Switch for old dslr to compact camera; am I making the right choice here?

Wim1964 · Oct 27, 2013

About four years ago I bought an second-hand Canon 350D which has given up on me a few weeks ago. Time for a new camera! As this website became my primary source for information I decided to sign up...

I'm mainly a holiday-photographer; sometimes I take snaps at home or during walks, but 60% are outdoors-shots of nature, villages, travelling-companions, etc. I already noticed that I grew to dislike the lens-switching routine from 35-80 to the 60-200 (and back again).

I've set my eyes upon the Nikon Coolpix P7800;

decent (electronic) viewfinder; I'm at the reading-glasses-ages, so for a point-and-shoot this is a must.
nice compact size, but, having large hands, not too tiny
quite a decent zoom
nice added options (filming in HD)

But I could also go for a camera like the Panasonic Lumix FZ200; the same price, LOADS of features, a larger zoom. Maybe a bit bulkier.

I like the images I've seen so far from the Nikon (7700 and 7800), I'm not bowled over by the IQ of most superzoom-camera's.

1) Am I overlooking another option?

2) Is the price of a camera for a large part dependent on its sensor-size? Why are there hardy any super-zooms with a 1/1/7" sensor?

3) The the 7800 a good choice or should I wait a bit for another option that will come along shortly? (The Canon G17? Nikon Coolpix P7900?)

Thanks!

TTMartin · Oct 27, 2013

cainn24 said:
cainn24 wrote:

cainn24 said:

TTMartin wrote:

cainn24 said:

cainn24 wrote:

. . .

No-one is going to argue that a DSLR won't produce superior IQ, but enthusiast compacts are producing such decent results these days that it's legitimate to ask "at what cost"? Twice the weight and more than twice the size for additional IQ that most hobbyist photographers don't even care about because they don't print large enough for it matter, and aren't obsessive pixel peepers? And if someone really needs all that extra IQ and dynamic range, they probably already know it.

Click to expand...

Your diatribe about obsessive pixel peepers and might apply if the OP was coming from a point and shoot and said he was happy with the image quality. But, in the case of the OP he is use to using a dSLR, and was asking if he would notice a difference moving to a bridge camera, and most likely he will.

Click to expand...

But we're talking about a 350D here, which by today's standards has pretty horrid sensor performance, and once you factor in the lens speed advantage (not to mention excellent IS) of today's enthusiast compacts over anything the OP was likely to be using with his 350D, how much of an overall IQ hit are we really talking about here?

I have a 400D and it actually produces very nice images so what are you basing your view that the sensor on the 350D is horrid?

cainn24 said:
cainn24 said:

Other than stating he didn't want to have to change lenses he gave no indications that carrying a dSLR was an issue. In spite of the size differences, neither camera is particularly pocketable, unless you have very big pockets. Most likely the OP would use a carry case for either camera, and if you are going to carry a separate camera case, you might as well go with what gives the best image quality.

Click to expand...

Compare the smallest case that you could fit a P7800 into with the smallest camera bag you could fit an EOS 100D + 18-135 lens into. The OP clearly expressed a preference for compactness.

cainn24 said:

The choice is obviously the OPs, but, I know which one I would choose.

Click to expand...

I have nothing against larger more expensive cameras that produce superior IQ. I have one myself. But what's the point of inaccurately representing the features of the P7800 and largely ignoring the OP's stated preferences?

cainn24 · Oct 27, 2013

TTMartin said:
TTMartin wrote:

I have a 400D and it actually produces very nice images so what are you basing your view that the sensor on the 350D is horrid?

I qualified that remark with the phrase "by today's standards". But perhaps "horrid" was too strong a word even in that context, so I'll retract it if you like. Regardless, the point is that when considering the IQ that can be produced by today's enthusiast compacts it's certainly relevant to point out that fast lenses, excellent IS and improved sensor technology render the gulf between them and generations-old APS-C cameras with standard lenses much less significant than some people seem willing to admit.

Wally626 · Oct 27, 2013

A Nikon 1 with 10 to 100mm or a m4/3 with a 14 to 140 (150)mm might fit your needs, as would the Sony e-mounts with the 18-200mm, but I think all these options would end up close in price to the Sony RX10, especially with a body with an EVF.

cainn24 · Oct 27, 2013

Just to drive this home, it's useful to go and use dpreview's studio comparison tool to compare the IQ of the earliest 350D successor available, which is the 500D. We can't compare that to the P7800 directly, but the P7700 produces very similar IQ so we can compare with that. Specifically, I think that in this case it's fair to give the P7700 a 1 stop advantage which is the least it would have over what the OP is used to in a broad range of shooting conditions. Of course when there's an abundance of light this would be an unfair move, but it is in exactly those circumstances that small-sensor IQ is rarely an issue anyway.

Not a whole lot in it if you ask me. And take a look at the XZ-2 as well. Excellent result. That's likely the sensor that will find it's way into the new Stylus 1, probably even with an incremental improvement too. And if you extrapolate this back to a comparison with the 350D, although we can't be definitive about it, I think the picture becomes clear enough.

P7800 gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/1...-enthusiast-compact-camera-real-world-samples

Robin Wongs review of the XZ-2 (again, indicative of what to expect from the Stylus 1) with plenty of excellent shots to examine: http://robinwong.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/olympus-stylus-xz-2-review-street.html

It's also worth noting again, too, that the Stylus 1 might end up with such a good lens that the small sensor disadvantage will be mitigated even further than what we see with the current generation of enthusiast compacts.

Wim1964 · Oct 27, 2013

cainn24 said:
cainn24 wrote:

Just to drive this home, it's useful to go and use dpreview's studio comparison tool to compare the IQ of the earliest 350D successor available, which is the 500D. We can't compare that to the P7800 directly, but the P7700 produces very similar IQ so we can compare with that. Specifically, I think that in this case it's fair to give the P7700 a 1 stop advantage which is the least it would have over what the OP is used to in a broad range of shooting conditions. Of course when there's an abundance of light this would be an unfair move, but it is in exactly those circumstances that small-sensor IQ is rarely an issue anyway.

Not a whole lot in it if you ask me. And take a look at the XZ-2 as well. Excellent result. That's likely the sensor that will find it's way into the new Stylus 1, probably even with an incremental improvement too. And if you extrapolate this back to a comparison with the 350D, although we can't be definitive about it, I think the picture becomes clear enough.

P7800 gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/1...-enthusiast-compact-camera-real-world-samples

Robin Wongs review of the XZ-2 (again, indicative of what to expect from the Stylus 1) with plenty of excellent shots to examine: http://robinwong.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/olympus-stylus-xz-2-review-street.html

It's also worth noting again, too, that the Stylus 1 might end up with such a good lens that the small sensor disadvantage will be mitigated even further than what we see with the current generation of enthusiast compacts.

Well, especially after seeing that impressive gallery of the XZ-2 I think it may very well end up as a match between the Stylus 1 and the Nikon P7800....

TTMartin · Oct 27, 2013

cainn24 said:
cainn24 wrote:

Just to drive this home, it's useful to go and use dpreview's studio comparison tool to compare the IQ of the earliest 350D successor available, which is the 500D. We can't compare that to the P7800 directly, but the P7700 produces very similar IQ so we can compare with that. Specifically, I think that in this case it's fair to give the P7700 a 1 stop advantage which is the least it would have over what the OP is used to in a broad range of shooting conditions. Of course when there's an abundance of light this would be an unfair move, but it is in exactly those circumstances that small-sensor IQ is rarely an issue anyway.

What a blatant display of misinformation. Take two completely different cameras from what are being discussed. Pull out of the air, that one deserves a one stop advantage, and pretend it has anything to do with the decision the OP is making! Just sad, and unfortunately it looks like the OP was swayed by it.

I'm done!

cainn24 said:
Not a whole lot in it if you ask me. And take a look at the XZ-2 as well. Excellent result. That's likely the sensor that will find it's way into the new Stylus 1, probably even with an incremental improvement too. And if you extrapolate this back to a comparison with the 350D, although we can't be definitive about it, I think the picture becomes clear enough.

P7800 gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/1...-enthusiast-compact-camera-real-world-samples

Robin Wongs review of the XZ-2 (again, indicative of what to expect from the Stylus 1) with plenty of excellent shots to examine: http://robinwong.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/olympus-stylus-xz-2-review-street.html

It's also worth noting again, too, that the Stylus 1 might end up with such a good lens that the small sensor disadvantage will be mitigated even further than what we see with the current generation of enthusiast compacts.

cainn24 · Oct 27, 2013

TTMartin said:
TTMartin wrote:

TTMartin said:

cainn24 wrote:

Just to drive this home, it's useful to go and use dpreview's studio comparison tool to compare the IQ of the earliest 350D successor available, which is the 500D. We can't compare that to the P7800 directly, but the P7700 produces very similar IQ so we can compare with that. Specifically, I think that in this case it's fair to give the P7700 a 1 stop advantage which is the least it would have over what the OP is used to in a broad range of shooting conditions. Of course when there's an abundance of light this would be an unfair move, but it is in exactly those circumstances that small-sensor IQ is rarely an issue anyway.

Click to expand...

What a blatant display of misinformation. Take two completely different cameras from what are being discussed. Pull out of the air, that one deserves a one stop advantage, and pretend it has anything to do with the decision the OP is making! Just sad, and unfortunately it looks like the OP was swayed by it.

I'm done!

1) The 500D has better IQ than the 350D, so I'm hardly stacking the deck against the 350D by substituting it, am I? Quite the opposite in fact.

2) The P7700 is the predecessor of the P7800, and the sensor performance is almost identical. So I don't see a problem there.

3) Modern enthusiast compacts do in fact have lenses that are quite fast, and excellent image stabilization to go along with them. This means that in a range of real-world shooting conditions they do in fact have at least a 1 stop advantage over a slower unstabilized kit lens of the sort that I bet the OP was using with his 350D. Even here I was being conservative.

It does no good to accuse me of being biased, and of intentionally misleading the OP, unless you've got something to back that up. A mere pronouncement followed by an exit from the discussion doesn't really do the trick.

Bizarre...

EXX · Oct 28, 2013

Or the Sony A3000 + the Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS (which is 27-160 mm equiv.). A little less range than the RX-10, but with the APS-C sensor, you have more room for cropping and better low light capabilities.

Wally626 · Oct 28, 2013

EXX said:
EXX wrote:

Or the Sony A3000 + the Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS (which is 27-160 mm equiv.). A little less range than the RX-10, but with the APS-C sensor, you have more room for cropping and better low light capabilities.

The A3000 might be OK for a person coming from a P&S and it does have good image quality certainly the best for the buck, but the LCD and EVF have such poor specs. Stick it in the pile of things to looks at, but do not buy web-order without looking at it first. The NEX 6 would be fine as far as viewfinders go, but by the time you stick a decent lens on it, the cost is getting pretty high.

Search

Switch for old dslr to compact camera; am I making the right choice here?

Wim1964

Active member

Wim1964

TTMartin

Veteran Member

cainn24

Veteran Member

Wally626

Senior Member

cainn24

Veteran Member

Wim1964

Active member

TTMartin

Veteran Member

cainn24

Veteran Member

EXX

Senior Member

Wally626

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts