DSLR or Point & Shoot?

I know I'm only an enthusiastic amateur who still has lots and lots to learn, but as an owner of several DSLRs as well as a point-and-shoot Coolpix 5700, I still occasionally find myself wondering if all that expenditure on high-end DSLRs was really worth it.

The answer for ME is always yes, because I am as much of a gadget-fan as I am a 'photographer' and I just love using that pro equipment ... it keeps me happy.

The question arose again in a different context last night during a wonderful meal with old friends, and the husband was seeking advice on what camera he should buy. I found myself really torn between recommending an entry-level DSLR or a P&S and I said I'd think about it.

This morning, whilst sorting through some old images, I came across this one taken with my Coolpix 5700 and I thought 'could I have done this any better with a DSLR ?'

I'd be interested in your thoughts ...



--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

I'm surprised to hear this kind of talk from you Dave, because I remember you found it nonsense if people said the camera makes no difference .

Anyway, my thought is that there will be technical differences. These will be larger if the situation is more challenging. In your photo the good light and moderate telelens make the P&S shine.

Apart from that you'll never find a DSLR that keeps the foreground in color while rendering the background in B&W

Dave Chambers said:

I know I'm only an enthusiastic amateur who still has lots and lots
to learn, but as an owner of several DSLRs as well as a
point-and-shoot Coolpix 5700, I still occasionally find myself
wondering if all that expenditure on high-end DSLRs was really
worth it.

The answer for ME is always yes, because I am as much of a
gadget-fan as I am a 'photographer' and I just love using that pro
equipment ... it keeps me happy.

The question arose again in a different context last night during a
wonderful meal with old friends, and the husband was seeking advice
on what camera he should buy. I found myself really torn between
recommending an entry-level DSLR or a P&S and I said I'd think
about it.

This morning, whilst sorting through some old images, I came across
this one taken with my Coolpix 5700 and I thought 'could I have
done this any better with a DSLR ?'

I'd be interested in your thoughts ...



--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

Click to expand...

--
Philip

Dave Chambers said:

The question arose again in a different context last night during a
wonderful meal with old friends, and the husband was seeking advice
on what camera he should buy. I found myself really torn between
recommending an entry-level DSLR or a P&S and I said I'd think
about it.

Click to expand...

Too many questions without answers. How much to spend, size/weight sensitive, expected use and all of the stuff that goes along with that.

Dave Chambers said:

This morning, whilst sorting through some old images, I came across
this one taken with my Coolpix 5700 and I thought 'could I have
done this any better with a DSLR ?'

Click to expand...

I don't see how that matters a great deal. Photos taken under optimal conditions, with optimal camera settings, won't reveal much difference of a dslr vs P&S photo contest, to the average person. If your friend wants to take photos of his grandson playing in a low light soccer game, would you suggest a coolpix?

--
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

Flashlight said:

I'm surprised to hear this kind of talk from you Dave, because I
remember you found it nonsense if people said the camera makes no
difference .

Click to expand...

LOL. Well, yes indeed I did Philip, and well remembered. I'm really just indulging in a little 'devil's advocacy' here )

Flashlight said:

Anyway, my thought is that there will be technical differences.
These will be larger if the situation is more challenging. In your
photo the good light and moderate telelens make the P&S shine.

Click to expand...

Fair comment, this was taken in ideal shooting conditions which did a lot to 'level the playing field'.

Flashlight said:

Apart from that you'll never find a DSLR that keeps the foreground
in color while rendering the background in B&W

Click to expand...

You mean you haven't heard the latest rumour from the Nikon factory ? ;o)

--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

I bought a Canon SD400 maybe a year ago thinking along the same line. If ambient conditions are real good I get pretty good results. As soon as this changes there is no comparison. Your shot came out really good! But you can't rely on the conditions for the next shot and this is where a DSLR with the right lens really shines.
Great shot!
Tom

Thanks for the input Kerry.

My friend has been to Canada recently and took a fairly basic Canon P&S with a 3 times zoom. He took some reasonable photos of bears catching river salmon but was disappointed that they were all 'so distant' in the resulting photos ... a very common reaction from those who don't understand cameras.

He's not really into techy things, which is why I'm torn between advising him to get an entry level DSLR or a newer P&S with longer optical zoom. I'm thinking the latter might be better suited to him.

For me it just became an interesting exercise in comparing results I'd got from my P&S with more recent results from my DSLRs and there were some surprises to be had.
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

Tom B. said:

I bought a Canon SD400 maybe a year ago thinking along the same
line. If ambient conditions are real good I get pretty good
results. As soon as this changes there is no comparison. Your shot
came out really good! But you can't rely on the conditions for the
next shot and this is where a DSLR with the right lens really
shines.
Great shot!
Tom

Click to expand...

You are quite right of course Tom, my DSLRs get me shots I could never even contemplate with a P&S. It all boils down to how much equipment an occasional photographer, like my friend, is willing to carry around, and learn how to use properly.
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

Dave Chambers said:

He's not really into techy things, which is why I'm torn between
advising him to get an entry level DSLR or a newer P&S with longer
optical zoom. I'm thinking the latter might be better suited to
him.

Click to expand...

There is a middle road with the current crop of superzoom cameras which, like your 5700, aren't really P&S cameras like Nikon's Coolpix line, but sit somewhere in the middle.

I am thinking that this is what you mean in this context by P&S -- something akin to your old 5700.

An advanced camera like Fuji's 9000/9500 will allow the reach your friend wants (28-300) but can still be fully automatic. AND there's lots of room to grow with an advanced camera that also offers complete manual control when wanted. But hey, you already know all this!

HTH.
--
Cheers,
Joe

Hi Dave,

what a great photo, perfect is the world that comes to my mind.

Concerning the P&S vs DSLR issue, I think that for a beginner/occasional shooter a P&S is more immediately rewarding. To get great results out of a DSLR such as the D200 takes a lot of learning (was so for me at least) that can be frustrating if you are not very motivated about photography.

Personally I immensely enjoyed my panasonic lumix FZ30 as it really let you concentrate on composition, choice of subject etc.. rather than on more technical issues.

Concerning the quality of the output, I'd say that for most common usage of the photos (sharing on the web, printing) a P&S is perfect. However for more specialized/professional applications such as for example stock photography, having a DSLR makes the difference and gives you more resolution and much less noise, this makes you life much easier in that you work with a better file to start with.

So if your friend just needs to take a few pictures on some occasions I would go for a P&S, while if he wants to study photography and plan to dedicate much time to this, a DSLR is a more versatile beast that will allow your friend a lot more flexibility.

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers-Ackab

--
Panasonic Lumix shots gallery:
http://cellbiol.com/cellbiol_photos/

Fuji F30 shots gallery:
http://cellbiol.com/photography/gallery/fuji_f30/

Nikon D200 gallery:
http://cellbiol.com/photography/gallery/nikon_D200/

As a keen amateur myself who owns a D200 / Canon 1dmk2N outfits, this is an example of a shot taken with a 5mp Sony pocket P&S.

I think theres more skill on PP nowadays with digital.

If you have a half decent photograph taken with any camera really, it can be made to look professional in PP if you have the skills there.

What do you think?

Regards.

FletchUK.

The answer for ME is always yes, because I am as much of a gadget-fan as I am a 'photographer' and I just love using that pro equipment ... it keeps me happy.

The image dosn't do much for me..............?????

Looks like you have already answered your question....Whats your point

If you look at http://www.daveblackphotography.com , the picutures on his website have been taken with D1X, D2H, D2X, D200, Coolpix 3100, and Coolpix 8800. He has shots from the US Open Golf Championships that he took with the 8800 that he couldn't have done with the DSLR.

Joe Mondello said:

There is a middle road with the current crop of superzoom cameras
which, like your 5700, aren't really P&S cameras like Nikon's
Coolpix line, but sit somewhere in the middle.

I am thinking that this is what you mean in this context by P&S --
something akin to your old 5700.

An advanced camera like Fuji's 9000/9500 will allow the reach your
friend wants (28-300) but can still be fully automatic. AND there's
lots of room to grow with an advanced camera that also offers
complete manual control when wanted. But hey, you already know all
this!

Click to expand...

Yes, but it's useful to hear others articulating those thoughts too. I think an advanced P&S is probably going to be my recommendation to him. Thanks for the input Joe.
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

I think you'd be hard pressed to pull off that shot with most of what Nikon sells now as P&S.

My son's Fuji 900 could do it, I've shot with it a few times and have been very, very impressed with image quality, although the lens flares as badly as my single-coated Graflex lenses do, and noise makes anything over ISO 400 suitable only as a small print snapshot. I've shot 100 or so images with a borrowed Canon G7, and I think you might be able to get the image you show with it, but again, ISO 400 and you're talking 4x6 prints. I don't think either camera has a super lens.

After fretting and testing a bunch of point and shoots, hoping to find something that I could tuck into a briefcase when I'm doing non-photographic travel, I couldn't find any camera that could come close enough to what I used to get from my 5700. Then when I tried a D80, I realized that a d80 with a 50mm 1.4 is much more capable than any P&S out there, and small enough. A d80 with my sigma 10-20, nikkor 50 1.4, and a nikkor 85 1.8, isn't much different in weight and bulk from a 5700 with the two accessory lenses.

There are fixed lens point and shoots - characterized mostly by the tiny sensor size - that are bulkier than a d80 with a 24-120VR mounted. Noisy images, limited flexibility, these days they tend to lack RAW as an option.

With a d80 I've got a nice small setup for brainless point and shoot (I've even taken to scene modes from time to time). If my d2x hiccups during a normal paid shoot, I have a backup camera that can hold its own.

ackab said:

Hi Dave,

what a great photo, perfect is the world that comes to my mind.

Click to expand...

Thanks very much Ackab.

ackab said:

Concerning the P&S vs DSLR issue, I think that for a
beginner/occasional shooter a P&S is more immediately rewarding. To
get great results out of a DSLR such as the D200 takes a lot of
learning (was so for me at least) that can be frustrating if you
are not very motivated about photography.

Personally I immensely enjoyed my panasonic lumix FZ30 as it really
let you concentrate on composition, choice of subject etc.. rather
than on more technical issues.

Concerning the quality of the output, I'd say that for most common
usage of the photos (sharing on the web, printing) a P&S is
perfect. However for more specialized/professional applications
such as for example stock photography, having a DSLR makes the
difference and gives you more resolution and much less noise, this
makes you life much easier in that you work with a better file to
start with.

So if your friend just needs to take a few pictures on some
occasions I would go for a P&S, while if he wants to study
photography and plan to dedicate much time to this, a DSLR is a
more versatile beast that will allow your friend a lot more
flexibility.

Just my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think that's very sound advice. Unlike me, he is not a gadget freak and I'm thinking a really good P&S with a decent zoom will be the best recommendation for him.

Best wishes and a Happy New Year.
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

Fletch147 said:

As a keen amateur myself who owns a D200 / Canon 1dmk2N outfits,
this is an example of a shot taken with a 5mp Sony pocket P&S.

I think theres more skill on PP nowadays with digital.

If you have a half decent photograph taken with any camera really,
it can be made to look professional in PP if you have the skills
there.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

Nice photo Jonathan. You are so right about pp skills and that's where my real weakness lies. Just can't get my head around the more sophisticated software packages. So I still tend to think and act in the way I did when shooting film ... make every shot count and try to get it right first time in the camera. I guess I'm just a dinosaur.

Happy New Year.

--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

rrxig said:

The image dosn't do much for me..............?????

Looks like you have already answered your question....Whats your point

Click to expand...

Well looking at your extremely brief and pointless posting history here, it seems that nothing does much for you. Maybe you should take up knitting?
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

Dave,

30 years ago in the grand old days before digital, a friend of my father's asked for a camera recco. I had a couple of SLRs. For him I recommended a nice, almost completely automatic, P&S. He was delighted and - because he had a good eye and the camera's automation was good - he got really nice photos. For him that's all he wanted or needed. He could have afforded anything, but the appropriate camera was a small P&S.

The same today. No one camera or even type of camera is going to be ideal for everyone or every situation.
--
--Bob

Scott Yu said:

If you look at http://www.daveblackphotography.com , the picutures
on his website have been taken with D1X, D2H, D2X, D200, Coolpix
3100, and Coolpix 8800. He has shots from the US Open Golf
Championships that he took with the 8800 that he couldn't have done
with the DSLR.

Click to expand...

Hi Scott and thanks for commenting. I have visited that site before and there's some great work there. It does demonstrate that there are times when a P&S can outdo a DSLR and vice versa. I think that is why I made the sub-conscious decision to hang on to my 'lowly' 5700 when I got the pro D2 bodies ... it still has its uses.
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq

All good points Ed. I still have and love my 5700, but it sees much less action these days.

I think if I were to advise my friend to go the DSLR route, and he does seem rather keen for one, then I think the D80 would be a good choice and a good balance between price/complexity/portability for him.
--
Dave (Sgt. Pepper), Epsom, England.
http://www.pbase.com/davecq