Why buy expensive big bulky Canon?

[discosuperfly]

It sounds to me like his friend was trying to save him from buying a couple of thousand dollars of camera equipment by pointing out that he can get good photos without doing so. I have had a professional photographer say something very similar to me. The bottom line is that photography can be an extremely expensive hobby. However, I agree with the forum in the case that pretty much all of us are represented in the 3% that his friend mentioned. Maybe smokey's professional friend doesn't think that he is like the rest of us (yet?) and that he should consider taking a more conservative approach with the hobby.

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

I don't believe the friend said story. Either he doesn't know the
differences between Dslrs and non-dslrs or you are your friend and
you don't know the difference. Did you friend not use a big bulky
film slr for 30+ years? For most people shutter lag is the big
difference or control of dof. These are things that are lacking on
the shirt pocket cameras. Of course we are talking about heresay
anyway which is non-admissable in this forum. We really need to
here it from your friend. You can't get every shot you need from a
shirt pocket camera with a 10-60mm zoom with a sensor with a 3.6x
crop factor.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

What big lenses? Many here don't have any big lenses. If he means
only 3% could use a 600 f4L correctly then i'd agree with him. A
24-70 f2.8L is large compared to point and shoot cameras, but i
know more than 3% of people can use it correctly, it's not that
complicated.

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

They are fantastic if you want everything in focus, but not if you
only want your subject infocus. They are fantastic if your subject
isn't moving. Personally I think the shutter lag on these cameras
is much longer than it could be and used to think it was this way
to protect the higher end dslrs, but of course then you have sony
who doesn't make dslrs so i guess it really is a limitation of
having the live preview.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

That's what camera phones are for, they are fantastic.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

Lots of people buy a camera that is more than they need, just as
many people buy a vehicle that is more than they need, like a
hummer for instance, who really needs a hummer? If people get more
enjoyment out of using a Dslr then there is nothing nutz/crazy
about that, just like people get more enjoyment from driving a
hummer. if you don't like the size of a dlsr then that is where
the smaller cameras come in, but neither can do exactly the same
things that the other can.

--



Narrow depth of field ahead
Use extreme caution

http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root

 

[hockeynut]

It sounds like you have more respect for your friend with "30 years of experience."

If you've never used a DSLR, how can you make a decision?

If we don't know your values, how can we help you?
And, we have no idea whether your friend is really an experienced photographer.

A DSLR gives you almost unlimited flexibility. A P&S offers convenience in a tiny package. The 2 are almost mutually exclusive.
A DSLR has lens options that leaves P&S owners drooling.
There are so many features that make a DSLR worthwhile:
Exposure control
Depth of field control
Shutter control
Bokeh
ISO selection (100 to 3200)
Low noise

Lens options for astrophotography with a telescope all the way down to 5x Macro and even microscope mounts.
Megapixels.
Flashes/studio lighting.
Manual focus
Shutter lag
3fps or 5fps
AI Servo (AF tracking)

I know there are more that I'm missing, but those are the ones that are important to me. Looking at a P&S picture after looking at a shot from my 10D and 50mm f1.4, it's night and day. The bokeh is so much better. No shutter lag, no redeye.

If you think that a DSRL is bulky and not worth carrying around, good luck, have fun with a P&S.

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

--

' We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm. '

• George Orwell

 

[Keeper Dave]

Henri Cartier -Bresson was one of the finest photographers ever and he essentially used a P/S camera, a non-SLR Leica, and in monochrome at that. that type of camera suited his style and enabled him to capture the "critical moment" that he sought. He probably couldn't have done it with an SLR. That said, there are very few Cartier-Bressons among us and most advanced photographers want to have the versatility, image quality and accuracy that a DSLR offers. I'll bet that most of the folks here have their DSLRs and also a P/S, and use both when appropriate. Heck, if you have the bucks for a 20D, you might want to get one of each. A good P/S can be had for a couple hundred dollars.

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

--

Money can buy you a pretty good dog, but it can't buy the wag of his tail... Josh Billings

 

[Monochrome]

It all depends on the type of photography. Perhaps the friend is one of those photographers that does street photography with a Leica. Also, digital point and shoots don't have a huge lag in shutter response these days. At least my SD300 doesn't. Still waiting for my newly ordered 20D to ship though...

 

[Wild-Mike]

Henri Cartier -Bresson was one of the finest photographers ever and
he essentially used a P/S camera, a non-SLR Leica, and in
monochrome at that. that type of camera suited his style and
enabled him to capture the "critical moment" that he sought. He
probably couldn't have done it with an SLR.

Why is that? Also, didn't he stop photography pretty much in the early seventies.

I'd bet if he was still shooting he'd have the Canon mkII

Mike

--
New Gallery (in development stage) http://wnyphoto.com
Photography is just one of my hobbies

 

[Wild-Mike]

It all depends on the type of photography. Perhaps the friend is
one of those photographers that does street photography with a
Leica.

But there are just some pictures you simply can't get with a P&S. A DSLR is a tool that will without a doubt do a better job than a P&S in most all situations.

Oh, congrats on your 20D.

Regards,
Mike

--
New Gallery (in development stage) http://wnyphoto.com
Photography is just one of my hobbies

 

[jbkazam]

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

 

[David Jeffery]

Be aware that you have come to the race track to ask about buying a car......folks here will defend the race car but a sedan will get you across town.......your friend has some good points. I think it depends how deep you want to pursue the hobby.....digicams are very versatile nowadays but are lacking a few high end features.....most around here are intested in those high end features, but in my camera club competition, there are folks who do very, very well with the digicams. I love my 20D but miss the compactness of the old digicam.

Spiritman

 

[Sheila Smart]

As others have so emphatically advised you (and with great decorum for DPR!!), the P&S and the dSLR are not in the same league! Sure most folk are happy with their photographs taken with the P&S - that's fine. No worries. But its when they decide to blow up the 3MP to 8 x 10 or more is when they find the limitations of their camera. And if your photographer friend thinks that the "D20 aka the 20D" is heavy, he should pick up a Canon 1D Mark II with grip! Gees, that's a lot of camera. I decided on the 20D which is fine even with my 300 f/4L IS. My first digicam was the Canon Ixus which was a fine point and shoot. My husband has this now as he can tuck it into his motorcycle jacket when he takes off on a Sunday morning. But you wouldn't want to enlarge any of his shots, bless him! If you want a smaller camera but a notch above your average point and shoot, I would seriously look at the Canon G5 (or whatever number they are up to now). I had a G2 for four months before it inspired me to buy a D60. I have never looked back.

Sheila Smart
http://www.pbase.com/sheila

All the technique in the world doesn't compensate for the inability to notice - Elliott Erwitt

 

[smokey888x2]

smokey888x2 wrote:

I think it's safe to say the 20D forum members

(and other DSLR owners here) make up a lot less than 3%. ;-)

--
Brian Kennedy
http://www.briankennedy.net/

Brian: Some very very nice photograpy there! You know, it might make a neat comparison ..... someone like your selt to take some side by side shots like you do and then also use a P&S, ha! I would love to see it.

Again, nice shots at your site.

 

[Jeffy C]

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

Your friend is absolutely correct and everyone in this forum knows it. The thing is though, most everyone here is looking to kick things up a notch or two. For some, it's a hobby becoming more refined. For others, it's their profession. This is my first DSLR and I never imagined that I would spend several grand on a rig like this but I did because I want to elevate my skill sets in the hobby we all love. I won recognition for numerous "Photo's of the day" at Digitalphotocontest.com with my F505. Still got it and still use it. If snap shots satify you, great. Buy a P & S. If you're looking for more, kick it up a notch to DSLR because they are absolutely more capable in skilled hands. Enough of this dribble....

 

[discosuperfly]

I would have to say that this is probably the single best reason to step up to a DSLR for just about anyone. You may not need the flexibility, lower noise, or interchangeable lenses, but you need the camera to take the picture when you press the shutter release. If someone would make a point and shoot that took a picture when you pressed the button, I think it would be a success.

Jim

Sure a small Point and Shoot camera is more than enough for most
people, most avid photographers and pros in this forum need more
control over their images, and therefore, a SLR is the way to go.
Of course a good quality point and shoot camera or even a faux
"SLR" can produce very high quality images, SLRs are still the
standard for most professional users. because the creative conrol
you have over your iamges. I'm pretty sure that your friend has
several SLRs.

Most of us do also have P&S cameras for taking snap shots of our
family or on vacation, but I always use the "bulky" 20D when taking
creative shots.
There are also situations where a rich amatures waste thousands of
dollars on a SLR and have no IDEA how to use it!!! I once hear a
guy asking why he couldn't see the images on the LCD screen but
only the small viewfinder?? (he clearly is wasting his time and
money and would probably get better shots from a P&S camera) At
least you're doing your research before you buy!!

 

[Keeper Dave]

Henri Cartier -Bresson was one of the finest photographers ever and
he essentially used a P/S camera, a non-SLR Leica, and in
monochrome at that. that type of camera suited his style and
enabled him to capture the "critical moment" that he sought. He
probably couldn't have done it with an SLR.

Why is that? Also, didn't he stop photography pretty much in the
early seventies.

I'd bet if he was still shooting he'd have the Canon mkII

Mike

Well, for one thing, he was a stealth photographer and loved the fact that his Leica was the quietest camera made. I can hardly say that about my 20D, much as I love it.

Money can buy you a pretty good dog, but it can't buy the wag of his tail... Josh Billings

 

[eshropshire]

Personally I find things like this pretty funny. Your friend has a pretty low opinion of a lot of people. While he might be right about a few, most don't undertake using a DSLR unless they really do find a need for a DSLR.

I have a smaller camera and know when I need it or when I need to use a DSLR.

This is more of a personal needs issue, I think if you can't see the advantages of a DSLR then maybe you should look at alternatives.

Ed

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

--
Ed
http://www.cbrycelea.com/photos/

 

[Koper]

I have 20D, 300D, but for a New Years Eve party I took my P&S Pana FZ10. Just because it's smaller, lighter, good enough for a few snapshots ( f/2.8 with image stabilisation), and... well, cost much less, I dont have to worry all night long. That's one of those situations when P&S suites my needs better then dSLR. Wedding is a different story, christening, baby shower party etc etc. You can not just ask what is better. The best is get what you want and what you need (if you can )

--
http://koper1.fotki.com/

 

[Francesco]

nt = no text

--
Francesco Gallarotti
-----------------------------
http://www.gallarotti.net/4images/

 

[Francesco]

Henri Cartier -Bresson was one of the finest photographers ever and
he essentially used a P/S camera, a non-SLR Leica,

You seem to believe that P/S and tiny are synonims... what about shutter-lag? HCB was able to catch a person while jumping in the middle of his jump in mid air... do that with a P/S if you can

--
Francesco Gallarotti
-----------------------------
http://www.gallarotti.net/4images/

 

[AnewMAN]

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

 

[localnet]

"Why buy expensive big bulky Canon?"

Because I can!

Now, show me a pocket P&S that will do 5 fps, and has a fast lens up to 200mm+, and not a digital zoom, etc., etc...

Yes, some of us do use, and want these features, but you know that. Your friend sounds like one of those "know it all" boors I run into on a seemingly daily basis. You know, the guy that would find fault with a sunny day, or at the very least, try to pick a fight with you about it. Always stirring the pot.

Mike

A good friend of mine who is a pretty good accomplished
photographer of about 30 years said that he thought its sort of
crazy/nuts to buy a big bulky camera like Canon's D20 when the kind
you can slip into your shirt pocket is all the camera you need
these days -- given Digital and all.

He said, that only about the top 3% percent, of really the best
photographers can adequately use those big lenses correctly w/ that
camera. (and)

That the smaller, carry with you everwhere, pocket size cameras are
fantastic! And that's all 97% of camera users need because they do
such a wonderful job.

And that w/ the smaller camera we would have it w/ us when we
needed it but his main point was that the smaller camera's are
really very very adequate. And he uses one very often, I've seen
his shots, very good too.

I am deeply thinking about his comments, and wanted to hear from
the troops. Take care and thank you.

 

[Guillaume paris2]

your friend, that is... do you know the notorious Photomaster?
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=11948109

seriously, I don't know what kind of business your friend is into, but I doubt the images he can produce with small digicams can be sold as easily as those we routinely shoot with DSLRs...
frankly, there must be a reason for the "bigger" cameras, don't you think?

for me it begins at the usability level, I simply prefer to shoot with a responsive SLR than with a laggy digicam slowing me down... then there is the image, the bigger sensor and its bigger Dof...

Guillaume
http://www.at-sight.com