Well, that’s the start, anyway. That water is moving away from the puddle fairly fast, and you need a shutter speed of 1/500 sec. or better to capture it at one place in time. I’d say a shutter speed of 1/2000 or faster, which is about how long a xenon flash tube lights. That’s what’s in an electronic flash, and some of them also have controls that cut them off sooner. So if the shutter is too slow, the strobe may be fast enough. (Your question really needs more answer than this, though.)
Check the message streams on flash photography. Many of the more advanced all-in-one cameras, and probably all the dSLRs, handle a separate strobe.
Problem: To catch splashes in the act, lighting needs to come from a direction other than attached to the camera — otherwise, the flash goes right through the drops. So if you use a flash, it needs to be somewhere like 90 degrees away from the angle your camera is aimed. (I’m sure there’s someone on the flash stream who knows better than I.)
Or the sun has to be pretty bright so everything reflects enough light to be seen on the picture you take.
Those amazing drop/splash photos you’ve probably seen where the liquid is brightly colored? Very shallow pan of viscous paint or ink, very fast shutter, probably two strobes slaved to the shutter, with the flashes and camera on tripods, prefocused. Lots of failure shots before the one, magical image appears. But regular stop action is quite possible with mid-price cameras and patience.
February 28th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
hey sudeesh, I suggest you go for the Fujifilm FinePix HS10. It comprises the world’s first Fujinon 30x optical zoom in a compact camera installed with the high speed CMOS Sensor. The widely renown Fujinon Lens are used popularly in numerous situations including satellites in outer space, TV/film, security and compact cameras. With the highly adept manufacture of Fujifilm, high precision optic and technology are provided for the best 30x optical zoom.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_hs10/
Dpreview has said about the HS10 that it has “A lens so good you’ll be glad you can’t change it”. Fujinon lenses have been used in an orbital satellite to capture high-resolution photos of the surface of the moon.
The FinePix HS10 also features a full HD movie mode (1080p/30fps) with stereo sound, and the camera’s mini HDMI output allows you to easily display ultra clear high definition photographs and movies on high definition televisions. A new Super High Speed Movie function allows you to freeze action and capture breathtaking movies at up to 1000 frames per second for amazing slow-motion movies that reveal the hidden world of events that normally occur in the blink of an eye.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1002/10020206fujifinepixhs10series.asp
It seems to be a very fine all-in-one camera I am also planning to buy it as soon as it is available here in India.
March 1st, 2010 at 5:25 am
thanx shaheen
March 1st, 2010 at 7:27 am
i have read some of this long list of replys and i did not find anything on ‘bridge cameras’. these are cameras that are on the high end p&s and have longer zoom and full manual controls. i owe a fuji finepix s5600 bridge camera and it is quite good considered i am a beginner in photography. i use it on full manual and i get good results. the only thing that bothers me is the limited depth of field between each f-stop, that is, it is very difficult to put foreground and background completely out of focus. however fuji is improving in both the sensor sizes and the zoom lenses, together with super macro mode. the frame is still bulky, but not as heavy i suppose. and i do not have to carry (or to buy!) different lenses.
while in the future i will invest in a dslr, right now i am thinking of upgrading my bridge camera with another bridgre camera also from fuji – the s200exr. compared to dslr, it is way much cheaper and suits my hobby purposes fine.
@shaheen do you think the hs10 is better than the s200exr? i did not know it existed before i saw your post! i might consider buying that instead of the s200
March 2nd, 2010 at 3:56 am
The HS10 features a Back Side Illuminated CMOS sensor whereas the S200EXR comprises a CCD sensor. The Back Side Illuminated CMOS sensor offers a 200% increase in sensitivity over a conventional CMOS sensor.
In CCD (Charge-Coupled Device) sensors, the pixel measurements are processed sequentially by circuitry surrounding the sensor, while in APS (Active Pixel Sensors) the pixel measurements are processed simultaneously by circuitry within the sensor pixels and on the sensor itself. Capturing images with CCD and APS sensors is similar to image generation on CRT and LCD monitors respectively.
The most common type of APS is the CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor) sensor. CMOS sensors were initially used in low-end cameras but recent improvements have made them more and more popular in high-end cameras such as the Canon EOS D60 and 10D. Moreover, CMOS sensors are faster, smaller, and cheaper because they are more integrated (which makes them also more power-efficient), and are manufactured in existing computer chip plants.
When more light is allowed to reach a Back Side Illuminated CMOS sensor, it can be more sensitive to light and this is useful for taking night shots. Typically, images snapped at night using high ISO sensitivity are dotted with digital artifacts. But BSI sensors allow users to get better low-light shots as the ISO sensitivity can be decreased while retaining the same amount of light capture as higher ISO settings.
You may be wondering why Fujifilm is using BSI sensors when it has its own Super CCD EXR which can deliver good night shots, too. The company told CNET Asia that in order to highlight the essence of speed for the megazoom HS-10 (it can rattle off 10fps at full resolution), the firm decided to incorporate BSI sensor in the shooter. That said, it will not scrape its inhouse-developed sensor for the BSI variation, but will instead work on the Super CCD EXR and improve this for future cameras.
This brings us to another trait of BSI sensor-equipped snappers: These cameras can capture fast action shots with ease, with some even rivaling the continuous shooting modes of dSLRs. Most entry-level dSLRs have a rated speed of only 3 or 4fps.
http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/digitalcameras/0,39001469,62061250,00.htm
Although the S200EXR features a 12 MP sensor it is not significantly much than the 10 MP sensor of the HS10.
The HS10 features a wider lens at 24 mm as compared to the 30.5 mm that of the S200EXR.
The HS10’s 30x lens has a twist-barrel manual zoom unlike the S200EXR.
The HS10 can record movies in full HD 1920 x 1080, UNLIKE S200EXR. Also the HS10 can freeze the action at up to an amazing 1000fps unlike the A200EXR.
The HS10 has a bigger LCD screen at 3″, whereas the S200EXR has a 2.7″ LCD screen.
The HS10 is also lighter at 666 g. The S200EXR weighs 865 g.
Hope these facts will help you on deciding which FujiFilm camera model to go for. As for me, I would prefer the HS10. It should be available in April, 2010.
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:42 am
Hi ,
will we get clear snap from hs -10 of falling water drops, splashing of water,water falls ,moving objects .what is the normal shutter speed ,iso and aperture to take such snaps?is it with the HS10?please chk about olympus sp 800 for the same purpose.price and weightwise its less.is it,hs 10 ,available in us?
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:48 am
Hi,
if the lens mms are 24 , 26 , 28, 35…..in these which one will have more wide angle?how will we calculate?which one will give a clear picture?
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:05 am
Hi 777, to know the answer to your questions please visit:
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_hs10/features/page_02.html
I would not recommend Olympus because the technology involved in FujiFilms lense, CMOS sensor etc are better. The lower the number, the wider the lens is. E.g. out of 24 , 26 , 28, 35…24mm is the widest. It means that it will cover the widest angle compared to a 26mm, 28mm or a 35mm lens, when composing a picture to shoot. That is why fish-eye lenses are typically 10mm and lower.
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:10 am
Hi 7777,
The lower the number on the lens, the wider it is. In the example given by you, 24mm is the widest. It will cover the widest field of view compared to a 26mm, 28mm or a 35 mm lens. That is why a fish-eye lens, which covers almost 180 degrees of view, is typically 10mm or lower.
To find the answers to your other questions, please visit:
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_hs10/features/page_02.html
The HS10 should be available in April, 2010.
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:31 am
About lens “sizes”: If they are all listed as “35-mm equivalent,” then the smaller number is wider. It seems counterintuitive, but think of them as “power,” with a bigger number equaling more reaching power. (This is not at all the same as the power ratings of binoculars, but can be thought of that way.)
Why “35-mm equivalent?” Because different cameras, using different sized sensors, have different focal lengths for the same wide angle or telephoto power. So camera-makers and reviewers need to convert them to the old standard of 35-mm SLR lenses. I looked at asia.cnet.com (searched for “hs10″), and it compared the HS10 to a Nikon Coolpix and an Olympus. It looks like the HS10 has a 24-720 mm (35-mm equivalent) zoom range. That’s verrrrrrrry powerful. But compared to the other cameras, it is about 50 percent heavier and 10-20 percent larger.
The review does not say the shutter speeds nor lens speed (the “f:” number, in which smaller is better for fast-moving objects). This seems to be a very new release and may not be available everywhere. I didn’t try, but check the fuji website for details and its marketing puff.
Also, hard to say which will give a clearer picture in optical (lens) terms. What I mean is, different makers have different methods and patents on their lens-making.
And thanks, Shaheen, for providing the asia.cnet link.
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:56 am
@vandy:
nothing about a lens changes whether it’s on a digital or 35mm camera. the only thing that might change is the angle of view because of a different sensor size. to be sure, a digital camera with a “full-frame” sensor would have the exact same feel as a 35mm camera using the same lens.
so… the focal length is not “different.”
that “35mm equivalent” number is actually useless for younger photographers. it’s only useful for people who have a lot of experience with 35mm cameras and want to have an idea for the way the lens might seem on a particular digital camera. but the lens has not changed– it’s subjective.
the APS-C sized-sensors are smaller than 35mm, so the lenses “seem” to be more telephoto on a digital camera than on a 35mm. but the same result could be achieved on the 35mm simply by cropping in on the photo.
:)
March 2nd, 2010 at 8:26 am
For a newbie new to DSLR’s what do you guys think about the Nikon D3000
March 2nd, 2010 at 11:12 am
@7777: Did anyone mention that the FinePix HS10 will not be available until April? (Don’t remember where I saw that.) I don’t know if that means you have 30 or 60 days to decide on this model, but if you’re looking for a more immediate buy…..
I have more about making your camera decision near the end, but before that,
@paul:
The FinePix web link you cited in your message previous to the one in which you attempted to correct me has these lines in its specifications:
Lens Fujinon 30x optical zoom lens, F2.8 (Wide) – F5.6 (Telephoto)
Lens focal length f=4.2 – 126.0mm, equivalent to 24 – 720mm on a 35mm camera
Therefore: The focal length, contrary to your admonishment, IS different. Further, your statement “that ‘35mm equivalent’ number is actually useless for younger photographers” is not only in error, I submit that the 35mm equivalent is essential to ALL serious photographers researching digital cameras.
Because different manufacturers use varying sensors and sensor sizes, the lenses may differ as well — especially among cameras with non-interchangeable lenses, such as the all-in-one HS10 in discussion. I guess you’re saying that the HS10 “is” a 35mm equivalent. But it emphatically is not, as indicated by the data provided by Fuji itself (above).
For example, my current Canon G11 is 6.1-30.5mm, defined in my user guide as equivalent to a 28-140mm lens for a 35mm camera.
I used to use a 35mm Mamiya-Sekor 500 DTL (which I pulled out to check), and the standard lens was 50mm. My high-school camera (in the ’60s) was a Yashica 635 (checked that one, too). The latter shot both 120 film (2-1/4″ square format, aka 6cm) and 35mm. Its lens is 80mm, average for 120 film, but when loaded with 35, the exposed width is a bit more than half the 120, so the camera specs listed the lens as equal to a moderate telephoto lens of 135mm when using 35mm film. I think the focal plane, or exposed width, for 120 is 55mm, and for 35mm film it’s 24mm. Length is, what, 36mm? That’d be a 3:2 ratio.
Further, I have a small Sony U60 (underwater) camera. It has a 5.0mm (7/32″) lens which is specced as “35mm camera conversion: 33mm (1-5/15 inches).”
That’s my hard evidence that lens sizes for cameras do not have exact correspondence unless they have the same full-frame focal plane image size. Which is why manufacturers and review sites alike persist in using the equivalency data. But since I have not looked into dSLRs, I do not know that all brands and models have exact equivalency as did all 35mm SLRs (and, I think ALL 35s whether SLR or other).
:)
But back to the buyer and camera in question. The HS10’s wide-angle equivalent of 24mm is rather wide, and these often produce “barrel distortions,” in which squares and rectangles seem to bow out in the middle. It’s usually not obvious for pix of splashing water or kids’ sports photos. Its long 720mm will make it difficult to hold the camera steady enough to avoid blurring the pictures, even with antishake engaged. The owner handbook will provide more info.
The aperture, which is a sort of light-gathering ratio, is a fairly fast f2.8 when shooting wide angle, but because of the extreme zoom, it is f5.6 in telephoto. (A theoretical perfect aperture would be f1, but the absolute best I have ever seen is f1.2, which is something like a 50 percent light difference.) So the HS10 is not bad, but that’s three or four shutter-speeds slower zoomed than wide (what, 88 percent light loss?). So if you were trying to get drops frozen in midair, your subject’s motion is four times as far (blurrier), or the ISO (sensitivity, which relates to sharpness) is 1/16 as good (grainier, more speckling). (Or maybe it’s three times for motion and 1/8 as good. I’m pretty sure it’s the former.)
So for those action shots of the kids and of splashing water that you said are driving factors, shoot at wide to maybe no more than 3x zoom for best stop-motion, and set the camera for 1/500 sec or shorter, and let the camera set the ISO.
Bob
March 2nd, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Thank u verymuch for yr instant replys……is THE HS 10 AVAILABLE IN THE US????!!!!!!!.
March 2nd, 2010 at 5:38 pm
this is an absolutely good ammount of information here!! thanks guys!
@shaheen
thanks for the detailed info on comparison of sensors. i saw the reviews and specs of cams (HS10 and S200)
what drove me to the s200 in the first place was its super macro function,( which is also present in HS10) and the Barcketing mode with Film Simulation BKT (PROVIA / Standard, Velvia / Vivid, ASTIA / Soft). this feature is not present in the HS10. i am after photos like macros with a soft focus. do you know if this will be possible with HS10?
as for its weight, i am not really bothered because it is always lighter than carrying a bag of different lenses! and more convenient too (no changing of lenses). this suits my hobby purposes fine.
March 2nd, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Hi audrey-g,
I have downloaded the manual of the HS10 from FujiFilm website and on page 87 it says that it is possible to select Sepia, Black&White, Vivid contrast, Standard contrast modes.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_hs10/pdf/index/finepix_finepixhs10_manual_01.pdf
@7777, I do not know about its availability in USA. I live in India. I suggest you contact customer care, USA, for information on its availability in USA.
@vandy, the focal length of the HS10 is Wide: F2.8 / F11.0, Telephoto: F5.6 / F11.0
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/s/finepix_hs10/specifications/index.html
Shutter speed is:
(Auto mode) 1/4sec. to 1/4000sec.
(All other modes) 30sec. to 1/4000sec.
March 3rd, 2010 at 12:20 pm
@Shaheen:
Thanks re: f-stops. Yeah, I got the wide-open stops in the next-to-last paragraph, but something above said f4.2, which according to the CoolPix site is the lens’s average value. I left out the closed-down f11 because using the tighter f-stop would lengthen the minimum possible shutter speed.
And my language was unclear regarding the motion of water drops. I wrote, “So if you were trying to get drops frozen in midair, your subject’s motion is four times as far (blurrier)….”
I should have typed, “Shooting at f2.8 will let you set the shutter at, say 1/1000 sec., but zooming loses 3 (or 4) f-stops, so your shutter will be open 3-4 times as long. The drops can thus fly 3-4 times as far, causing more blur.”
I found another error: I typed the wrong value for the Sony, which should have said “35mm camera conversion: 33mm (1-5/16 inches)”; I typed 1-5/15.
1/4000 sec. for shutter speeds was unheard of when I was learning photography in the 1960s. Top cameras might offer 1/1000; those were focal-plane shutters on the best, like Hasselblads and Leicas. As well, they were full-frame cameras, 120s and 35mm, so the curtains had to really fly across the film. The size of the sensor in a 1/1.7″ is actually only 7.6 x 5.7 mm. (Found that yeasterday; value was based on the working surface of ancient television vidicon tubes.) Much smaller than found in dSLRs, even the new 4/3 format. (My new Canon G11 is 1/1.7″.)
If I weren’t such a tightwad, I would have bought a good dSLR with maybe a 35-70 and 70-210 zoomers. Cropping with a lens gives you much more detail if you decide to crop something really tight in PhotoShop later.
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:12 pm
Hi…,,,
Finally which camera i hav to buy to capture moving objects,splashing of water drops ? or just clearly give me the specs of a camera to capture these kind of snaps.like shutter speed?, iso ?,aperture?, F?if anythig else is there include that also?why you people are not advicing olympus sp 800 30x ?
Actually fuji hs 10 is not launched yet and nobody has any xperience with this,in this case shall I have to go for hs -10??!! whats your opinion?
March 4th, 2010 at 3:42 am
@7777,
If I were you, I would have waited for the HS10. Then would have taken a few shots with the HS10 (once available) as well as with the SP-800UZ and then arrived at a decision.
March 4th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
@7777:
Most cameras now have the capability. You need to be able to lock in a minimum shutter speed of 1/1000 sec., a zoom range of 5x or more, and probably be able to lock in a focal range so the camera can snap the instant you press the shutter release. You have to be able to test these things in the camera store or find a better adviser than I.
The point is that these shots either have to be planned for, or you and your camera have to be able to respond instantly.
I’m sorry I can’t suggest a bunch of models. I searched for my own needs, and just bought a Canon PowerShot G11. It’s a great, if somewhat complicated, camera if you’re not into setting things up yourself. It sells for about $450-500. I’ve seen Stratman on this string comment positively about the Canon PowerShot S90 (~$400). I looked it up on cnet.com and it provided these cameras for comparison: Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS1 ($220), Sony Cybershot DSC-W290 ($180), Sony Cybershot DSC-H20 ($225), and Sony Cybershot DSC-WX1 ($290). Dunno why it loaded up on Sonys, not to mention at half the price.
I’ll keep checking back here. Good luck in your search.
Ideas, anyone else?
March 7th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
please advice me……………canon powershot sx 20 IS or fuji hs 10 ..which one will be good for fast moving object shots ??
March 7th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
DSLR is the best…. Canon EOS most of it… with a P&S Camera you can’t make a money, but if you got DSLR, with less than 2 years, your invested money to buy that DSLR is returned, why?, cause you can sell a picture you’ve taken to free royalty web site, but if you use P&S Camera, the website will said ” your image is blurred or not crisp”
March 8th, 2010 at 12:34 am
@slms:
If you’re into action photography and want take fast continuous shots, the PowerShot SX20 IS is NOT for you. It’s a slow poke. Consider the Fuji HS-10 instead as it has a very much faster burst rate. I may be a Canon fan but I have to say that the SX20 IS’ burst rate is very poor.
@ar:
Not true. I don’t know which photo gallery sites you’re inferring reject P&S camera images but I can tell you that thousands of P&S camera owners have taken superb images with their compacts.
Unless you peek at the EXIF data, you wouldn’t know if they were taken with a Canon A620 or an EOS 1D Mk III when viewed on your computer screen. This is especially true with wide angle landscape images with deep depth-of-field. Very hard to tell the difference.
The camera is only a fancy light tight box to capture images. It’s the person who really knows how to make use of it that distinguishes resulting award winning-like images from mere snapshots. It’s called “photographer talent” which doesn’t come with the camera or owner’s manuals.
Have a look at the various images on Flickr’s photo pools and you’ll see what I mean.
March 11th, 2010 at 10:22 am
@7777:
I had a rainy day with backlighting, so I shot some frames to see how the showers appeared against a dark background. They were not impressive. At 1/320 sec, the drops were visible streaks. At 1/1000 sec the drops were specks of white. Here’s how I translate the need from that. Rain is going as fast as it ever will, being in equillibrium between gravity and air resistance. Same with waterfalls. Kids splashing in a pool, jumping in a puddle, squirting a hoze — those are water droplets decelerating upwards, but possibly moving faster than raindrops. You’ll want the fastest shutter possible.
I also took some shots with the flash on to see how that affected the visibility. Not much help, but some. The closer drops, being a bit better lit, were brighter but out of focus. That won’t apply if the water and the source are close together. And I keep thinking of a photo I saw decades ago of a woman with long hair emerging from a pool: she whipped her head and hair back, and the water and all were stopped in dramatic clarity. That took a model, excellent equipment, and lots of shots.
And Stratman, commenting for another reader above, knows things I don’t: Which camera is going to be too slow in responding to your press of the shutter button to catch the image you want. It’s honorable and impressive that you know just what demands you set for minimum performance. But I’m afraid it will take a great deal of experimentation, and frustration, before you get the shot of your dreams.
Go for it! The pictures you get until then will be all the better.
March 11th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
Hi MR .RMVANDY ,,,,,,,,,,whats your opinion about NIKON P 100 26 X, 10MP .please advice me after comparing with fuji hs 10 .can i take photos of water droplets with nikonP 100s specification ?want a fast reply!!!!!!!
March 11th, 2010 at 4:04 pm
Sorry, slim, but I didn’t know either camera. The search for answers took me about an hour.
The two products are roughly comparable in possibilities, but the fact is, I just didn’t want to keep searching for data after I found this web page that compares the two for you:
http://asia.cnet.com/reviews/digitalcameras/0,39005881,45197453p,00.htm
I think both will do the water torture for you, but asia.cnet.com doesn’t seem to think the color and detail is excellent. And the Fuji isn’t out yet. Are you really in such a hurry for a camera that won’t be released until March 20 that you need me to find an answer ASAP? Maybe if you’d taken your own hour for your own needs, you’d have found that out.
But hope the information helps.
March 13th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
hi,
canon sx 20 IS ( ccd sensor ) or nikon p 100 (cmos sensor ) which one will give more clear picture?which one has good features?
March 13th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Hiiiii,
I hav chkd both nikon p 100 and fuji hs 10 in the internet not tested ,.The main diference i could feel is that there is no sweep panorama mode in p 100 and a 4 optical zoom diffr as a beginner in your DPS & PHOTOGRAPHY FIELD .In p 100 VR & sensor (5way ) stabilization is there ,will it give good result?waiting for your perfect decision to buy a camera .
please compare with canon sx 20 IS also.
March 13th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Please let me apologize to SLMS, with whom I was abrupt last night. I blame only myself. I hope you were able to use the link.
When I was searching for a new camera, I thought I wanted a 20x or 30x zoom with lots of megapixels. Another reader here — Stratman — helped me greatly by seeing that what I needed wasn’t the same as wanted. Stratman was right. I searched some more and ended up with his recommendation with fewer megapixels and less zoom, but a few features I really appreciate.
That’s what all of us have to do.
Have I been mistaken for an instructor here? I’m just a curious photographer like the rest of you. My knowledge base is not in comparing modern electronics or the advantages of a specific camera over another. But I’m pretty good with the concepts of lenses, light, and some shooting techniques.
I wish I knew a “best place” for finding your answers. Usually, you have to use your imagination, discoveries and stubbornness to find what you need to know. How serendipidous that just this evening I was reading on the web about ccd vs. cmos (at howstuffworks.com). It said that CCD, being the more mature technology, had the advantages ***on the date the article was written***. When was that, though?
CCDs, though, consume 100x the power of CMOS (that’s why, it said, CMOS is used extensively in cellphone cameras). You’ll find a higher ratio of CMOS sensors in the higher-end SLRs. There must be a good reason that higher-priced cameras have them, but it didn’t register in my thick head. I think they cost more, but when included in the cost of a more-complex, expensive SLR, the price is relatively less important. But its advantages in small cameras? I don’t know, but if I couldn’t pick between two otherwise-equal cameras, I’d probably go CMOS. Gut feeling, and sometimes the gut has a memory the brain can’t recall.
Please search the photography sites for yourself. I looked all over Wikipedia.org and howstuffworks.com, but didn’t get a qualitative comparison out of them. I didn’t look at Canon or Nikon or Fuji sites because they write to sell more than inform. Look for things on this site, or CNET, or — well, see what else you can find.
And I know that’s not a specific answer to the P100 versus HS10 quandary.
There are so many cool features that one camera has that another doesn’t — such as sweep panorama here, auto-stitching of panoramas there, special low-light function, a megazoom that can fill your frame with a hummingbird at 100 yards — you just have to find the one that’s most important, that you’re already searching for or had decided before that you needed. Go with that.
What, REALLY, will you use? The rest is just extra nuts in the candy bar.
March 13th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
hi,
Thanku so much for sharing yr opinions with me……..
You already recommended CMOS CAMERAS and so now thats cleared .But I would like to know which camera would u prefer for the best combination of features amongst p100 & hs 10?
Sweep panorama is high on my list as is aleast 26 X and low light function.Hope u will help me conclude my hunt for the right camera .
Xpecting yr reply asap..
March 14th, 2010 at 7:25 am
OK, sss, this is about as well as I can do without actually testing the cameras myself.
The cameras are so much the same that they seem to use the same 10-mp, back-side illuminated CMOS sensor. The zoom ratios are almost the same. The video capabilities are virtually the same (if not identical; I wasn’t paying close attention because I was focusing on the sensor). However: The Nikon is smaller, lighter, comes with a paper manual (does the Fuji?), has a higher-resolution display, and is available now.
As CNET noted, the superzooms, those that go way beyond 5 or 10x, are simply not as sharp as lenses with lower values. You just can’t shoot through that much glass that’s only an inch or so wide and still get a razor-sharp image at the end. CNET wrote that people who want a lot of tricks and features, but not high resolution (sharpness and contrast) will find the Nikon to be good. (And, since it is much the same as the Fuji, it as well.) If it will be your primary or only camera, they say steer away. (From both, I’d guess.)
By the way: back-side illuminated cmos sensors are called that because the order of layering the metals and silicon are reversed, and the metal circuitry, which usually resides on the front, go to the back. Or, put another way, the epitaxy is backwards. No, not an obvious name to me, either. This is likely to be the technology most better cameras go to in a very few years, I think.
So: BSI CMOS is said to have better light sensitivity because there is no “wiring” blocking the light from reaching the semiconductor layer. Plus, CMOS requires lower power. Finally, because CMOS is the technology of current superchips, there’s a lot of designer and foundry expertise available to improve the product. The last sentence is my opinion, and not necessarily accurate.
Lastly, the panorama mode. I used mine only one time in the last dozen vacations. When you blow it up, it still can be only as wide as the biggest single-sheet print you’re able to print (or buy). And in most albums, that’s a 12-inch (30cm) max. But if you think the panorama is important, AND TO YOU all other things are equal, go with your panorama pick, the Fuji. If you want it ASAP, as your messages ask, go Nikon. Unsure? Get opinions from a few Nikon and Fuji owners on their opinions of quality.
But the final decision is yours.
March 14th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Mr.rmvandy,
Thanku so much for bearing with me and answering each one of my questions so patiently…………All your pointers havebeen considered and will hopefully help me make a sensible decision on the camera selection.
Panoramic mode is still on my list and since I dont really tke print outs of my images ,but rather prefer viewing them on the PC or sending them by email,I think I’ll go for the hs 10 .In nikon p100 there is only panoramic stitch assist mode and we wont get a 280 degree view ????
ONCE AGAIN …..THANKS FOR YOUR SUPPORT……….
rgds
sss
March 14th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
@sss
I would recommend that you wait for professional camera sites to test the Nikon P100 and publish images taken with it before buying it.
Do note that a 1/2.3″ backlit CMOS sensor will not the yield the same high ISO image quality compared to a 4/3rds format digicam, let alone an APS-C dSLR. A tiny sensor cannot simply match the light gathering properties of a bigger sensor.
Panoramic sweep assist and multi-exposure capability (for twilight scenes) are actually not new features.
In April 2009, Sony introduced both features in their DSC-HX1 (9MP, Exmor CMOS sensor). It’s capable of a 10 fps burst rate. The problem is that ultrazoom cameras don’t have the large buffer capacity that dSLRs and 4/3rd cameras do.
So, you fire off a 10-frame burst. The camera locks up for like, 30 seconds after that as its processor struggles to process all the JPG images one at a time. Which means, you’ll miss a candid photo opportunity while the camera is busy.
A comparison with the Canon SX20 IS would be unfair, as it’s equipped with a CCD sensor. You have to pit the Nikon P100 against Canon’s excellent SX1 IS, which also has a 10MP CMOS sensor. Like all Canon ultrazooms, the SX1 IS has a panorama stitch assist (but not panorama sweep), a good fast burst mode of 4 fps and more importantly, RAW format shooting.
As a side note, Nikon has never been known to excel in the ultra-zoom market. Nikon makes terrific midrange and high end dSLRs, but historically its ultra-zooms have never been up to Canon’s image quality.
I’m happy with my 2006-era PowerShot S3 IS, which is one of Canon’s most successful ultrazooms. It may not have the sharp, 460K dot LCD the Nikon P100 has or the 26x zoom ratio (the S3 IS had only 12x zoom).
Sharp images and low chromatic aberrations at the telephoto end is more important to me than a really long zoom range. It’s an old marketing tactic, like the so-called Megapixel race (more is better) – so manufacturers try to build a higher zoom ratio lens into a point-and-shoot camera to beat the other guy (ultrazooms are considered P&S as they are NOT dSLRS).
As rmvandy had pointed out, you’ll be compromising image quality with a longer zoom ratio lens. If I were you, I’d wait for real world test results from DPreview, Digital Camera Resource, Imaging Resource and Camera Labs websites, to name a few before shelling out my money on the P100.
I’ve never considered CNET to be a reliable review source for photography products, even though they are very quick to make announcements of new, upcoming models. Reading the specs is one thing, looking at test picture results is another.
good luck! :-)
March 14th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
Thanks, Stratman, for putting CNET in context among review sites. Yep, they are very fast with reviews (it is a division of on of America’s largest television networks, CBS, and in ways they’re treated as a deadline news department). Sometimes they have good photo comparisons, but I didn’t notice any for the Nikon. And, of course, the Fuji hadn’t been released even for reviews by Saturday.
I’m glad you listed the other test sites.
As for panoramas: I think I found that most recent mid-range and better cameras — or the pc/Mac software that comes with them — have the capability to create them. The free supporting software that comes with cameras should get more attention in reviews, I think.
sss: In addition, the feature is built into many photo applications, some of them possibly free downloads. I’d note that cnet, again, has a list of applications, but I don’t want to drag my fingernails down Stratman’s chalkboard!
Happy shooting. Drop a line here a while after you get your camera so all the readers can get your impressions. I’m curious, too.
March 14th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
I am a physician and need a camera for before and after shots — which one would give me the best quality with the best ease of use (since my nurses/employees are not professional photographers — or even close). I hope that you can help!
March 15th, 2010 at 12:51 am
@sss
Nikon has never been known to be successful with their Coolpix ultrazooms. The company excels in the midrange and high end dSLRs, but not bridge cameras like their P-series. Canon is a lot better in this area, with their ultra-successful S2/S3/S5/SX1/SX10 and SX20 IS models.
Furthermore Canon S/SX ultrazoom owners (and other PowerShot models) are lucky to have the Canon Hack Developer’s Kit (CHDK) add-on software (free) which allows the special functions originally not intended for the camera.
26x zoom should not be your priority in choosing a bridge camera. Such extremely long focal ratio lenses will always lose in image sharpness at the telephoto end, chromatic aberrations and wide angle barrel distortion.
If you like sweep panorama, have a look at the Sony DSC-HX1 (Exmor CMOS sensor) which supports that feature. Low light performance is never a selling point of P&S cameras (ultrazooms included). That’s where Four Third sensor cameras come in and dSLRs too.
If I were you wait for professional review sites like DPreview, Camera Labs and Digital Camera Resource to actually test the HS10.
I own an old PowerShot S3 IS myself, although I seldom use it nowadays can be useful in situations where I need telephoto in good lighting conditions. My current workhorse digicams are the EOS 450D, PowerShot G11 and an ultra-compact Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W150.
March 15th, 2010 at 2:02 am
@debra
For general photography without the need for long zoom shots, I would highly recommend the Canon PowerShot G11. While it’s not a pocket P&S camera, it fits into a handbag or a desk drawer nicely when you need it.
The G11 is Canon’s flagship, non-ultrazoom compact digicam. With a hot shoe, you can add the more powerful and more versatile Speedlite 270EX flash gun. It supports wired and wireless (albeit from third party brands) triggers for taking photos of your patients, when the G11 is mounted on a tripod.
Its image quality is very exceptional for a non-dSLR camera and the G11 earned many favorable reviews from camera websites. See some awesome examples of user photos in Flickr <a href="
Its macro capability up to 1cm means you can take close up shots of say, skin lesions, etc. Need larger close up shots? There are optional add-on macro lenses for it, although you'd need a special adapter for the lens.
Canon has a heavy duty waterproof WP-DC34 underwater housing for the G11, which means you can take pics of fish and coral – all the way to 40 meters in depth.
March 15th, 2010 at 7:39 am
Debra:
I regard Stratman’s advice very highly, which is why I bought the G11 a few weeks ago. Like many instruments and specialized equipment you’d have, this will require some learning and practice by you and your staff.
Perhaps he listed the waterproof housing because it provides a clean instrument that can survive wetness. Price is about $170. One extra product that may be important to you is called a ring flash (Canon Model MR-14EX). It virtually eliminates the problems of shadows when taking closeups, and reflections are less trouble, too. This, perhaps with an add-on close-up (macro) auxiliary lens, is combination Canon reportedly created for dentists.
A ring flash is an electronic flash using the same kind of lamp as those found built into cameras. It differs in being a ring of light that encircles the lens. With regular flash you can get harsh shadows; this surrounds the target with light. The unit actually uses two semicircular flash tubes, which are independently adjustable. That will allow you to set them either to create or avoid shadowing.
List price is $750 but it’s available for $500 on line — about the same price as the G11. An alternative is an LED ring light for about $70. It’s not nearly as bright, and the color may not be close enough to daylight for accurate reproduction of skin tones. Its illumination range is one to 9.75 inches. (Find either on Amazon.com by searching for ring light.) Finally, there’s a Canon light pair called MT-24EX that lists at $1,100 and is available for about $700. These units cannot be attached if you use the waterproof housing, and they would negate the sterile advantage of using the dive case, anyway.
I suspect, though, that your procedure rooms have adequate lighting for photography of body surfaces. But you can create a more easily reproducible standard of lighting and camera settings for your before-and-after shots if you use an attachable strobe.
As the “owner” of your “business,” you can decide the standards to set and how to budget or depreciate the cost of what essentially becomes a medical instrument.
March 15th, 2010 at 8:15 am
The Canon S90 is quite a mix up. A superb sensor and better quality photos than your average point and shoot.
Maybe we will see less difference between DSLR and point and shoot in the future? The one point that is most important is having your camera with you when the opportunity strikes. Unfortunately the DSLR is too big for some situations.
March 15th, 2010 at 2:29 pm
It is dangerous or harmful for the CCD sensor of a digital camera to point it directly to the sun? even more if it action is at the noon sun?
March 16th, 2010 at 12:52 am
@rmvandy
Wow, you really pulled out all the stops on that reply, brother! lol . :-) Debra didn’t elaborate her exact specialty in her medical profession. I don’t know if the WP-DC34 was ever intended to be used in bio-hazard conditions, if it were CDC Atlanta and the World Health Organization would have given the seal of approval for use in medical science. :-)
The rubber seals would deteriorate if exposed to decontaminating agents like chlorine found in bleaching solutions. Nay, I was just saying that the G11 is a very modular (and affordable) camera with many optional accessories. Short of a dSLR for use in forensic work (notice the characters in CSI and CSI:NY use Nikons with macro ring flash?), the G11 should be more than adequate for “before” and “after” images of a patient .
cheers.
March 16th, 2010 at 1:54 am
@Mark
IMO, the PowerShot S90 is the best P&S camera in the sub-compact category. Heck, I would have bought one, in addition to my existing G11 if the S90 had a back up optical viewfinder.
I’ve often encountered situations where the midday is so bright that it’s impossible for me to compose a shot using the LCD. My carry-everywhere Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W150 has a zoom coupled viewfinder and in such bright situations I have to resort placing my camera at eye level and shooting via the viewfinder instead. I know it’s not an accurate means of composing, but at least I can see what I’m pointing the camera at.
Less difference between a dSLR and a P&S? Never! There’s more to it than just advanced sensors and fast imaging processors in a dSLR.
Even when the day comes when small sensors in P&S cameras approach those of APS-C dSLR sensors in terms of dynamic range and low noise levels, there’s one problem that even advanced technology cannot overcome – laws of optics and light physics.
Due to the small lenses employed in pocket P&S cameras, the depth-of-field is extremely deep. F/2.0 on your S90 is roughly equivalent to f/8 or f/11 in a dSLR and probably f/22 in a medium format camera. It is impossible to isolate the background from the main subject with a small lens P&S.
If you have a camera cellphone, just look at photos that you’ve taken. You’ll notice that EVERYTHING is sharp and in focus. The cellphone’s camera has an even tinier pinhole sized lens than the S90 – therefore the depth of field is much greater than the S90.
You will never get a deliberately out-of-focus background from a cellphone cam, let alone quality bokeh, if there’s such thing as visible bokeh from a cellphone cam.
Giving an example, my Sony Ericsson G705 phone has a fixed focus, 3.6mm lens. That’s very wide indeed. Even at f/2.8 (the G705 selects the aperture, shutter speed and ISO automatically) objects in front and in the background come up all sharp. That might be desirable for landscape shots, but certainly not for portraiture.
Now don’t get me wrong! The S90 is a formidable sub-compact in its class. Its f/2.0 lens is the largest aperture in such a pocketable camera, but it’s not a constant aperture f/2.8 throughout its entire focal length.
Which means to achieve f/2.0 you’re limited to 28mm and thereabouts. At full telephoto (105mm, 35mm equiv) the S90’s max aperture drops to a slow f/4.9. Even the bigger G11, at 140mm (35mm equiv) is slightly faster at f/4.5.
Due to cost and weight considerations, P&S cameras don’t come with constant aperture zoom lenses. Therefore, dSLRs will never replace P&S cameras for the ultimate photographic and imaging flexibility.
March 16th, 2010 at 4:53 am
@gabriel
Don’t do it!
You have to remember that your camera lens also acts as a magnifying glass which converges light onto a small circle of focused light onto your sensor. Taking pics of sunrise or sunsets is OK, but never point your lens directly at the midday sun for more than a few seconds. You can severely damage the sensor by doing so.
If you’re taking pictures of the sun (e.g. solar eclipse), you need to place a strong neutral density (ND) filter in front of the lens to cut down the light. With dSLRs that are not on Live View mode, the shutter and sensor are protected by the reflex mirror, but P&S cameras have electronic shutters with no mirrors involved.
As long as you can view the image on the LCD, you are in Live View mode – which means the sensor is exposed to whatever light there is. All P&S digital cameras operate in LV mode.
The same goes for high output laser pointers, e.g. 50mW and above. Powerful lasers pointed directly into a P&S camera’s lens can leave a scarring mark on the sensor and permanently damaging it.
March 16th, 2010 at 7:13 am
Gabriel:
I second that emotion. Although the sensors don’t burn through with instantaneous exposure to the sun, aiming at and holding the camera on the sun (or as Stratman notes, laser pointers and bench lasers) is a bit like focusing your eyes on them. And, as you probably learned in grade school, even one or two pair of sunglasses is not adequate protection for staring at the sun or welding. If you think of it that way, you’ll probably never damage your camera’s image sensor.
And if the light doesn’t blind them, the intensely hot spot might literally overheat and wreck the microscopic elements and wiring in the sensor.
Back to Debra and the G11 for medical-office use: I hadn’t thought of bleach being used to sterilize instruments, and of course you mustn’t autoclave the camera (and probably not the dive case). But you know your bactericides and how plastics and latex react to them, so use that as a guide, of course.
Yes, I got carried away in listing all the flash attachments designed to function well with the camera. (Maybe I was daydreaming of what I’d do if I were to take the padlock off my credit card.) There are accessory lenses, too, for close-up, wide angle, and telephoto use. In this accessorizing the G11 is unusual. Only the more complex, heavy and expensive SLRs, as seen in the TV crime shows, offer better opportunities, I think.
As for CSI and other shows using Nikons: Many companies pay for product placement, and Nikon may be one of them alongside Coca Cola, Hewlett-Packard, and Apple.
March 16th, 2010 at 7:33 am
Hey, boys and girls! If you buy a camera after reading this, or recently got one after getting recommendations here, how about writing us other readers to let us know about your choice? We’d like to know:
o0o What camera you’re moving up from,
o0o what your top picks were and why,
o0o how you made your final choice,
o0o is it making you happy,
o0o do you use a cool feature that future buyers might like,
o0o where’d you get it and how was the store’s service.
Or just a couple of the above.
After recommendations from commenters here, I chose the Canon PowerShot G11 (as if you hadn’t noticed my preferences in answers above). I didn’t want another SLR, but thought I wanted a long-zoom (15x or above) lens and 15+ megapixels.
Stratman questioned me, and determined I was an experienced shooter who misconnected zoom and megapixels with image quality. Sometimes your definitions change!
The G11 has 5x zoom, 10 megapixels, the ability to micromanage your exposures, and RAW as well as JPEG file format. The RAW format is a step towards professional quality, and the 10 mp sensor has better quality than the 15’s that it replaced.
I already threw away my research notes, but I was looking at some of the superzooms named by others above. Although it’s bigger than some, it’s still quite compact for its capabilities. Lots of knobs to adjust things instead of having to click and scroll through endless menus just to change most shot settings.
I bought through amazon.com, about $US 450. I can’t download photos via USB as it should (only by using a card reader), so I’m sending the camera back for replacement.
The pictures and possibilities are great.
March 16th, 2010 at 10:39 am
ok, thank you very much for your answers, they have been very helpful, and now i will prevent to do it (ihave never done that, by the way)
March 18th, 2010 at 11:51 pm
Nice article, it helped me to chose between point and shoot and DSLR.
Thanks.
Tariq
March 20th, 2010 at 5:21 am
Thanks Stratman and rmvandy for your prompt and thorough advice!!!!
May 10th, 2010 at 4:35 pm
I was in a store to get a Sony wx1 and found that the store was giving out sony dslr-a200 on a heavy discount. the wx1 was $326 and a200 for $377. i had already spend a month deciding between a dslr and point and shoot. but this offer is really tempting to go for the a200.
Please help me make a decision, the offer wont last long.
May 10th, 2010 at 8:30 pm
@ Amit,
IMO, your should narrow down to these questions before deciding:
a) What sort of photos do you normally take?
b) Which would you normally carry – a small P&S camera or a large dSLR?
c) How frequently do you take photos?
d) How serious are you about photography?
Sony is slashing prices of the Alpha A200 because it’s an obsolete model and they want to rid of their old stock. I’ve heard of lots of people who purchased a dSLR because they were offered for a cheap price but only to under-use them. Some end up selling them and going back to compact P&S cameras.
The “best cameras” are the ones that you would readily take with you and you won’t mind the hassle of bringing it along.
If you’re seriously considering a dSLR, you must look into the entire system, which includes the lenses, flash, memory cards and accessories. You have to account for the price of the lenses, the availability of cheaper third party compatible lenses, etc. DSLR photography can be a very expensive hobby – you’ll soon find the limitations of the kit lenses that come with the camera and sooner or later you’ll want better ones. Once you’ve accumulated a considerable amount of lenses and accessories and you want to switch brand (e.g. Canon, Nikon or Pentax), you’ll have to sell off the entire gear.
The Sony DSC-WX1- while not exactly a stellar P&S camera (I’ve tried one at a store), it takes better images than lesser Cyber-shot models in low light. I didn’t like its very small plasticky rear control pad and it didn’t feel solid in my hands. I thought of upgrading my metal body, DSC-W150 to the WX1 but decided against it.
Even the sales guy at the Sony Center told me that in his experience, the Carl Zeiss optics (actually they’re made under license by Sony) on the older W-series compacts are better than the Sony G lens.
If I were you, I’d buy the WX1 first, enjoy taking photos and take my time choosing a dSLR brand later. Don’t be tempted to get a dSLR just because a seller is dangling a bargain price tag in front of you.
May 10th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Thanks Stratman for the great advice. I don’t think I’ll be able to carry a dSLR to the places I generally like to take photos. Never thought of it that way.
I’ll go with WX1, I like that camera.
May 11th, 2010 at 1:05 am
@ Amit,
Good decision! I have three P&S cameras (two Canons, one Sony) and a Canon 450D dSLR. My lens, flashes and other accessories cost more than the dSLR kit I originally bought. I only take my dSLR to places where it’s worth lugging the gear (and risking damage or theft) for a serious photo shoot where I’ll be taking hundreds of images. Otherwise my Sony DSC-W150 goes with me in a belt pouch for candid, unplanned photo captures.
Although I have a Sony Ericsson W995 camera phone with 8.1 Megapixels, the DSC-W150 takes much better quality photos than my cellphone, hands down. Cellphone cams are handy and convenient when image quality is not paramount – they are good for landscape shots in daylight but are poor for people portraits and low light night scenes.
I would have bought the DSC-WX1 if I hadn’t already bought my DSC-W150. The WX1 is actually a fun camera and it’s got a nifty automatic panoramic mode….you’ll love it! :-)
May 12th, 2010 at 7:32 pm
Im a Beginner in photography… was using a Kodak Digicam for couple of yrs and wanted to Upgrade being found that SLRs are priced around 25k range ( Canon D1000..NikonD3000) decided to buy one of them
While doing some Net surfing i found this website and Read this article… :) and now i feel i must go for a brige cam/point shot cam before going to DSLR s …to be familier with those manual modes and all
kindly suggest a Good cam… how good is Panasonic FZ30?
May 14th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
Hi!
I currently own a Canon SX100 IS, and I am really pleased with the variety of shooting modes that it offers: Av, Tv, P, A, etc…. and the quality of images. It is almost similar to a DSLR: of course the lenses cannot be changed. I wanted to know what truly makes an SLR…. By definition, it is the cam that allows the photographer to see exactly what he’s shooting….But this ” through the lens” feature is supported by all new LCD based P & S cams. Does the difference then lie only in image quality and changeability of the lenses?
I am an amateur photographer, but serious in the field. If I upgrade my equipment to a DSLR, what other accessories (lenses, flash, etc) will I essentially need? Also, what must be the basic (fundamental) lenses I must necessarily own? (I mean the most “general” or “standard” type of lenses and filters, etc)? Please help.
Thanks in advance!
May 15th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Aarunn: Something happened — I posted a longish response to your request for info, and it went into the bit bucket. But I remember part of it: The FZ30 is a five-year-old model. You would probably get a better camera if you bought the new FZ35 or FZ38 (same camera, different numbers in different nations). Check out the reports on review sites.
But if you found a very good price on a new or lovingly used FZ30, and are buying to try out your hand at manual control before making the jump to dSLR, that is an excellent idea. A year or two of practice with a less-expensive camera — as long as it is working well — can tell you whether you have the temperament for the complexities and mass of a dSLR.
God’s Friend: SLR means single-lens reflex, an old term for cameras that reflect an image from the main lens into the eyepiece. It provides an almost exact image of what will hit the focal plane — either film or sensor. That includes focus. The mirror that reflects the image into the viewfinder and its optics flips up when the shutter is released, and the light has a straight path to the shutter and then film (sensor). SLRs allow the photographer to change lenses and still see the size and focus of the image being shot — which most old-school cameras could not.
So to be precise, SLR is the mechanics, but the mechanics allow its greatest feature: lens interchangeability.
The rest of your question is surprisingly complex, and I can only answer briefly. Others will want to add to my comments.
Should have been #1 and 2: Spare battery and memory card.
1. You will probably want more than the “kit” lens that comes with an SLR. We usually want a wider set of options for wide, close-up, and tele than the stock lens. You probably will want an excellent mid-range zoom that goes from about 28mm to maybe 70mm.
2. You may instead want a wider lens, no larger than 50 mm and as low as 18-24, instead of 28-70. The smaller numbers are great for indoors and street work.
3. Many people also pick up a telephoto that starts where the main lens drops off (at the larger number).
4. The flash built into cameras is very limited. It’s always a good idea to have a flash that takes advantage of your camera’s automatic adjustment features.
5. A good bag with comfortable strap to carry everything, and another that’ll protect the camera with one lens — the one you’ve mounted for the day’s shooting.
The list can get enormous — people will recommend different tripods and filters, and other useful tools for special functions.
Who wants to add something?
May 15th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
@rmvandy: Thanks very much for your prompt reply! Well, let me be a little more specific this time. Basically I want to know about:
1. The lens required for Macro photographs. I guess although that 105mm f/2.8 would be fine enough, which lens do you think should a beginner necessarily possess for macros?
2. The lens required for landscape photography. Here again I think 24 mm f/2.8 would be fine. But please guide.
3. The zoom lenses required necessarily, I mean for general nature photography.
Also, when I say 105 mm f/2.8 macro lens, does that mean the lens has a fixed focal length of 105 mm? And the aperture, is the minimum f-number 2.8 or is it fixed? Further the aperture of lenses in SLR, is it controlled by rotating the lens barrel? If not, what is rotation of lens barrel for?
Lastly, what is the role of focal length in making a lens wide angle or telephoto? Is it that shorter focal length means more angle of view and hence wide angle lens, and greater focal length means smaller angle of view and hence telephoto lens? (??????)
These questions may appear very elementary, but they have been hovering in my mind for quite sometime. Please guide. Thanks!
May 15th, 2010 at 11:51 pm
@Aarun:
All bridge cameras do not have a reflex mirror, therefore an electronic viewfinder is used in place. There are good and bad points of electronic viewfinders:
The good:
- An EVF gives you 100% viewfinder coverage as it gets the image from the sensor. Except for pro-grade bodies, consumer dSLRs typically give you 97% coverage.
- You can take images of a bright source of light without the camera blinding you, as the EVF is an image from the sensor.
- Minimal viewfinder blackout except when the camera processes the image briefly.
- You get the camera information superimposed on the EVF display.
The bad:
- EVFs are grainy, even with today’s advancement in LCD viewfinders.
- EVFs have trouble composing in very bright sunlight or very dim light
- EVFs consume power, which optical viewfinders do not.
- Superimposed information display can be distracting for critical shots
Bridge cameras may have a manual mode, but you cannot set the shutter speed to it’s maximum and at the largest lens’ aperture at the same time. This is because bridge cameras do not have a focal plane shutter like dSLRs. Its shutter is a hybrid mechanism, using the lens’ iris and the sensor acting as an electronic shutter. DSLR shutters are always mechanical and since they operate independently of the lens’ diaphragm, you can have a max shutter speed and the largest lens opening at the same time. .
Bridge cameras employ smaller sensors, typically from 1/2.3″ to 1/2.5″ to accommodate the long focal zoom. Which means poor high ISO performance and it some cases, noise reduction is apparent even at low ISOs. Noise reduction eliminates grain but it also destroys textures in your image.
Bridge cameras have shallower depth-of-field compared to dSLRs, but you can use the telephoto focal lengths to isolate the background from the main subject.
I don’t know much about Panasonic’s bridge cameras but Canon PowerShot ultrazooms are more popular. With the free CHDK (Canon Hack Development Kit), you can add lots of features to Canon P&S cameras. Like the ability to use blazing fast shutter speeds up to 1/10,000sec and automatically capture lightning strikes.
My transition period from my a bridge camera to a proper dSLR was three years. If you’re thinking of getting a dSLR next year, it’s better to skip the bridge camera altogether. Consumer level dSLRs, like the EOS Canon 1000D, the old Nikon D40/D60 and Sony Alpha A-230 have gotten cheap to the point that they rival the price of a Canon PowerShot SX1 IS. Even as a long discontinued camera, the Nikon D40/D60 are a formidable dSLRs.
The only reason you would want to buy a bridge camera is when you want to travel light as possible and don’t want to carry extra lenses.
May 16th, 2010 at 12:46 am
@god’s friend asked:
“1. The lens required for Macro photographs. I guess although that 105mm f/2.8 would be fine enough, which lens do you think should a beginner necessarily possess for macros?”
That depends on the sensor field of view crop factor (FOVCR). On non full frame bodies, e.g. Nikon FX dSLRs, Sony Alpha A-900 and Canon 1D and 5D series, a 105mm lens will give you exactly 105mm focal length (as with 35mm film SLRs). If you mount a 100mm lens on a crop frame Canon, you’ll get a field of view of 160mm. On DX Nikon bodies and crop frame Sony Alphas you’ll get 150mm.
You should look into 1:1 magnification when it comes to macro lenses. This means a 5mm x 12mm sized object will be recorded as a 5mm x 12mm image on the sensor. A 1:2 magnification means the recorded image is half as large. On the other hand, a 5:1 magnification means the same real life object will appear five times larger on the sensor.
There’s a cheaper way of increasing magnification by using extension tubes (which have no lenses in them) but you cannot focus at infinity distances.
“2. The lens required for landscape photography. Here again I think 24 mm f/2.8 would be fine. But please guide.”
24mm is considered very wide on a full frame body. On a crop frame Canon body, you’ll get just 24mm x 1.6 = 38.4mm, which is actually not wide enough. To obtain an equivalent of 24mm on a film SLR, you’ll have to go for ultra wide lenses, e.g. 15mm. The shorter the focal length and the bigger the maximum aperture, the costlier the lens will be!
It’s not uncommon for crop frame dSLR owners to go for wide angle zoom lenses in the region of 10-22mm.
“3. The zoom lenses required necessarily, I mean for general nature photography.
That can be anywhere between 200mm to 400mm at the telephoto end, depending on your needs and your budget. If you’re buying a Canon EOS or Rebel dSLR, recommended beginner Canon zoom lenses include the EF-S 55-250mm IS and the EF 70-300mm IS USM. However these are slow lenses, maxing out at f/5.6 at the telephoto side. Serious amateurs and professionals would go for constant aperture zoom lenses like the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM, but they’re heavy, large, attracts more attention and not to mention very expensive.
Specialist wildlife photographers generally shun telephoto zooms in favor of prime telephoto lens as they’re optically sharper.
“Also, when I say 105 mm f/2.8 macro lens, does that mean the lens has a fixed focal length of 105 mm?”
Yep, it means that you have a prime lens with a fixed focal length of 105mm and a maximum aperture of f/2.8.
“And the aperture, is the minimum f-number 2.8 or is it fixed?”
On refractive lenses, it means that the f/2.8 is the biggest aperture it can give you. It’s not fixed. Depending on the lens, it can stop down to f/22 or f/32.
Fixed aperture lenses are like the ones used in reflective mirror telescopes or telephoto lenses for astrophotography or extreme telephoto length shots. There’s no way to control the aperture with reflective telephoto lenses. You’re stuck at its one and only aperture.
“Further the aperture of lenses in SLR, is it controlled by rotating the lens barrel? If not, what is rotation of lens barrel for?”
In the old film days, SLRs had an aperture ring on the lens barrel which you rotate to set its aperture. Old Canon lenses from the 70s had an “A” setting on the ring, which denotes automatic aperture selection on Program and Aperture Priority film SLRs.
Since the Canon EOS came out in 1987, the old FD mount lenses are discontinued in favor of electronically controlled focusing and aperture control. The SLR body sets the aperture via electronic signals to the lens. This is also true with Nikon dSLR lenses today.
On prime lenses, the ring serves as a manual focus ring in situations where the camera is unable to perform auto focusing accurately or for specialized manual focus lenses. Zoom lenses have an extra ring to adjust the focal range. Old zoom lenses from the 70s and 80s are usually of the push-pull type, instead of twist-and-turn to zoom in and out.
“Lastly, what is the role of focal length in making a lens wide angle or telephoto?”
As a general rule of thumb, the longer the barrel length, the longer the focal length of a lens. Wide angle lenses are not limited to landscapes, they’re useful for shooting in tight interior spaces, street photography or to exaggerate people’s and pets’ faces when shot at very close range.
While telephoto lenses are not just limited to sports or wildlife photography, they also make great portrait lenses to deliberately blur the background or to take very tight field of view shots of scenery.
You’ll need to do some reading on your part if you want to learn more. Here’s a good place to start. Wikipedia also has a wealth of easy to digest information on lenses.
Good luck!
May 16th, 2010 at 6:11 am
which p & s camera has more shutter speed ?like 1/8000, 1/ 10000.canon or fuji?
May 16th, 2010 at 9:07 am
Here are some amplifications to Stratman’s notes.
Almost all camera lens focal lengths refer at some time back to the standard of 35mm film SLRs. When Stratman mentions in #2 a multiplier value, it is the number you multiply the lens focal length by to get its effective length on the camera in question. It differs because 35mm film frames are about 24 x 36mm; digital camera sensors are almost all smaller (and many are smaller than 5 x 7mm). On my bridge camera, a Canon PowerShot G11, the lens’ focal length is 6.1-30.5mm (28-140mm equivalent). Without this standard reference, photogaphers (and camera salespersons) would be just stuck.
Next, remember that a “fast” lens is one that has a small f-stop number — it opens very wide, and for a given level of light, the shutter speed will be faster (shorter) on an f2.0 lens than an f2.8. Also, fast lenses have a shorter depth of field (DoF). That’s an important term meaning the minimum and maximum distance that can be in focus. Narrow DoF allows you to focus in on a specific item in the frame. It also can mean that if you have many points in the frame you’d like to be in focus, you will have to make a decision: Wider lens, greater DoF; smaller stop (larger f-number), greater DoF; more light (allowing smaller stop), greater DoF.
Fast lenses usually cost more, and also deliver cleaner, crisper shots (usually — if you focus carefully).
Lenses with larger zoom ratios usually cost more than the reverse. If they don’t, it is because they are probably not as good. In camera lenses, you almost always get what you pay for, when bought from a similar type of store or under similar taxation. Read around the web on different brands.
Under #3, you ask about a 105mm “macro” lens. Stratman can correct me, but I don’t know that macros are measured quite that way — more like ratio, as he notes. (I had a macro-zoom lens in the ’70s that allowed me to shoot either normal or macro photos, and the focal length was irrelevant for the latter.) But any lens with only one focal-length value is a fixed lens, and any with a range is a zoomer. Let’s say 50mm is the mid-range lens (as it was in 35mm film SLRs). One that has a range mostly below 50mm is a wide-angle zoom, over 50 is a telephoto zoom, and one that mostly balances the line is a wide- to tele-zoom.
And remember, in almost all digital cameras with a built-in lens, the focal length is much smaller than in my example above.
May 16th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
Sued:
Sorry, our messages crossed in the ether.
All the cameras are roughly the same in a given feature set, probably all going to 1/2000. As Stratman mentioned above, there’s a programming hack called CHDK (search the web) for Canon that allows you to set many features beyond the built-in advertised specs. I don’t know if other brands also have such a hack.
The easy way to find the specs for almost any camera, and often to compare them on the same screen, is at CNET.com. Click Digital Cameras below the search bar. Now you need to narrow down the search results in a way that does not eliminate either of the cameras you want to compare. Click on each camera you want to compare, and at the bottom of the screen, click Compare Selected. (I wanted to search for “shutter speed,” but when I clicked “all features” in the choices, shutter speed did not appear.)
Or, you can search for each model separately, using any reviewing site you want.
May 16th, 2010 at 8:07 pm
Thanks Stratman and rmvandy for your great help. I am finding this place really helpful to develop more on my clicking skills.
I had a query regarding metering……I know it is process by which camera’s processor records ambient light intensity. But on my Canon SX100 IS, there are three metering modes: Spot metering, evaluative and center weighted. I know the last method lays maximum emphasis on intensity at the centre of the scene and accordingly decided exposure. What are evaluative and spot modes for? Can you please explain with an example?
I guess evaluative is somewhat manual in the sense that the photographer can decide the way metering is done…..but how??
May 16th, 2010 at 8:11 pm
Thanks all for your informative insights!
My camera has 3 metering modes:
Matrix
Spot
Centre weighed
Can you please explain each of these in detail giving examples?
I have a slight hint that centre weighed lays more emphasis on central subject’s intensity and decided exposure. What about the other two then?
May 16th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Hello!
I am recently visiting a tiger reserve………..(!!!!) and taking alone my Canon PowerShot SX100 IS…
I wanted to enquire how I can improve the quality of wildlife shots (tiger???!!!) I take…. and in which mode should I photograph the animals? I guess I won’t require Shutter speed priority mode, since I am unlikely to see a tiger hunting, rather a tiger relaxing. Is aperture priority or Kids & Pets (better Image stablisation) mode better? How about Program mode??
May 18th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
@ god’s friend:
This useful link will answer ALL your questions on the metering modes. If the embedded link doesn’t show in this post, try this version: http://tinyurl.com/24l8pcx
Kids & Pets mode is usually a short cut mode for noobs who don’t know the essence of photography. What the camera does is to set to an automatic or Program mode, turn the continuous AF and image stabilization (if available) on and perhaps, activate burst shooting mode as no not to miss candid shots.
Experienced shooters usually photograph tigers using a long focal range telephoto or zoom lens, with the dSLR set on aperture priority as they need to control the depth of field of the image.
May 30th, 2010 at 3:21 am
Greetings All,
MY GOAL:
Purchase of a camera.
Take my magazine quality photos.
Focus on Family pictures and family events. (Preserving their Images as best a possible)
Apply photography knowledge to take the best pictures.
MY QUESTION’s:
1) Should I be focused on getting a point and shoot with:
a) Larger image sensor (for the quality shots)
b) Manual Functionality (to apply the photography knowledge)
c) High ISO
d) Wide angle Zoom lens approx 20x (for the odd distant shots)
2) Should I get a light weight entry level SLR? (It achieves the points above and will deliver in much greater benefit than any P&S)
3) Can you recommend a P&S or DSLR in this regard? (Price $450-$500)
Some that I have seen:
(P&S) NIKON Coolpix P100
(DSLR) Canon 350D / 1000D
Thank you for your time.
May 30th, 2010 at 11:37 am
I enjoyed the comprehensive comparo between P&S cameras and DLSRs in general. I don’t know when this was written but I find most of the discussion current. But not all of it. I would have compared only top line superzoom point and shooters with DLSRs and here I would have mentioned that 30x zoom in a single fixed lens is doable from 24mm. This is a significant advantage probably permitted because of the small sensor and smaller optics. Also that the vast, vast difference in sensor sizes does not really translate into such a vast difference in noise level that appears mostly in darkened areas of the picture. P&S also seem to be more versed at video without having the clunky SLR mechanism which as I see it, is on its way out as it really has no function other than to add weight and noise – see various Micro Four-Thirds models. I think I shall champion the cause of better sealed fixed-lens cameras. Really quite simple P&S pocket cameras can do very nice photography. For the occasional very large blow-ups one can zoom in and take multiple shots then stitch them together. Some P&Shooters take bracket shots to greatly improve the detail and lower noise levels of twilight shots. (1) I think the SLR mechanism will be gone in two or three years and (2) better superzoom P&Shooters will continue to improve faster than their large outfit brethren. Time will tell. Thank you for your great write-up, your skill and for letting me discuss this with you. JT
June 1st, 2010 at 8:53 am
Thank you, Jim, for your well-considered view. I’m not so sure, based on some people more expert than I, that very high zoom ratios are superb. Essentially, the optical engineers, even wth modern programming, have difficulty balancing very wide and very narrow fields of view in a single lens package. But the flopping mirror in SLRs is surely going to fade, and as lenses get better the sealed package will steal more of the SLR market. (And who wants to buy tons — well, several pounds — of glass to screw onto an SLR when a built-in zoom can supplant them?
I just returned from a vacation in Alaska, where I needed wide-angle shots for landscapes and shipboard interiors, and tele for wildlife. Using my Canon PowerShot G11 with accessory lenses, I was able to modify my zoom range from 5:1 up to about 20:1. (Yes, I succumbed to the “pounds of glass” option, but really more like ounces.) The far end of telephoto remained somewhat sharp, but with some blue fringing; light gathering was good, with the much-larger (72mm) objective lens collecting about 4 times as much light (based on surface area). Between a carefully designed 5x zoomer and a matched multi-element 2.2x multiplier, I believe my shots will be sharper than someone would likely get with an all-in-one camera sporting a 20x lens and a sensor of equivalent quality. (I include the 0.45x wide-angle accessory to estimate the total of 20x on my G11; the tele gives about 11x total.)
Next consideration: CCD sensors are reaching maximum pixel density for the amount of light the lens systems can gather. Superior, but more-expensive, CMOS sensors are the answer to better image quality. To get enough sensitivity for low-light or night shooting, ISO must be boosted. It is computationally achieved by (essentially) amplifying the photon count for each pixel, and applying an algorythm that is supposed to compensate for errors and variations between adjacent pixels. The math doesn’t match the quality of larger objective lenses that capture more photons, and thus need less manipulation to produce a color/brightness value.
For average photographers, which includes almost everyone who relies on web sites such as these, you are exactly right. Of course, we all want to think that we’re above average, but I’m straying from your point: Almost every camera that can produce a large file size can produce a good enlargement. (We can’t go around shooting jpegs of 1-2mb and expect them to look good at 16 x 20 inches. We need to shoot in RAW for maximum retained sharpness, or have a 10-12mp sensor and both a choice of large pixel count and of compression software that lets us save larger files.)
We also should have vibration compensation.
So based on your observations and Buddha Prince’s wishes, we come to this: A magazine-quality photo is not really that great. Print media uses 120dpi to maybe 180dpi. Newspapers are at the lower end, and as low as 60dpi. A 120-dpi image of 10 x 10 inches is only 1.4mp! Magazine quality is not measured in DPI, but in color, contrast, composition, and interest. And maybe I have those backwards. A well-shot 3-mp photo will make a very nice 8×10-inch print, and most cameras made recently can do that.
In the $450-500 range, look at the camera I recently chose (with the help of Stratman, a regular contributor here): Canon’s PowerShot G11. Canon also makes the S90, which is similar in lens (3.8x, f2.0 vs. 5.0x, f2.8) and sensor, but is more designed for a pocket and simple operation. The G11 has separate knobs for shooting modes, ISO, and exposure compensation; buttons give access to metering and spot focusing. By pressing on the control wheel’s cardinal points, you can switch to manual focus; between normal and macro; set flash to off, on or automatic; or set the timer. You also can easily adjust flash brightness, JPEG/resolution, light color-temperature, color styles, exposure bracketing, continuous shooting (when you’d press shutter and hold for a string of shots); and neutral-density filter.
My friend bought a Nikon D5000 dSLR, and while he has many more features in his camera, I have the easiest access to the ones most likely to be used. He has trouble remembering how to access his useful features, and sometimes gets stuck in modes he doesn’t want. And his prints of up to 11 x 14 are no sharper.
The G11 also has an LCD viewscreen with twice the pixels of most others, even though it is fractionally smaller than 3 inches diagonally. It also has a viewfinder for those times you’re shooting in bright sun and can’t read an LCD, or if you want to shoot with the LCD turned off in church or a show. The viewfinder is not an exact match to what gets shot; it captures 77 percent, and has a bit of parallax, but almost nobody offers viewfinders. This alone disqualified most cameras from my search.
Whether Buddha Prince is experienced with manual settings or wants to become so, I must say the Canon G11 or S90 is a good choice. For real control in a small package, I am thrilled with my G11 — whether for its higher quality 10mp sensor (compared to its earlier 12-mp), 5x lens, extensive software for use on your computer, or view screen and viewfinder, whether for its easy-access feature set or compactness compared to dSLRs (it’s bigger and boxier than most compacts though), this camera is a winner.
Sorry, I don’t remember enough about other brands and models. But I did decide that my original demand for high MP count and large zoom ratio were ill-conceived, and chose the quality of output instead. I’m not at all disappointed.
June 2nd, 2010 at 5:52 am
Dear Jim and Rmvady,
Thank you for the detailed responses. I appreciate the time and effort. Looking at the content of the response, it seems that the Pro’s of the SLR does not outway the Pro’s of an advanced point and shoot camera with the manual settings.
MY FINAL QUESTION:
(I am new to photography, please excuse my duplication of something you may have already answered).
My most important requirement is that I would like to be able to manually use the features of a camera not to just take good pictures but to make photographic art and preserve the images of my friends and family.
This would entail:
1) Great capture of light, and color. (Hardware for Photographic Art)
2) The ability of the camera to add unique effects, i.e. focus on subject and blur backgrounds etc. (Hardware and Software Combination for Photographic Art)
3) Be able to manually apply the right amount photography knowledge to a level to create that art on the camera. (Sotfware for Photographic Art)
4) I would like to get each member of the family a digital photo frame to continually display the images. However we may want to print larger photos for a special family vacation or event etc.
In light of the above, (and not accounting for the size and weight disadvantages of the SLR, i.e. focusing on best output of photos), can you categorically say that the SLR will not add that much more value towards what I am looking for?
Please supply me with your response of the preferred camera from the two.
P&S
If it has to be a point and shoot then ideally I would like to pay as less as possible (G11 is great, but too expensive for a point and shoot)
DSLR
$450 – $500
Thank you again. Truly appreciated that you are able to guide me here.
June 2nd, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Because you acknowledge that photography is an art, you’ll surely agree that it takes a great deal of study and practice to reach the level of artisan. If you’re in your first year or three of shooting with art as a goal, you probably would do best starting with less-expensive equipment — the reason is that as you develop skill and style, you’ll probably find that your initial camera doesn’t do exactly what you want. Considering your last questions first, I’d say don’t buy an SLR until you’ve exhausted the capabilities of whatever all-in-one camera you choose.
Actually, you shouldn’t feel (or be) limited by your equipment; it’s largely a matter of thinking artistically and setting up your shots. If you believe the G11’s price is too high, the Canon S90 offers most of the features of the G11, I hope people with experience with Sonys, Kodaks, Fujis and Nikons pitch in here!
Your numbered questions:
1. Most cameras are about the same for capturing color and light variations until you get into models with large CMOS sensors. They’re expensive, so the cameras are made to match.
2. For special effects, you’ll have to check the review sites. My Canon G11 offers some in-camera color swapping, in addition to special modes that many others don’t have. You’ll find they’re fun to play with, but probably won’t be featured in your work. (For example, I just came back from 12 days in Alaska, and shot 1,200 frames with only a couple dozen in special modes.) Besides, software like PhotoShop, PhotoShop Elements and Lightroom does a better job. Software for your computer that comes with the camera isn’t properly reviewed, but I think Canon’s is good for full-frame tweaking — not for spot fixes. You’re also seeking shallow depth of field. Few digital cameras excel at that. But it can be done well, with experience and planning.
3. Read reviews comparing software named above. Most non-commercial photographers (and many who are) find Elements to have plenty of features. Again, as you note, it’s a matter of knowledge and practice applying the tools well.
4. Should be no problem moving photos to digital frames from any model camera. You can make standard prints on your home inkjet, or more cheaply by uploading to a neighborhood chain-store’s web site. Remember, photos will generally not be viewed under a magnifying glass, so a little pixilating is completely acceptable. Considering your price control on the camera, printing a “contact sheet” with a dozen photos at home will let you prepare for a $2 (US) 8×10 print from the drug store.
Unsolicited advice: Consider taking a photo course at a community college or adult school, or join up with the on-line class at this site. You’ll get great ideas, and will benefit from the discipline of progressively more difficult assignments.
Lastly, I think setting a tight budget is a great idea that too many people don’t consider. Stick to your price limits and your dreams!
June 3rd, 2010 at 1:24 am
@ JimTroy,
You know the saying “the more things change, the more they stay the same?. This holds true with single lens reflex cameras, whether film or digital. Although this year sees the entrance of EVIL cameras (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens) like the Sony NEX series, I do not believe that dSLRs will fade into the oblivion.
EVF viewfinders have their share of shortcomings:
- they are hard to compose in very bright sunlight and very dim lighting
- they consume a lot of battery power
- you cannot see the effects of graduated Neutral Density filters through them
- most EVFs today are still grainy hardly matching true TTL optical viewfinders
- you cannot gauge the depth of field through an EVF
Sony has had its share of successes and failures in their history of introducing new technological products. Remember the floppy disk based Sony MAVICA digital cameras of the 1990s? They died a dismal death. Both Canon and Nikon had the resources to explore something like the MAVICA, but they didn’t. Instead, they preferred to wait the right storage media for digital cameras which would be practical and publicly acceptable.
While their R&D on digital cameras went on, Canon and Nikon continued to improve on their film based SLRs. It wasn’t until 2005 when both companies introduced entry level dSLRs for the consumer market that dSLRs really took off in terms of sales and popularity.
I have to disagree with you that sensor size has no bearing on image quality. It does. Image quality goes beyond just sensor noise, there’s the depth-of-field to be considered as well. The larger the sensor size, the more light it collects without needing to boost ISOs. Its S/N ratio and dynamic range increases as well.
A medium format 6×7 dSLR like a Hasselblad yields the least noise and the shallowest depth of field, while a tiny cellphone camera goes quite the opposite. Canon and Nikon has vested a lot of money into their lenses for their full frame and crop frame bodies – they are not going into the 4/3rds format, which involves a risky investment on their part; not to mention diluting their current dSLR and lens market.
EVFs are nothing new to Canon or Nikon – they’ve had experience with their EVF based ultrazooms like the PowerShot S5 IS and the Coolpix P90. Sony is far behind either company in terms of dSLR sales and as you know the Alpha brand of dSLRs are based on the old Konica-Minolta platform. Sony knows it cannot beat either Nikon or Canon at dSLRs, so the have a free hand at exploring EVIL cameras.
If Canon or Nikon wanted to make EVIL cameras, they would have done this years ago, but they did not. Granted, there will be a niche market for EVIL digicams, but it will be a small, niche market. DSLRs are here to stay. The market for their full frame and crop frame lenses are too large to ignore and purists would balk at the thought of losing an optical viewfinder to an electronic one.
When was the last time you saw press photographers and professional lensmen using Panasonic GH-series or Olympus 4/3rds dSLRs?
I thought so.
June 3rd, 2010 at 2:37 am
@ Buddha Prince,
RmVandy has provided a useful insight deciding between a P&S and a dSLR camera.
Before you make your decision, you have to consider the following:
a) How far are you taking this photography hobby of yours?
b) What kind of photography do you intend to take most?
c) Are you willing to continue spending on additional accessories and/or higher quality lenses?
You mentioned that the G11 is too expensive for a P&S camera. Actually the price is right, considering that it’s not the average compact P&S camera that takes excellent daytime shots but perform poorly at high ISOs. The G11’s price is about that of Canon’s EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens. And that is the cheapest 1:1 magnification lens in the Canon lens lineup. I haven’t even mentioned the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM zoom or the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.4-4.5 USM ultrawide zoom lens!
There are other alternatives, like the new superzooms such as Fuji’s new HS10 with a CMOS sensor and a new Panasonic F75 superzoom that will be launched later this year.
Once you step into dSLR territory, you’ll soon realize that the kit lens that’s supplied with the body has lots of limitations. They’re generally yield soft looking images and are not sharp at the telephoto end. They have variable maximum apertures, for example the EF-S 18-55mm supplied with the EOS 450D/500D/550D have a slow f/5.6 aperture at the 55mm focal length.
You’ll still need a telephoto zoom lens, at least the affordable but quite passable EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS zoom. If low light is your kind of photography style, you’ll need a very fast prime lens or a zoom lens with a large, constant aperture. Neither types of lenses are considered affordable.
Then you’ll definitely need a powerful flash with tilt-and-bounce capability, like the Canon Speedlite 430EX II, which is not that cheap.
Think carefully before you make your choice. If you visit the Flickr website, look for groups like the PowerShot G11, Fuji HS10, Olympus SP-550, PowerShot SX1 IS. You’ll be amazed that so many images are of awesome quality – and none of them were taken with a dSLR.
What constitutes the ingredients of an inspiring and creative photo? I’ll let you in a little secret:
1. The person behind the camera (that’s you).
2. The quality of the optics (lens).
3. The camera body itself.
Note that I listed the camera last for a very good reason. A digital camera is nothing more than a fancy light-proof box that captures images. The lens collects the light waves and bend them before hitting the image sensor. The person who takes the picture determines whether the final image would be a masterpiece or a mere snapshot.
Even if you can afford the state-of-the-art EOS 1D Mk IV professional grade dSLR with an EF 24-105mm /f4L IS USM lens but haven’t grasped photography skills and don’t have an eye for creativity, a skilled photographer with a cheap PowerShot P&S compact can easily beat you, hands down. I’ve seen many awesome images taken with even the very old Canon G9, mind you.
If you like the feel of a dSLR in your hands and enjoy the experience taking photos with one, that’s a different story altogether. The reality is, one doesn’t really need a dSLR to take superb images. A good ultrazoom P&S camera can come close to a dSLR in most situations.
Hope this helps.
June 3rd, 2010 at 3:46 am
Dear Stratman,
Thank you for the wisdom. Excellent points. I did refer to Flickr and the photos are really amazing.
3 questions:
1) On Flickr there is mention of “processing” photos. I assume that this means changing the levels, tones etc with a sotfware program. What program would you recommend?
2) Regarding your comments on the Lenses, should you wish to buy a DLSR Body and one good lens to enable most shots. Which lens would you buy? (You were right, I do like the feel of a DLSR in my hands. It also has a psychological effect of being a professional photographer)
3) Can you recommend an alternative to the G11 with a larger zoom range?
Thank you again.
June 3rd, 2010 at 5:40 am
@ buddha prince
Replies to your questions:
1. There are three unofficial categories of photographers. The first group consists of “Photoshoppers” who are probably decent photographers but they are very skilled at post processing their images using software like Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom. They come up with awesome but surreal looking photos, some not even matching the original scenery. IMO, these people are more like artists than photographers.
The second group also post process their images (usually RAW images) and fine tune their images to correct for optical imperfections in the lenses that they use, exposure compensation and for tone curves
The last group of photographers are purists who insist on uploading SOOC (straight out of the camera) images as they are – no tweaking at all. There are a few Flickr groups that cater for only SOOC shooters. Their philosophy is that uploading SOOC images forces you to be a better photographer, as with the old school film era.
The most popular post processing software is perhaps Adobe Photoshop CS4/CS5, Lightroom and Aperture. The best RAW processing software is the one that comes with the CD-ROM that accompanies the dSLR kit. For example, Canon’s Digital Photo Professional (DPP) is best used for RAW images shot with Canon cameras (whether an EOS model or the PowerShot S90/G10/G11). You can however, use free post processing software such as GIMP.
2. There is no such thing as a lens that “does it all”, which explains why dSLR hobby can become really, really expensive. Purists prefer prime lenses (fixed focal lengths) as they are optically superior to zoom lenses due to the simplicity in the optical design. Others choose short focal length zooms as a compromise. Long focal length zooms, e.g. 18-200mm and 18-270mm lenses are more suitable for traveling and photo journalism convenience rather than for the ultimate image quality. They are not sharp lenses, especially towards the telephoto side but permits you to use one single lens for light traveling.
Once you have more than two lenses and an external flash, you’ll need a good SLR bag to protect your investment. Good quality SLR backpacks like Tamrac and Lowepro can be expensive, depending on the model.
If you’re starting out with a dSLR, prioritize the lenses before the camera body. A cheap EOS 450D with a high quality EF 17-40 f/4L USM lens will give you better results than an expensive EOS 7D with an EF-S 18-55mm IS kit lens.
Bear in mind that dSLR bodies continue to drop in price, while lenses get more expensive each year. Canon’s L-series (“L” means Luxury) lenses hold their resale value quite well. All “L” lenses use very fast focusing and quiet USM AF motors. They’re also made from metal components with some weather sealing against the outdoor elements like dust and very light rain. L-series lenses are however, not waterproof.
3. The G11 is perfect for landscape, general and street style photography, but is ill-suited for sports photography. If you need something like a 30x range zoom (24-720mm), look into the newly introduced 10 Megapixel Fuji Finepix HS10. It uses a smaller 1/2.3″ CMOS sensor than the G11 (1/1.7″ CCD). For an ultrazoom, it’s quite heavy and looks and feels like a dSLR, but it’s a non-interchangeable lens camera. It has a hotshoe for an external flash, but since Fuji doesn’t manufacture flash units you’ll have to use a third party brand and adjust the flash power manually.
Remember that when you step into the world of dSLRs, it can become a wallet draining hobby. There are people who bought low end dSLRs as they were inexpensive, thinking that they would take better photos (turned out that they’re just snap-shooters) but sold them and replaced with more simple P&S camera suitable for their needs.
If you’re on a budget, I suggest that you look for gently used, second hand dSLRs and lenses.
Good luck with your choice.
June 3rd, 2010 at 4:09 pm
Buddha Prince:
Again, Stratman has the details and insight.
I’m so pleased with my G11 that many of my photos could be SOOCs. However, I learned darkroom techniques in the ’60s, and had my own, so I almost always want to punch the contrast or fix a color problem. Also, all the software allows you to crop, even the on-line drugstore print options (I use walgreens.com, a drugstore chain with a photoprocessor in a store near my home; cheap prints).
Today I saw a newspaper ad for a fine local store (Keeble and Suchat, Palo Alto, California — home of Stanford University) and it listed a newish Casio Exilim EX-FH25 (about $310). Check it out: it has a 10.1MB back-illuminated CMOS sensor and 20x zoom. It can shoot 40 frames per second in burst mode (great for sports or catching kids in motion, but a real memory burner). It also shoots slo-mo HD video at 1,000 frames per second for specialty work, but I don’t know how useful that would be (nor how much memory that’d take).
The backlit CMOS has better low-light response than most other sensors. The 20x lens is a bit too long to be truly sharp, I suspect, as Stratman noted; it also is difficult to hold the camera rock-steady as needed at 580mm telephoto (35mm equivalent). The camera has a shape and probably feel of an SLR, which should interest you.
Casio also has an older EX-FH20 with 9MB sensor and most of the same features (about $250). These look like they could be excellent choices for many people, but I haven’t looked at any reviews or photo comparisons. Don’t forget to do that for all your finalists!
You can show your appreciation to your favorite photo website (such as this one) by clicking on one of its sales links when you’re buying. That’s about the only way these sites remain viable.
June 4th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
Hi,
I own a Celestron C5 (1250mm). I am thinking of putting a DSLR on the end for terrestrial shots.
Any suggestions on what to look for in a camera and options that will be more useful at the longer distances.?
Thanks.
Paul
June 5th, 2010 at 12:23 am
I was wondering if I purchase a DSLR of a particular brand, say Olympus, does it place a restriction on the lenses I can use on it? Do all of them have to be of the same brand as the camera body i.e. Olympus? Or I can use lenses of another brand on it?
What are your views on the Olympus E-450 ? I am moving from my high end P & S to the DSLR range, and am an amateur photographer. What about the compatibility of different lenses on this model? Please explain your views on the E450 in a little detail.
Thanks!
June 5th, 2010 at 2:37 am
@ Paul
Any good dSLR like the Canon Rebel XSi and Nikon D5000 are able to fit your Celestron telescope. You need a special T-adapter from Celestron and a lens mount that attaches to the dSLR body. Check with the Celestron customer service what you really need and which adapter model is best.
For astrophotography you may have to look into higher end dSLRs that have low noise sensors for very long shutter speeds but there are people who have successfully used even the affordable Rebel XSi. Some have resorted to DIY external cooling using peltier cooling devices to reduce or eliminate hot pixels. Digital camera sensors get hot when very long exposures are used, resulting in false “stars” in the final image.
June 5th, 2010 at 3:12 am
@ god’s friend
Generally people who buy Olympus 4/3rds dSLRs are those who want better looking images than P&S cameras but don’t like the bulk and weight of traditional dSLRs. The 4/3rds sensor takes 4:3 aspect ratio images and that’s how the Four Thirds name came about. Traditional dSLRs all take photos in 3:2 aspect ratio.
There is a trade off with 4/3rds dSLRs – you compromise shallow Depth of Field and sensor noise. Which is fine if you don’t require the shallower DoF with APS-C and full frame dSLRs and you’re heavily into low light shooting. Still, the image quality of the Olympus E-450 should surpass even the much coveted Canon PowerShot G11 and Panasonic Lumix LX3.
When you buy a dSLR, you should look into the total system rather than the camera itself, if you’re going for the long term. Going Olympus means you’re limited to original brand Olympus Zuiko lenses as the Leica brand lenses for the Panasonic Lumix is incompatible. Be mindful that Olympus 4/3rd dSLRs including E-450 lack in-body image stabilization and Olympus does not make optical image stabilized lenses.
Same brand lenses are more expensive than ones made by third parties like Sigma, Tamron and Tokina. I’m not sure if they make lenses compatible with the Olympus. It’s the same with accessories like external flashes. Third party manufacturers like Nissin, Metz, Vivitar and Sunpak prefer to make flash units for the more popular brands like Canon, Nikon and Sony.
Only you can decide if going the Olympus route is worth it.
June 5th, 2010 at 8:12 am
Hi…I’ve been reading this all day…so many choices! You guys really know your stuff! I am looking to get a camera…I currently have a fairly old Gateway P&S – it takes decent pictures…I even cropped one and then blew it up to 8×10 and it was good…unless you look really close…but on the wall, it looks good. I also worked in the past with an old Minolta FILM manual camera with a 200mm zoom – sorry…don’t know all the jargon!! I enjoyed learning on the old Minolta, but it’s INCREDIBLY cumbersome. I am definitely still a beginner but I am willing to learn.
I am very interested in a DSLR camera. I am a volunteer at a birds of prey rehab center and I want to be able to take vivid, clear pictures of the birds in our flight cages – if good enough, I’d like to blow them up and sell them at our functions. The birds could be any distance from me, but our largest cage is our eagle enclosure, and it’s 108 feet long, 18 feet high…we enter at one end and all the eagles are up on a high perch at the opposite end…it’s tough to get close pics in those cages. We also have a hard time taking pics of the birds flying from end to end…it’s usually the luck of the draw getting a good shot of one in flight with my Gateway. Also, the flight cages are vertical 1×2 slats with 1″ gaps between…so ultimately, if the sun is out, our birds look like jailbirds! (becasue of the shadows). Everyone says you get better pics on a cloudy day, but then the birds don’t SHINE as much!!
I have weighed all the information you all have given, and looked at different cameras. I am a Costco fan, be it good or bad, and they have a Nikon D5000 for $840, a kit, of course, with 2 lenses (and Stratman, I know your feelings for lenses out of kits). They also have the Canon EOS Rebels for $750 ( T1i) & $760 (SXi) and $600 (XS), kits too. One more is the Sony A230 for $550. I am willing to learn all the technical details. Would you recommend one of these over the other? or would you completely get away from this type of store? I know they don’t have the people with the knowledge, but they will take anything back if you don’t like it!!! ;-)
Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Thank you, Christy
June 5th, 2010 at 1:23 pm
Christy:
I’d like to compliment you on two things: First, you mentioned cropping and enlarging a photo to 8 x 10, and that the print shows pixillation only when you look at it up close. How sad that more people don’t think as you do! A photo on the wall, like an art litho or even an original oil, is not meant to be examined from inches away. Second, in asking for Stratman’s advice on comparing or choosing specific cameras, you have exhibited excellent judgment. I don’t know the models as he does.
But among the questions you ask, I am able to offer some thoughts. First, shooting the raptors: You will want a camera that can take rapid-fire photos. Because you’re not burdened by the cost of film and of printing each frame to check for acceptability, dSLRs are certainly the way to go. But do you want to make a major expenditure based solely on the criterion of taking pictures where you volunteer? How convenient will this be when you take a vacation, or want snapshots at family gatherings? All your needs should be considered.
But the wildlife photos will be easier if your camera has a high burst rate. You can then pick the one with the nicest composition or wing extension. It also should have little or no delay between pressing the shutter release and pictures being taken, because you have few opportunities and they don’t last long. If you buy a camera with a somewhat large sensor (15 mb or more), you’ll be able to crop more tightly and won’t need to zoom in and out on the birds.
For best lighting, overcast avoids the shadows you mentioned, but requires a slightly slower shutter speed. You want to shoot at 1/500 or faster. You may also want to get a powerful flash unit and acclimate the birds to seeing it go off. Maybe you’ll want two, with the second being slaved (going off automatically after the flash on=camera fires) for balanced lighting or to put the remote high in the cage.
As I wrote earlier for another reader, the Casio EX-FH25 has many of the features you seek, but is not an SLR. It costs much less than the dSLRs you mentioned. If price is no consideration, you should go to a top-flight camera shop and pick something that Costco doesn’t handle. You might even want to mount the camera high in the cage and buy an infrared trigger to capture the birds in flight. Stratman might be able to advise on high-quality SLRs. I know my G11 is not highly suited to the narrow task of capturing avian motion in the cage, and probably no pocket-size camera is, either.
June 6th, 2010 at 5:32 am
@rmvandy…
Thanks…That is good advice on taking photos in the cage. I do have a budget, and the flash units will have to come in the future, but your idea about putting them up in the cages is great! Do the DSLRs have the motion sensor you mentioned? Or would that be something I’d have to buy? I’d also like to take pictures of owls at night…flash is OK…what do you think?
I would still like stratman’s input on the models above, but I think I’ll take your advice and go into a camera store to talk with someone…I’d be able to handle them more than at Costco. What about looking online at used cameras?
As for using the camera on vacation, I am going to Costa Rica to see the Raptor Migration in October, and although it’s bulkier, I want to take the camera with me. I may end up leaving it in the hotel part of the time, but I definitely want it along. I’ll have my P&S too.
Thanks again for the info!
Christy
June 7th, 2010 at 8:07 pm
@Stratman
It’s been almost a month since I brought Sony DSC Wx1 on your advice. I am really enjoying it. It’s so small that I carry it with me all the time. And the HD video recording is an added bonus. I am clicking at every thing :) . Just dropping by to say thanks again for helping.
June 13th, 2010 at 6:40 pm
HI!
1. I read in a book that canon dslr’s don’t support MF only lenses, while nikon ones support AF as well as MF only lenses. It mentioned that AF lenses have MF mode of operation also. How far are these statements correct? If so, then aren’t Canon camera’s inferior to nikon in that they don’t support MF only lenses?
2.Further, can all AF lenses be used in MF mode too? And are there MF lenses that can be used in AF also?
Thanks!
June 14th, 2010 at 12:59 am
@ Amit,
Glad you’re enjoying your new Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX1. Please look into the Flickr group related to your camera and your photographic interests. Participate in their discussions on how to get the best out of your camera.
Happy shooting!
June 14th, 2010 at 1:49 am
@ God’s friend:
1. Not true. In order to understand Canon’s EF lens mount, you have to know the history of the EF (Electro Focus) system. Canon introduced the EOS 650 and 620 35mm film SLRs in 1987, replacing their old FD mount lenses. The principle behind the EF system is to have the auto focusing mechanism AND electronic aperture control built into the lens instead of the camera body. Canon decided this was the future of their lenses but made older Canon 35mm film SLRs with their FD mount lenses obsolete. Needless to say, this move initially didn’t make Canon owners happy. They had to sell off their entire gear to embrace the EF technology.
Nikon on the other hand, preferred to have a geartrain driven AF system in which the AF motor is built into the body instead of the lens. The company wanted to retain their existing user base who have amassed their arsenal of manual focus Nikkors. Therefore Nikon made available (then) newer SLR models that have the AF mechanism built into the body. Such models are able to use AF-Nikkor autofocus lenses or the manual ones from the past.
Canon’s EF system assured that all EOS film bodies are able to use autofocus EF lenses. The aperture is electronically controlled via the body and not on the lens, as with the old FD mount lenses. You cannot use FD mount lenses on any EOS body, whether film or digital.
There was one exception though. From 1991 to 1994, Canon made the only non-AF body SLR – the Canon EOS EF-M as a low end model. It can still use EF lenses but with that camera you have to focus manually. It was based on the EOS 1000 film SLR, but without autofocus, a built-in flash and quartz date printing. Since then all other EOS bodies are autofocus bodies.
In the EF system, only six manual-only lenses exist:
1. The MP-E 65mm f/2.8 macro lens. (It has a 5:1 magnification that the depth of field is too shallow for precise focusing)
2. Five TS-E tilt & shift lenses for perspective and architecture photography.
The above lenses are non-AF, therefore the prefix “EF” is not used to describe such lenses.
2. All Canon EF lenses have manual focus override via an AF/MF switch, but only ring USM based Canon lenses are able to offer full time manual focusing (you can manual focus without flipping the AF mode to MF). With cheaper EF/EF-S lenses that employ the AFD micro motor AF, you can damage the AF mechanism if you try to turn the focus ring while the lens is on AF mode.
When do you use manual focus mode with an AF lens?
- When the light is too low for the dSLR’s phase detection AF system to calculate accurate focus.
- When you shoot macro images, because of the very shallow DoF.
And no, you cannot have autofocus with a manual focus only lens! That’s impossible!
Hope this helps.
June 14th, 2010 at 2:33 pm
Thanks very much Mr. Stratman for your very helpful and prompt reply.
Well, I was wondering after reading your reply what the final verdict is….
1.Is it that since Canon dslr’s support only a few (6) MF only lenses, aren’t they less versatile as compared to nikon?
2.Isn’t it better to have a Nikon SLR which can support plenty of AF as well as MF only lenses?
3. For a photographer who would like to venture into mannual focussing as well, aren’t Nikon models better?
And one thing I read in the specifications of Nikon D3000 is that it does not have the depth of field preview button. Doesn’t that take away its credibility to qualify as an SLR as the photographer can’t see what exactly he is photographing (especially in close ups and landscapes)?
Then, it does not feature the essential quality of a true SLR: you get in final image what you see in the viewfinder?
June 14th, 2010 at 5:41 pm
@ God’s friend:
1. Canon has tens of millions of digital EOS owners worldwide (not counting the film EOS owners) and nearly all of them use auto focus mode on their lenses, except for those who use the manual focus only, specialty lenses. With dSLRs you have to review the body separate from the lenses, although the entire system of accessories and their prices should also be put into consideration. To answer your question, it
2. Not unless you have access to lots of older Nikkor manual focus lenses. Unless you inherited plenty of non-AF Nikkor lenses, it would only make more sense to buy the Nikon brand. Again, not all old Nikkor lenses may fit digital Nikon dSLRs.
3. Nikon’s midrange models have better high ISO performance than Canons, but Canon EF/EF-S lenses – especially with image stabilization are much cheaper than Nikon’s ED lenses with Vibration Reduction. Same-brand lenses are almost always better than alternatives from third parties like Tamron, Sigma and Tokina for the same type of lens.
A DoF preview button is important when you’re taking close up macro shots of small objects if you need to determine the degree of DoF, especially in Live View mode. The DoF preview also helps if you’re shooting wide angle landscapes with a graduated neutral density filter to determine where the darkened parts of the filter begins.
The D3000 is Nikon’s current entry level dSLR and lacks a Live View feature and AE bracketing. Both are essential features in a modern dSLR (even most P&S compacts have AE bracketing). If you’re set on Nikon, get the D5000 or D90. For Canon, I would recommend either the EOS 450D or their latest 550D if your budget is below USD1000.
You have to define what kind of photography you want. If you wish to shoot action and sports, you’ll need a dSLR body with the fastest continuous burst rate. If you shoot in low light, you’ll want a dSLR that has good high ISO characteristics. If you prefer to take scenery and landscapes, choose a dSLR with the least noise reduction at low ISO sensitivities.
Please join photographic communities such as Flickr (it’s free and if you have a Yahoo ID you can readily register) and find the groups that are related to your interests. Find the camera model under Flickr groups, subscribe to them and ask your detailed questions there.
Don’t ask stuff like “Which is better? Nikon or Canon?” in specific Canon or Nikon groups because the members there won’t like that sort of question. If you join the Canon dSLR Users Group for example, it’s better to ask something like “Newbie question: Is the Rebel XSi or the T2i the better purchase?” and I’ll guarantee you’ll get many replies from members (perhaps one from me as well).
Also, don’t join a dSLR Flickr group which doesn’t restrict to any brand/model just to ask “Is Nikon better than Canon? , because you’re likely to start off a thread war. Nikon users will tell you to go Nikon, Sony Alpha owners will persuade you to buy Sony and Canon fans will start countering with their arguments.
I have my own reasons for sticking to the Canon make and you’ll have yours in choosing a particular dSLR brand. Good luck.
June 14th, 2010 at 6:29 pm
Thanks, again for your answer. One final query:
Since I am interested in nature (which includes wildlife photography as well) photography, if I am to photograph a pride of lions behind a bush (the photograph I take must have blurred bush and distinct and clear pride), I would prefer MF lenses to focus on the pride rather than use AF as the camera’s processor won’t distinguish between the bush and the pride. What’s your take on this? Can I still go with a Canon 1000D with an AF telephoto? Or a Nikon D90 with a MF telephoto would be better?
Actually, I am confused between the compatibility of Canon and NIkon. Although I currently own a Canon SX100IS, I am afraid with EOS series, I will have to use EF (which are all AF) lenses, and few MFs, if at all. I’ve read that MF only lenses (like those of Nikkor-the newer ones) are a great asset to a wildlife photographer. What are your views from a purely unbiased state of mind?
Thanks again. And yes–do forgive me if I seem foolish–I am new in this field, but very serious.
June 14th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
Hello God’s friend, almost all the lenses of almost all DSLR models regardless of the make can be manually focussed too even if they are autofocus. The camera body will have a switch for MF/AF which can enable manual focus or autofocus as and when you wish. So if you go with the Canon 1000D with an AF telephoto, you can always use MF mode to manually focus with the AF telephoto.
I would like to make another important point here. A prime/fast telephoto lens whether manual or autofocus will always be much sharper and faster than a variable focal lenth telephoto lens. For example a AF Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 IF-ED lens will be much sharper and faster than the AF-S VR Zoom- Nikkor 70-300mm
f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED lens. Same goes for Canon lenses or third party lenses.
Since you interested in nature as well as wildlife photography I suggest that you opt for a prime/fast lens and this will enable you to capture fast action moments even in low light conditions.
To understand my point better you may visit the following links:
http://www.tawbaware.com/canon_lens_test2.htm
http://digital-photography-school.com/factors-to-consider-when-shopping-for-a-dslr-lens
http://digital-photography-school.com/what-is-a-fast-lens
hope the above information helps you in arriving at a decision. :-)
June 14th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
By the way, if you’re wondering which MF lenses I am talking about, they are the 24mm f/2.8 Ultra wide , 105mm f/2.8 macro,55 mm f/2.8. Now, for example, can I use a 105mm macro MF on a EOS system, say 1000D, or will I have to work only with the AF version? I cannot be more specific.
June 14th, 2010 at 10:19 pm
@ God’s friend:
Well, I’m afraid you’ve been greatly misinformed. I’m going to be brief this time:
1. All Canon EF lenses can switch to Manual Focus on demand. So can Nikon’s AF lenses. So can third party lenses that are compatible with either the Canon or Nikon mount. All you have to do is to flip a switch on the lens or pull on the focus ring, easy as pie.
2. Canon dSLRs can set their AF focusing points to user selectable center AF, all-points AF (this mode can sometimes can cause the camera to lock on to an off-center subject depending on the lighting levels and contrast). So does Nikon. Experienced photographers almost always use center AF and recomposing the shot if necessary.
3. Autofocus capable lenses have NO correlation to its optical sharpness. If you have determined that you have a slightly miscalibrated Canon EF or Nikon AF lens you can always send it back to their respective service centers for recalibration. Why would you want to buy a MF telephoto lens for the Nikon D90 when there are Nikon and compatible Nikon mount AF telephoto lenses?
The EOS 1000D can even use the super expensive Canon EF 800mm f/5.6 USM super telephoto (if you can afford that lens) but those who own such lenses usually have professional EOS 1D or 1Ds series bodies. Only the 1D/1Ds are capable of very accurate and fast AF focusing with “slow” apertures of f/5.6 and slower.
It’s been said that over 99% of bad images are the result of photographer’s error, inexperience, or sheer ignorance rather than a case of a bad camera or lens. And yes, I have had my share of bad images too. Everyone makes novice’s mistakes at the beginning.
If you take shots of a pride of lions and your SX100 IS instead focuses on the nearest bushes, the solution is very simple: use center point AF instead of the Face Detect AiAF focusing mode.
Lastly, I want you to take a look at the Canon Wildlife image pool on Flickr.
Seriously, do you have any complaints on the quality of those images? They are all shot on either Canon EF lenses or third party autofocus lenses. There are no manual focus only lenses in the EF range of zooms and telephoto primes.
June 15th, 2010 at 12:45 am
Thanks Shaheen and Stratman, for your replies. I get it now. You said that AF lenses can work in MF mode too, but I have read that the “feel” of the focussing mechanism in there is not good, and MF in AF lenses tends to be treated as a secondary function. Is it so?
And yes, don’t you feel Nikon D3000 offers too less as compared to its competitor Canon 1000D among entry level cams. It has no exposure bracketing, no DoF preview. The Canon 1000D on the other hand has both of them at almost the same price.
June 15th, 2010 at 12:51 am
@Stratman: You said in point 3 that I would work fine with AF telephoto as well. But what if the lighting is really poor? Wouldn’t MF lenses (instead of MF mode in AF lens) be better?
And what about shooting macros? Aren’t they better shot with MF lenses? The image can then be composed more suitably, rendering a more satisfying exposure.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:04 am
@god’s friend, if you had gone carefully through the article provided at the following link:
http://digital-photography-school.com/what-is-a-fast-lens
you would have known by now that in low light conditions, a fast lens will make your day. any lens upto F4 is considered fast. F1.2, F1.4, F1.8, F2.0 and F2.8 are considered excellent lenses for low light, HANDHELD (that without using a tripod) photography. But then these lenses are heavy and expensive but I will not talk about the expenses involved here. It is for you to decide. Even the variable focal lenses like 80-200mm 2.8 with image stabilization will be a sharp lens as compared to a 80-200mm F5.6 with or without image stabilization. These heavy and fast lenses are generally weather-sealed also.
Lets come to macro lenses. They are built for the specific purpose of taking macro shots. Manual focus will allow you to choose the area you wish to focus on unlike in auto-focus. Good composture and exposure will depend upon how skilled you are. :-) And again for blur free images in low light conditions, the lens should offer atleast F2.8. If it comes with image stabilization, the better.
Regarding focussing meachanism, expensive lenses are well damped, therefore the focussing mechanism is very smooth unlike focussing mechanism of cheap quality and third party lenses. Thus, it is again for you to decide that what are your priorities.
I agree with you that the Canon 1000D is better than the Nikon D3000 for the reasons mentioned by you. However you can look at D5000. It offers much more than the D3000.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
God’s Friend:
Both Stratman and Shaheen know far more about dSLR models and some functions than I, and have written extensively to help you learn the answers to your questions. I thank them for broadening my knowledge, too. But one concern of yours continues to appear in your questions: Apparently, you have great concern with the accuracy of autofocus, and whether an AF lens can be as accurately focused manually. It depends entirely on your vision. Including when light is low. (Your June 15 question about answer 3 really does not matter; there is no advantage of one technology over the other in that case — nor in overall sharpness. Individual models may vary in quality though.)
Autofocus is a bit easier to understand if you consider automatic transmissions in modern cars. You can place the car in Drive and allow it to pick shift points and RPM, or you can slip the lever into 2 or 1 at a time of your choice. The quality of the transmission and engine don’t change. And with the lenses, their quality remains regardless of your choice of auto or manual focus.
Manual focus is a “secondary function” only because the primary function, AF, is most popular. In the early days of anything automatic, automation is secondary; later, auto is the primary choice, or function. Like the car, or autocompletion in a cellphone for texting.
Here are limitations: Autofocus needs good light to do its job. So does manual, in that you must be able to clearly see the center of the mirror where it splits the image to show out-of-focus conditions. In manual, however, you can estimate the distance and dial it in when it’s impossible to see the subject through the lens (manual or auto).
Next, auto often chooses the center point as its range target. If you compose the frame with your prime subject off-center, you may find that the subject is also out of focus. Different cameras have different options for focal points, with higher-end cams generally having more options. As Stratman noted, if you want an off-center prime subject, you point the camera directly at it to utilize autofocus, lock it, and then re-aim.
If the pride of lions and the brush are directly in line, the AF system defaults to the nearer object in its field. That is the time to switch to manual. However, at long ranges — those at which you need a telephoto, and at which you are likely to be shooting lions — the distance between brush and lion will likely fall within the depth of field of the lens. Generally, your lens will be focused at infinity anyway.
The situation would be different for birds in trees. You may be within 20 feet, but size changes the situation, as does bright sky as a background, and shooting through branches that are at different distances from you. Here you get into “critical focus,” I think it’s called, wherein you manually set the focal point to encompass a range. A photographer may try to shoot through foliage, trying to throw the near field out of focus, by setting his lens to focus beyond the bird. The depth of field — literally the depth, or distance in the field of view that will be in acceptable focus — includes the subject and items beyond, but the nearer are out of focus. This is much easier to illustrate than describe, and is illustrated well on various web pages.
People who shoot wildlife and sports must be able to grab the shot immediately. To do that, they set the focus manually so there’s no autofocus delay. And, as both the experts above noted, you can ALWAYS switch a recent dSLR AF lens from auto to manual focus.
You will make a lot of mistakes at first, so make your mistakes at home or the zoo, not on the once-in-a-lifetime safari. Practice, compare, analyze, modify your methods, and practice again. That would have been very expensive in the days of film (I say from experience).
By all means read the web sites Shaheen suggests, and find others by searching for specialized photography terms and comparing sites returned. And Stratman’s recommendation of finding Flickr user groups was a big help for me a few months ago.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Thanks Shaheen and rmvandy for your very helpful replies.
@Shaheen:
You said that in low light conditions, I might use a fast AF lens with IS, but will it compete with an MF only lens under the same conditions?
Next– D5000 is no better than D3000 as it offers exposure bracketing which is absent in the latter. However, both of them lack the depth of field preview button, which, I think, is absolutely essential atleast in close-ups and landscapes. Any amateur photographer too deserves it. It is but, essential for a good SLR. In that way, I think D90 is a true entry level (though it’s quite professional too) SLR….it offers DoF preview too.
@rmvandy: You said: “In manual, however, you can estimate the distance and dial it in when it’s impossible to see the subject through the lens (manual or auto).”. Can you please explain this point more clearly?
Are all telephoto lenses focused at infinity? And how does one focus at infinity?
Lastly, one thing remained unanswered–Does the MF mode in AF lens work as accurately and cleanly as a MF only lens? Or does it go treated like a secondary function? What about the image quality of MF mode in AF lens as compared to a MF only lens?
@Stratman: Actually, when I talk about a MF only lens, I am not talking about the older Nikon lenses I may have inherited. For a better understanding on what I mean, please visit this link:
http://www.nikon.co.in/products.php?categoryid=34
It lists the MF special purpose lenses. Apart from these, in the right pane in that webpage you can see the MF only wide angle, telephoto, normal lenses etc. All of these are compatible with all Nikon newer D series SLRs. There is no such option available with Canon wherein I must stick to the AFs—EF or EF-S series except for the 6 MF lenses you described. It is in this light that I think Nikons (say D90) are more compatible and versatile than Canons (say 1000D) for a particular photogenic situation. I agree MF mode is available in an AF lens—but does it compare with an MF only lens?
What do you think?
@all: Actually, I am buying my first SLR. Since SLRs are not things to be continually changed every few months, I want to be careful enough to buy one which is most compatible with the variety of MF and AF lenses available. I don’t want myself to be trapped in a situation which demands more of a MF lens than an AF lens (even in MF mode). And, rightly, if MF only lenses are indeed compatible with Nikon D90, why should I head towards a Canon 1000D then? (which is compatible only with EF and EF-s lenses). Of course, D90 costs more than 1000D, but lets leave that for a moment.(Although this factor pushes me more towards a Canon in that I can invest the remainder sum in a good lens later). What do you feel?
June 16th, 2010 at 10:39 am
@ God’s Friend:
Please take note of my reply very carefully:
OK, so you sent me the link to the Nikon India website (I assume you’re from India) which points to the Manual Focus lens category.
I’m going to have to ask you this question beforehand: Are you buying a digital SLR or an old film SLR? This is because, with the exception of the PC-E tilt & shift lenses – all the other manual lenses that are listed are the bayonet mount type for the old Nikon SLRs from the 1970s and 1980s.
Are you looking to buy a digital D5000 or an all manual, all-mechanical FM10?
Here’s the lowdown:
- You CANNOT use any bayonet mount manual Nikkor lenses on any Nikon dSLR or any film Nikon SLRs that use the Nikon F mount. If you want to use those old manual Nikkor lenses, you have to buy a bayonet mount 35mm film Nikon SLR. Such cameras have NO autofocus capability whatsoever. You set the shutter speed on the body and the aperture on the lens barrel.
- Tilt and shift lenses use specialty optics that require very fine focusing, that’s why they are manual focus only. Are you going to take professional architectural photos? Because that’s what T&S lenses are for and they are definitely not cheap. Such lenses can be used only with certain Nikon dSLR models.
- If you expand on the “Related Products” tab, you will see the types of Nikon cameras those manual lenses are meant compatible with. This is more important than the general “Manual lenses” tab.
- Nikon is the only camera company that still makes old, early 1980s bayonet mount lenses because there’s still a demand from Nikon film SLR shooters that own old FM2, FE2, F3 35mm film cameras. Yes, there are people who prefer film to digital, They would scan their negatives into JPG or TIFF images and store those files in their computer.
- I’m going to say this for the last time. All autofocus lenses have a manual focus override in case the AF mode doesn’t produce satisfactory results. There is no difference in optical quality whether you shoot in AF or MF mode because it’s the same glass is the the lens barrel. The feel of the focusing ring depends on whether the lens is a cheap model or a professional grade lens.
- A dSLR is nothing more than a fancy light tight box to capture images. It is not the camera that makes award winning photographs. It’s the person behind it. In most cases, the camera doesn’t matter. You do.
- Please do some research on your own as well. There are so many photography blogs and gear review sites that will help you choose your first dSLR.
For my parting words to you, I’d like to share this very invaluable link which I found to help you decide between Canon or Nikon dSLR.
Best of luck! :-D
June 16th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
You ask, can I explain manual focus more clearly when it’s impossible to see the subject through the lens: You estimate the distance by pulling the camera away from your face and use the naked eye. You dial it in by turning the focus ring on the lens. As Stratman and Shaheen explained in depth, an autofocus mechanism has to “see” the subject. If it has insufficient light to register the range, it may use a focusing light. That may not be bright enough. Fortunately, the eye is more sensitive than the camera (which is why we can see the stars easily at night, but a camera needs seconds to minutes to record them).
The reason you may be able to estimate the distance better without looking through the camera is that less light will reach your eye through a camera’s optics than is needed to see the focusing feature of the camera. (Some use a grid, some use a split image, to make focusing easier, but neither can be acceptably discriminated in low light to focus.)
Focusing to infinity: All lenses “can” focus to infinity, but virtually no “good” telephoto lens is focused on infinity alone except a celestial telescope. (Cheap cameras, such as the single-use film cameras, cannot be focused and are set to register acceptable focus at infinity. They also have somewhat wide-angled lenses.) Infinity is the far end of the focal range. That you don’t know how to set a lens to infinity makes me wonder whether you are ready to dive into things you are already asking questions about. To get the camera to automatically shoot at infinity, point it at a mountain or other object a few hundred yards or more away. To manually set to infinity, turn the lens’ focus ring all the way to the infinity (sideways 8) symbol.
Manually focusing an autofocus lens: An AF lens is “primarily’ expected to be used in autofocus. That by default makes manual a secondary function. It does not make it inferior. Secondary does not mean second in quality. It means the method most people would choose second, not first.
Focusing manually is possibly more accurate than using autofocus but almost always slower for well-lighted subjects. I examined how my camera set its focal point by switching to manual after autofocus. It chose to focus beyond the subject because that offered depth of field to infinity — in other words, everything beyond the subject would be in focus (and nearer things would be less likely to be in focus). In that example, I could have focused more sharply manually. A lens has an acceptable sharpness within its depth of field, determined by whether a reasonable enlargement would show a lack of focus at the far or near boundary of its depth of field. Therefore, with the camera intentionally focusing beyond my subject, the subject could have appeared out of focus in an extreme enlargement or crop.
Manual-focus-only lenses are not superior per se to AF. I don’t even know if you can buy an MF lens designed for a dSLR. And I don’t think you should, especially considering your admitted inexperience with SLRs.
So you don’t have to worry about accuracy of the lens in manual vs. auto; you have to worry about the accuracy of the programming or of yourself.
Based on the questions you ask and that you are unfamiliar with many common terms and concerns, I hope you are prepared to spend a lot of time practicing, taking classes, and reading up on this fascinating and rewarding hobby. Otherwise, you’ll just be frustrated by the expense and challenges.
June 18th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
Hello guys, I want to buy a camera and I’m eyeing for Nikon p100, I’m just an amateur photographer.
I will use the camera for travel(local and foreign), taking pictures of scenery, friends night-outs and events. I just want to have a good zoom, macro and crisp photos (just for amateur photography)
I don’t want to go far and buy an SLR since I don’t have any plans to buy different lenses. But I don’t want to regret also buying something so close to SLR that I’ll regret.
Please someone help me with this dilemma. Would Nikon p100 will suffice my needs?
TIA
June 18th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
BTW. I’m also open for other came suggestions. Thanks! :)
June 19th, 2010 at 2:25 am
@ Kaye,
Unfortunately Nikon has never been known for optical quality in its Coolpix bridge camera lineup. Nikon’s expertise lies in its dSLRs rather than its P&S compacts. The Coolpix L100 is a bridge ultrazoom camera and it severely lacks major features found in its competitors, namely Canon, Panasonic Lumix, Olympus and Fujifilm.
That said, Canon’s S/SX series of ultra-zooms outsell Nikon Coolpix L and P series of the same category. I’ve read reviews on Nikon’s P90 and P100 and both models got lower ratings than, e.g. the Canon SX1/SX10 IS.
For a bridge camera, it doesn’t have a Program, Aperture/Shutter Priority and Manual mode and lacks an electronic viewfinder (EVF). Ultrazoom P&S cameras are large and heavy therefore it’s more natural to compose photos using the EVF instead of the rear LCD screen,
The lens fitted to the L100 is kind of mediocre and exhibits undesirable traits such as chromatic aberration (or purple fringing). I would pass this one if I were you. (It’s also a discontinued model, no surprise here).
Decent ultra-zoom bridge cameras include the Canon PowerShot SX-series (eg. SX10 IS, SX20 IS). Both have great optical quality (they share the same 28-560mm lens) and you can use any Canon Speedlite EX external flash on them. Should you buy a Canon dSLR someday, the same flash unit can be shared between both cameras.
Another worthy consideration is the new Fujifilm Finepix HS10/HS11 which promises 10 frames/sec burst mode and a sensitive back-side illuminated CMOS 10 Megapixel sensor. Down scaling the megapixel count to “just” 10MP is more than adequate for large prints and also improves the camera’s high ISO performance.
Canon did this to their current PowerShot G11 which was introduced in September last year and test shots from reviewers confirmed the G11’s lower noise at high ISOs compared to its predecessor, the 14.7MP PowerShot G10.
The Fujifilm also sports a whopping 30x optical zoom (24-720mm) which has a wider angle lens compared to Canon’s offerings (28-560mm). As the camera is relatively new, it hasn’t been thoroughly reviewed by the popular camera review sites yet.
The downside is that the Fujifilm HS10 is on the large and bulky side (that’s to be expected with camera with a 30x zoom) but it looks so much like a real dSLR, without the costs involved (like buying additional lenses). While it has a hot shoe for an external flash, Fujifilm doesn’t make a flash unit for this model. You’ll have to use third party brands and use manual flash mode.
If the external flash issue is not of a concern to you, I should think you’ll be very pleased with the Fujifilm HS10. In fact, I might consider buying it to replace my aging PowerShot S3 IS. The HS10 has a top shutter speed of 1/4000sec, equal to many entry level dSLRs. It also has the usual P/A/S/M modes expected in a good ultra-zoom P&S camera. Shooting in aperture priority and manual override modes will give you more flexibility, which you’ll appreciate if you’re serious about learning photography.
Be sure to test the Fujifilm HS10 or the Canon SX20 IS at a camera store rather than buying online. You’ll want to evaluate its weight, size and handling. Personally, if I were to give up my expensive dSLR hobby and stick to one travel camera, I’d pick the Fujifilm HS10 although I’m largely a Canon fan.
Hope this helps. :-)
June 19th, 2010 at 9:28 am
Kaye: I’ll make the same recommendation to you that Stratman made to me several months ago. I had written that I wanted a superzoomer — something with 12x or more zoom, 12mp sensor, plus manual control (the manual, program, shutter priority or aperture priority that Stratman mentioned as P/A/S/M. I owned and successfully operated a film SLR in the ’70s and ’80s, but got tired of lugging around a heavy camera and bag full of lenses, flashes, filters….
A good digital all-in-one (I don’t like the term point-and-shoot, it sounds too pejorative) offers control over how the camera records your images, is easy to use in automatic mode, works fast and — most important — takes sharp pictures. As you may have seen in Stratman’s earlier entries, superzooms don’t shoot as sharply as cameras with lower zoom ratios — say, less than 5x. He took your model question and extended it to the better cameras in the same field — superzooms. And his comment on newer 10mp sensors has been right on for months.
I had a massive lens for my old SLR; it had a 3:1 zoom ratio, and that was excellent in its time. More recently, I had 2x and 3.4x; both were a bit limited in my opinion. But when you look at test photos taken by some web sites, you’ll see that at very long settings, zooms lose contrast and sharpness. And there’s not that much to gain beyond 5-8x in terms of composition. (Except for the purple fringing!)
The longer zoom ratios are usually in the bulkier cameras that have the SLR form. If you don’t mind that, and expect to make large blowups regularly from long shots zoomed way in, stick with the cameras Stratman named. His opinions are practically revered. Digital SLRs start below $600, and offer a bewildering range of features and tricks. Top P&S (sound of teeth gritting) cameras sell just below that, and you said you didn’t want to regret paying in the SLR range for something not SLR.
As good as the Canon G11 is, it approaches that price, selling for $450-499 — but I really love it. Not as small as most, but with a good lens and sensor, plus a real feature package and manual control knobs instead of functions buried deeply in menus. It also has a rotating/pivoting screen that’s very bright and sharper than most. A slightly cheaper option (about $50 less?) is Canon’s S90. Its soom isn’t as long, but it’s much smaller and has the same functions (mostly) and sensor. For size and weight, it goes with a fixed screen, and has no viewfinder (which the G11 has — a feature rare on P&S cameras). A few weeks ago I mentioned reading an ad for a Casio Exilim EX-FH25 (about $310). Scroll up a ways and see what I wrote. You might be interested.
I’m not up on other models, but perhaps another reader can name some of the smaller options that are very satisfying.
June 19th, 2010 at 9:38 am
@ Stratman…
I had sent the following in on June 6 and RMVANDY responded but left a few questions open for clarification from you if you could please…
(June 6) Hi…I’ve been reading this all day…so many choices! You guys really know your stuff! I am looking to get a camera…I currently have a fairly old Gateway P&S – it takes decent pictures…I even cropped one and then blew it up to 8×10 and it was good…unless you look really close…but on the wall, it looks good. I also worked in the past with an old Minolta FILM manual camera with a 200mm zoom – sorry…don’t know all the jargon!! I enjoyed learning on the old Minolta, but it’s INCREDIBLY cumbersome. I am definitely still a beginner but I am willing to learn.
I am very interested in a DSLR camera. I am a volunteer at a birds of prey rehab center and I want to be able to take vivid, clear pictures of the birds in our flight cages – if good enough, I’d like to blow them up and sell them at our functions. The birds could be any distance from me, but our largest cage is our eagle enclosure, and it’s 108 feet long, 18 feet high…we enter at one end and all the eagles are up on a high perch at the opposite end…it’s tough to get close pics in those cages. We also have a hard time taking pics of the birds flying from end to end…it’s usually the luck of the draw getting a good shot of one in flight with my Gateway. Also, the flight cages are vertical 1×2 slats with 1? gaps between…so ultimately, if the sun is out, our birds look like jailbirds! (becasue of the shadows). Everyone says you get better pics on a cloudy day, but then the birds don’t SHINE as much!!
I have weighed all the information you all have given, and looked at different cameras. I am a Costco fan, be it good or bad, and they have a Nikon D5000 for $840, a kit, of course, with 2 lenses (and Stratman, I know your feelings for lenses out of kits). They also have the Canon EOS Rebels for $750 ( T1i) & $760 (SXi) and $600 (XS), kits too. One more is the Sony A230 for $550. I am willing to learn all the technical details. Would you recommend one of these over the other? or would you completely get away from this type of store? I know they don’t have the people with the knowledge, but they will take anything back if you don’t like it!!! ;-)
(today June 18th – (colorado)) I also would like to possibly use the camera for night pictures of owls…flash is OK. any suggestions???
Thanks so much!
Christy
June 19th, 2010 at 3:09 pm
Thanks everyone for the reply and also opening up my eyes to other choices. Now, I have two options, Canon Powershot SX210 IS or Canon PowerShot SX20 IS.
Can you please help me picking the right camera for me. I like the portability of sx210, and the color which is pink. But does it give me sharp images? On the other hand the sx20 gives better grip for the camera and articulating LCD, oh wait the viewfinder makes me feel like a photograper. LOL.
Now, as I have said before I only care for the sharp pictures, easy to use, great in lowlight and great experience of photography. But, part of me feels that sx210 will be just another digital camera.
Thanks all in advance:)
June 19th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
@ Christy,
Sorry for forgetting to reply, Christy….I guess I got sidetracked by the relentless postings by a certain poster earlier and didn’t know you were waiting for an answer.
I’ll try to come out with a lengthy reply later tonight, but meanwhile please have a look at this Flickr group.. Are these the type of shots you hope to emulate?
And more importantly, what is your absolute budget?
cheers,
Stratman
June 19th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
@ Stratman…
Thanks…believe me, I know distractions! And I’ve been out of town for a week, so no problem at all!
Yes…similar…I want to be able to take all sorts of photos…I want in-flight photos which rmvandy talked about in his response, and I want take full-body photos definitely, but I’m interested in macro and telephoto also…I love the extreme close-up photos of feathers, or eyes, or feet, etc. I also love the distant shots, and action shots…and maybe the night shots…can I say I want it all??? ;-)
My budget is about $1000 US dollars. I also have an ad for a place called Mikes Camera here in Denver and it doesn’t include the zoom, but shows it…it says “$699…includes 18-55mm VR Zoom-NIKKOR lens, camera case and DVD” (I’m thinking instructional DVD…), and also can add 55-200mm VR Zoom-NIKKOR lens for $150, or add a 70-300mm VR II Zoom-NIKKOR lense for $190. This would work in my budget, and I’d be willing to learn everything about it!
rmvandy warned me about the bulkiness, but I already have a decent P&S camera, so I won’t mind that. I will be going to Costa Rica in the fall to see the Raptor migration.
Thanks!!
Christy
June 20th, 2010 at 3:02 am
@ Christy,
OK, here goes a very long read. First off, USD1K will NOT buy you a dSLR body coupled with an excellent lens.
Canon makes better lenses overall than Nikon, but Nikon has better bodies for the same price point. Canon brand lenses are also cheaper than Nikon brand lenses. Third party lenses costs the same whether they’re for Nikon, Canon or Sony Alpha. When it comes to dSLRs, optics make a lot of difference to an image quality and perspective compared to the body.
Kit lenses have optical performance that is average: neither shabby nor excellent. DSLR manufacturers bundle with cheap kit lenses to make entry level dSLR kits reasonably priced. Of course, the higher end models are often fitted with more superior lenses as a kit lens. For example, the Canon EOS 5D MkII comes with the superior EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM lens, which is a high priced lens if bought separately.
I’m a Canon shooter therefore I know Canon bodies and gear more than I know Nikon or Sony, so bear with me. :-)
There are several options for you that I can think of. I don’t live in the USA so I’ll base the price according to Adorama.com, a renowned and dependable online seller in the States.
Option 1:
Adorama’s Rebel T1i bundle which includes the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens AND the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS zoom for USD900. Add another USD100 and you can get the EF 50mm f/1.8 Mk II prime lens, it’s the cheapest lens in Canon’s entire range but surprisingly optically sharp for its low price. Many Canon amateur photographers own the EF 50mm f/1.8.
Total cost: USD1K.
Option 2:
Rebel T2i kit plus EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM. The EF-75-300mm has a longer reach but it’s a poor lens and lacks image stabilization. Many folks at the Flickr group would prefer the EF-S 55-250mm IS to the EF 75-300mm, which is an old lens design. Add the EF 50mm f/1.8 prime lens for another USD100.
Total cost: USD950
Option 3:
Rebel T2i body only at USD600. As there’s no lens, I’d suggest that you go for the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM for an additional USD530. This lens is much better than the EF-S 55-250mm IS and it has a faster focusing and quiet USM lens. Bear in mind that Option 3 leaves you with only ONE lens and you’ll have to stretch your budget a bit further.
Total cost: USD1,130
Option 4:
Same as Option 3, but with the all-rounder EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.5 IS zoom for an additional USD574. The EF-S 18-200mm is a “jack of all trades, master of none” kind of lens. It’s suitable for traveling light or for covering events and there’s no time to change lenses, where functionality is more important than image quality.
This lens is expensive due to its long focal range and image stabilization. With this lens you’ll cover the entire focal lengths of 18mm (wide angle) to 200mm (telephoto). At the telephoto it may not yield superior results compared to the EF-S 55-250mm IS or the EF 70-30mm IS USM.
Total cost: USD1,174
The reason I recommended the Rebel T1i is because:
a) for in some markets, it can be sold separately. The older Rebel XSi is only available with the EF 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens. It’s never sold alone but always with a kit lens, whether you like it or not.
b) it has a high resolution 920,000 pixel LCD screen compared to the XSi’s LCD (230,000 pixels)
c) 15MP sensor gives you more detail for cropping.
d) It offers video recording (if video is your thing) while the XSi does not. The T1i was Rebel’s first model to offer video recording.
e) Some additional features like adjustable Auto Lighting Optimizer and adjustable Highlight Tone Priority. The Rebel XSi also has both, but you can either turn them off or on (no adjustable levels).
f) Creative Auto, which is actually Aperture Priority for novice users.
The latest Rebel T2i is still new therefore it costs USD800 (body only) and it won’t leave you much for at least a decent zoom lens. As you can see from the pricing, the lens will determine the total cost of the camera.
If you can swing for the very excellent and popular EF 70-20mm f/4L USM lens, expect to pay USD624. The stabilized version is even more costly at USD1K, equal to your budget for a dSLR and lens. Some people advocate the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM over the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM if optical quality is more important to you. The “L” stands for Canon’s Luxury range of lenses and they are weather proofed with better build quality.
You can also go for third party lenses from Tamron, Tokina and Sigma but there are good and bad models among the lot. Plenty of research is needed before you decide on a third party lens.
Hope this helps. :-)
June 20th, 2010 at 3:39 am
@ Kaye,
A small lens packing a 14x optical zoom will not give very good results at the telephoto end. P&S cameras with tiny sensors, small lenses and long focal range will trade optical superiority for compactness and light weight. The SX20 IS has a larger lens and gathers more light than the SX210 IS.
Larger lenses (by this I mean the diameter of the optics, not the aperture of the lens) generally yield better sharpness with less with reduced optical flaws or artifacts than smaller lenses. The flaws won’t show up at small web resolutions but will be apparent when viewed at 100% size on your screen.
That’s the dilemma here – you can’t have your cake and eat it too. I’ve always taken very compact P&S ultra-zoom cameras with a grain of salt. I have an old PowerShot S3 IS with a 12x optical zoom and I’ve tried a friend’s SX210 IS. Her camera gives very soft results when zoomed all the way in compared to my old S3 IS.
Here’s an example of the SX210 IS’ sharpness when zoomed in. Cameras Labs has a good review on this model too. It scored only 16/20 for its optical quality, which you’ll find in the verdict.
I’m not saying the SX210 IS is a bad camera but it’s not an excellent one either. Don’t be afraid to tote a larger ultra-zoom like the SX20 IS, Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35 or the Fujifilm HS10 (full reviews not out yet) – there are many young women photographers that use full sized dSLRs,
BTW, my experience has taught me that people in a group shot with several photographers taking their pictures at the same time tend to look at photographers with larger cameras than those with compacts. It’s a public perception that the bigger and serious looking the camera, the more attention they have to give to the one with the larger camera. :-)
You have to decide whether optical quality and features are more paramount than the camera’s size and color. :-)
June 20th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Thank you Stratman and RMVANDY…you’ve both been a world of help…I’ll let you know what I end up getting, and give you updates as I go…
Christy
June 20th, 2010 at 4:19 pm
@Stratman
“Adorama.com, a renowned and dependable online seller in the States…”
Excellent summary – and thanks so much for your kind words re Adorama Camera.
BTW if you ever need advice, or after-sales support concerning an order from Adorama Camera, you are most welcome to contact me directly.
Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador
http://helenoster.blogspot.com
helen.oster@adoramacamera.com
June 20th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
Guys, thank you for the previous advice on my journey to choose between a SLR and a point and shoot. A professional photographer colleague had agreed to consider selling his used Canon 20D to me. My questions: 1) I need to make an offer. What is a reasonable price to pay? 2) Quality SLR’s like the 20D should last a lifetime. What are the major things I should check to ensure the camera is in good condition to buy. Thank you for the wisdom.
June 21st, 2010 at 12:38 am
@ Helen,
You’re welcome. I have no affiliation whatsoever with Adorama but your online store and B&H Photo Video are often recommended by members of the Flickr Canon dSLR User Group. Unfortunately I live in SE Asia and shipping charges from the U.S. is expensive therefore it makes more sense for me to shop locally.
Anyway, it’s awfully nice of you to drop by, I didn’t know Adorama has a Customer Service Ambassador that reads this blog. :-)
June 21st, 2010 at 12:58 am
@ Buddha Prince,
The EOS 20D is a pretty old model by today’s standards. You’re much better off looking for a used EOS 40D, IMO. It has Live View and is more popular than its more expensive successor, the 50D.
Do note that professional photographers generally don’t baby their cameras and gear. Expect scratches, scuffs and dents on a dSLR used by pros compared to amateur photographers that take pictures as a hobby.
If your colleague uses the 20D very frequently, it’s likely that its shutter count to be very high. The 20D is rated to 100,000 shutter cycles (or clicks) before the shutter needs replacing by the Canon service center. You can use this free software to check the actual shutter count of that 20D. The camera needs to be connected to a computer or laptop running this program via a USB cable.
I have no idea how much to offer for the 20D. It depends on which country you live. For example, dSLRs and lenses are cheap in the U.S. but very expensive in countries like Venezuela and India. If you have a local online photography community, check its websites for classified ads.
Good luck!
June 21st, 2010 at 1:02 am
@Stratman
I’ve been following Darren for a while, he does a great job – and I’m a regular on many Flickr groups, too, including the Canon DSLR group!
Helen Oster
Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador
http://helenoster.blogspot.com
helen.oster@adoramacamera.com
June 21st, 2010 at 3:22 am
@Stratman
Thank you for for the rapid response. In my budget I have the following options: NEW NIKON D3000 with 18-55MM lens / NEW CANON 1000 With 18-55MM Lens/ USED CANON 350D with 18-55MM Lens and SIGMA 55-300MM lens. What would you recommend?
June 21st, 2010 at 4:16 am
Buddha Prince: Have you used the search terms “camera review,” and the camera model you’re considering? (Also try looking for reviews of your lens choices.) You’ll get back a host of sources that conduct professional comparisons, many with sample photos. Also, you can compare used camera prices at ebay.com and amazon.com. Both will reflect U.S. prices, and Stratman offered the important caveat that both popularity and local availability may affect prices outside the states.
I took Stratman’s advice on checking specific models (and you’ve chosen your options), then conducted searches. Unfortunately for you, I cannot offer any help on dSLRs, except to suggest that, if you have several years’ experience you’ll do well to start looking at models above entry level, and carefully consider whether the camera uses a workflow you’re used to — if available, it will make your work easier. It took a few afternoons of selecting and reading reviews to make my own decision.
I chose the Canon G11, which has many SLR functions without the bulk or fast lenses. I’d already decided against another SLR after using lesser point-and-shoot digitals and finding their shots generally acceptable for 8×10 and smaller enlargements or tight snapshot crops. My point is that the easy part was deciding between SLR and other, and then came the challenge of whittling down my options.
I think everyone should conduct these searches in addition to finding helpful experts like Stratman. Best wishes, and keep in touch as you work through the decision process and after you’ve used the camera for a while.
June 21st, 2010 at 8:23 am
Forgot to mention: DVDs included in camera kits provide a variety of software specific to the brand. Each advanced model (thus all dSLRs) can save in the manufacturer’s RAW format. Not all other software lets you edit such photos. You then can save them as jpegs, etc.
June 21st, 2010 at 11:09 pm
I wonder why the Canon DSLR lenses so expensive in India?
June 22nd, 2010 at 12:58 am
@ Buddha Prince:
Between the Nikon D3000 and the EOS 1000D I’d pick the latter. All Rebel series EOS cameras since the 450D onwards comes with Live View, which uses contrast and phase AF detection. Live View allows you to take photos via the rear LCD, pretty much like with a P&S camera.
Live View is best used on a tripod for taking landscapes in low light and close up macro shots when manual focus is preferable. You can magnify the image by 10x for a precise manual focus. Please go through the video tour by Camera Labs for a better understanding.
June 22nd, 2010 at 1:07 am
@ shaheenazk:
There are a few factors affecting the prices of dSLRs and lenses for a given country:
- currency exchange rates against the Japanese Yen or USD
- economies of scale (the bigger the market, the cheaper the item would be)
- taxes and import duties
- income per capita of the country
- shipping and logistics costs, etc
I’m no economist, perhaps someone else can answer your question better than I can. :-)
June 22nd, 2010 at 1:20 am
Agree with rmvandy that same camera brand work flow processing software gives slightly better results than generic RAW post processing software like Adobe Photoshop. There are no international standards when it comes to RAW images as each camera manufacturer designs its sensors differently. Nikon has its NEF format and Canon uses its CR2 RAW format.
If you shoot JPGs, any good post processing software will do the job if you need to tweak the images.
July 2nd, 2010 at 2:36 am
I also like having both a DSLR and a point and shoot camera… Something small I can have in my pocket if I don’t want to take my SLR with bag and lenses and filters and and and the rest with me everywhere I go. Would NEVER part with the SLR though.
July 3rd, 2010 at 12:18 am
@ Josh,
Exactly.
If cameras could be likened to firearms used by security personnel, the M16A2 assault rifle would be the dSLR with higher firepower and long range, while a sidearm would be a compact P&S digicam. The M16 would be unwieldy for close quarters combat while a 9mm or.45 pistol would be more suitable.
There are venues that prohibit bringing in anything looking like a professional camera but permit P&S cameras to be brought in. That said, in some major cities the local police are more likely to question photographers toting a large dSLR with a long lens than a small pocket digicam.
July 9th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Hello all!!
Thanks Stratman and rmvandy for your insightful discussions. I am thinking of buying a Canon 450D or 1000D with the 18-55mm IS kit lens. Will I be able to shoot Macros (magnification 1:1 or greater) with this lens? Does this lens feature a macro mode, or will I have to buy a dedicated macro lens?
Actually, in my current bridge camera, I have an option in choosing between “Normal”, “MF” and “Macro” modes. Does such option feature in DSLRs? Or I have to use dedicated lens only and there is no other option??
Thanks for your reply!!
July 11th, 2010 at 3:40 am
@ Om,
Thanks for the compliments. :-)
The EF-S 18-55mm kit lens that is issued with every EOS 450D and 1000D (you cannot buy either as body only) doesn’t have a macro mode. When you’re dealing with macro in dSLR photography, you cannot compare the macro mode built-in into P&S and bridge cameras.
P&S cameras have very short distances to their sensors thus allowing you to get very close to the subject. The Canon PowerShot ultrazooms since the S2 IS are renowned for their ability to focus at 0cm (yes, zero), allowing the subject to literally touch the lens. Most P&S cameras have macro modes with a 2-5cm working distance.
DSLR lenses don’t work that way, because the distance from the sensor to the rear lens element is much further away. The rear lens element requires some distance to stay clear of the swinging reflex mirror. DSLRs have no macro mode. For you to have macro capability you need to buy dedicated macro lenses with a true 1:1 magnification ratio. This means that the image of the subject would be as large as what the sensor records. A lens with a 1:2 magnification will capture images half of the actual subject size.
For Canon, there are six dedicated macro lenses available. They are all prime lenses and not zooms.
1. EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM
2. EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (recently discontinued)
3. EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM (the only model with image stabilization)
4. EF 50mm f/2.5 compact Macro (this is a 1:2 magnification lens; an additional Life Size Converter is required to get 1:1 magnification)
5. EF 180mm f.3.5L Macro USM
6. MPE 65mm f/2.5 1-5x Macro (manual focus only)
The cheapest of the lot is the EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, but it doesn’t give you 1:1 magnification. If you have to buy the Life Size converter, you’re better off buying the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 instead. The MPE 65mm is not an autofocus lens but a manual one. It has an adjustable high magnification of up to 5:1 and is a specialty macro lens. The depth of field of the MPE 65mm is so shallow that precise focus is achieved only through manual focusing. Hence it doesn’t carry the “EF” prefix as EF lenses are always auto focus (with manual override).
Your choice of a macro lens depends on your budget and what you intend to shoot. For product photography, the EF-S 60mm should suffice. For insects and dangerous animals (like snakes) you need a further working distance as you don’t want to get too close to them. Thus, the EF 100mm and the EF 180mm lenses would be the better choices.
Macro lenses are expensive due to their long focus range, from near to infinity. With the exception of the MP-E 65 and the EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro, the other four models also serve as excellent portrait lenses for taking photos of people.
hope this helps,
Stratman
July 11th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Thanks again Startman for your time.
You said:
” P&S cameras have very short distances to their sensors thus allowing you to get very close to the subject. DSLR lenses don’t work that way, because the distance from the sensor to the rear lens element is much further away. The rear lens element requires some distance to stay clear of the swinging reflex mirror.”
1. I remember people putting extension tubes between the DSLR body and the lens for shooting macros, as it allows them to move closer to the subject. Considering that way, using extension tubes increases distance of CCD/CMOS sensor from the rear lens element……and this should allow closer focusing for a DSLR as compared to a P&S.
2. The manual of the EOS 1000D says that it features a “close up” mode. Will this mode-
*not work if the lens I use is not a dedicated macro lens
*or, it will work without dedicated macro lens but the magnification will not be 1:1 or greater, or in other words I won’t get true macros
July 11th, 2010 at 2:58 pm
Thanks again Startman for your time.
You said:
” P&S cameras have very short distances to their sensors thus allowing you to get very close to the subject. DSLR lenses don’t work that way, because the distance from the sensor to the rear lens element is much further away. The rear lens element requires some distance to stay clear of the swinging reflex mirror.”
1. I remember people putting extension tubes/ bellows between the DSLR body and the lens for shooting macros, as it allows them to move closer to the subject. Considering that way, using extension tubes increases distance of CCD/CMOS sensor from the rear lens element……and this should allow closer focusing for a DSLR as compared to a P&S (as the former has greater sensor to rear lens element distance). What’s your take on this?
2. The manual of the EOS 1000D says that it features a “close up” mode. Will this mode-
*not work if the lens I use is not a dedicated macro lens
*or, it will work without dedicated macro lens but the magnification will not be 1:1 or greater, or in other words I won’t get true macros?
3. Further, which among Nikon D90 or EOS1000D/ EOS450D better for serious photography?
4. I have come to know that the entry level Nikons like the D3000 don’t have depth of field preview button. I feel this is really essential, particularly for close-ups and portraits. Whereas, even entry level Canons feature them. What do you think, isn’t this feature necessary?
Thanks in advance for your reply.
July 11th, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Sorry , due to a problem with the browser, comments got repeated…..the immediately preceding comment is complete, but the one before that is not……
July 11th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
Om:
I’m long out of touch with film SLRs, and have never bought a dSLR. However, about extension tubes: I had one and it serves to multiply the “length” of the lens. (It is really a spacer — mine contains a plano-concave lens — mounted between the lens and the body.) Thus, a doubler would change a 55mm to 110, a tripler to 165mm. The effect of doubling or tripling the lens value is to allow the image to appear larger while still maintaining a meter (or major fraction) of distance from the subject while enlarging the subject.
But they did not really serve as “macro” accessories — at least not way back when. I don’t think that’s changed.
When I took a college TV-studio production class, we had “diopters” that were threaded on like a filter to the front of the camera lenses to allow tighter closeups (and thus “macro”-type shooting. I don’t recall seeing them on line or in camera stores, but they may be available. I recall them having unacceptable chromatic aberrations, creating rainbow fringing.
Stratman can provide superior information on current models and modes. I guess that, per your question 2, the “close-up” mode may be equivalent to a digital zoom — discarding the outer 50% or more of the image to give the impression of macro. I hope not, though. Question 4: Possibly, depth of field can be previewed by switching to manual mode, thus allowing you to see the effect of changing focal point through the stopped-down lens.
July 11th, 2010 at 6:10 pm
@rmvandy: Thanks, for your reply!
Actually, I know of teleconverters of 1.4x and 2x used for tightening the composition. But I don’t think extension tubes can serve the same purpose…. I agree though that ext. tubes tighten the composition,but by allowing photographer to move in closer to the subject. Do you really think, that like teleconverters, they can double the focal length of a lens? Have you used such an arrangement before?
@Stratman: Waiting for your kind advice on my earlier post…
July 11th, 2010 at 6:13 pm
@rmvandy: Thanks, for your reply!
Actually, I know of teleconverters of 1.4x and 2x used for tightening the composition by multiplying focal length. But I don’t think extension tubes can serve the same purpose…. I agree though that ext. tubes tighten the composition,but by allowing photographer to move in closer to the subject. Do you really think, that like teleconverters, they can double the focal length of a lens? Have you used such an arrangement before? Also, as you said, switching to manual mode to preview depth of field is a good way…..but only approximately. Focal length increase can mimic stopping up the aperture, for example, right?
@Stratman: Waiting for your kind advice on my earlier post…
July 12th, 2010 at 3:17 am
@ Om,
The lenses on P&S cameras are of very short focal length, (typically 5-6mm at the wide end) thus allowing you to get very close to the subject. DSLR lenses are larger in diameter, have larger image circles and need to have a further distance from the film or sensor plane.
The close up picture mode sets the EOS 1000D on Single shot and single AF, while putting the metering mode to partial metering. It has absolutely nothing to do with Macro, unlike P&S cameras. It will not turn its EF-S 18-55mm into macro mode. Don’t get confused. You still need a 1:1 macro lens for life sized pictures.
Extension tubes are the cheapest way of allowing your lens to get closer to the subject, thus almost filling the frame. With dumb extension tubes, you will have no AF ability and you’ll have to shoot at wide open aperture. You will also lose light and depth of field in the process. In addition, any lens attached to a tube will have no infinity focus. There are smart extension tubes that pass the electronic signals from the dSLR body to the lens, you’ll get AF and aperture control, but you’ll still lose light, depth-of-field and infinity focus.
Extension tubes give better close up with shorter focal length lenses, like a 35mm compared to a 70-200mm zoom.
A bellows does the same thing as extension tubes except that with bellows you can continuously vary the lens distance. Other alternatives include add-on diopters which are thin magnifying glasses and close up lenses like the Raynox DCR-250. Diopters and close up lenses add chromatic aberration generally degrades the resulting image.
In the macro world there is no substitute for at least a true macro lens with 1:1 magnification. You can add extension tubes for greater magnification but the primary lens should be capable of true macro.
Any dSLR can be used for “serious photography”. But you have to define what “serious photography” means to you, because it translates differently to different photographers. The Nikon D90 has better dynamic range than both the EOS 450D/1000D but Canon offers a wider range of lenses than Nikon. Canon lenses are also cheaper than Nikon’s for the same type of lens. Canon’s high end primes are said to be optically superior to Nikon’s. When you buy a dSLR, you’re not buying just the camera – you’re looking into the entire system of lenses and accessories.
In any case, you should really compare the D90 to Canon EOS 50D in terms of features, not the Rebel series.
Finally, a DoF preview button is useful for macro as you want to verify the DoF before tripping the shutter. It is not required for general photography. I’m sure D3000 owners don’t really bother about their camera lacking one.
July 12th, 2010 at 3:20 am
Om,
The lenses on P&S cameras are of very short focal length, (typically 5-6mm at the wide end) thus allowing you to get very close to the subject. DSLR lenses are larger in diameter, have larger image circles and need to have a further distance from the film or sensor plane.
The close up picture mode sets the EOS 1000D on Single shot and single AF, while putting the metering mode to partial metering. It has absolutely nothing to do with Macro, unlike P&S cameras. It will not turn its EF-S 18-55mm into macro mode. Don’t get confused. You still need a 1:1 macro lens for life sized pictures.
Extension tubes are the cheapest way of allowing your lens to get closer to the subject, thus almost filling the frame. With dumb extension tubes, you will have no AF ability and you’ll have to shoot at wide open aperture. You will also lose light and depth of field in the process. In addition, any lens attached to a tube will have no infinity focus. There are smart extension tubes that pass the electronic signals from the dSLR body to the lens, you’ll get AF and aperture control, but you’ll still lose light, depth-of-field and infinity focus.
Extension tubes give better close up with shorter focal length lenses, like a 35mm compared to a 70-200mm zoom.
A bellows does the same thing as extension tubes except that with bellows you can continuously vary the lens distance. Other alternatives include add-on diopters which are thin magnifying glasses and close up lenses like the Raynox DCR-250. Diopters and close up lenses add chromatic aberration generally degrades the resulting image.
In the macro world there is no substitute for at least a true macro lens with 1:1 magnification. You can add extension tubes for greater magnification but the primary lens should be capable of true macro.
Any dSLR can be used for “serious photography”. But you have to define what “serious photography” means to you, because it translates differently to different photographers. The Nikon D90 has better dynamic range than both the EOS 450D/1000D but Canon offers a wider range of lenses than Nikon. Canon lenses are also cheaper than Nikon’s for the same type of lens. Canon’s high end primes are said to be optically superior to Nikon’s. When you buy a dSLR, you’re not buying just the camera – you’re looking into the entire system of lenses and accessories.
In any case, you should really compare the D90 to Canon EOS 50D in terms of features, not the Rebel series.
Finally, a DoF preview button is useful for macro as you want to verify the DoF before tripping the shutter. It is not required for general photography. I’m sure D3000 owners don’t really bother about their camera lacking one.
July 12th, 2010 at 3:28 am
Sorry for the duplicate post. I think Darren’s WordPress plugins may need some tweaking.
July 12th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Stratman, as usual, your response is brilliant. Om, I was wrong when I used the term “extension tube” as equivalent to “teleconverter.” I have not used an extension tube or bellows.
As Strat notes, an extension (and teleconverter, too) moves the lens farther from the sensor. the f-stop is calculated as a ratio of the [distance from the film plane to front of lens] to width of the objective lens. I think that’s it — but basically, when you move the lens farther from the sensor, you should see less light but greater depth of field. I wish I knew with more accuracy. You probably can find the answer on wikipedia; it seems to be an exhaustive source on optics.
Regardless, either product will reduce the sharpness of the prime lens. It’s like asking Lance Armstrong to race with his seat jacked up four inches. Changing the precise conditions to which the lens was matched induces undesirable conditions. I used a teleconverter (tripler) with a telephoto macro/zoom. I got the pulling power of a 630mm lens, but lost both sharpness and contrast. It was not a good tradeoff, but I was too young and inexperienced to appreciate it.
In fact, as good as the multifunction lens was (it was very good in its time), it was not excellent in any mode. If you are shooting for “serious photography,” to use your term from above, you probably want several excellent prime (that is, single focal-length) lenses. That would include a macro, but probably not an extension, converter or diopter.
But search flickr.com for “reverse macro.” People mount camera lenses backwards to get sharp macro shots. Could be a lot of fun, and very effective. Macro shooting is fun but not usually a large part of personal photography or professional (published) work.
Whatever choices you make, remember that you need to enjoy what you have, and not worry about the equipment — it’s the thought and care that goes into a photo that makes the biggest difference.
July 12th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
@Sratman: Thanks again. I am unable to understand how P&S have closer focusing than DSLRs…..although I agree that some P&S even have 0 cm focusing distance….again agreed that P&S have extremely short focal lengths at their wide end– my Canon has 6mm–but that in 35mm equivalent terms is a whooping 36mm for my 1/2.3 inch type CCD sensor (crop factor=6). For, say a DSLR with kit lens’s wide end as 18mm, the 35 mm equivalent is around 29mm (assuming crop factor as 1.6). Comparing 29mm and 36mm, the former is wider, and conclusively the DSLR should provide closer focusing distance than the P&S……..but what’s wrong in this argument?
@rmvandy: Thanks for your reply.
” I think that’s it — but basically, when you move the lens farther from the sensor, you should see less light but greater depth of field.” True, the sensor plane illumination will decrease in getting closer to the subject, but the depth of field should decrease, after all the aperture is wide open. Also, you said you own a bridge camera– have you tried making some sort of modifications to it– like adding lenses, etc as I have read in some Flickr groups. The images the people show as being taken after such modifications are really stunning– perhaps even better than DSLRs. I really doubt if these modifications really work without any aberrations and distortions… What do you feel?
July 12th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
@ Om.
You’re confusing the effective focal length with the native focal length. Your camera’s widest end is actually 6mm, not 36mm. The EF-S 18-55mm’s widest end is 18mm and not 29mm. Only when you factor in the magnification factor (or crop factor) does your camera have a 36mm field of view in 35mm SLR terms. Therefore your camera has a crop factor of 6x, or six times smaller than that of a 35mm film camera, or a full frame dSLR.
The same goes for the EF-S 18-55mm lens. On a crop frame Canon body, you’ll have to multiply it by 1.6x as the sensor is 1.6x smaller than that of a full frame dSLR. Although it’s physically impossible to fit this lens on e.g. an EOS 5D full frame dSLR (1x), the same lens will give you exactly 18mm field of view on the 5D.
Because P&S cameras come with varying sensor sizes, manufacturers will quote the 35mm equivalent to make it easy for buyers to know its effective focal length.
For example,
* Camera A has a 9mm lens giving a 36mm field of view (35mm equivalent).
* Camera B has a 4mm lens giving a 36mm field of view. (35mm equivalent)
* Camera C has a 6mm lens, also giving the same 36mm field of view (35 mm equivalent).
Do the three cameras have a 36mm lens? No! Their focal lengths are actually 9, 4 and 6mm respectively. It’s only when the lenses are matched with their respective sensor crop factors that they are equivalent to 36mm focal length on a 24×36mm film camera (or 35mm format).
If your Canon starts off with 36mm at the widest, then you’ll be having one heck of a big telephoto zoom lens, starting at 36×6 = 216mm (35mm equivalent)!
The effective focal length is never printed on the rim of the lens. If it says 4.4mm-12.1mm then its widest focal length is 4.4mm and its telephoto side is 12.1mm. If you examine your photos’ EXIF data you’ll see that the focal length is always stated based on its native focal length, not the 35mm equivalent.
July 12th, 2010 at 6:14 pm
To give you a sense of what Stratman means when referring to the different cameras having the same “35mm equivalent,” a 1/2.6″ sensor is about 25 mm sq., and a 1/1.7″ is about 43 mm sq. — and a 35mm is about 24 x 36mm, or 864 mm sq.
Yes, I have a bridge camera, the Canon G11. I’ve been using Opteka-brand add-on converters. With the 2.2x teleconverter and the 0.45x wide-angle converter, I get, effectively, a 20x zoom out of my 5x G11. As with a native 20x zoom, the quality is not equal to a lower multiple. But at my native 5x, I likely have superior clarity to a camera with 20x capability shooting at 5x. (I’m actually getting 11 times the reach when not considering the wide-angle converter, but many superzooms start out much wider, so their maximum reach is about equal to a G11 with converter.)
The G11 has a bayonet mounting ring around the base of the lens. An accessory tube extending around and beyond the lens has threads to accept the accessory lenses. These have 72mm objectives, gathering much more light to pass into the G11 — more effective than a 35mm-type teleconverter that sits between the prime lens and the camera body. However, clamping several more layers of glass onto a carefully designed lens cannot be expected to improve the quality. I see chromatic aberrations — the common “purple fringing” around high contrast edges at the outside of the shots. I’ve seen worse in test shots on line made with other cameras unmodified by add-ons.
Yes, I believe you are right about less depth of field. I should think harder before writing. A wide-angle has greater depth of field than a tele, doesn’t it? And we’d be making the lens “longer” with the converter.
Not to put my error in a good light, which it doesn’t deserve, but cameras using tiny sensors located close to the lens have greater depth of field (when calculated as a 35mm equivalent — there it is again). The old box-bellows-glass plate cameras of Ansel Adams fame had depths of field of sub-centimeter size when taking portraits. Witness the famous photo of Abraham Lincoln, with his eyes sparkling and his nose out of focus.
So yes, you can get good enlargements with the accessory lenses. I got several photos of a brown bear in Denali National Park about 100 feet away, and you can see individual hairs in enlargements. Once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and I could shoot in seconds and get quality.
Makes me smile.
July 12th, 2010 at 9:59 pm
@Stratman:
Thanks for the explanation. I understood it now……I guess that a typical optical lens, can at its best focus on objects at distance equal to or more than a small multiple (quite close to 1) of its focal length. Do you agree? Considering this, the P&S indeed has a closer focusing distance…..isn’t it?
@rmvandy: I own a Canon Powershot SX100 IS which unfortunately has no provision for attaching any add on teleconverters or accessory lenses….. so I have to remain contented with the inbuilt fixed lens…….
You’re lucky to have spotted a bear though…. wish I could too someday………….
July 16th, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Hello, I just read this article and hoping to get a few clarifications.
I own a -relatively outdated- Canon S3 IS.
I’m quite happy with it but I do feel its shortcomings in low light conditions (indoor I typically have to use the flash, even with lights on) or with fast moving subjects.
I’ve been debating for months now whether to get a DSLR (I seriously doubt that a more recent non-DSLR camera would alleviate the issues above).
While I like the idea of owning a good DSLR camera (I have in mind the Canon 550D), I have, for the moment, no intention of going around with a backpack full of lenses.
And here come the questions: I have zero knowledge/understanding of lens options/variants.
If I get a ’standard’ package with body+lens (one example: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-European-Digital-3-0-Inch-18-55mm/dp/B0037KM2IS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1279280985&sr=8-2) do I end up with an “all purpose” camera that is as flexible as the S3 IS?
I do appreciate having a decent zoom: the 12X of the S3 IS proved useful many times, and I have the feeling that it will take a small fortune to buy a lens for the 550D with a 12X zoom (or so). Is that right?
Which brings to another question: why is it , that the DSLR lenses don’t have a simple nX zoom description, in addition to the focal length (18-55mm)? I suppose that the zoom factor is 55/18 = ~3X, is that right?
I don’t ‘need’ a 12X zoom, but 3X is certainly NOT enough for my needs.
Any suggestion would be welcomed. Thanks.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Sorry, a few more questions:
- once the lens is mounted, would I have the option to use it in “auto” mode like in a non-DSLR? For example, to zoom from the body and to auto-focus?
- if the answer above is yes, then should I expect a similar response time as in a non-DSLR? (e.g.: the time it takes to focus …)
Thanks again …
July 17th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
Hi, Yankeeddl. I looked briefly at Amazon, both the D550 you’ve been looking at, and the S3. Almost any new camera will provide faster sensors, with sharper enlargements. I’m not up on dSLRs (I decided to avoid lugging around all those lenses and other accessories). Instead, I bought the G11, which is the top of Canon’s non-dSLR line.
You’ll get much faster exposures with a new camera; the S3 has a top ISO setting of 800, and the D550’s is 12,800 — 16 times brighter. You will rarely use that setting, but it even half of that is the difference between a one-second exposure on the S3 and about 1/200 on the D550.
Because the dSLR has a CMOS sensor with 18 megapixels, you can expect much sharper, crisper shots with the option of tighter cropping. And the software that comes on disc with new cameras has some great features.
About extreme zooms: The farther they reach, the more trouble they have staying sharp and bright across their range. You may consider a 12x as “decent” on an all-in-one, but the camera companies know it wouldn’t suit the quality of an SLR. Where you’d hope to see high contrast between dark and light subjects, you’re more likely to see murky color instead of pure blacks and whites. Contrasting edges, such as tree branches in winter, are more likely to display “purple fringing,” or blue-violet edges. Superzooms seem like a great thing, but not if you’re unhappy with the quality of the prints you make. The fringing is prominent on the periphery, so — with newer, high-megapixel sensors — you can crop and enlarge with less pixelation.
Canon has a 38-300mm and an 18-200 in the EOS line (Canon claims the largest range of SLR lenses in the business). Because of the limits of superzoom lenses, these may not be as sharp as you could get with a couple of lower-zoom lenses. Many Photographers don’t buy any zooms, relying on a series of “prime” (as in “one”) focus lenses. Supersharp.
Lens “power” ratings (like 12x) are more common in compact cameras because, having different sensor sizes, their millimeter ratings vary widely for the same aspect angle. It allows for easier comparison between dissimilar models. Millimeter sizes are the same between cameras of similar types (two APS-C cameras from different makers will both see the same angle with a 28mm lens, for example).
You might be surprised to find that a 70-200 mm and one covering wide angles will be as good for you as the old 12x you’re replacing. That’s all I worked with when I had a film SLR. I had thought I’d need a superzoom, but have found the G11 with 5x (plus an add-on teleconverter) is just great. Even without the teleconverter, it’s good for most purposes. However, I was glad to have the extra pull when I went to Alaska and shot wildlife.
The auto mode: I suspect every current Canon lens is controlled by the camera — but you can manually focus, and may have to manually zoom. Autofocus is probably much faster on a new-model dSLR than on the S3.
Almost everything about a dSLR will be better — except weight and size.
Look at http://www.usa.canon.com for more specifics on the camera lines and the lenses. Strangely, the site has not been updated to include the 550D, but it may be the Rebel T2i.
Also, zoom lenses don’t transmit as much light to the sensor as primes. Look for low f: numbers for more light.
Write back to let us know how you like whatever camera you end up choosing.
July 17th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Hello rmvandy,
what can I say: thank you SO much for all the info and suggestions. It’s all very, very helpful.
Some comments: the main subjects of my photos are my 2 young kids. I don’t need to tell you what it means in terms of photographic challenges :)
Just last night I’ve tried hard to take a good shot of one of them giggling and rolling, but to not avail: the S3 was not fast enough to focus in indoor lighting settings.
I’m by no means a “good” photographer, which, I’m sure, does not help, but -I think- I can appreciate a good photo and I do try to get better.
I do understand your comments on the quality of zoom lenses and it’s clear to me that making a 12X zoom for a ’small’ sensor is a different story than making one for the large sensors of the DSLR.
You’re probably right on the 5X being enough on a good camera, but the G11 is not what I’m looking for. I shoot also videos and the G11 for some obscure (to me) reasons has been capped to VGA mode: if I need to ‘up’ the bar, I’d like to have 720p capabilities.
I had a look at the Canon SX20 and it’s certainly a step forward over the S3, but given the sensor size I’m afraid I’ll have similar problems, indoor, as the S3. Although, the SX does have a hot shoe, which, with a good flash, perhaps, could solve some of the problems. Somehow though I think that shooting with a better sensor with no flash, is always better than with a smaller one and no flash.
I’ve had the chance to use the Panasonic DMC FZ50 for a few days: quite an impressive piece of hardware, with massive Leica lenses and a 20X zoom, but I did find it comparable (in terms of focus speed and low light imaging) to the S3. I realize I’m blowing off with few words 4 years of technical progress here: the FZ50 is undoubtedly a better camera, but not from the perspective that I’m interested in.
Lastly, given my non-professional photographic requirements, the superzoom lenses for the DSLR could be a good choice after all.
July 17th, 2010 at 5:37 pm
Ah, typo:
Somehow though I think that shooting with a better sensor with no flash, is always better than with a smaller one and no flash.
Should read
Somehow though I think that shooting with a better sensor with no flash, is always better than with a smaller one and flash.
Also, I forgot to mention: in my experience with the S3, the image becomes quite noisy using ISO > 200. At high ISO (800) it’s just rubbish: you can take shots for the heck of it but it almost bothers me looking at those images afterwards.
July 18th, 2010 at 3:04 am
@ yankeeDDL
No SLR zoom lens comes with a motorized zoom control, if that’s what you were referring to. They never had and never will. Here’s why:
- Motorized zooms defeats the purpose of total control, i.e. stepless, precise zooming.
- A manual zoom allows you to take interesting zoomed in and zoomed out photos, using a slow shutter speed and zooming at the same time.
- The lens would be a complicated design, not to mention added weight and cost of manufacturing. The bigger the lens, the more powerful motors required.
P&S cameras have very small and lightweight lenses, therefore it makes sense to have motorized zooms. But their zooming operation is not stepless, but in small discrete steps. This won’t matter to P&S owners but for SLR/dSLR users, stepless zooming is critical for accurate framing. If I’m not mistaken, the new Fuji HS10/HS11 ultra-zoom has a manual zoom.
AF speeds are always faster in a dSLR than any P&S camera. This is because the AF sensors on the dSLR body are larger and more sensitive than ones on P&S digicams.
As brother RMvandy pointed out, long focal range zooms (9x and above) will not be optically sharp. Canon has the EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and the very expensive L-series, EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM and neither lens are renowned for their optical prowess. Long focal range zooms have more glass elements in them, which means the light has to go through all those elements before hitting the film plane or sensor.
However, there are situations in which e.g., the EF-S 18-200mm IS may prove useful: for light traveling and photojournalism, where image quality isn’t as important as missing vital photo captures due to changing lenses. When it comes to lenses, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. You have to decide between optical quality and convenience.
I still have my PowerShot S3 IS and I don’t think I’ll be upgrading it. It can still be a valuable asset where dSLR cameras are disallowed, mainly for security reasons. It’s noisy at ISO 400 and pushing it to 800 is worse still. That said, the S3 IS a compact ultra-zoom – it’s stealthy and lightweight, compared to the SX20 IS. That camera still excels for daytime photography at low ISOs.
But that’s a fact with small sensor P&S cameras. I only wished I had waited and gotten the PowerShot S5 IS instead because I can mount my Canon Speedlite 270EX or 430EX II flash on it. The built-in flash often results in redeye effect on human subjects due to its low height relative to the lens.
There’s still life in your S3 IS. Just buy a Lensmate 52mm adapter for it and you can use effects filters like polarizers and even graduated ND filters. Plus, when the adapter is mounted it helps to protect the lens while looking cool like a miniature dSLR. :-)
July 18th, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Yankeeddl: I posted a comment on June 3 (above) about the Casio Exilim EX-FH25 (about $310). It’s not a dSLR, but has lots of possibilities because of its fast-response CMOS sensor. It takes 40 frames/sec in burst mode, and thus is great for parents and sports fans. And, meeting other interests you named, it has 20x lens system and HD video, with the ability to shoot 1,000 frames a second (that’s SUPER slo-mo). Look for the posting and then check on line for specs.
How sharp its lens is when zoomed tight I don’t know. And having to sort through the 10-40 shots you’d get every time you hold down the shutter will be challenging.
I think that’s a good alternative to a dSLR, with a good price. I’m not trying to divert you from an SLR, I’m just not enough informed on them to suggest anything
July 19th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
Hello Stratman and RMVandy,
again thank you for your kind and informative replies.
Manual zoom is OK for me. Autofocus is a must though.
In general, today, for me, convenience takes a precedence over optical quality. This said, the fact that I’m looking for options is a clear indicator that I’m not totally satisfied.
About the S3, by the way: I’m perfectly happy with the behavior outdoor. I could only wish for a better macro mode (I like shooting flowers, amongst other things). I wouldn’t be replacing the S3, rather complementing it with something that works better especially indoor; which is also why another P&S is not ‘that’ attractive (i.e.: being only marginally better indoor ).
I had a look at the Lensmate website: the existence of lens-mount for a P&S blew me away. Pity that, it seems, the lensmate for S3/S5 is out of stock. I’m sure I can find something on eBay (although in Europe it may get a bit trickier).
I had a look at the review of the Casio EX-FH25 (there’s a recent one on DPReview) and the outcome was lukewarm, at best (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q110superzoomgroup/page3.asp).
It’s fast indeed, but the low-light performance seems to be below par (which is a bit surprising for a BSI sensor). Panasonic FZ35 seems to be superior to the Casio in every aspect (according to DPR of course)
I realize that if I wait for the “perfect” camera, I’ll never buy one, but I still feel I’m having to compromise too much.
That’s actually how I ended up to this website: after DPR’s review I found myself contemplating the Canon SX20 and the Panasonic FZ35 both of which are lather large cameras. So I wondered about taking the extra step for a DSLR instead. And here I am: still a bit skeptic about DSLR, and not sure whether a new P&S would make a difference.
By the way, DP School is a fantastic website: I feel like I’ve learned more about photography in the 4~5 days I’ve been browsing it than in my past. And with feedback like yours in the comments … well, I couldn’t really have asked for more.
So, thank you again.
July 20th, 2010 at 1:09 am
@YankeeDDL
Glad that you found our comments useful. :-)
Casio is renowned for for coming up with innovative nifty features such as high speed captures and other novelties but in my opinion, very few general users would use them for everyday photography. Unless you’re really into high speed photography or video, you won’t miss such features anyway. That said, there folks who find niche features like high frame capture useful, perhaps in their line of work or hobby.
Canon could have adopted Casio’s marketing strategy, but they prefer to concentrate on image quality and ease of use in a P&S camera. Since Canon also manufactures its own lenses, it has the upper hand in designing high quality lenses for its non-dSLR cameras, i.e. compacts and bridge ultra-zooms.
IMO, Panasonic is Canon’s direct competitor in the P&S ultra-zoom market segment. Panasonic Lumix’ FZ series cameras are legendary and gives Canon owners a run for their money. In fact, if I didn’t start off with Canon P&S (I started off with the PowerShot A80 and S2 IS), I would’ve gone the Panasonic route a long time ago.
If you’re comparing the macro capabilities of the S3 IS and a dSLR with a true macro lens, you’ll see a big difference. While the S3 IS is capable of zero cm macro focusing distance, its lens is locked in wide angle position. Barrel distortion is very evident at such close distances – an undesirable trait in dSLR macro photography. Although you can use the normal macro on the S3 IS, it doesn’t quite give the frame filling, shallow depth-of-field and magnification capability that a true macro lens can.
That said, dSLR photography is a rewarding hobby but unless you know how to restrain yourself, you’ll be tempted to buy additional lenses and accessories that you may or may not really need. I’m speaking from personal experience, lol… If you’re not into expanding your photographic equipment, the Panasonic Lumix FZ35 should serve you well for general photography.
The SX20 IS holds its own, but unfortunately it has a very slow continuous burst rate that will rule out sports and action shots. Your S3 IS’ burst rate is a lot faster than the current crop of PowerShot ultrazooms (except for the CMOS based SX1 IS with HD video and 16:9 aspect ratio rear LCD).
July 20th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
YankeeDDL:
I know that lots of people, and for good reasons, dislike using a built-in flash. Memory shots of the kids roughhousing or fingerpainting at home seems an acceptable time to break with that preference. Here’s a thought about flash: It has the ability to stop motion as effectively as a shutter speed of about 1/2000 sec. (that’s the duration of the flash). Because it provides bright light, it could solve your problems if you set the camera so it doesn’t delay in focusing.
(I’m not trying to dissuade your choice of upgrading, just offering a solution you can use with the current camera.)
It requires manual settings. Flash on, focal range for maximum useful depth of field, experimenting with f-stop a few times. With manual settings, the camera can shoot almost the same instant you press the shutter.
With autofocus off, set your range for about 1/3 beyond the closest you’ll shoot. For example, if you will be shooting in a room about 12 feet from you to the wall, and the kids no closer than four feet, set focus for 6-7 feet. Depth of field will cover roughly 4-12 feet. Try it and check the results, then adjust as needed. There’s a page in http://www.cambridgeincolor.com on depth of field that explains it better and provides a calculator.
These are common techniques used by pros shooting indoors, such as at weddings, basketball games, etc. After a while, you’ll get an intuitive feel for what settings you need.
It’s a method you can use with your dSLR, too. The Canon 550D is a LOT of camera in the APS-C format (a fraction of the 35mm format, but many times the sensor size of a pocket shooter). I looked at the page you provided — thanks. Wishing you the best of luck with your new camera. Write back after you’ve had it a while to let us know how it’s working for you.
July 20th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
@ RMVandy
I haven’t got the 550D yet. And I’m still not sure I will get it.
There are two things that are clear now (thanks to you and Stratman:
a) I have margin for improvement on my S3 which I should certainly investigate
b) Neither a new P&S or a DSLR will be the ‘perfect’ solution for me. Which is a reassuring confirmation of what I thought (and the reason why I came to this site to begin with), and yet it’s strange because I consider myself a pretty standard, relatively un-aspiring and un-pretentious user. One would think there would be plenty of options and instead …
It seems to me that the bridge cameras have been dragged into the megapixels race: I’m quite happy with the 6Mpix of the S3 and I wish there was a camera with 6Mpix using a more updated pixel technology so to have a better performance at higher ISOs. This, coupled with a more recent autofocus and s hot shoe for the flash, would make it -in my opinion- a very attractive camera for non-professional users.
On the DSLR side: going for an entry-level DSLR makes little sense (always IMHO) if you own a bridge: you run the risk of spending your money to get something only incrementally better but somewhat limited.
That’s actually why I was pondering the 550D: not the best of the prosumer cameras (for which you’ll have to fork quite a premium) but certainly above the bunch.
At that point though … you get to wonder whether you need such beast (18Mpix?!?!).
As I write, I’m convincing myself that I should improve myself first, until I really feel ‘constrained’ by the S3’s capabilities, and only then look for a DSLR.
Makes sense?
July 21st, 2010 at 1:12 pm
@Yankeeddl: “if you own a bridge: you run the risk of spending your money to get something only incrementally better but somewhat limited.” Actually, the validity of this statement depends on what kind of a photographer you are. If you are a keen or serious amateur who is willing to delve into photography, and to examine the effects of the various polarising filters, lenses, extenders, etc on your pictures to get more creative, and to be able to control your camera (and hence your final pictures) to a greater extent, than DSLRs are definitely better than most P&S. Obviously, owning a DSLR does not mean you get awards winning shots everytime, even P&S are excellent cameras. It is the photographer you captures photos; not the camera.
And, talking about the resolution of the CMOS/CCD sensor, remember two things:
1. The greater the resolution of a camera’s sensor (more MPs), more of the finer details you will be able to capture, with lesser pixelation on enlargement.
2. But there is a shortcoming to whooping megapixels, and that is for two sensors with the same resolution (same MPs), the one with the larger area will have much greater SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) which means that the larger sensor will have much lesser noise (or grains in film terminology). This is where the term pixel density arrives: it is the ratio of the total resolution of the sensor to its area, or in other words, the number of pixels per unit area. Therefore, the lower the pixel density, the lower the resolution, and greater the size of individual pixels, and hence the more photons of light they capture, leading to better performance in low light. Thus a lower MP APS-C sensor is better for low light photography.
@Stratman: I was wondering over the utility of Live view in DSLRs… Though they can be useful in low light situations, is it really good to have live view built in the DSLR? Actually, in deciding between the Canon 500D and 550D, I have come to know that the 500D does not have live view focusing, while the 550D has it. Is this feature really necessary and worthy enough to push me more towards the 550D?
Also, the 550D has 63 zone evaluative metering, while the 500D has 35 zone evaluative metering. I guess metering would be more accurate in the former. But again, is this feature the major persuader for me to own a 550D?
I am an aspiring nature photographer…. and wish to build my photographic system gradually… Since the full frames are too expensive to start off, I have set my eyes upon the upper end entry levels. I have heard many people saying that the entry levels are not worth buying due to their smaller APS-C sized sensors. The full frames are much more useful. So should I wait to raise my funds (that will take a lot time) and then buy a full frame, or start off with a entry level and some lenses (the Canon EF 70-300mm IS USM and the kit EF-S 18-55mm IS along with the EF 28-105mm USM) without losing anyway?? I have planned to buy the EF and not EF-S lenses for this very purpose of later putting them on a full frame as EF-S have smaller image circles. Please help!
July 21st, 2010 at 1:20 pm
If there were one perfect camera, it would be the only camera bought! You make a good point about not entering the SLR market at the bottom of the line — for example, the 550D you had researched has features and capabilities many others don’t. Also, a lot of people looking into this string could benefit by reading their user manuals closely and searching through the lessons in this site for ways to extract more value from the cameras they have.
After the experience, we come away with a better idea of what we can do, how we could do it better, and what features our next cameras need to lift us to the next level.
The “megapixel war” you mentioned benefitted the consumer in the first few skirmishes. The 6mp your camera offers are not as sharp as the capability would be now for the same capacity. But later in the war (which, fortunately, appears to be over), the companies were squeezing in a few megapixels but losing the advantage the extra count should have provided. It boiled down to two problems: Logic chips to interpret the signals from sensors, and the ability of sensors to gather light. The latter was hampered by size.
In the 550D, for example, the sensor is an “APS-C,” roughly the size of the APS camera system film frame (after which it was named). It is about 329 mm sq. It has 18mp, or about 1mp per 18 mm sq. Your camera has 6mp on, probably, a 1/2.5″. It has about 24 mm sq., or about 1mp per 4 mm sq. (Top bridge cameras are using 1/1.7″ chips, which are 43mm sq., almost twice as large as yours, but probably with fewer pixels/mm).
By comparison, cell phones now have 6mp sensors about 1/6″, or 4.3 mm sq.
Smaller pixels can’t catch as many photons while the shutter is open, and the laws of averages have adjacent units of area capturing a range of photons during the same single exposure. So you get only one unit of area per pixel, and their signals will vary enough to be visible when enlarged. If, though, you have a pixel that contains several units of area, its average exposure is more consistent. Thus, less “noise,” or variations in color and brightness. Smoother images, with details not overwhelmed by the average variations.
That’s the huge advantage of dSLRs: much larger sensor, larger area per pixel, more light and more even light.
So where’s that put us in the megapixel wars? The consumer was dragged in, but the camera makers let us excape.
The new cameras now have the same surface area in their sensors, or maybe a bit larger, but fewer pixels. The variations are less, and the pictures will be sharper. It also allows the camera makers to give you a wider range of shutter speeds or, correspondingly, ISO settings. So your older camera, which offers only up to 800 ISO, might now be available with 3200-6400 ISO. MUCH better in low light!
The megapixel wars, in addition to squeezing more megapixels into a limited patch of silicon, also gave the chip foundries more experience in making larger chips without losing a large percentage to flaws. That makes it cheaper (relatively) to make larger sensors. First battle, more pixels per mm. Second battle, more mm per chip. Third battle, improve the other electronics. Fourth battle, keep the chip size, but drop pixel count.. That’s roughly how it went. The result was more sensitive and accurate pixels as well as more of them.
We should not go back, and there’s no reason for a good camera not to have 10mp or more. And it’s better for you now. Here’s the quick answer:
10mp = 3648 x 2736 pixels (my camera, a Canon G11).
6 mp = 2816 x 2112 pixels.
3 mp (~=HD) = 1820 x 1020 pixels.
When you shoot and want to crop out the left half of a frame because your children are on the right (so you are enlarging them), you lose 1/2 of your pixels. If you want to make an enlargement, you can only go half as large as you could with a full-frame image without seeing pixels and noise.
So to a point, more pixels is better — and the sensor makers have reached that point.
July 21st, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Sorry, Om, I started writing just before your message arrived. It looks like you and I were on the same wavelength about your point #2: pixel size. My paragraph 4 shows the APS-C with 1 mp per 18 mm sq, making the pixels about 4x the size of those on my Canon G11 (10.1mp on 43 mm sq.). That’s a huge, huge difference. APS-C is not necessarily a beginner’s quality. I like your idea, though, about being able to use what you have when you upgrade.
I just came back to add that I still need to learn a lot — I don’t think I’ve used half the possibilities built into my camera. Plus, I make a lot of mistakes. I need to practice, read, experiment. I just keep looking at the links in sites as I read online, and now have 23 I use for reference. Plus, I joined Digital Photography School here.
Being able to find actual sensor sizes is one thing; knowing how to use them is what i still need to work on.
July 22nd, 2010 at 12:39 am
@rmvandy: I completely understand…it’s fine. Yes, I have now decided to weigh EF series over the EF-S series. This is because EF lenses fit over both full frame and cropped sensors, while the EF-S aren’t that versatile in that they can only be used on the cropped sensors due to their smaller image circles. And as you said, our cameras are full of loads of features, limited only by our imagination. However, the fact that I can’t use telephoto lenses on my powershot and a variety of other lenses is the main source of my dissatisfaction with the P&S and reason for deciding to move into the DSLRs……Hope you understand.
@Stratman: I was wondering over the utility of Live view in DSLRs… Though they can be useful in low light situations, is it really good to have live view built in the DSLR? Actually, in deciding between the Canon 500D and 550D, I have come to know that the 500D does not have live view focusing, while the 550D has it. Is this feature really necessary and worthy enough to push me more towards the 550D?
Also, the 550D has 63 zone evaluative metering, while the 500D has 35 zone evaluative metering. I guess metering would be more accurate in the former. But again, is this feature the major persuader for me to own a 550D?
I am an aspiring nature and wildlife photographer…. and wish to build my photographic system gradually… Since the full frames are too expensive to start off, I have set my eyes upon the upper end entry levels. I have heard many people saying that the entry levels are not worth buying due to their smaller APS-C sized sensors. The full frames are much more useful. So should I wait to raise my funds (that will take a lot time) and then buy a full frame, or start off with a entry level and some lenses (the Canon EF 70-300mm IS USM and the kit EF-S 18-55mm IS along with the EF 28-105mm USM) without losing anyway?? I have planned to buy the EF and not EF-S lenses for this very purpose of later putting them on a full frame as EF-S have smaller image circles. Please help!!!
July 22nd, 2010 at 2:07 am
@ Om:
I’m afraid you’ve been grossly misinformed. The Live View feature first appeared in the EOS 450D, followed by the EOS 1000D (introduced later in 2008) and of course, the 500D and 550D. There are two LV modes for the EOS 1000D and 450D: Quick AF mode (using phase AF detection) and Live View (contrast AF detection).
On the 500D and 550D, an additional Live View mode was introduced: the Face Recognition Live View for people portrait shots.
The Live View mode is not meant for “low light photography” as you mentioned, although you can still use it for night shots, using the viewfinder would be a lot better. The Live View mode is better suited for landscape shots on a tripod or macro photography where 100% frame coverage and precise manual focus is essential.
I can tell you that the Live View mode is either clunky or painfully slow. Quick Mode means you have to press a separate button which flips the mirror momentarily while the camera uses phase detection for fast auto focusing. You still need to depress the shutter button to take the image. The downside is that the mirror slap makes noise and introduces vibration. This makes Quick Mode less suitable for long exposures where you don’t want any kind of vibration ruining your shot.
The other Live View mode works exactly like the AF on a P&S camera (contrast detection), but it is very, very slow to focus compared to any cheap compact digicam. You’ll want to use this for macro shots or night photography on a tripod. Manual focusing works best with Live View. You can appreciate the whole story right here, in the video tour.
Umm..the 63 zone iFCL metering on the 550D is by no means a magical feature that gives you award winning images. Some 550D users in a few Flickr groups have reported metering inaccuracies, but it could be that they got problematic copies. Then again, the calibration of the meter can vary within batches and from body to body. It doesn’t mean that you won’t be able to take awesome images with the 500D’s 35-zone metering. As your experience grows, you’ll be relying less on the metering and more on your instincts.
If you really want very accurate metering, buy an external hand held light meter instead. For this reason professional photographers that shoot fashion and models indoors or outdoors rely on a handheld light meter instead of the camera’s built-in metering.
As for the dSLR of your choice, you must remember this: the camera only captures light. It’s up to you whether you need the features a particular model has and whether you’re willing to pay extra.
Photographers (that’s you) determine whether the resulting shot would be outstanding or looking like an uninteresting pics. A very capable photographer can take excellent images even with a P&S camera like the Canon G11, while a 1D Mk IV pro-grade dSLR in the hands of a total noob will take mere snapshots.
If I were you, I’d start with a good entry level dSLR and invest in quality lenses (the EF 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS is an average lens, neither mediocre nor excellent) instead. Camera bodies continue to depreciate while lenses go the opposite direction – they get more expensive every year.
July 23rd, 2010 at 7:32 am
Stratman, Rmvandy,
I’m actually fairly familiar with silicon and sensors :)
It’s everything upstream that I have … ehmm … let’s say that I have room for improvement.
I took your suggestion and started from page 1. Of the user manual of the S3.
I had done it already, but few pages were enough to see how much I had forgotten. I’ve place the camera handy for me to grab on the fly whenever there could be an opportunity. More experimenting means more learning, more questions and probably will trigger more experimenting again. We’ll see where that leads me.
Cheers!
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:45 pm
It’s almost like finding a favorite, old Ray Bradbury book and rediscovering some short story about being lost on Mars: How could I use this tool; what does that strange symbol bode? I remember this, how did it affect my progress last time?
I didn’t want to divert you from the excitement and broadened limits of an upgrade, and I’m sure in a few months you’ll be thinking about it again. Not much will change; no magical lens or function will appear to make the research you conducted obsolete. You seem to be pleased to set aside the million questions and doubts we all accumulate when we try to pick the “best match” to our desires. (And I don’t mean the crush you had on Ruthie in third grade.)
I had a Kodak in 1965 that stretched my budget. It was just a box camera, but had two focus settings, two f-stops, and a flash. I discovered that opening the flash door cut the shutter speed in half — I didn’t even need to put a bulb in it. Little tricks can make a big difference. You’ll still feel limited, but empowered in other ways because you’ll know how to get more from your camera.
July 24th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
Stratman and rmvandy: Thanks for your insightful replies. So, it is better to buy a cheaper entry level DSLR, with only the features that I need, and buy good quality lenses. I figured out the following lenses:
1. EF 70-300mm f/3.5-5.6 IS for wildlife and bird photography
2. EF 18-55mm IS for general purpose people’s photography and landscapes at 18mm wide end
3. EF 100mm Macro L IS USM for photomacrography
As per my budget, I plan to buy the first two lens in a few days, and the latter one later, it being the most expensive. Do you have a suggestion regarding my choice of the above lenses, or would you like to suggest some alternatives? As I said earlier, I am mainly interested in nature photography (landscapes, waterfalls, flowers, insects, birds, animals, etc primarily).
Now comes the ancient question, which I know, you will hear for the 1000th time: Should I go for a Nikon system or a Canon system?!!!
You’ll consider the above question as religious, but I have to ask which system among the following would you go with, along with the reason:
1. a Canon entry level (say 550 or 500D)+ above Canon lenses [about $ 1680 in India, for 550D excluding macro]
2. a Nikon entry level (say D90)+above lenses of Nikkor brand [ about $ 1450 in India, excluding macro and 70-300 mm Nikkor at wide end f/4.5, while for Canon at wide end f/4]
3. Canon entry level(500 or 550D)+above lenses of third party
4. Nikon entry level(say D90)+ above lenses of third party
And if you suggest Canon, which one among 500D and 550D if I don’t need HD recording, just quality stills and by budget permits both the cams. Do you suggest 500D + more expensive lenses or 500D + little less expensive lenses?
Sorry If I sound unreasonable and repetitive, but I feel a person of your caliber is the best to consult before jumping into a thing. Thanks!!!!!
July 24th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
@ Om,
Asking whether to buy Canon or Nikon is akin to asking whether to buy a Maruti-Suzuki or a Mahindra-Renault. :-) They both have their merits and demerits.
OK, I’ll try to be as brief as possible without rambling on too much, so I’ll use easy-to-digest point forms. Hope this is OK with you.
- The Nikon D90 is not an entry level dSLR (the D3000 is). It’s positioned slightly below the Canon EOS 50D and the EOS 550D. In terms of RAW sensor performance the D90 beats both Canons, at least on paper. In real world shots, you can’t tell the difference between the D90 and the 550D at very high ISOs.
- The EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is better than the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS (in terms of build and AF speed), but for a bit more money the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM (non-IS) will be your best long term investment, if you can afford it. Otherwise, go for the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS, which is a great value-for-money zoom lens. .
- Money saved by getting the EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS instead of the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM means you can allocate your remaining budget for a Canon Speedlite flash, (e.g. the 430EX II) and maybe a BG-E5 battery grip. When you’ve hit the limitations of the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS zoom, you may as well jump straight to the optically excellent EF 70-200mm f/4L USM.
- Avoid the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM or Mk III USM zoom, which are old designs from Canon. The EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS is actually optically superior to both of them for the same price range.
- Don’t buy the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS separately. Get the 500D kit, it’s much cheaper than buying separately.
- If you’re buying the 500D body only, look for better alternatives to that kit lens. For long term, these four lenses come to mind (in descending order of price):
1. EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
2. EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
3. EF-S 17-85mm f/4.0-5.6 IS USM
4. Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC. IMO, the Tamron gives you the best value for money and there’s an even cheaper non-VC (Vibration Compensation) version available.
- IMO the EOS 500D gives you the best bang for the buck, as it’s now priced lower than the 550D, which is a recent introduction. You get some features borrowed from the 50D, like vignetting correction and a high res 920k pixel LCD screen. However the 450D, at its max ISO of 1600 is less noisy than the 500D. 12MP vs 15MP won’t be much of a difference in real world photography.
- If you’ve ever considered the EOS 1000D (which is quite a good entry level dSLR), it’s worth paying a bit more for the EOS 450D. You get 14-bit RAW conversion, spot metering and IR sensors for the wireless remote and to turn off the LCD screen automatically.
- No need to splurge on the new EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM. For a lot less money, the recently discontinued EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM will deliver equally sharp images, providing your camera technique is polished. The price gap between the two lenses is quite significant.
Bottom line:
1. If you’re going the Canon route, the 500D is more than enough for your daily needs.
2. If you’re not sure how far this new hobby of yours will take you, go for the best value-for-money lenses.
3. Don’t forget that you’ll be needing premium accessories like camera bags, tripods, monopods, flash, spare batteries, filters, remote triggers, lens hoods (except for any L-series lens or Tamron lenses, as the hood is included). All this gear will come up to a substantial amount.
4. Canon brand lenses are more often cheaper than Nikon lenses of the same kind. You can use any EF lens made by Canon, even from 1987 (when the EOS line was first introduced). Note that manual focus, mechanically controlled aperture FD lenses before 1987 cannot fit on any EOS camera.
I don’t read up on Nikon lenses, therefore if you’re going the Nikon path you’ll have to do some research on your own.
OK, that’s it from me. Signing off.
July 30th, 2010 at 3:45 am
I presently have an Olympus SP-550UZ 18X OPTICAL ZOOM 28MM WIDE DUAL I 15FPS burst rate camera. I can never seem to take a great pic or the same pic each time..it is complicated for me and although there are times I get a great pic..most of the time I don’t. I know it is me and probably not the camera and it has soooo many setting and choices it just overwhelms me. I was looking to see if a point and shoot would serve my purposes better. This is what I need the camera for and basically all I use it for. I am a reborn artist ..which is painting dolls in oils and making them look like real babies..I take pics of them in different positions mainly on a table with some props. I am fairly close to the subject each time so zooming in is not really nessesary. I need to find a camera that will take a good crisp pic, pay attention to the details and not have an orangey over cast most of the time.. there are so many cameras out there and I am not looking to spend a fortune but was wondering if you or anyone had any suggestions for me.. I usually take lots of pics and pic out the best ones. I need help desperatel because a great pic does help sell the doll…thanks for anyone who answers..
Claudette
July 30th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
Hi Claudette,
Your SP-550UZ ultra-zoom is actually a good camera in its class, but fine tuning the white balance for tricky lighting situations can be a somewhat frustrating affair.
You have two options as I see them:
a) Retaining your Olympus SP-550UZ and learning how to extract the best out of it or;
b) Entirely replacing your present digicam with a new one.
I’ll get back to you on this, but I’ll need you to answer these questions first:
1. Have you ever shot RAW images with your Olympus, rather than JPG format?
2. What kind of indoor lighting do you use to illuminate the doll models? Do you have studio lighting or use makeshift table lamps? If use to the latter, is your lighting the tungsten or fluorescent kind?
3. How long have you owned the SP-550UZ and are you getting tired of it?
4. List down other shortcomings of your present camera that you’ve found to be detrimental to getting awesome images.
5. Are you open to digital SLRs or prefer to stick to P&S cameras like your SP-550UZ?
6. What other kind of photography do you take other than your dolls?
And finally:
7. What is your expected budget and your absolute (e.g. never-exceed) budget for a new camera?
These questions will help us in narrowing down your choices.
Leave a Reply