Last edited by kurtlim; 7th December 2008 at 02:50 AM.
Try taking some shots at night
my skill cmi for dslr, so is happy to be stuck with compat PnS
why never apply 1/focal rule?
before you confuse the TS any further, let me clarify one thing.
Depth-of-field (DOF) refers to the distance, in front and behind the focused subject, in which subjects are also in focus.
Generally i've seen people refer to a lens as having a shallow or deep DOF, but not sure what 'big' refers to (according to bro RayDream).
When you have a large aperture (small f-number, e.g. f/2.8), the DOF is shallow, and everything even slightly in front or behind the subject will be blur.
It is important to note that f/2.8 on a DSLR and f/2.8 on a PnS or prosumer (my old Lumix FZ-10 had f/2.8) is not the same thing, because of the size of the sensor, and hence the focal length of the lens used. Generally PnS and superzooms have considerably deep DOFs. It would be (almost, i think) impossible for them to take portraits with nice bokeh (out-of-focus background).
If both the PnS and DSLR capture the same image at f/5.6, the DOF will be considerably different, due to the different focal length of the PnS lens. The deeper DOF makes the image seem 'sharper'.
So to the TS, your comparison is flawed, and hence not valid.
Just look through some macro galleries on clubsnap, flickr, pbase, etc. Then you'll see what a DSLR can achieve in the right hands. The greatest PnS won't even come close.
Last edited by ZerocoolAstra; 7th December 2008 at 09:16 AM.
and a lot of them do better than many dslr users.
it is more of the knowledge, the patience, the passion. that said, a dslr usually gives you more room to operate, but that's about it. it is also worth noting that dslr generally gives you uncooked meat, i.e. minimal processing so you can cut it to your own liking. p&s gives you cooked meat, usually quite cooked as well. you can't uncook it and try to cook it your own style.
I owned a 'high' end PnS (even has manual mode) and just 'upgraded' to dSLR. PnS is enough if you can live with its limitation:
- slow shutter speed, slow lag time,
- long minimal focal len (due to the sensor size so difficult to take in narrow places),
- not so sensitive sensor (due to low max ISO value),
- poorer image quality (may be brand dependent)
- poor autofocus speed (esp in dim light, so making quick photo taking a chore)
When I bought by Oly c770UZ, I thought that will be the camera I would want. Then the limitations showed but if you can work around the problem like taking photos is bright areas, use high ISO (altho max only 400 and IQ suffers but still tolerable), change to sports mode (for 'fast' candid/poorer lighted area) it probably still tolerable.
'Upgraded' to dSLR cos more able to PP (altho Oly has TIFF which still can PP) and more control of the camera (wider range of control for each function cf to PnS), more sensitive sensor with higher ISO (and better IQ). This enables me to take photos in dim places where flash is prohibited or frown upon.
So if you understand your PnS and can live and knows how to work around the problem stay with PnS cos it is convenient and easy to use (minimal effort for near-maximal outcome). Get dSLR if you want more control and expanded possibilities like better lens, longer lens, filters (thinking about graduated filter when extraneous light source can be 'control'), etc (more effort but unlimited potential and good outcome).
There is no right or wrong; just what is necessary, needed and affordable
Nikon, once had a lens in their array, hailed by most photographers amateur/professional inclusive as best " portrait " lens.....a 105mm f/2.0 Nikkorr.
If you look a little into the shadow area of the PnS shot, you'll notice lots of noise, which is almost absent in the DSLR shot.
Comparison is flawed.
Try doing the test with normal distance photos not macro and make sure all factors are taken into account, like using a tripod to shot, use a smaller aperture on DSLR to compensate for the shallower DOF and you'll see.
And I agree with ZerocoolAstra about going to the macro forum and see some delightful shots by DSLR.
1. photographer's technique - hand shake
2. camera/lens problem - focusing errors
i have used both dslr and compact camera and found that under ideal shooting conditions (bright lighting, low iso), a good compact cam holds its own against a dslr in terms of sharpness and resolution. however, the dslr is much better than the compact in terms of low noise at high iso and bokeh.
i'm using a compact cam (fuji f100fd) now mainly for the convenience/portability and good image quality (within its restrictions).
Last edited by zaren; 8th December 2008 at 01:45 AM.
I agree DSLR not good. TS please tell your fren so and tell him to give me his DSLR. I collect junks. Thanks.
Here's somethings I've pulled off the web. Take your comparison to the next level. Take pictures at night..... One of the articles made a statement..... a compact makes all the decisions for you. Even though you have some room to play... it still decides for you. My biggest pain was buying was a Nikon Coolpix 5000.... I didn't understand then but now, hahaha I do. that camera gave you room to play BUT it was slow and all electronic. The DSLR is literally Point and Shoot and you are in control at all times!
Does this sound familiar?
You're attending a big event and want to grab a shot of a fleeting moment
For some reason your compact digital camera just won't focus
FINALLY it locks the focus and you're ready - you press the button
But there's a DELAY - the camera pauses for a second, then it takes the shot
The moment is gone - you've missed it.
Do you want to take more professional-looking photos?
Do you want to be able to change the lens attached to your camera?
Do you want more control over the photos that you take?
Are you sick and tired of the slow speed of your compact camera?
Do you want to take lots of photos in dim light?
So if you want immediate gratification when you've just taken the picture (in a 3.5mm window), without the additional tweaking... 'better' pictures immediately, buy a compact. Otherwise the investment in a DSLR is worth it.
Hope this helps.....
Last edited by milo85281; 8th December 2008 at 05:31 PM.
Is there any PnS with as little shutter lag as an average DSLR? I am looking for one myself. Nice to have something that gives good pics, compact enough to pocket and not let shutter lag make you miss the shot. Tks.
1. Due to sensor size and distance of lens to sensor, the depth of field (DOF) value on a compact is different to that of a DSLR. Its probably a rough 4 or more times the f-stop in terms of DOF. Ie. f2.8 in this instance is more like gosh! .... f11 on a DSLR
here's a DOF calculator to play with
This is one of the reason, its so hard to do portraits where the background is blurred for compact cams.
2. Magnification is different as well.
3. Already covered by many others, the in camera processing is different (compact cam are usually programmed with high sharpness for in-camera processing)
My few cents, all said, is if your question/point is "All right, I don't care about all the mumbo jumbo, and the PnS looks sharper for what I did with it." Then yeah, I guess the PnS will serve you well for your purpose (ie. sharp picts for the photography type you are doing). Good value for money too.
If you want a larger 'dimension' to taking photos (ie. portraits+blurred bkgnd; interesting bokeh; sharp picts (used with understanding wrt the compact cam); faster lens in ambient light; better post processing capability, etc). The DSLR is still the best option.
So often, I look at the picts on Flickr or PBase taken with compacts and they are way better then what I can do on my DSLR. Its really the photographer that counts.
A PNS camera is simply Point-And-Shoot. You leave everything to the camera to decide which is best. For a DSLR, say 40D which I am using, you have many modes to chose from. Typically, I shoot in AV mode. If the pictures turn out less sharp than the PNS camera you mentioned, there are a few points to note:-
1. Setting i.e. AV, PictureStyle (Standard with Sharpness level at 4 or 7?)
2. Lens used (With or without lens hood)
3. Fundamentals of Photography (Handshake and stability)
The sensor on a compact is far smaller in size as compared to a DSLR; 40D in this case. So, the question is how much detail is captured by a PNS camera as to a DSLR. In simple terms, two fishermen casts our their nets, one larger than the other. It's obvious that the one with the larger net will catch more fish.
Bring a PNS camera to next year's F1 and see which picture is clearer... PNS camera or DSLR?
Also, if PNS cameras are "better" than DSLR's, why do pros and prosumers use DSLR's? Think about it.... Cheers!
Last edited by sabrecruz; 9th December 2008 at 04:01 PM.
Mentioning F1 in this thread just confuses everyone, because that is sports/action photography. A different aspect altogether.
Ok you've made your point that the DSLR is supreme
The TS wished to state that under the 'same' settings, the PnS produced noticeably sharper macro photos.
My point is that this was not a valid comparison, because from the 2 images, the DSLR shot had a noticeably thinner DOF. Probably same f-number, but as I explained in the earlier post, f/4 on a PnS and f/4 on a DSLR don't mean the same thing!
Also the DSLR shot is blurry due to slight hand-shake. Either the cameraman is not holding the DSLR properly, or their interpretation of 'maximum zoom' is not correct, causing the DSLR to exhibit more pronounced effect of hand-shake.