DSLR or Prosumer camera model

  • Thread starter strawberry-shortcake
  • Start date

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

strawberry-shortcake

Guest
#1
Switching from basic point and shoot camera, I would like to upgrade my camera.
Which would be a good choice, to DSLR basic model or prosumer model? What are the pros and cons?
Any recommendation of brands and models?
Thks!
 

jumbocrab

New Member
Jun 27, 2004
406
0
0
#2
Maybe you can first tell us why you want to upgrade? Otherwise it may be difficult for people to advise you which is the better option. Also, you should state your budget.
 

fWord

Senior Member
Jun 23, 2005
3,350
0
0
35
Melbourne, Australia
#3
Tough question to answer completely. It's something that'll need to be studied for many hours in order to decide what's best for you, but a short (and incomplete summary):

Prosumer (including superzooms)

Pros

-cheaper (than DSLRs)
-generally smaller, lighter, easier to carry around
-superzooms offer tremendous focal length that is hard to duplicate in DSLRs for low cost
-very contrasty, colorful images straight out of camera (consumer-orientated appearence)
-most superzooms and many other models have image stabilizer. Useful feature
-most capable of doing movie clips, Canon's S2 IS even allows zooming while filming

Cons

-less responsive than DSLRs, longer shutter lag, longer focusing time
-difficult to get a 'bokeh' (background blur) effect because lenses are generally shorter
-some may have limited manual controls
-some will not support a mounted external flash unit
-images may be overprocessed, difficult to manipulate on computer without making artificial results
-limited ISO settings. Most have a max of 400 and images are destroyed by noise at that stage

DSLRs

Pros

-almost unlimited expandability. Huge range of lenses and flash units, plus filters for every need
-very responsive, usually instant startup, near zero shutter lag (especially if lens focuses fast). Never miss a candid/ action shot again
-high ISO capability. Very useful. Simply increase ISO to 1600 and even beyond to shoot in low light conditions without flash. Images still very usable and noise levels low
-yields images with a somewhat 3D appearence with some elements in sharp focus and others relatively softer
-superb image quality. Can choose to shoot very neutral images that allow further processing on computer. A lower megapixel model may still produce images comparable to higher megapixel prosumer cameras
-myriad of manual controls
-generally durable, long-lasting
-people may THINK that you're a professional, so they keep out of your way and let you shoot. Easier to strike up conversations with some people.

Cons

-cost. Buying the body is just the tip of the iceberg. Expect to pay many times more for additional lenses and accesories
-usually bulkier than prosumers
-more prone to getting stolen
-need to take more care with regards to humidity and especially dust. Dust on sensor creates spots on images...annoying and expensive to clean professionally

Overall, the summary is a statement I've heard someone make before, "DSLRs are for people who want quality, and are willing to pay for it."
 

Jul 31, 2005
768
0
0
Bt Batok
#4
dont even bother with prosumers, get a d50 instead for abt the same price. prosumers r nt tt better thn pns while lags behind dslr in many ways. the [mega zooms] r nt very useful as well since prosumers r nt fast enough to capture action. prosumers cant go very wide, wide zooms start at 28mm and ends at 100+, so u lose out on tele. mega zooms start at 35-38 so u lose out on wide. converters juz degrade the img. the puny sensors in prosumers giv very bad noise beyond iso400 generally.

a year or 2 ago, prosumers hav a market as they bridge the price gap between pns and dslr. now with dslrs approaching the $1000 mark, there're no real reasons to choose prosumers
 

Hexlord

New Member
Dec 25, 2004
1,599
0
0
Bedok
hexlord.multiply.com
#6
roti_prata said:
a year or 2 ago, prosumers hav a market as they bridge the price gap between pns and dslr. now with dslrs approaching the $1000 mark, there're no real reasons to choose prosumers
The price has gone down a lot.. however it will still take some significant amount of money to kit out a DSLR.

Maybe if bodies start to dip below the $900-1000 mark (brand new), then I might consider (planning one in 2-3 years time :))
 

fWord

Senior Member
Jun 23, 2005
3,350
0
0
35
Melbourne, Australia
#7
Hexlord said:
The price has gone down a lot.. however it will still take some significant amount of money to kit out a DSLR.

Maybe if bodies start to dip below the $900-1000 mark (brand new), then I might consider (planning one in 2-3 years time :))
That's true. And even then, the bodies better come with a lens, otherwise it'd be an expensive practice to go out and buy a lens straight after the body.

I was clueless when I first jumped into DSLRs, and didn't even know what lens to buy. Luckily, the kit lens fit the bill. I'm still using it now and enjoy it very much more now than I did just months ago.
 

Jul 31, 2005
768
0
0
Bt Batok
#8
fWord said:
-people may THINK that you're a professional, so they keep out of your way and let you shoot. Easier to strike up conversations with some people.

Cons

-cost. Buying the body is just the tip of the iceberg. Expect to pay many times more for additional lenses and accesories

-more prone to getting stolen
-need to take more care with regards to humidity and especially dust. Dust on sensor creates spots on images...annoying and expensive to clean professionally
using anything but pro dslrs w/built in vert grips still make u look noob:bsmilie:

a d50 kit + 70-300 is better thn any prosumer while nt tt more expensive. when getting pro lenses, ur leaving the league of prosumer/amature dslr

ppl will juz steal any camera given the opportunity. it think its easier to steal a prosumer since its more compact and easier to conceal. when stealing a dslr i'll hav to grap the whole bag:sweat:

humidity is oso an issue for prosumers since they hav lenses oso.

i use hair dryers on [cool] setting to blow away dust on sensors:thumbsup:
 

fWord

Senior Member
Jun 23, 2005
3,350
0
0
35
Melbourne, Australia
#10
roti_prata said:
using anything but pro dslrs w/built in vert grips still make u look noob:bsmilie:

a d50 kit + 70-300 is better thn any prosumer while nt tt more expensive. when getting pro lenses, ur leaving the league of prosumer/amature dslr

ppl will juz steal any camera given the opportunity. it think its easier to steal a prosumer since its more compact and easier to conceal. when stealing a dslr i'll hav to grap the whole bag:sweat:

humidity is oso an issue for prosumers since they hav lenses oso.

i use hair dryers on [cool] setting to blow away dust on sensors:thumbsup:
Heheh...well, you don't need a big camera plus a grip to look 'pro'. If I wanted to put up that facade, all I needed to do was to get a really long lens. Canon white lenses do just that. Anyway, it's intended as a joke, and wanted to poke fun at those who look only superficially and think that the camera IS everything and DOES everything.

Technically humidity will affect a compact or prosumer just as much as it does a DSLR. But for some reason, I've never seen anyone complain about fungus in such cameras. Complains are usually made by those who own SLRs and the associated interchangeable lenses. I am interested to know if fungus degrades an image less on compacts/ prosumers and thus goes unnoticed.
 

Hexlord

New Member
Dec 25, 2004
1,599
0
0
Bedok
hexlord.multiply.com
#11
roti_prata said:
using anything but pro dslrs w/built in vert grips still make u look noob:bsmilie:

a d50 kit + 70-300 is better thn any prosumer while nt tt more expensive. when getting pro lenses, ur leaving the league of prosumer/amature dslr

ppl will juz steal any camera given the opportunity. it think its easier to steal a prosumer since its more compact and easier to conceal. when stealing a dslr i'll hav to grap the whole bag:sweat:

humidity is oso an issue for prosumers since they hav lenses oso.

i use hair dryers on [cool] setting to blow away dust on sensors:thumbsup:
Actually does it matter if you look n00b or not?

Actually a D50 kit with such a lens can still cost a lot more.. if I am not wrong, a D50 kit set is around 1.2k with goodies? Then u add up the lens etc :p

So its still quite expensive. What is not expensive to you, is expensive to others!

Btw, the remark about prosumers being easier to steal is just speculation on your part right?
 

Hexlord

New Member
Dec 25, 2004
1,599
0
0
Bedok
hexlord.multiply.com
#12
fWord said:
Technically humidity will affect a compact or prosumer just as much as it does a DSLR. But for some reason, I've never seen anyone complain about fungus in such cameras. Complains are usually made by those who own SLRs and the associated interchangeable lenses. I am interested to know if fungus degrades an image less on compacts/ prosumers and thus goes unnoticed.
Personally speaking, I do not have a dry cabinet at home, although I did keep my PnS in a cupboard when not in used. No thirsty hippos, etc.

After more than a year of constant usage, there seems to be no signs of any fungus. Maybe I was just lucky.
 

obrag

New Member
Dec 26, 2004
854
0
0
#13
roti_prata said:
dont even bother with prosumers, get a d50 instead for abt the same price. prosumers r nt tt better thn pns while lags behind dslr in many ways. the [mega zooms] r nt very useful as well since prosumers r nt fast enough to capture action. prosumers cant go very wide, wide zooms start at 28mm and ends at 100+, so u lose out on tele. mega zooms start at 35-38 so u lose out on wide. converters juz degrade the img. the puny sensors in prosumers giv very bad noise beyond iso400 generally.

a year or 2 ago, prosumers hav a market as they bridge the price gap between pns and dslr. now with dslrs approaching the $1000 mark, there're no real reasons to choose prosumers
I have to agree that years ago there is a market for Prosumer digicam, and that time has changed.

I picked up a KM 5D (with kit lens, 1GB CF, free tripod and bag) for my wife a few days ago for $1160, and that's less than half the price of my 20D body! The noise produced by the 5D @ higher ISO is way less than any compact/Prosumer digicam, and the Anti-Shake really works.

Other than the fact that the compact/Prosumer digicams are less prone to (though NOT completely free from*) dust on sensor, DSLR is really a much more attractive image-making proposition. Yes, the lenses for DSLR will cost money, but current Prosumer with long lenses either don't have stabiliser or/and have high image noise (think Olympus and Panasonic FZs), or cost more than a DSLR and yet has fixed lenses of limited focal length (think Sony).

For me, the only mitigating factors are the variable-angle 'live' image preview and near-silent shutter of the Prosumer cams.

I do wonder where the market will lead to: at the lower end, compact digicam marketshare is pressured by camera phones, and the Prosumer marketshare is pressured by DSLR sales... :think:

(* My compact Fuji F10 had to be serviced because dust landed on the sensor)
 

fWord

Senior Member
Jun 23, 2005
3,350
0
0
35
Melbourne, Australia
#14
Hexlord said:
Personally speaking, I do not have a dry cabinet at home, although I did keep my PnS in a cupboard when not in used. No thirsty hippos, etc.

After more than a year of constant usage, there seems to be no signs of any fungus. Maybe I was just lucky.
This is precisely the thing that puzzles me. My PowerShot A40 is almost three years old, and I'd often leave it in the case where it's all dark, for long periods at a time.

Now I keep this camera together with everything else in a dry box.

One of my friends also has a digital camcorder which he's used for some 3 years now, and even then, it doesn't appear to be affected by fungus.
 

Jul 31, 2005
768
0
0
Bt Batok
#15
who uses a prosumer for >5yrs? i think theres nt enough time for fungus to develop before the cam is sold 2nd hand.

a 70-300 is only $300+ add tt to the $1200 of a d50 kit givs a managable $1500. take for average a prosumer costs $900, the d50 package is only 66.6% more while offering so many more options.

obrag above got a km5d for $1160 which is a gd deal imo. this is exectly wat i want to say: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2dig.htm

p.s button-push zooming really sux
 

May 26, 2004
343
0
0
Singapore
#16
Prosumer cameras are still quite in demand. More for people who are not much interested in lens changing all the time and wanting to have a wider focal range from macro to telezoom.
 

Jul 31, 2005
768
0
0
Bt Batok
#17
ernie_ng81 said:
Prosumer cameras are still quite in demand. More for people who are not much interested in lens changing all the time and wanting to have a wider focal range from macro to telezoom.
18-200vr:thumbsup:
 

Hexlord

New Member
Dec 25, 2004
1,599
0
0
Bedok
hexlord.multiply.com
#18
roti_prata said:
who uses a prosumer for >5yrs? i think theres nt enough time for fungus to develop before the cam is sold 2nd hand.

a 70-300 is only $300+ add tt to the $1200 of a d50 kit givs a managable $1500. take for average a prosumer costs $900, the d50 package is only 66.6% more while offering so many more options.

obrag above got a km5d for $1160 which is a gd deal imo. this is exectly wat i want to say: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/2dig.htm

p.s button-push zooming really sux
LOL maybe I can show you this link by Mr Rockwell too :)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

I am curious to know if you are going to use your D50 for more than 5 years.

Yeap, its 66.6% more only.. but again I reiterate, what is expensive to you could be expensive for others. :dunno:

Ps. The newer prosumers are using mechanical zoom & focus rings. :)
 

TMC

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2004
6,321
0
0
Beyond Space-Time Continuum
#19
18-200vr is costs as much as a new body, normal consumers will not spend money on that if they are just looking for a regular camera. PnS are normally brought around all the time so the conditions are not there for fungus to grow. But lenses kept in a dry box, can end up unused for months. Dry box is not a foolproof way to stop fungus from growing, thus most of the time only dslr users end up complaining about fungus on the lens.

That reminds me, time to clean my lenses. :bsmilie:
 

Jul 31, 2005
768
0
0
Bt Batok
#20
Hexlord said:
I am curious to know if you are going to use your D50 for more than 5 years.

Yeap, its 66.6% more only.. but again I reiterate, what is expensive to you could be expensive for others. :dunno:

Ps. The newer prosumers are using mechanical zoom & focus rings. :)
haha ok..its the lenses tt develop fungus and nt the body right?:bsmilie:

some1 will consider $900 affordable and $1500 expensive?? ppl would want to get prosumers because it offers them more control over pns but inheient flaws like shutter lag/high noise/slow burst/evf makes it a compromise. prosumers wont last as long as dslrs. the d100 released 4yrs ago(im nt sure) is still a worthy camera today, lenses can easily last for decades. so u cant really say tt dslrs r more expensive.

if ur passionate enough abt photography to want to buy prosumers, u'll find dslrs a more cost-effective and long term solution

im saying tt prosumers r nt as gd, not tt they're bad

using a prosumer will always leave u desiring for a dslr and ur very likely to upgrade.

MF is useless on a prosumer due to the evf
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom