Prosumer vs. DSLR approach

Yep type,

the absence of snobs is what makes me loyal to OTF. And everytime the C8080 is discussed i always get the itch to throw-in my two cents. Due to the C8080's lack of speed I had to pair it with an XT.

So far these are my conclusions.

Needs addressed:

XT (+28-105mmf/3.5-4.5+24mmf/2.8+85mmf/1.8+kit lens) is for speed.
C8080 is for sharpness.

Subject orientation:

XT (+28-105mmf/3.5-4.5+24mmf/2.8+85mmf/1.8+kit lens+kneeling+crawling+climbing) is best for people
C8080 is best for things.

So:

My XT with the said four lenses can't equal the corner to corner sharpness of my C8080. So when a customer emphasizes that the hook of the necklace is as equally important to its pendant, I know I have to photograph the necklace with my C8080.

I however will not be taking my C8080 to a fashion show where models will be wearing the same necklace because it's just too slow. Too slow that when I miss my first shot I have very little chance at taking a second shot.

(Perhaps one could point out the fact that I don't have an L lens. Still I doubt if an L lens can render the same corner to corner sharpness of the C8080.)

Since I work for the lifestyle section of a local daily, I do photograph people more than things. Thus I carry my XT more often. So I now have this division of the cameras. For work: XT; for love (street photography, stolen shots): C8080
--
slowshotmax

Your reasons for thinking about the E-500 are valid, and you would be able to make better quality, large prints than with your present camera. Plus, you'd have more cropping capability and still maintain adequate quality. So, if those are the limitations that are holding you back, go for it. Or, if you simply think you would enjoy it, go for it. Pay attention to your gut feelings and do what feels right to you. We don't have to be rational all the time.

As GCam has pointed out, your camera has more than enough pixels to display on the Internet. So, there must be more to it. For, example, many photo sellers/publishers do have minimum standards which are necessary to meet the needs of the end user. So, if he's posting on a web site for the purpose of selling/brokering photos, he could well require more pixels.

--John C.

As you so well pointed out, many, if not all, of our choices in life involve compromises. And we just have to figure out what problems we can tolerate better than others. I don't think there ever has been, nor will be, one camera that's perfect for everybody. To each his own. And, I think it's good to keep in mind that, since each of us is different, rarely will our opinions be exactly right for another.

Thank you for adding a positive contribution to the thread.

--John C.

GCam said:

GCam said:

Not really. If I understand the concept, a pinhold camera gives
great depth of field, but the downside is correspondingly slower
shutter speeds to properly expose the picture.

Click to expand...

You need to work on your panning technique. gc

Click to expand...

Panning technique? If I was photographing race cars then yes, I would need to work on my panning techinque. What I'm talking about is taking candid shots of people, and shots of performers on stages. I usually keep the camera in my hand, but not up to my eye. If I see something that might be interesting, I bring the camera up to my eye, take the picture, and put it back down. Here are some recent shots from wandering around Boston. Are they 'great art', probably not, but I like to see people enjoying themselves:

Olympus E-1 camera with Olympus 14-54mm lens, f/4.0, ISO 200, 1/125 sec, 35.0mm, auto mode, SHQ, matrix metering, +2 sharpening:



Olympus E-1 camera with Olympus 14-54mm lens, f/6.3, ISO 100, 1/250 sec, 29.0mm, auto mode, SHQ, matrix metering, +2 sharpening, continous shooting (shot 2):



Olympus E-1 camera with Olympus 14-54mm lens, f/5.6, ISO 100, 1/320 sec, 54.0mm, auto mode, SHQ, matrix metering, +2 sharpening:



Olympus E-1 camera with Olympus 14-54mm lens, f/5.6, ISO 100, 1/320 sec, 49.0mm, auto mode, SHQ, matrix metering, +2 sharpening, continous shooting (shot 2):



Olympus E-1 camera with Olympus 14-54mm lens, f/5.0, ISO 100, 1/250 sec, 42.0mm, auto mode, SHQ, spot metering, +2 sharpening:



I also like animals, like this penguin from the Boston Aquarium. Shot with an Olympus E-1 camera with Olympus 50-200mm lens, f/3.5, ISO 800, FL-50 flash, 1/160 sec, 200.0mm, auto mode, SHQ, matrix metering, +2 sharpening (this by the way using high zoom, TTL flash, and high ISO on my E-1):



Squirrels are nice too. Shot with an Olympus C-2100UZ camera, f/3.2, ISO 100, 1/125 sec, 57.3mm, auto mode, SHQ, cloudy, matrix metering:



If anything, this discussion shows that what each of us thinks is photography is different. While I will do landscapes and flowers, what I really like is photographing people. Others like doing sweeping vistas, and thats cool also, just not my usual style.

John Chandler said:

Michael,

I hope you knew I was only joking.

Click to expand...

I thought you might be, but as my wife can tell you, subtle doesn't work on me.

John Chandler said:

Then one the other hand, you could put your UZI in an oatmeal box
painted black, rig it with a remote, and cut a hole for a lens,
paint "pinhole camera" on it, and you'd be right "in costume."

Click to expand...

Well if I remember good old Leonardo, the camera obscura was actually a dark room with a pinhole that projected the image upside down on the opposite wall (it also by that time a historical relic, since what most renaissance faires portray is England in the time of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, which is 200 years after the real renaissance). Hardly portable

Susan G said:

I have been offered to
show some of my photos on a local website but the guy says my 3.9
pixels isn't enough and needs to be at least 6mp -- I should have
bought the 8080 last year when it was still available.
Susan
--

Click to expand...

When I contribute pictures to our Morris Dance website, I am told to keep file sizes below 50 kiloBytes. That means 640x480 resolution at the lowest quality setting. A 1.3 MegaPixel camera will do those.

I don't do my own website, but I thought one of the main criteria was downloading speed. I keep my uploads to pbase generally to 180 kiloBytes or below, which means images are mostly 800x600 size at High Quality (according to PSE2). I have pictures from my old C-1400L up there, which does 960x1280 pixels.

So, if your guy needs pictures for a website only, he is having you on about 6 MegaPixel and above originals. Is he flogging off large prints on the side?

Just my thoughts.

Henry

--
Henry Falkner - C-750UZ, Stylus 800 http://www.pbase.com/hfalkner

Michael Meissner said:

Panning technique? If I was photographing race cars then yes, I
would need to work on my panning techinque.

Click to expand...

It was a joke about shooting with a pinhole camera.

If I see something that might be interesting, I bring the
camera up to my eye, take the picture, and put it back down. Here
are some recent shots from wandering around Boston. Are they
'great art', probably not, but I like to see people enjoying
themselves:

Who determines this??? The shooter and no one else, as long as it appeals to him/her. Great city Boston. Loved playing golf there when I was able. gc

John Chandler said:

I always found it impressive that Henri Cartier-Bresson did not crop,
but his printer sure did post processing.
--John C.

Click to expand...

I learnt much of my photography at the Polytechnic in London, England (1964 to 1967), then became a photographic technician in a colour laboratory.

Post Processing? 'Dodging' and 'Printing In', using your fngers or pieces of paper. All the composition, using 'Cut' and 'Paste' (literally) was done by graphic artists, not the photographer, and not the photographic technician. The tools that PSE2 gives me are far and above what I was taught to use.

Henry

--
Henry Falkner - C-750UZ, Stylus 800 http://www.pbase.com/hfalkner

Susan,

We even had A3 size prints taken from some C770 captures I had. Of course Photoshop resize/USM etc was needed, but they were good enough to go into an exhibition along with others of the photography group I belong to . Yes, the DSLR photographs next to it did look better, but not by too much. http://www.thepca.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=1 . It all boils down to usage. If you need great high ISO shots, more cropping, better quality enlargements, faster speed, you need a DSLR.
--
-- Aamir --
3D/Multimedia
Olympus C770
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aamir

Thank you for replying to my concern -- yes, he does use the website to market the images for commercial or home use. If you wish, you can take a look at his website (www.israelimages.com) and get a better idea of what I mean. He seems to have the photos available for billboards, advertising, magazines, etc. and even includes a price list on his website.

The odd thing is I sent him a disk with pictures of the bulls I've posted here (in pbase) some time ago and they were all OK, apparently. Now I've sent another disk of photos he selected and he said they weren't large enough. Go figure.

I'm curious about this new E400 -- especially for its small size -- if the lens is as good as the 770 or the 14-52 (dslr) (and why shouldn't it be???), then maybe that's a better choice for me since I don't like lugging heavy stuff. I'm on the proverbial see-saw, should I or shouldn't I with this dslr decision.

Thanks again for the printing information -- I'd like to get some of my pictures printed in large size.

Best,
Susan
--



http://www.pbase.com/susan_1016

referred us to, John, since I'm a dyed-in-the-wool-DSLR-convert now! heheh

That said, anyone interested in 'why' I am a DSLR guy now, the following link will take you to Ken Rockwell's website and a piece he wrote regarding the differences, advantages/disadvantages, etc. between the 'two kinds of digital cameras':
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2dig.htm

I still read the posts to the OTF, and occasionally respond/comment, but I no longer have any Oly pics to post...since I moved from using my old C-700 and UZI to Panasonic and then to the Nikon D50.

For me, there isn't a 'P&S' camera out there that could provide me with the joy I get from shooting with the D-thangy (as RichardR calls it
Regards, to all...
--
Jim K...just outside Detroit, MI...US of A
OlyUZi...PanyFZ5k...Nik.DeeFifty

http://www.pbase.com/jkorsog ...Pbase supporter
http://motorcityjim.fotopic.net/

Susan G said:

Thanks again for the printing information -- I'd like to get some
of my pictures printed in large size.

Best, Susan
--

Click to expand...

For a laugh I had a C-750 image printed to A2, after some processing of course. I enlarged the picture to 7200x5387, then I used Neat Image followed by Unsharp Masking (not the other way round).

You need to make sure that the original is as sharp as the camera will allow. Check with a 100% crop. It depends on the strength and uniqueness of the subject whether it is worth your while.

I admit, there is no elbow room with a 3.9 MegaPixel original, and this may be the reason why your correspondent has started standardising on 6 MP and above. It will reduce the time he spends on rejecting pictures.

Henry

--
Henry Falkner - C-750UZ, Stylus 800 http://www.pbase.com/hfalkner

Sorry to be so long in answering (real busy this weekend).

As far as printing is concerned... Many of my "Autumn" shots done last Sept. thru November were published in a Water industry magazine.. but they were all printed at 4x6, 3x5 ect.

I havent printed anything larger than 8x10 from a C-770 file, but I've been really happy with the result.

I do have several DSLRs (3 Oly, 1 Canon), and I tend to use them more than the 770, but that doesnt mean I feel "hampered" when I use the 770, I just use it for what I feel it does best --- Quick, easy, non, action shots of beautiful colors.

--

Put one hand on each cheek..Now the solution to better photography is in your hands

Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

I forgot to mention... ALL of my "Autumn" series last fall were shot with the C-770 and a Canon S2.. All of the published shots came from the C-770.
--

Put one hand on each cheek..Now the solution to better photography is in your hands

Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.

…provided. And I would recommend others read it to get the author's point of view. As the author admits, he is very opinionated, and generally dismisses any P&S camera as worthwhile for any person, for any reason, when they can have a "real" camera (DSLR), instead of even the best P&S. Which, of course, was the opposite point of the article refereed to in my initial post.

I agree with many of the points in the link that you provided, and they are certainly valid for many photographers. However, I'm still of the openion that, as I said in my reply to Abid in the post just above yours:

"…many, if not all, of our choices in life involve compromises. And we just have to figure out what problems we can tolerate better than others. I don't think there ever has been, nor will be, one camera that's perfect for everybody. To each his own. And, I think it's good to keep in mind that, since each of us is different, rarely will our opinions be exactly right for another."

Jim, I'm glad you joined the discussion, and your contribution is helpful. It adds some perspective to the question that many people are grappling with in regards to what kind of camera is best for them in order to meet their objectives in photography. And everyone's objectives/needs are different -- and they do change -- often in unexpected ways.

I'm glad you are finding such joy in using your DSLR. After all, as they say, that's the name of the game. I hope you'll come back to see us more often. I've always enjoyed your posts.

--John C.

One more minor item in the prosumer vs. DSLR is weight. I was at a pirate festival (like a renaissance festival, but with pirates instead of good king Henry or queen Bess), and I started out the day with the full kit (E-1, 4 lenses, flash, extra batteries, etc.). At the last minute, I also decided to carry along the stabalized prosumers (UZI and S1). I couldn't get as close to the stages as I normally like, and switched over to the UZI for all of my shots because it was just out of 14-54mm range. Eventually I ditched the E-1 and gear in the car (I did take some wide angle shots of the bay with the 11-22mm that I wouldn't have been able to take with the UZI), and just carried the UZI. So sometimes, an all-in-one will beat the heavier, bulkier gear.

John, I've followed this thread since your first post and have found the different points of view interesting. I've started to write a response several times but couldn't decide just what I wanted to add. Sorry to come in at the tail end of the thread.

This debate has been going on in various forms ever since film days when new types of cameras were introduced. The 35mm SLR was quite a revolutionary piece of equipment which also began to divide afficienados into 'them' and 'us'. Even without considering the distinction between P&S and DSLR, we have the same debates such as "My anon is better than your ikon".

The truth is that there is no 'best camera' but only which camera is best suited to the job at hand, whether it be for professional or amateur purposes. It's sometimes hard for us to make such choices objectively as we all have personal preferences and sometimes our actual needs are surpassed by our wants. Accordingly, there is no right or wrong answer to the question, but only personal preference or requirements for individual shooting style.

I made the move to a DSLR a little over two years ago because my beloved UZI just wasn't getting the job done for wildlife photography. I needed the 'no shutter lag' quickness and ability to use higher ISO's in the low light of early mornings or shade of the forests. Being able to add different lenses was also a plus.

My friend Jim Logan, who passed away several months ago, and I were making weekly treks to the mountains to shoot wildlife over the previous two years, he with a Sony 717, and me with my Oly C-2100UZ. Both cameras had the long zoom range and excellent lenses but were handicapped by shutter lag and inability to boost ISO to useful levels. Trying to anticipate just when a deer would jump a fence was problematical. The jump would last but a second and a good shot was more luck than skill. Being able to rack off a succession of shots at 3fps also helped for moving animals or bobbing heads. The extra megapixels were a bonus for additional cropping-in for distant subjects. We both bought D70's the same week and never looked back. We could just as easily bought Canons or E-1s, but the brand wasn't that important as all three of those are good and neither of us had existing lenses. I had spent several months narrowing down my decision.

I still use my Oly digicams, with the UZI, C-5050Z, and the tiny C-7000Z each filling a niche for different occasions and purposes. I even drag out the old C-3000Z sometimes when I don't want to risk one of the newer ones, such as kayaking or some other such foolish activity. )

One day, I even took them all with me to Cades Cove and my front seat looked like this: (Took the photo with the C-3000Z!)



I've since upgraded my tripod but still have everything else shown in the photo.

Everybody has their own opinions and reasons for choosing one type camera over another but it all boils down to personal choices and choosing the right tool for the job at hand. (Not to mention the available cash.)

I respect each person's choices (and brands) so really don't have an answer to "Prosumer vs DSLR."

Thanks for starting this very interesting thread.

Best regards,

****

--
http://www.pbase.com/richardr
D70&C-2100UZ&C-5050Z&C-7000Z&C-3000Z

nada.

...it's right here in the last part of your post:

" Everybody has their own opinions and reasons for choosing one type camera over another but it all boils down to personal choices and choosing the right tool for the job at hand. (Not to mention the available cash.)

I respect each person's choices (and brands)…"

****, thank you for joining in to the discussion and providing the answer.

--John C.
nds)

RichardR said:

One day, I even took them all with me to Cades Cove and my front
seat looked like this: (Took the photo with the C-3000Z!)

Click to expand...

.. and I love that photo! If I had 4 cameras at my disposal, I'd spend more time trying to figure out which one I want to use than taking pictures! Obviously you don't have that problem Lol!

Cheers,

Wayne
http://www.pbase.com/wayne_n