What is a "point and shoot" digital camera?

[DenImage]

There has been some discussion in these forums about what is/isn't a "point and shoot" digital camera.

What do you consider a "point and shoot" digital camera?

Do they still exist?

If not, what was the last "point and shoot" digital camera?

Are Smartphones "point and shoot" digital cameras?

What's the difference between a "compact digital camera" and a "point and shoot" digital camera?

:

Looking forward to people's thoughts.

Den

 

[Stephen Ingraham]

I wrote the book on Point and Shoot Nature Photography (no...I really did. You can find it on Amazon.)

A Point and Shoot Camera is one that was designed to be used in Auto or Program most of the time. It will, today, have intelligent Auto (scene selection auto), and lots of Scene Modes built in. Generally they have a fixed zoom lens. 3x to 83x (with the Nikon P1000 at 125x or something like that). They are generally more compact than any equivalent DSLR or even Mirrorless outfit. Some are still pocket-sized.

Yes they are still made. The old 3 to 4x zoom, pocket-sized P&S are gone, replaced by phone cameras, but most brands still have a 10 to 15x pocket sized offering...there are even 30 to 40x pocket sized P&S travel cameras. Most have small sensors...bigger than a phone but still 5.7 times smaller than full frame. They use contrast detection auto focus (for better and worse).

With the demise of the simple 3 to 4x P&S, most P&Ss today do have more sophisticated controls...including Aperture and Shutter Prioirity and full manual, so they do not have to used in the P&S fashion...though I recommend you do. The most sophisticated are “enthusiast” compact cameras with DSLR like controls (and, in the most recent, equivalent focus systems) and larger 1 inch sensors for better image quality.

However, you can use any digital camera currently made in the Point and Shoot fashion, by just setting it to intelligent Auto (or Program with a few modifications of your own) and letting the camera do the work of exposure and focus and white balance while you pay attention to finding and framing the images that are worth taking/making. Point and Shoot: with you doing the pointing, and the camera doing the shooting. Simple. I let people post DSLR and Mirrorless shots on my P&S Natrue Photography groups on Facebook and Google+ as long as they are using the P&S method...letting the camera do whatever it can do well.

(To me it makes no sense for the P&S photographer to use RAW, though a few P&Ss and all of the enthusiast cameras offer the option. Among the things that P&S cameras do very well is processing to jpeg...and most of the more sophisticated modes, especially multi-frame modes, are based on jpeg. The most sophisticated P&Ss use multiple (and adjustable) processing profiles (creative styles, picture modes) so you can, if necessary, fine tune your jpegs in camera for your typical subjects.)

I put phone cameras in a slightly different category but the method you use (generally are forced to use) is pure Point and Shoot. They are different in that their sensors are even smaller (even when they have the same pixel count) and they generally have a fixed focal length lens...no zoom (though a few have two lenses for a choice of focal lengths and special effects). Digital zoom (pinch and zoom) is not real zoom and always degrades the image...though if you are only posting to FB and Instagram no one will notice. I think phone photography deserves its own category because using a phone as your primary camera comes with a whole new set of challenges (and opportunities). But that is just my opinion. I let people post phone images in my P&S groups on Facebook and Google+. Still, it amazes me how many people show up for a safari, for instance, with only a phone or tablet for a camera.

Other’s may have a different definition for (and attitude toward) P&S....but as the guy who wrote the book...

 

[KeepCalm]

It is probably really used more as a derogatory term to talk down compact kit. The large sensor users would have you believe having their sensors with massive dynamic range and low noise where you can drift in to high ISO with less problems makes photography more difficult and in need of particular expertise.

I would not worry about it.

 

[DenImage]

No need to confuse the reason I started the thread, I'm not worried about it, I'm just interested in what defines the category.

I have a Sony RX100vi, and I consider it a "point and shoot" digital camera, but a few others have argued that it isn't. So I've wanted to know where the line is in the category of a "point and shoot" digital camera.

I'm just interested in what others think.

Den

 

[D Lynch]

A Point and Shoot camera takes all decisions away from the holder, except where to point and when to shoot. Push the shutter release, and an image is taken.

Then there's bridge cameras. They are much like dslr's in their capability except they have fixed lenses. Consider the RX10 as a bridge camera, as was my old Sony F828 (which I cherished)

Good photographers understand light. Very good photographers see photo opportunities where others don't and capture images that suit their intended purposes.

Is the RX100 a P&S? Yes with some settings.

Is the RX100-6 a bridge camera? Yes. A very forgiving one, because it can be used by beginners and experts

After all, is all about getting images that satisfy you.

--
DaveL
Toronto

 

[phingchian]

(To me it makes no sense for the P&S photographer to use RAW, though a few P&Ss and all of the enthusiast cameras offer the option. Among the things that P&S cameras do very well is processing to jpeg...and most of the more sophisticated modes, especially multi-frame modes, are based on jpeg. The most sophisticated P&Ss use multiple (and adjustable) processing profiles (creative styles, picture modes) so you can, if necessary, fine tune your jpegs in camera for your typical subjects.)

The problem is at what point a camera will cease to be a P&S? If functions like zoom control/processing profiles/P-mode make a camera a sophisticated P&S, one could go on arguing that A/S/M-modes will make it an even-more-sophisticated P&S.

Even my 10 yo Nokia N95's camera comes with multiple modes and controls so it is not P&S in the strictest sense.

Luckily, most people are not so anal about the term so P&S cameras are now commonly viewed as: 1) small, and 2) have automatic mode. In that sense, it is absolutely correct to regard Rx100 series as P&S cameras!

 

[KeepCalm]

A Point and Shoot camera takes all decisions away from the holder, except where to point and when to shoot. Push the shutter release, and an image is taken.

In some way these means a camera where you do not have to worry about shallow depth of field so a point and shoot camera would need to be a small sensor and small aperture camera for a start.

Then there's bridge cameras. They are much like dslr's in their capability except they have fixed lenses. Consider the RX10 as a bridge camera, as was my old Sony F828 (which I cherished)

Good photographers understand light. Very good photographers see photo opportunities where others don't and capture images that suit their intended purposes.

Is the RX100 a P&S? Yes with some settings.

Is the RX100-6 a bridge camera? Yes. A very forgiving one, because it can be used by beginners and experts

After all, is all about getting images that satisfy you.

 

[zackiedawg]

Personally I've always used it as a category for all cameras which are not interchangeable-lens cameras. I don't use it in a derogatory way, but just a familiar parlance that's become familiar and common.

Nowadays, there are true "point and shoot" cameras which operate almost exclusively in Auto type modes with virtually no user control, middle models which have perfectly capable auto modes but also allow for more user control, more optical reach options, etc., and advanced P&S models which can have very good manual control-ability, excellent lenses, and large sensors. Categorically, I still call all of these 'P&S'.

Just as 'mirrorless' has pretty well come to be the catch-all phrase meant for interchangeable lens cameras with electronic finders or LCDs and larger sensors. Taken literally, any camera that is not a DSLR is technically 'mirrorless', which would include all fixed lens and compact small sensor 'P&S' models...but the term 'mirrorless' or MILC has become accepted terminology for the interchangeable lens systems.

And even in the DSLR world - I personally always stuck Sony's 'SLT' models in the DSLR category, even though technically they weren't. Again, the classification wasn't meant literally, but just as a familiar category for large sensor, interchangeable lens camera systems which were generally used for traditional lens mounts with larger registration distances and some kind of mirror and dedicated focus sensors. Sony was still using A-mount, which started as an SLR mount, and the translucent mirror didn't move but was still a mirror, serving a dedicated PDAF sensor.

Anyway, that's how I'd break it down. RX, HX, TX, WX, and so on - all P&S. NEX, A7xx, A9xx, A6xxx, etc all mirrorless, and all Nikon, Sony, Pentax, & Sony traditional SLR mounts in the DSLR category.

 

[CaliforniaDave]

Some thorough and thoughtful responses here.

Traditionally point and shoot cameras in the film era were extremely simple. You loaded film and there was one button you pushed to take a photo. That was it.

Now point and shoot is often used to describe fixed lens compact cameras. Most of those cameras these days have a huge range of controls or options in menus, and are pretty far removed from the point and shoot original meaning. Something like a recent RX100 model can be shot in full automatic mode, but the user can also gain almost complete control of the camera.

I have no problem with people describing such a camera as a point and shoot. I do have a problem when people come into a thread (usually hijacking it) and using "point and shoot" as a derogatory term to describe cameras such as the RX100VI, usually in order to dismiss them in comparison to what they consider to be a "real" camera. At that point, it becomes less about the meaning of the phrase "point and shoot" and more about the ego and obnoxiousness (is that a word?) of the person posting.

Here are some terms that I find descriptive and useful for fixed lens cameras:

compact camera - camera with <1" sensor, modest zoom

compact superzoom - camera with <1" sensor, large zoom range

enthusiast camera - camera with 1" or large sensor, better optics, numerous controls

bridge camera - larger body camera with large zoom range but bigger and faster lens

enthusiast bridge camera - same as above, but 1" sensor, and usually better optics

None of these terms is perfect, and there are grey areas between them.

 

[D Lynch]

A Point and Shoot camera takes all decisions away from the holder, except where to point and when to shoot. Push the shutter release, and an image is taken.

In some way these means a camera where you do not have to worry about shallow depth of field so a point and shoot camera would need to be a small sensor and small aperture camera for a start.

Then there's bridge cameras. They are much like dslr's in their capability except they have fixed lenses. Consider the RX10 as a bridge camera, as was my old Sony F828 (which I cherished)

Good photographers understand light. Very good photographers see photo opportunities where others don't and capture images that suit their intended purposes.

Is the RX100 a P&S? Yes with some settings.

Is the RX100-6 a bridge camera? Yes. A very forgiving one, because it can be used by beginners and experts

After all, is all about getting images that satisfy you.

I describe my RX100-2 as a Point and Shoot camera that I bought used, when I'm in questionable surroundings and may be overheard.

To me, it's priceless. It takes images I like. And I haven't needed to replace it.

 

[Clix Pix]

I consider my RX10 M4 a "bridge" camera, but not really in the same category as a P&S because it is larger and definitely allows me more control, similar to a DSLR; the primary difference being that I cannot swap out lenses, and of course the sensor is significantly smaller. I consider my RX100 Mk V and RX100 Mk VI to be "Compact" cameras, as they are somewhat larger and heavier, they offer more control for the user, they provide for shooting RAW, and they have a larger sensor (1") than most cameras that are usually identified as "P&S."

My HX90V I consider a P&S because it has a smaller sensor, is lighter in weight than my RX100 cameras and it does not give me as much control, nor does it offer RAW. The even smaller, lighter-weight TX-30 is even more P&S by dint of its styling, design and purpose. There is a significant difference between the HX90V and the RX100 series cameras although they look somewhat alike on the surface. The TX-30 definitely looks like most people's idea of a P&S camera.

I agree that cell phone cameras are in their own category, as although they perform much like a straight P&S, there are still several limitations to them. Aside from that, they also are not simply a camera, they are not standalone and dedicated to that purpose -- they are built into a device which is used for other things as well -- talking on the phone, listening to music, watching movies, surfing the internet and participating in forums such as this one.

 

[sybersitizen]

I put phone cameras in a slightly different category but the method you use (generally are forced to use) is pure Point and Shoot.

That's right.

They are different in that their sensors are even smaller (even when they have the same pixel count) and they generally have a fixed focal length lens...no zoom (though a few have two lenses for a choice of focal lengths and special effects). Digital zoom (pinch and zoom) is not real zoom and always degrades the image...though if you are only posting to FB and Instagram no one will notice. I think phone photography deserves its own category because using a phone as your primary camera comes with a whole new set of challenges (and opportunities). But that is just my opinion.

I'd go one farther: Phone cameras are the new Point and Shoot cameras.

Pocket-sized enthusiast cameras (The Cameras Formerly Known as Point and Shoot) should instead be categorized differently. If Pocket-Sized Enthusiast camera doesn't sound right to someone, here's one alternative: Point, Zoom Optically and Use The EVF If It's Too Sunny Out There, and Shoot camera.

 

[Bill Borne]

Personally I've always used it as a category for all cameras which are not interchangeable-lens cameras. I don't use it in a derogatory way, but just a familiar parlance that's become familiar and common.

Me too....

Nowadays, there are true "point and shoot" cameras which operate almost exclusively in Auto type modes with virtually no user control, middle models which have perfectly capable auto modes but also allow for more user control, more optical reach options, etc., and advanced P&S models which can have very good manual control-ability, excellent lenses, and large sensors. Categorically, I still call all of these 'P&S'.

Just as 'mirrorless' has pretty well come to be the catch-all phrase meant for interchangeable lens cameras with electronic finders or LCDs and larger sensors. Taken literally, any camera that is not a DSLR is technically 'mirrorless', which would include all fixed lens and compact small sensor 'P&S' models...but the term 'mirrorless' or MILC has become accepted terminology for the interchangeable lens systems.

And even in the DSLR world - I personally always stuck Sony's 'SLT' models in the DSLR category, even though technically they weren't. Again, the classification wasn't meant literally, but just as a familiar category for large sensor, interchangeable lens camera systems which were generally used for traditional lens mounts with larger registration distances and some kind of mirror and dedicated focus sensors. Sony was still using A-mount, which started as an SLR mount, and the translucent mirror didn't move but was still a mirror, serving a dedicated PDAF sensor.

Anyway, that's how I'd break it down. RX, HX, TX, WX, and so on - all P&S. NEX, A7xx, A9xx, A6xxx, etc all mirrorless, and all Nikon, Sony, Pentax, & Sony traditional SLR mounts in the DSLR category.

 

[Bill Borne]

Some thorough and thoughtful responses here.

Traditionally point and shoot cameras in the film era were extremely simple. You loaded film and there was one button you pushed to take a photo. That was it.

Now point and shoot is often used to describe fixed lens compact cameras. Most of those cameras these days have a huge range of controls or options in menus, and are pretty far removed from the point and shoot original meaning. Something like a recent RX100 model can be shot in full automatic mode, but the user can also gain almost complete control of the camera.

I have no problem with people describing such a camera as a point and shoot. I do have a problem when people come into a thread (usually hijacking it) and using "point and shoot" as a derogatory term to describe cameras such as the RX100VI, usually in order to dismiss them in comparison to what they consider to be a "real" camera. At that point, it becomes less about the meaning of the phrase "point and shoot" and more about the ego and obnoxiousness (is that a word?) of the person posting.

Absolutely and I consider someone who truly shoots Point & Shoot using auto as snapshooters and someone who uses most other mode as photographer. Just my opinion...others may have other opinions

Here are some terms that I find descriptive and useful for fixed lens cameras:

compact camera - camera with <1" sensor, modest zoom

compact superzoom - camera with <1" sensor, large zoom range

enthusiast camera - camera with 1" or large sensor, better optics, numerous controls

bridge camera - larger body camera with large zoom range but bigger and faster lens

enthusiast bridge camera - same as above, but 1" sensor, and usually better optics

None of these terms is perfect, and there are grey areas between them.

 

[abiquiuense]

. . . helped me survey the Pueblo of Abiquiu.


Halfmile Post: West Boundary, Pueblo of Abiquiu.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1

Enjoyed the article, supra.

abiquiuense

 

[Bill Borne]

. . . helped me survey the Pueblo of Abiquiu.


Halfmile Post: West Boundary, Pueblo of Abiquiu.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1

Enjoyed the article, supra.

abiquiuense

Composite photo????

--
Bill
"Life's Too Short to Worry about the BS!"
So I Choose my Battles
Click for Wild Man's Photos
Using Rx10 IV at Present

 

[abiquiuense]

. . . helped me survey the Pueblo of Abiquiu.


Halfmile Post: West Boundary, Pueblo of Abiquiu.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydscr1

Enjoyed the article, supra.

abiquiuense

Composite photo????

I thought I saw you going by. What cued your inquiry? I've bokeh, DOF, maybe I can go vain, and say it's three dimensional, ya' think? ;-) All my brasscaps are like this, on auto focus.

Composites for me are Ltd to transparencies in the classroom on an overhead projector. I'm truly envious of the composites done of meteors.

My DSCR-1, bit the dust, inhaling it into the lens. So, it doesn't zoom anymore. I think that it went 40K captures, and I bought it used, in a Hospice Thrift Store.

Can't wait for edform's challenge.

abiquiuense

 

[JDLaing50]

A camera that has an Auto selection on the dial that lets you point the camera and take a picture with the camera doing all the work ie exposure, focus, other settings.

 

[CaliforniaDave]

A camera that has an Auto selection on the dial that lets you point the camera and take a picture with the camera doing all the work ie exposure, focus, other settings.

That would make the A9, A7III, A7RIII and numerous other high end models point and shoot cameras.

 

[Harry Hughes1]

My favorite point and shoot does work...even has a flash!

Harry