Prosumer or SLR

Had a little accident on holiday. Took my Canon Ixus 400 into the sea in it's waterproof case, only it did't turn out to be quite waterproof enough!

So I'm in the market for a new camera. The Ixus 400 was a nice snap shot camera but I'm looking for something a little more feature rich, which will allow me to experiment a little more but which is still useful for the basics.

I'm looking around the £450-£600 mark. I know the quality, flexibility and speed of SLR's are superior, but the down side is the bulk (Body and extra lenses) and I must admit I don't like the fact that you can't use the LCD to frame shots. SLR's may be overkill for my needs.

The prosumer compacts seem to suit me better, but when you can get something with gives you much higher quality results, for similar money, I am know unsure in which direction to go.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

You've set yourself quite a problem here; totally different type of camera, entirely different set of uses. I have the s400 and also use a Konica Minolta 5D (DSLR) as well as an older D7i (prosumer); and I really would not want to be without that little s400 or something similar.

Take a look one of my galleries here which has shots from all 3 cameras which all have their different uses and pros and cons:
http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor

The s400 is a pocket or belt take-anywhere camera that can be relied upon to get exposure spot-on most of the time. Very limited zoom and manual settings.

The D7i (current model in the line-up is the A200), is a SLR-like prosumer camera with an electronic viewfinder (you may not like EVF) and a good 28-200 (7x) zoom with macro. The only thing I don't like too much about it is that it eats batteries - I understand later models are much better.

The 5D takes you into interchangeable lens territory and denies you the live electronic preview offered by the other two. The image quality is significantly better and the so-called 'shutter lag' is no longer an issue for action shots.

You probably need to work out a few things before you proceed, including what you actually want the camera for (now's the time to make a list.)
1) Your tolerance of different camera sizes.
2) Whether you want a megazoom prosumer with image stabilisier.
3) How much you need live preview and can tolerate EVFs

4) How tight a hold you can keep on your budget. (Buy a DSLR and you WILL end up buying a range of expensive lenses quicker than you think; and £100 ($170) doesn't buy a good one new.

The DSLRs which you will may find most friendly to use IMO are these two:

The little Pentax *istDS (orDL) or the somewhat heavier Konica Minolta 5D. The latter has Anti-shake built in so virtually every lens will gain this feature. (Camera shake will be more noticeable on a DSLR because the extra image quality easily shows it up.)

Don't be too concerned if what you may end up with Canon's Ixus 700/750. Many of my favourite photographs still come from the little camera and that's no surprise really given the fact that it is unobtrusive and does more than what it's supposed to do.

I hope this has helped rather than confused you.

John.

Thanks John

You have hit the nail on the head. I'm a bit of a gadget freek and the geek in me wants the best technically my budget will stretch to. But the real issue is what I will be using the camera for most of the time.

I have to go away and have a long hard think. (Or I could just buy a point and shoot and a DSLR. I feel my little flexible plastic friend could be edging ever closer to it's limit!)

Once again, thanks for the reply.

I had a similar dilemma two years ago when I didn't close well enought the housing of my Canon S300 and dive with it. The camera was RIP and I buy an Canon S1 IS. The problem was : to buy a housing for the new camera or to buy an old camera for the housing. I buy a camera for Ebay and it works. Now I wnat to buy a DSLR (maybe an Oly E500) and maybe a housing for the S1 (a housing for Oly is more than 1000$)
--
zeev

Seek out a used DSLR, and see how you get on? Shouldn't be too long before you can decide if you like it or not? Then you can trade up, or out of, DSLR.

Personally, I don't like using an LCD to compose, it's just not accurate enough.

YMMV of course.

TTG

ScribbleDog said:

Had a little accident on holiday. Took my Canon Ixus 400 into the
sea in it's waterproof case, only it did't turn out to be quite
waterproof enough!

So I'm in the market for a new camera. The Ixus 400 was a nice snap
shot camera but I'm looking for something a little more feature
rich, which will allow me to experiment a little more but which is
still useful for the basics.

Click to expand...

A prosumer will meet this requirement.

ScribbleDog said:

I'm looking around the £450-£600 mark. I know the quality,
flexibility and speed of SLR's are superior, but the down side is
the bulk (Body and extra lenses) and I must admit I don't like the
fact that you can't use the LCD to frame shots. SLR's may be
overkill for my needs.

Click to expand...

You may get over the dislike of not being able to use the LCD for framing, but depending on what you shoot, you may be correct about a Dslr being overkill.

ScribbleDog said:

The prosumer compacts seem to suit me better, but when you can get
something with gives you much higher quality results, for similar
money, I am know unsure in which direction to go.

Click to expand...

So, as I mentioned above, what do you shoot? If you shoot the normal type stuff (kids, pets, landscapes, family gatherings, etc) a prosumer will probably keep you quite happy. If you shoot in low light, or shoot low light action where high ISO performace is key, or wildlife where focal length is critical than a Dslr may be a better choice for you.

Your choices look to be:
Pick up a prosumer for around $600-$900

Get an entry level Dslr w/kit lens for around $800 (this price is mis-leading since just about everyone buys at least one additional lens, probably more)

Check out the new Sony 'hybrid" R1 with a street price of around $900-$1000 It's got a fixed lens so it's focal range is limited, but it does have an APS size sensor that will yield really nice high ISO results. Sort of a prosumer with Dslr image quality It's nice and techy too....lol

Steve

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
http://freezeframephotography.smugmug.com
http://www.photobird.com/steve

As mentioned some where else here in DPR the price of DSLR are coming down to and even getting lower than some of the prosumer cameras.

Take a look at the Oly E-300 and even the new E-500 a two lens kit can be had for under a grand US, not sure what they are selling for in GB.

Hop on over to the Olympus SLR forum to see what the users are saying about them.
--
Pixelseeker formerly known as Markee



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.-Benjamin Franklin

A key issue is quality and response time.

My understanding is that a D-SLR (eg. XT Rebel) has a fast response (particularly when prefocussed), compared to a prosumer (eg. FZ5 – which itself is quite fast).

A DSLR seems the right choice – but it appears that the kit lense in many entry level DSLR’s are of poorer quality (i.e. slower and limited).

Assuming we only consider the kit lense, how do these compare with the lenses in high level prosumer ?

For example, How does the speed of the XT Rebel with kit lense compare with the Pana FZ5 or FZ20 which both use a Leica lense. The Leica lenses on these prosumers appear to be of a higher quality than the kit lenses on the XT Rebel (is this correct).

Basically if you can only afford to buy an entry Level DSLR with a “kit” lense, are the results better or worse than a high level prosumer camera with a high level lense ?

The type of use I am comparing is for amateur enthusiast (for eg. taking photos of fast moving two year old children)

After reading through a lot more posts on this forum, I am leaning towards a prosumer. The general opinion seems to be if you can only afford a dSLR with the kit lens, which will be the case with myself for quite a while, then you will be missing out on a lot of the pluses a dSLR has.

The Panasonic FZ30 seems a nice camera, and the new Sony R1 seems to combine a lot of the advantages of both types (and the disadvantage of size).

Thanks for all the replies

ScribbleDog

A month ago I faced the same question as you. My time with my Canon A75 had reached its limit and I needed something more, so I gave the A75 to my parents, and I ended up buying a G6. Honestly, there is not much I can do with the G6 that I could not with the A75. But when I play with friend's dSLR's, there is a WORLD of difference. Particularly in regards to indoor/low-light/no-flash shooting. High ISOs are usually completely unusable in prosumer cameras. With most dSLRs, youre much better off, at least up to 400, and often up to 1600 (for example with the Canon 20D). I like my G6, but I think I would be much more happy with a dSLR, and so would you. Why not supplement a dSLR purchase with a little $150 IXUS when you dont want to carry around the bulk. Old models can be had for cheap, which still produce fantastic images in good lighting. If you dont want to worry about buying all the extra lens, I have heard that the Nikon D70 kit lens is rather excellent compared to all the others, so you could stick with that for a year, and upgrade later when you have the money/inclination. Cheers.

I went from a mega zoom to a DSLR and never looked back. The DSLR is about the same size as a megazoom with lens extended. It is also a joy to use an old 28/2.8 prime to get tack sharp, clean images at ISO800 where the only light is a single bulb.

I saw a comparison of DSLR's and kit lenses on a Korean site. The Pentax and Nikon lenses are similar in quality. The Nikon is best zoomed in and the Pentax is best at wide angle. It is a matter of preference. They both use the same sensor, too.

I think there are only two prosumers which are serious challengers to the
DSLR at present. They are the Sony R1 (which only has a medium zoom)
or the Fuji S9000. Of these two the Sony is the better camera if you can
live with the zoom range (you can buy add on tele adaptors) but the Fuji
is cheaper.
Its a difficult choice, like many photographers I have settled for a DSLR and
a carry everywhere Fuji F10 compact.

Tim the Grey said:

Personally, I don't like using an LCD to compose, it's just not
accurate enough.

Click to expand...

Huh? Most are nearly 100% accurate and put the typical DSLR (especially the consumer oriented ones) to shame in this respect.

There are all kinds of legit reasons to prefer either type of viewfinder or camera. But I don't think composing accuracy is one of them. My

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

ScribbleDog said:

I'm looking around the £450-£600 mark. I know the quality,
flexibility and speed of SLR's are superior, but the down side is
the bulk (Body and extra lenses) and I must admit I don't like the
fact that you can't use the LCD to frame shots. SLR's may be
overkill for my needs.

Click to expand...

Some Sonys and other cameras are as fast or nearly as fast as some DSLRs. in shutter response. If speed is an issue check imaging-resource.com for shutter/autofocus response times.

Some fixed lens digitals are very high quality. The lens on the Canon G6 is exceptional. The build of the Olympuse C7070W is quite robust. So for quality, I don't see inexpensive DSLRs being clearly better.

Now if you are talking picture quality, then the DSLRs are better. But the differences are most pronounced at higher ISOs. So if you shoot a lot of low light above 400 or even 200 ISO, then you might really want to consider a DSLR. But when light is adequate, the differences are more subtle than stunning. Just download some of the sample photos from the various reviews on DPreview. Look at the results from the recent crop of 7Mp fixed lens digitals. You may be surprised at what you find.

ScribbleDog said:

The prosumer compacts seem to suit me better, but when you can get
something with gives you much higher quality results, for similar
money, I am know unsure in which direction to go.

Click to expand...

A DLSR has four main areas of benefit.

1) it is generally fast (though a few fixed lens cameras are as fast as some DSLRS)
2) You have a choice of a wider range of lenses.

3) The larger pixel pitch gives lower noise images and better high ISO performance.
4) Good performance while shooting RAW

You give up

1) Compactness
2) Quiet unobtrusive operation
3) Versatile viewfinder options such as tilt and swivel LCDs.
4) depending on the camera - you might give up more money.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

Shaun Williamson said:

I think there are only two prosumers which are serious challengers
to the
DSLR at present.

Click to expand...

The problem with a blanket assessment like this is that it doesn't consider the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two different forms. Since compact and quiet performance and viewfinder flexibility matter a lot to me, I could justifiably say that there are no serious challengers to fixed lens digitals from the DSLR camp. But a blanket statement like that without the qualifiers would be misleading.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

Hi,

The problem is that no one has sorted out just what a "prosumer" is (other than not so dear to buy) and many are SLR's IMO and vice versa. It not one of those words like "macro" or "inch" with a precise meaning that only ignorance can excuse being altered.

For my money I'd go for the best lens and ignore what it's called. In years to come when the camera has gone to the celestial dustbin, the images will be all you have and that's why the lens is important. Everything else can be worked round with a bit of cunning.

Regards, David

As you can probably gather I am quite new here. The impression I have got so far is a 'prosumer' relates to high end compacts, but reading your post I may be mistaken.

The lens is obviously a crucial part of the camera, unfortunately, cost is an important issue in any purchase I make at this time. So the camera I eventually choose must cover as many bases as possible for a given price. Hopefuly there is a camera out there that will fit the bill!

Thanks for your advice

ScribbleDog

David Hughes124436 said:

The problem is that no one has sorted out just what a "prosumer" is
(other than not so dear to buy) and many are SLR's IMO and vice
versa. It not one of those words like "macro" or "inch" with a
precise meaning that only ignorance can excuse being altered.

Click to expand...

Given the context of the OP's statement, his usage of "prosumer" is pretty clear.

As for "macro", some people like to think there is a specific and precise meaning, but the historical usage says otherwise. It has been used as a vague marketing term for decades - and still is.

David Hughes124436 said:

For my money I'd go for the best lens and ignore what it's called.
In years to come when the camera has gone to the celestial dustbin,
the images will be all you have and that's why the lens is
important. Everything else can be worked round with a bit of
cunning.

Click to expand...

If only it were that simple.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

ScribbleDog said:

As you can probably gather I am quite new here. The impression I
have got so far is a 'prosumer' relates to high end compacts, but
reading your post I may be mistaken.

Click to expand...

That is a common usage. Your intent was pretty clear.

BTW, you probably want to review your picture taking and come up with some notion of camera focal length range that is important to you. That might help you narrow the choices.

As for the DSLRs, consider that future upgrades represent only the marginal difference of buying a new lens. With a fixed lens digicam, you might be able to purchase an add-on wide or tele converterer, but beyond that, choices are very limited. So you could easily find the next purchase being a whole new camera and not just a new lens.

You need to figure out what your biggest "issues" are. For me, it is size and ease of carrying around. But that won't be the case for everyone.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

Jay Turberville said:

A DLSR has four main areas of benefit.

Click to expand...

At least five, if you count the ability to use a TTL-metered external flash unit that has a high guide number and a tilt/swivel flash head. This setup is useful if you take indoor pictures and want to avoid "red eye".

The Canon PowerShot G6 is a point-and-shoot camera that supports this, but it's the exception that proves the rule.