Whats the difference in picture quality between a P&S and a DSLR?


Status
Not open for further replies.

boroangel

New Member
Apr 23, 2005
431
0
0
#1
Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question.....been using the S5500 for some time now and really itching for a S9500 or a DSLR soon.....very attracted by the D50.....but I was just wondering....I know DSLR would give better pics than a normal prosumer but let say I have a prosumer and a DSLR......both having the same MP and focal ranges and I shoot at the same settings, aperture, shutter speed,ISO, white balance etc.........is there a huge difference in the picture quality like colour and sharpness produced by the respective cameras?
 

jnet6

Senior Member
Apr 21, 2004
8,179
0
36
not here often anymore
#2
boroangel said:
Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question.....been using the S5500 for some time now and really itching for a S9500 or a DSLR soon.....very attracted by the D50.....but I was just wondering....I know DSLR would give better pics than a normal prosumer but let say I have a prosumer and a DSLR......both having the same MP and focal ranges and I shoot at the same settings, aperture, shutter speed,ISO, white balance etc.........is there a huge difference in the picture quality like colour and sharpness produced by the respective cameras?
u will be surprise by the details it can capture with a veri gd lens.....

gd iso performance too.
got lots more, maybe u need a some pics to tell u the diff.
 

#4
boroangel said:
Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question.....been using the S5500 for some time now and really itching for a S9500 or a DSLR soon.....very attracted by the D50.....but I was just wondering....I know DSLR would give better pics than a normal prosumer but let say I have a prosumer and a DSLR......both having the same MP and focal ranges and I shoot at the same settings, aperture, shutter speed,ISO, white balance etc.........is there a huge difference in the picture quality like colour and sharpness produced by the respective cameras?
I was using the Fuji S602Z for 3 years until August this year, when I was deciding between the S9500 and a DSLR. I went with a DSLR and have never looked back since. :)

But beware that if you go the DSLR route, be prepared that you will spend more than double compared to the S9500.
 

boroangel

New Member
Apr 23, 2005
431
0
0
#7
Hitman said:
I was using the Fuji S602Z for 3 years until August this year, when I was deciding between the S9500 and a DSLR. I went with a DSLR and have never looked back since. :)

But beware that if you go the DSLR route, be prepared that you will spend more than double compared to the S9500.
Yeah....considering that the specs offered by the S9500 are technically better than say the D50 with similar lenses attached.....but I know everyones been telling me the DSLR will give better quality......but havent really seen two exact pics taken by a high end prosumer and a DSLR to compare ......think theres also some issue about no full frame exisiting in digital cameras yet?

Anyways......so its confirm the
1. D50 would give better colour and picture quality than the S9500?
What other pros and cons can we list between a high end prosumer and an entry level DSLR? Like iso performance etc...but S9500 can also go up to ISO 1600 leh....
 

#8
boroangel said:
What other pros and cons can we list between a high end prosumer and an entry level DSLR? Like iso performance etc...but S9500 can also go up to ISO 1600 leh....
Yes, S9500 can go up to ISO 1600 but the quality at ISO 1600 will not be comparable to one from a DSLR at ISO 1600 considering the difference in sensor size.
Cons of a DSLR, is you do not have live preview via the LCD screen, no movie mode, bulkier, more expensive and you have to clean the sensor once in a while if you do not handle well when switching lenses.
 

ricleo

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2004
6,570
30
48
Eastern Singapore
#10
Jul 31, 2005
768
0
0
Bt Batok
#11
lenses will cost a bomb. the 2 represent different lvls of commitment to ur hobby
 

nikkie

New Member
Jan 7, 2005
998
0
0
Singapore
#12
layman reasons:

1.DLSR has proper complementing flash system. can go shoot at events and TFP/CD/N/S without looking too much like a wannabe. heh...
2.has reason to go look/buy better lens, spend more money.
3.faster, bigger, better, clearer. don't doubt this one. (otherwise so many serious hobbists/pros use SLR for what?)
4.has proper reason to use a big tripod on the streets.
5.won't be mistaken for a tourist on the streets.
6.can approach girls on the streets and ask to take photos of them and deliver to them by email or call them out again.

guess, don't even need to go into the technicalities.... you are already convinced right?
 

boroangel

New Member
Apr 23, 2005
431
0
0
#13
majere2sg said:
Cons of a DSLR, is you do not have live preview via the LCD screen
Yeah.......for prosumer straight after you use the viewfinder(if thats what its called) not the LD screen to view your object and shoot, the picture u captured will appear for like 1 second and u can decide roughly if its good enough or you haev to reshoot......for DSLR...I suppose it doesn't show the picture you capture in your viewfinder? So you have to switch it back to the LCD screen mode to view the pics and decide if you wanna shoot again?
 

boroangel

New Member
Apr 23, 2005
431
0
0
#14
ricleo said:
Hi, in dpreview's review of the S9500, the camera's images for a studio scene comparison were compared to those of a DSLR (350D, not D50 though) at both their lowest iso and iso 1600. Just look at the following links to see what kind of advantage the bigger sensor size of a DSLR has.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms9000/page11.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms9000/page12.asp
Yup thanks I saw it. At high ISO, S9500 and the DSLR really no fight....but at low ISO seems quite ok especially considering that they mentioned a good lens was used for the 350. Did notice that slightly different aperture was used for the comparisons...
 

boroangel

New Member
Apr 23, 2005
431
0
0
#16
Ever since that Ben from AP let me touch the D50...initial reaction was that it was so much bigger than my S5500......but now its like kinda contagious.....keep thinking about it.....if shooting using the D50 kit lens gives better image quality and sharpness than S9500 then it will be very tempting since the S9500 cost almost 1K and the D50 is like $1200+ now...

PS: Next time just see dont touch...touch liao cannot resist hehe...
 

michhy

New Member
Oct 21, 2005
780
0
0
#17
boroangel said:
Yeah.......for prosumer straight after you use the viewfinder(if thats what its called) not the LD screen to view your object and shoot, the picture u captured will appear for like 1 second and u can decide roughly if its good enough or you haev to reshoot......for DSLR...I suppose it doesn't show the picture you capture in your viewfinder? So you have to switch it back to the LCD screen mode to view the pics and decide if you wanna shoot again?
Yes that. and also, dSLR do not allow you to compose a shot using the LCD.
You must die die use the little viewfinder peep-hole to compose photos.
 

#18
boroangel said:
Ever since that Ben from AP let me touch the D50...initial reaction was that it was so much bigger than my S5500......but now its like kinda contagious.....keep thinking about it.....if shooting using the D50 kit lens gives better image quality and sharpness than S9500 then it will be very tempting since the S9500 cost almost 1K and the D50 is like $1200+ now...

PS: Next time just see dont touch...touch liao cannot resist hehe...
Know the feeling, ,...;p :heart:

Go for the D50, but don't forget, you need the 55-200mm/18-200mm lens for longer zoom, SB-800 for better flash, tripods for stable shots, etc. Will definitely cost more than the initial $1200, but I think it is worth it, cause the satisfaction of control and seeing the photos you take. Not that the Prosumer cameras photos are no good. many good photographer can produce outstanding photos using P&S too.

I was using the CP5700 before the D50 was launched. found it too slow in focusing. Manual focus was extremely tough to use, battery life extremely short, with the heavy use of LCD.

No regrets for me with getting the D50, SB800....etc
 

#19
michhy said:
Yes that. and also, dSLR do not allow you to compose a shot using the LCD.
You must die die use the little viewfinder peep-hole to compose photos.
Why is there a need for composition using LCD? No doubt easier, but with practise and experience, composing a shot with VF is not that difficult.

Composition starts even before you point the camera at the subject...;)
 

michhy

New Member
Oct 21, 2005
780
0
0
#20
nikkie said:
layman reasons:

1.DLSR has proper complementing flash system. can go shoot at events and TFP/CD/N/S without looking too much like a wannabe. heh...
2.has reason to go look/buy better lens, spend more money.
3.faster, bigger, better, clearer. don't doubt this one. (otherwise so many serious hobbists/pros use SLR for what?)
4.has proper reason to use a big tripod on the streets.
5.won't be mistaken for a tourist on the streets.
6.can approach girls on the streets and ask to take photos of them and deliver to them by email or call them out again.

guess, don't even need to go into the technicalities.... you are already convinced right?
1. wannabe of what?
2. agree, spend spend! :thumbsup:
3. agree again. definately better quality. :thumbsup:
4. tripod for show off? :nono:
5. i like being mistaken as a tourist :bsmilie: shoot without worry police or sec guards
6. err... :sweat:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom