Reading mode: Light Dark

Pro 1 vs. 300D

Go to last post
Mike Hunt said:
The Pro1 offers a much more compact size, excellent quality images,
and some nifty features such as the lie articulated LCD viewfinder
and the abilit to capture video clips, but its autofocus, manual
focus, viewfinder, low light caabilities, and continuous shooting
capabilities don't eve remotely approach those of an SLR.
Click to expand...
those are pretty strong statements which i must say that i disagree.

yes, images produced by the 300D are much cleaner at higher ISO, but shots taken with the Pro1 at ISO50 are basically as smooth as those taken with the 300D. i also do not find teh 300D's autofocus vastly (if at all) superior to the Pro1, both in terms of speed and ability to focus in low light. manual focus...i'm not sure how the 300D is also better in this regard, as i can just as easily focus manually with my pro1 as i can with the 300D.

the digital photography world is constantly changing. many old school film photographers who at one time proclaimed that they would never be able to do with digital photography what they could with film photography are now embracing digital photography for the possibilities it has opened up for them. the point is that one should not form a conclusive view of something based on past perception. Sometimes if one would only try to see for himself if what he thought was impossible was indeed impossible, he might be pleasantly (or unpleasantly) surprised.
Mike Hunt said:
wfjdi0r said:
I am planning to purchase a 6 or 8 mp digital. It seems that the
Pro 1 is close in price to the 300 D. Will the pro 1 replace the
300 D? Shouldn't the 8mp be a better buy than the 6 mp at almost
the same price?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Galay said:
agreed with the former but not the latter. one can easily produce
pictures with shallow DOF with the Pro1, or any other prosumer
level cam for that matter.
Click to expand...
It can be done, bit not as easily or to the same extent, given the same conditions. On a compact camera, you need to use a longer telephoto setting, getcloser to your subject, and farther from the background than with an SLR to achieve the same effect.
 
webdivauk said:
Thanks for your comments Olga, greatly appreciated. I've promised
myself that I would invest in a better camera once I have taught
myself how to use the different settings on my A80, what you've
written has certainly given me food for thought!
Click to expand...
Of course, if you;ve never ownder an SLR, you better be prepared for the inconvenience of carrying around all the extra size and weight. Many peoiple find themselves leaving their camera at home most of the time becauwse they don't feel like lugging around a large and heavy camera system everywhere.

And of course, there are some unique features in compact cameras you may miss, such as the ability to see a video image of the subject before taking the photo, the ability to rotate that display for viewing/shooting from different angles, and the ability to record video clips.

So even with an SLR, you wil be sacrificing certain things...
 
Which circumstances? I thought I gave pros and cons for both cameras...
webdivauk said:
Am I right to assume that a Pro1 would take better pictures than my
A80 under the circumstances you just mentioned?

Sian
Mike Hunt said:
SLR cameras like the 300D can accept a large assortment of
interchangeable lenses. They have vastly superior autofocus and
manual focus controls, and a much larger and brighter optical
viewfinder. They produce soother images with greater dynamic range
at much higher ISO settings.

All of the above makeds an SLR indispensable for any professional
or a serious amateur who needs to take photos very quickly, in low
light levels, and of fast moving subjects.

The Pro1 offers a much more compact size, excellent quality images,
and some nifty features such as the lie articulated LCD viewfinder
and the abilit to capture video clips, but its autofocus, manual
focus, viewfinder, low light caabilities, and continuous shooting
capabilities don't eve remotely approach those of an SLR.

There is no one "perfect" camera, or even one camera that is
"better" in all conditios ad for all purposes.
wfjdi0r said:
I am planning to purchase a 6 or 8 mp digital. It seems that the
Pro 1 is close in price to the 300 D. Will the pro 1 replace the
300 D? Shouldn't the 8mp be a better buy than the 6 mp at almost
the same price?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Kodak DX4900 Canon A80
Click to expand...
 
Galay said:
agreed with the former but not the latter. one can easily produce
pictures with shallow DOF with the Pro1, or any other prosumer
level cam for that matter.
Click to expand...
O.K. I'll bite. Show me some DOF shots with Bokeh like these.







--
Doug D.
'Promise a rainbow, and someone will look to the sky.'
Equipment in profile.
http://public.fotki.com/DougD/
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1681338
http://www.imagestation.com/member/
index.html?name=diamondspoint&c=201
http://www.pbase.com/doug_d
 
Mike Hunt said:
And of course, there are some unique features in compact cameras
you may miss, such as the ability to see a video image of the
subject before taking the photo, the ability to rotate that display
for viewing/shooting from different angles, and the ability to
record video clips.
Click to expand...
actually today's advanced prosumer digicams allow for much more than teh flipping of LCD, taking video clips and the EVF...personally i believe these are not the important things why ppl choose a prosumer digicam as most of these are available in lower end compact digicams anyways.

take a look at the specs of the 5700/8700/A1/A2 and one can see that the photographic elements one can control with these prosumer cams outnumber those avail in a low end DSLR ie 300D, 10D, D100, E1, *ist etc...
 
I nearly missed it, too, but it's switched from a comparison to a DSLR to a comparison with a A80!

I haven't used the a80 or the Pro1, so I don't know, although I would imagine that the Pro 1 would be ahead in some respects, certainly resolution and probably AF speed
Mike Hunt said:
webdivauk said:
Am I right to assume that a Pro1 would take better pictures than my
A80 under the circumstances you just mentioned?

Sian
Mike Hunt said:
SLR cameras like the 300D can accept a large assortment of
interchangeable lenses. They have vastly superior autofocus and
manual focus controls, and a much larger and brighter optical
viewfinder. They produce soother images with greater dynamic range
at much higher ISO settings.

All of the above makeds an SLR indispensable for any professional
or a serious amateur who needs to take photos very quickly, in low
light levels, and of fast moving subjects.

The Pro1 offers a much more compact size, excellent quality images,
and some nifty features such as the lie articulated LCD viewfinder
and the abilit to capture video clips, but its autofocus, manual
focus, viewfinder, low light caabilities, and continuous shooting
capabilities don't eve remotely approach those of an SLR.

There is no one "perfect" camera, or even one camera that is
"better" in all conditios ad for all purposes.
wfjdi0r said:
I am planning to purchase a 6 or 8 mp digital. It seems that the
Pro 1 is close in price to the 300 D. Will the pro 1 replace the
300 D? Shouldn't the 8mp be a better buy than the 6 mp at almost
the same price?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Kodak DX4900 Canon A80
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment
 
Galay said:
Galay said:
The Pro1 offers a much more compact size, excellent quality images,
and some nifty features such as the lie articulated LCD viewfinder
and the abilit to capture video clips, but its autofocus, manual
focus, viewfinder, low light caabilities, and continuous shooting
capabilities don't eve remotely approach those of an SLR.
Click to expand...
those are pretty strong statements which i must say that i disagree.

yes, images produced by the 300D are much cleaner at higher ISO,
Click to expand...
OK you agree there.
Galay said:
but shots taken with the Pro1 at ISO50 are basically as smooth as
those taken with the 300D.
Click to expand...
For the most part, yes. But even at ISO50 you may sometimes see some noise in shadow areas with compact cameras like the Pro1. Also, limiting yourself to ISO50 can be very restrictive indeed.
Galay said:
i also do not find teh 300D's autofocus
vastly (if at all) superior to the Pro1, both in terms of speed
and ability to focus in low light.
Click to expand...
There I believe you are mistaken. Any SLR will kick the living you know what out of any compact camera in autofocus performance under any conditions - especially in low light, with telephoto, and with fast moving subjects.
Galay said:
manual focus...i'm not sure how
the 300D is also better in this regard, as i can just as easily
focus manually with my pro1 as i can with the 300D.
Click to expand...
No you can't. The Pro1 has an electronic manual focus control which is neither as responsive nor as precise as an SLR's manual focus ring. And it is far easier to observe differences in focus through a big and bright SLR viewfinder than through an EVF or LCD.
Galay said:
the digital photography world is constantly changing. many old
school film photographers who at one time proclaimed that they
would never be able to do with digital photography what they could
with film photography are now embracing digital photography for the
possibilities it has opened up for them.
Click to expand...
I don't see how this applies to the subject at hand.
Galay said:
the point is that one
should not form a conclusive view of something based on past
perception. Sometimes if one would only try to see for himself if
what he thought was impossible was indeed impossible, he might be
pleasantly (or unpleasantly) surprised.
Click to expand...
And sometimes we must try things out in person instead of faling for marketing propaganda. Brochures will always make a product seem better than it is in reality. The Pro1, and every other non-SLR digital camera on the market cannot compete with SLRs in the areas I mentioned.

SLRs have phase detection AF systems, which nobody has figured out how to implement successfully in a non-SLR camera system. It's either impossible or impractical to do so, or else someone would have done it by now. SLR cameras have larger sensors which produce cleaner images, with greater dynamic range, with less light. If you placed such a sensor in a compact camera, the optics, electronics, and mechanisms required to make it work would make the compact camera not so compact anymore.

There's no telling what's over the horizon, but I haven't heard of any imminent technologies that are expected to close the gap betweeen SLRs and compacts in the areas we've discussed...
 
Mike Hunt said:
Steve Norton said:
...although the pro1 samples look great, in fact very impressive
compared to the nikon and sony 8mp cams you cannot control the DOF
Try these shots with a pro1 and you will
have everything in focus.
http://www.pbase.com/stevieboroboy/redcar_beach
Click to expand...
You could create similar or even better effects than shown in those
photos with a compact camera, but it would be harder to do. You
would have to use extreme telephoto, get closer to your subject,
and farther from the background. But yes, given identical
conditions and shooting distances, an SLR could blur the background
easier.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, these beach shots are all at f/8 and above. If you really want to control DOF, trying going with something closer to max aperture. The Pro 1 could certainly duplicate these results if shot wide open.
 
Galay said:
Galay said:
And of course, there are some unique features in compact cameras
you may miss, such as the ability to see a video image of the
subject before taking the photo, the ability to rotate that display
for viewing/shooting from different angles, and the ability to
record video clips.
Click to expand...
actually today's advanced prosumer digicams allow for much more
than teh flipping of LCD, taking video clips and the
EVF...personally i believe these are not the important things why
ppl choose a prosumer digicam as most of these are available in
lower end compact digicams anyways.
Click to expand...
I didn;t say they are the reasons people choose them, onbly that they are useful features that will be missed in an SLR. The main difference is SIZE and WIEGHT.
Galay said:
take a look at the specs of the 5700/8700/A1/A2 and one can see
that the photographic elements one can control with these prosumer
cams outnumber those avail in a low end DSLR ie 300D, 10D, D100,
E1, *ist etc...
Click to expand...
Which elements are you referring to?
 
Dave Knadler said:
Mike Hunt said:
Steve Norton said:
...although the pro1 samples look great, in fact very impressive
compared to the nikon and sony 8mp cams you cannot control the DOF
Try these shots with a pro1 and you will
have everything in focus.
http://www.pbase.com/stevieboroboy/redcar_beach
Click to expand...
You could create similar or even better effects than shown in those
photos with a compact camera, but it would be harder to do. You
would have to use extreme telephoto, get closer to your subject,
and farther from the background. But yes, given identical
conditions and shooting distances, an SLR could blur the background
easier.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, these beach shots are all at f/8 and above. If you
really want to control DOF, trying going with something closer to
max aperture. The Pro 1 could certainly duplicate these results if
shot wide open
Click to expand...
No, given the same focal length, distance to subject, and distance to background, an SLR could blur the background to a far, far greater extent.
 
ok, what the heck...it took me a while to upload the images and to figure out how to embed images here...i hope i've proved my point with this.









btw doug, nice pictures.
Doug D. said:
Galay said:
agreed with the former but not the latter. one can easily produce
pictures with shallow DOF with the Pro1, or any other prosumer
level cam for that matter.
Click to expand...
O.K. I'll bite. Show me some DOF shots with Bokeh like these.







--
Doug D.
'Promise a rainbow, and someone will look to the sky.'
Equipment in profile.
http://public.fotki.com/DougD/
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1681338
http://www.imagestation.com/member/
index.html?name=diamondspoint&c=201
http://www.pbase.com/doug_d
Click to expand...
 
Galay said:
yes, images produced by the 300D are much cleaner at higher ISO,
but shots taken with the Pro1 at ISO50 are basically as smooth as
those taken with the 300D.
Click to expand...
How many shots are you going to be able to take in a gym, ice rink, theater, etc. at iso50 with no flash? Zero.

If one doesn't need low light, high iso performance or shallow DOF, I'm sure the pro one would be fine. But, if one needs to shoot in these conditions, a DSLR is a must.

-- Doug D.
'Promise a rainbow, and someone will look to the sky.'
Equipment in profile.
http://public.fotki.com/DougD/
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1681338
http://www.imagestation.com/member/
index.html?name=diamondspoint&c=201
http://www.pbase.com/doug_d
 
Member said:
If one doesn't need low light, high iso performance or shallow DOF,
I'm sure the pro one would be fine. But, if one needs to shoot in
these conditions, a DSLR is a must.
Click to expand...
Doug, check out my shallow DOF shots taken with my past prosumer cams posted elsewhere in this thread.

i'm not sure if you've ever used the BSS features in the more recent Coolpixes. They are great and i can ensure you that they help a great deal with shooting under low light conditions even on action shots.

but then again, there's no questioning that a prosumer cam cannot outperform a DSLR in those departments. but mypoint has all along been that the 'gap' between DSLR and prosumer cams is often times not as wide as it seems, when one actually tries to compare both by using them for a while, which i have done.
Member said:
-- Doug D.
'Promise a rainbow, and someone will look to the sky.'
Equipment in profile.
http://public.fotki.com/DougD/
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1681338
http://www.imagestation.com/member/
index.html?name=diamondspoint&c=201
http://www.pbase.com/doug_d
Click to expand...
 
i believe the poitn was to prove that one can achieve shallow dof with a prosumer cam too, not jsut with a DSLR. the focussing had to do with lens speed/lighting condition/ISO/shutter speed as those were all handheld shots.

i think i've done all i can to say that from a USER experience point of view, of BOTH a DSLR and a prosumer cam, the gap between these two species is sometimes not as great as some might think.
Doug D. said:
They are nicely out of focus, but I don't see great bokeh. The
third shot I posted has the same effect. Smooth out of focus, but
not great boekh.
--
Doug D.
'Promise a rainbow, and someone will look to the sky.'
Equipment in profile.
http://public.fotki.com/DougD/
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1681338
http://www.imagestation.com/member/
index.html?name=diamondspoint&c=201
http://www.pbase.com/doug_d
Click to expand...
 
Galay said:
but then again, there's no questioning that a prosumer cam cannot
outperform a DSLR in those departments. but mypoint has all along
been that the 'gap' between DSLR and prosumer cams is often times
not as wide as it seems, when one actually tries to compare both by
using them for a while, which i have done.
Click to expand...
I believe you. It's just that every sports or low light picture I've seen form the new crop of 8 mp cams, has awful noise or motion blur, due top the camera limits.

People are doing all kinds of crazy things with neat image and the like to get them cleaned up, but the cameras just don't shoot in these conditions very well.

I shoot a lot of hockey and symphony concerts without flash. I have a hard enough time with my 10D using a 135 F/2L at iso800.





--
Doug D.
'Promise a rainbow, and someone will look to the sky.'
Equipment in profile.
http://public.fotki.com/DougD/
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=1681338
http://www.imagestation.com/member/
index.html?name=diamondspoint&c=201
http://www.pbase.com/doug_d
 
Galay said:
but then again, there's no questioning that a prosumer cam cannot
outperform a DSLR in those departments. but mypoint has all along
been that the 'gap' between DSLR and prosumer cams is often times
not as wide as it seems,
Click to expand...
In evryday situations, that is true, which is why so many serious photographers use compact cameras. But when speed and low light matter, there's a huge gap in capabilities between these cameras. A compact camera is almost useless for indoor sports and will require much more effort than an SLR to get remotely similar results in outdoor sports.
 
Mike Hunt said:
For the most part, yes. But even at ISO50 you may sometimes see
some noise in shadow areas with compact cameras like the Pro1.
Also, limiting yourself to ISO50 can be very restrictive indeed.
Click to expand...
then that is besides the point. it just shows that the the Pro1 can achieve the same level of image quality as the 300D. just that the 300D can do it in a wider variety of lighting conditions.
Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:
i also do not find teh 300D's autofocus
vastly (if at all) superior to the Pro1, both in terms of speed
and ability to focus in low light.
Click to expand...
There I believe you are mistaken. Any SLR will kick the living you
know what out of any compact camera in autofocus performance under
any conditions - especially in low light, with telephoto, and with
fast moving subjects.
Click to expand...
with fast moving subjects under low light, no doubt. but not for stationary objects under low light. mike, i HAVE both of these cameras and i'm telling you that i do not notice significant difference. but you are making your points based on your belief and theory.
Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:
manual focus...i'm not sure how
the 300D is also better in this regard, as i can just as easily
focus manually with my pro1 as i can with the 300D.
Click to expand...
No you can't. The Pro1 has an electronic manual focus control which
is neither as responsive nor as precise as an SLR's manual focus
ring. And it is far easier to observe differences in focus through
a big and bright SLR viewfinder than through an EVF or LCD.
Click to expand...
Again, Mike, YES I can. To me, the EVF makes it easier to approximate distance AND easier to see if the object is in focus under low light. It may be different for you or others, but for me, after trying to manually focus the same object under the same lighting condition, with both the 300D and the Pro1, that is my conclusion.
Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:
the digital photography world is constantly changing. many old
school film photographers who at one time proclaimed that they
would never be able to do with digital photography what they could
with film photography are now embracing digital photography for the
possibilities it has opened up for them.
Click to expand...
I don't see how this applies to the subject at hand.
Click to expand...
That is precisely my point. One has to experience it to believe. Do not make highly subjective comments based on theory and/or common perception WITHOUT having actual experience, especially when those who have actual hands on experience (not just one, but many) tell you so. Of course you are entitled to your own opinions, but I think you need admit that people who are using/have used the cameras are in a better position to judge than those who have not.
Mike Hunt said:
Mike Hunt said:
the point is that one
should not form a conclusive view of something based on past
perception. Sometimes if one would only try to see for himself if
what he thought was impossible was indeed impossible, he might be
pleasantly (or unpleasantly) surprised.
Click to expand...
And sometimes we must try things out in person instead of faling
for marketing propaganda. Brochures will always make a product seem
better than it is in reality. The Pro1, and every other non-SLR
digital camera on the market cannot compete with SLRs in the areas
I mentioned.

SLRs have phase detection AF systems, which nobody has figured out
how to implement successfully in a non-SLR camera system. It's
either impossible or impractical to do so, or else someone would
have done it by now. SLR cameras have larger sensors which produce
cleaner images, with greater dynamic range, with less light. If you
placed such a sensor in a compact camera, the optics, electronics,
and mechanisms required to make it work would make the compact
camera not so compact anymore.

There's no telling what's over the horizon, but I haven't heard of
any imminent technologies that are expected to close the gap
betweeen SLRs and compacts in the areas we've discussed...
Click to expand...
this is probably out of the realm of our original discussion, but if you consider it from the angle of product positioning and cannibalization, it may shed some light on why manufacturers would liek to maintain a perceived gap between DSLRs and prosumer cams. who would buy their lenses if prosumer cams can do everything a DSLR can? of course i'm not saying that prosumer cams are better than DSLR or that they already have the technology to practically make prosumer cams as good as DSLRs, what i'm saying is that there're more factors to consider before camera manufacturers may want to make prosumer cams as good as DSLRs.

would u buy a DSLR if a prosumer cam can do what it does, at a fraction of their cost?
 
Once you've mastered that you should have a good idea of what you need, want and will use.

Its too easy to get bogged down in "feature accumulation". This is where you look at a camera as a list of bullet-point features where each bullet-point is of equal value and the idea is to accumulate as many bullet-points as possible for a given dollar amount.

A prime example of this is the Pro1's 8mp sensor. Sure its 8mp but its also 8.8x6.6mm. I'll take my 300D's 6.3mp 22.5x15mm sensor over this in a heartbeat. Then again a small sensor can be really good for macro and landscape photography, which is kinda ironic if you think about it.

In addition to the shallow DOF of a larger sensor, its also less noisy. I wouldn't be surprised if the 300D at ISO 1600 had the same or even less noise than the Pro1 at ISO 400 (I don't know this; its merely speculation but the 300D has very little noise even at ISO 800).

I love my 300D. For me, it is much better than a prosumer digicam but for many people the all-in-one prosumer solution is a good one.
webdivauk said:
Thanks for your comments Olga, greatly appreciated. I've promised
myself that I would invest in a better camera once I have taught
myself how to use the different settings on my A80, what you've
written has certainly given me food for thought!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top