Travel Technology - Slightly OT: Advantages of DSLR over Point and Shoot?

Moderators, feel free to kick this down to Omni should it be too OT for Travel Tech.....

Anyway, I almost bought my first DSLR in the sales today (come to think of it, I also almost bought a MacBook to go with it :)) but thankfully, the shop had sold out and will not get more stock until tomorrow; thereby giving me a nice cooling off period.

So, other than the interchangeable lenses (excellent way to spend arm+leg IMHO), what are the advantages of current generation DSLRs over the best point and shoot cameras? Other than bulk, are there any significant disadvantages I should be aware of?

I've been getting more into my photography recently; probably because of the amount of travel I've done over the last year. My current point and shooter is a Panasonic DMC-LX2 and in spite of its failings (it's a noisy beast at higher ISO) I'm very much in love with it.

Incidentally, the DSLR I'm thinking of getting is the Nikon D40....

The main advantages of a DSLR, in addition to interchangeable lenses of all sorts, are:
1) physically larger sensor for the same number of pixels. This means that each pixel sensor is larger, resulting in better overall performance and expecially better performance at higher ISO levels. Even a 6MP DSLR will produce better images than a 10MP point and shoot. Better colors, contrast, etc.
2) No shutter lag. Once you're focused, press the button and the picture is taken. In "motor drive" mode, hold the button down and take shots as fast as the shutter can operate, up to the limit of your particular camera (mine is limited to only 4, but its a first generation Canon Rebel 300, technology has gotten better). New point and shoots are much better than older ones, but they still can't match DSLRs.
3) Better battery life. Because the battery is only used to take pictures, and you look thru an optical (unpowered) viewfinder to frame shots, battery life is generally 500-1000 shots depending on the camera.

Personally, I got a DSLR because I was sick of shutter lag when taking pics of my kids, but I love the other advantages as well. The big downside is the size/weight, especially when I have a telephoto lens hanging off it, but in my opinion it's worth the tradeoff.

dpreview.com is (IMHO) the best site on the web for reviews and info on all sorts of digital cameras, so you may want to check for more info there.

Bob


Moderators, feel free to kick this down to Omni should it be too OT for Travel Tech.....

Anyway, I almost bought my first DSLR in the sales today (come to think of it, I also almost bought a MacBook to go with it :)) but thankfully, the shop had sold out and will not get more stock until tomorrow; thereby giving me a nice cooling off period.

So, other than the interchangeable lenses (excellent way to spend arm+leg IMHO), what are the advantages of current generation DSLRs over the best point and shoot cameras? Other than bulk, are there any significant disadvantages I should be aware of?

I've been getting more into my photography recently; probably because of the amount of travel I've done over the last year. My current point and shooter is a Panasonic DMC-LX2 and in spite of its failings (it's a noisy beast at higher ISO) I'm very much in love with it.

Incidentally, the DSLR I'm thinking of getting is the Nikon D40....

Very good advice from bpratt. Those were all factors in my switching from a P&S, and I love my Nikon D70.

The D40 is getting good reviews, as are the D80 and D200, depending on your price range.

DSLR: much better pictures in large auditoriums/rooms, which is why I bought one during the Thanksgiving sales. (I need to take conference/convention pictures a few times a year.)

Three immediate advantages come to mind:

- Instant on. No waiting .5-3secs for the camera to power up
- No shutter lag
- Ability to adjust depth of field.

In addition to the good information provided above, I find that the creative control provided by a DSLR is a huge differentiator. Due to the sensor size and related optics, it's nearly impossible to provide anything but an infinite depth-of-field with a P&S camera. Selective focus, blurring the background to make your subject stand out, bokeh, whatever you want to call it, is a necessity once you want to get beyond snapshot/document-the-moment type of photography.

Many other creative control options - second curtain synch, pure manual control, etc., are also a difference. And you've identified that low light/high-ISO is an area of great difference - the sensitivity and dynamic range of larger pixels is just a fact of physics.

Of course, most of these capabilities are for folks who want to get a bit more serious about photography. Not 1DsMkII, 600/4L serious (12K, body and 1 lens), but enough to learn what aperture proiority, hyperfocal distances, dragging the shutter, etc., mean, how to use them, and the results they provide.

P&S's have come a long way and are good for 90%+ of the population. I borrowed a Canon S2 IS P&S for the Super Bowl and got some very respectable shots.

And there are many places other than lenses to spend money once you get a DSLR...

Some excellent summaries above. I would only add that it is important to realize that all of the different advantages are bundled together in a DSLR. You can get aspects of all of them except the interchangeable lenses with some point and shoots, but you dont get ALL of them with any point and shoot. The result is something vastly more flexible than any point and shoot.

I just took about 4000 pictures with a DSLR. Im guessing that more than half were taken with either aperature priority or full manual exposure rather than a programmed P&S type exposure. Also, due to brush and things in the way I had to restrict the focus point manually to get good focus. Both may be possible on some point and shoots but not easy on many. Also I shot from 100 ASA to 3200 ASA, again, not possible on most if any point and shoots. Of particular importance was the depth of field control and the ability to preview that in the viewfinder with the press of a button. Then of course there are the lens options.

Many thanks for the all the advice above. The D40 is selling like hot cakes here in the UK at the moment but I'll probably get my hands on one this afternoon if I can.

Just one more question: How do you carry these things around when traveling through airports? Is it normal to detach your camera from the lens to fit it into your hand luggage? I take it there is a cap of some sort to protect the lens mount/sensor from dust? I normally also have a laptop with me when traveling so I can see I need to get a bigger laptop case this weekend.

I guess these are questions for our European forum members as we now have super draconian hand luggage rules here in old Europe.

Many thanks for the all the advice above. The D40 is selling like hot cakes here in the UK at the moment but I'll probably get my hands on one this afternoon if I can.

Just one more question: How do you carry these things around when traveling through airports? Is it normal to detach your camera from the lens to fit it into your hand luggage? I take it there is a cap of some sort to protect the lens mount/sensor from dust? I normally also have a laptop with me when traveling so I can see I need to get a bigger laptop case this weekend.

I guess these are questions for our European forum members as we now have super draconian hand luggage rules here in old Europe.

It should come with a cap for the body and all lenses should come with a cap for both ends.

all these points are great, I would just roll them up and you have a sticky.

My highlights for DSLR over PoS are:
Speed, Speed, SPEED! This cannot be underweighted, it just makes the shot. Finally having the speed back, after eights years of pands was a relief.

Ability to adjust Shutter speed and aperture independanty, to get stop action or depth of field (or sharpness, which is VERY necessary with a DSLR)

More powerfull flash, or flash off the camera, ability to bounce flash, all are GOOD for better indoor and outdoor shooting with flash.

Ability to dynamically adjust ISO (yeah, most pands will do this, but the range of ACCEPTABLE ISO is not good on a PandS) with low noise impact is GREAT. I got shots INSIGHT the museum in Xian, that looked like they were shot with a flash, with very low noise.

Downsides:

It will take a bit of tiral and error to become adept at the settings, and how they are QUITE a bit differant than a regular SLR.

Need to do a bit of post processing in order to really get the shots you take, to pop and look beautiful. Yes, some of this can be done in camera, but I get FAR better results doing it with the computer.

If you have liked photography before, and have been using a pands, you will LOVE photography again, with a dslr and a bit of time to learn it.

One additional point regarding creative options for photographs. With the DSLR, you get the ability to use filters with the lenses. I'm not aware of any easy options regarding filters for point and shoot.

I'm sure someone is thinking "Do I need filters when I can just use photoshop?" My personal opinion is that on a basic level, the digital sensor is just another recording medium for the light. Looked at this way, I'd rather manipulate the light hitting the sensor rather then spend time in front of a computer. Also, the effects of a polarizer can't be simulated, and others are just easier to do up front (graduated neutral density). Those are my personal favorites as I'm partial to landscape photography, so you may not need them.

Once again, thanks. I am now the owner of a D40 kit (inc 18-55 lens) plus an additional Nikon 55-200mm lens (saving of £100 though I'm always dubious of such things). I've taken my first photos with it (all in auto mode and causing flash to fire indoors) and I think it might just be fun. The images I've taken so far look very good to my eye.

Just one thing: I'm used to composing pictures by looking at the large lcd screen on the back of the camera (yes, in spite of being 36 years of age, I'm very much a child of the digital age and have no real experience of film beyond Kodak instant cameras) so this looking down an optical view finder with one eye business is a bit different...

Also, in spite of being perhaps the smallest, lightest DSLR on the market when using the kit lens, this baby is now known in the Internaut household as "the beast".

Incidentally, Nikon have gone out of their way to make the transition from P&S to DSLR smooth:

http://www.nikondigitutor.com/eng/d40/index.shtml

Happy snapping everyone!

Regards
I

The only downside I find with a DSLR is the time required to process all those pictures you took......

DSLRs have much better viewfinders, with much more information in the viewfinder, than P&Ss. I don't like using a P&S lcd as a viewfinder, as it's harder to hold a camera steady unless it's pressed against your face with arms tucked in.

The major downside is size and weight. You might not carry a DSLR as much as a pocketable camera, and a camera you have with you will take a better picture than the camera you don't :)

The major downside is size and weight. You might not carry a DSLR as much as a pocketable camera, and a camera you have with you will take a better picture than the camera you don't :)
Hence the need for one of each.:)

I have a Canon SD600 for out-and-about unplanned shooting.

Once again, thanks. I am now the owner of a D40 kit (inc 18-55 lens) plus an additional Nikon 55-200mm lens (saving of £100 though I'm always dubious of such things). I've taken my first photos with it (all in auto mode and causing flash to fire indoors) and I think it might just be fun. The images I've taken so far look very good to my eye.

Just one thing: I'm used to composing pictures by looking at the large lcd screen on the back of the camera (yes, in spite of being 36 years of age, I'm very much a child of the digital age and have no real experience of film beyond Kodak instant cameras) so this looking down an optical view finder with one eye business is a bit different...



Welcome to DSLR world. The viewfinder thing is a common issue for a lot of people who are migrating from P&S cameras and the LCD screen. There are a couple of things you can do to make it more intuitive:

1) Proper grip technique. DSLRs are meant to be operated with both hands. Right hand obviously goes around the grip, with index finger manipulating the shutter, thumb operating any rear controls. Left hand should wrap the thumb and finger(s) (depending on what feels most comfortable) around the lens close-in to the camera body, with the bottom of the body resting on your hand. When you raise the camera to your eye, tuck in your elbows - they shouldn't be sticking out - my left elbow rests on my lower torso in shooting position. This should help steady the camera and naturally get it up close to your face.

2) Modify the viewfinder. Adds a few USD/GBP, but I think it's well worth it. There should be a little rubber eyecup around the viewfinder which you can slide off vertically - it's a friction-fit on the sides. If so, yours is like the D200/D70(s)/D50, and can be converted to a round eyecup with the following part:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=37445&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

Buy that item and the two suggested accessories on that page (the DK-3 eyecup and FM eyepiece). The larger eyecup makes it easier to block out outside light when using the finder, plus you're not pressing so much of your face up against the camera.

To your earlier question about body/lens caps, if for some unexpected reason your camera/lenses didn't come with them (which surprises me, as mine did), here's what you need:

Body cap:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=37163&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

Lens rear cap:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=37683&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

(If you can't tell, I'm partial to B&H Photo)

Generally, when I travel with my camera, I always have a lens attached. If your bag is getting bounced around, mounting a shorter lens on it will reduced the strain on the lens mount, but the 55-200 isn't really that big of a lens compared to something like a 300mm f/4 monster. You can further minimize the stress by carrying the camera with the lens pointed up or down.

Some good input, but keep this in mind. P&S cameras may have lots of megapixels, but the lenses usually aren't grade A. Buy GOOD lenses for your digital SLR and you'll be repaid many times over.

Michael

Some good input, but keep this in mind. P&S cameras may have lots of megapixels, but the lenses usually aren't grade A. Buy GOOD lenses for your digital SLR and you'll be repaid many times over.

Michael

Very good point. I started a thread a little over a year ago on what DSLR to buy. One thing that came out of that was to buy high end lenses. I was surprised at some of the examples showing Canon L lenses versus the standard Canon lenses. So I bit the bullet and bought all L lenses except for my 50mm and it really seems to make a difference. But they are pricey. Im assuming the same situation exists in the Nikon product line.

I am going to get a new P&S in the upcoming year though. Im really getting into photography more and just cant carry the DSLR as many places as I would like so I need something else. I'll fart around with my old Canon G1 for a bit but I think Imm going to go for one of the Leica D-Lux 3s in the upcoming year. Something I can always have in my briefcase because the DSLR just is tough always have around.

In addition to business, I also have a second career as a freelance photojournalist.

Lenses are where the camera companies make their money. It doesn't cost Canon $6500 to build a 400mm f2.8.. it does make for a sore back if you forget your monopod:D .

I've shot with Canon and Nikon. Both companies produce great optics. The more expensive L line in Canon is great product. AFS product in Nikon tends to be the better stuff.

As for the Leica, lets hope their financial situation is stable... They waited too long to jump on the digital bandwagon.

Michael


Very good point. I started a thread a little over a year ago on what DSLR to buy. One thing that came out of that was to buy high end lenses. I was surprised at some of the examples showing Canon L lenses versus the standard Canon lenses. So I bit the bullet and bought all L lenses except for my 50mm and it really seems to make a difference. But they are pricey. Im assuming the same situation exists in the Nikon product line.

I am going to get a new P&S in the upcoming year though. Im really getting into photography more and just cant carry the DSLR as many places as I would like so I need something else. I'll fart around with my old Canon G1 for a bit but I think Imm going to go for one of the Leica D-Lux 3s in the upcoming year. Something I can always have in my briefcase because the DSLR just is tough always have around.

Once again, many many thanks for all the great advice. It's been a grim day up north so I've amused myself by taking photos in a difficult environment (my bedroom - think messy dark place with yellow wallpaper and dark antique furniture). So far, I'm pleased with the results :).

I'll fart around with my old Canon G1 for a bit but I think Imm going to go for one of the Leica D-Lux 3s in the upcoming year. Something I can always have in my briefcase because the DSLR just is tough always have around.

Just a word of warning about the Leica: I bought the D-Lux 2 last summer. I was in India right when the fuss about the liquids started, and they made us check all our luggage. I put the Leica in its own case, wrapped it in clothes, and put it in my luggage. When I got home the LCD screen wasn't working, although it wasn't visibly broken. I contacted Leica, thinking the camera was still under warranty. They refused to fix the LCD screen, saying it isn't covered under the warranty. They want $300 to fix it. I've finally decided to pay the $300 because my India pictures came out so well, but I'm really annoyed at Leica. I've had many digital cameras over the years and they've bounced around in luggage and backpacks without incident. If you do buy the camera, you might want to buy an after market screen protector. On the other had, the Canon G7 looks awfully nice....


BTW, I'm also a fan of having more than one camera. My Digital Rebel XT takes terrific pictures, but I don't carry it around with me unless I anticipate needing it.

Just a word of warning about the Leica: I bought the D-Lux 2 last summer. I was in India right when the fuss about the liquids started, and they made us check all our luggage. I put the Leica in its own case, wrapped it in clothes, and put it in my luggage. When I got home the LCD screen wasn't working, although it wasn't visibly broken. I contacted Leica, thinking the camera was still under warranty. They refused to fix the LCD screen, saying it isn't covered under the warranty. They want $300 to fix it. I've finally decided to pay the $300 because my India pictures came out so well, but I'm really annoyed at Leica. I've had many digital cameras over the years and they've bounced around in luggage and backpacks without incident. If you do buy the camera, you might want to buy an after market screen protector. On the other had, the Canon G7 looks awfully nice....


BTW, I'm also a fan of having more than one camera. My Digital Rebel XT takes terrific pictures, but I don't carry it around with me unless I anticipate needing it.

Thanks for that info. Most places, like Amazon will sell an extended warranty. I hardly ever get on but maybe the Leica is an exception. I have one of the point and shoot 35mm Leicas that I loved. It took great photos for a point and shoot.

In addition to business, I also have a second career as a freelance photojournalist.



Can you give us a couple of paragraphs on how you got into that line of work? Also, what's your typical deal?

Thanks.

No DSLR experience here yet but I do own a decent film SLR.

As others have pointed out you get a great increase in flexibility. Instead of simply living with what the computer offers you, you can override it as you need to. The most common thing I find myself doing it taking the exposure and focus (it works together) on something like a properly-placed rock and then aiming at the real target. Even spot metering modes just don't seem to get backlit targets correctly. It's also nice when there is nothing for the auto-focus to lock onto where your target is, or there is something wrong to lock onto.

Also, as has been mentioned, filters. Anything done in postprocessing costs you a bit of quality, a filter on the camera doesn't. Also, photoshop has no polarizer--the polarization information isn't recorded and that's that.

You get far more glass in a SLR lens than in a P&S lens. This means a better image quality.

You can put whatever strobe you want on, or even use an off-camera strobe. This means you can get as much light as you need. I've taken flash shots from more than 100' away--try that with a P&S! Better flashes also can be aimed at the ceiling instead of at your target. That costs you a lot of light but it makes better pictures. Note that the farther the strobe is from the lens the less red-eye you get. Mount the flash on a grip and red-eye is all but unheard of. Also, sometimes you simply can't have the flash near the camera--try to take a picture into an aquarium!

Also, SLR's mean your equipment comes in pieces (camera, lenses, flash). That means you can upgrade one piece without having to replace everything.

Very good point. I started a thread a little over a year ago on what DSLR to buy. One thing that came out of that was to buy high end lenses. I was surprised at some of the examples showing Canon L lenses versus the standard Canon lenses. So I bit the bullet and bought all L lenses except for my 50mm and it really seems to make a difference. But they are pricey. Im assuming the same situation exists in the Nikon product line.


Nikon doesn't quite have an equivalent to the "L" line of Canon lenses. Look for lenses with a gold ring on them - that's usually an indication.

In the affordable price range, I can recommend the 50mm f/1.8 D Nikon lens. Under $100, sharp as they come. However, this is NOT an AF-S lens, so it will not autofocus on the D40. Nikon has two AF systems. AF-S has a focus motor located in the lens itself. These lenses usually have an auto/manual focus switch on the lens itself. Conventional AF uses a screw drive which has a connection point on the lens mount (at about the 7 o'clock position if you're looking at the camera from the front). The D40 does not have a screw drive motor in the body (part of what makes it cheaper). However, when using it as a manual focus lens, you should still get the green "focus confirmation" dot in the viewfinder.

The D70's kit lens (18-70 f/3.5-4.5) is also good in terms of bang for the buck. Should be available for under $300. I haven't seen samples from the new 18-135 kit lens for the D80.

If you're looking for a single-lens solution for everything, the 18-200 VR at $750 (if you can find one) is the way to go (it's the D200's kit lens). A little soft at 200mm, but still more than adequate for the advanced amateur (and even pros in wedding photography). About 90% of my shots on my D70s are with this lens.

For the big bucks, you're looking at lenses like the 12-24 f/4 for ultra wide angle, 17-55 f/2.8 for "normal" shots, 85mm f/1.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 VR for telephoto. The first three lenses sell for around $1000 each, and the last for about $1400.

Just a word of warning about the Leica: I bought the D-Lux 2 last summer. I was in India right when the fuss about the liquids started, and they made us check all our luggage. I put the Leica in its own case, wrapped it in clothes, and put it in my luggage. When I got home the LCD screen wasn't working, although it wasn't visibly broken. I contacted Leica, thinking the camera was still under warranty. They refused to fix the LCD screen, saying it isn't covered under the warranty. They want $300 to fix it. I've finally decided to pay the $300 because my India pictures came out so well, but I'm really annoyed at Leica. I've had many digital cameras over the years and they've bounced around in luggage and backpacks without incident. If you do buy the camera, you might want to buy an after market screen protector. On the other had, the Canon G7 looks awfully nice....

Unfortunately, unless you put the camera in a hard case before packing it into your main luggage, you run a fair risk of having it broken. Even if you do pack your camera in a hard case in your hard Samsonite check in luggage, it might still break due to the extremes of temperature!

BTW, you might have been able to get a brand new Panasonic version of the same camera for what Leica were charging you for the repair.

BTW, I'm also a fan of having more than one camera. My Digital Rebel XT takes terrific pictures, but I don't carry it around with me unless I anticipate needing it.

Absolutely! Oddly enough, I have no problem walking around a city I'm visiting with a large SLR around my neck. In my home town? No way! So, there will always be room in my life for a decent point and shoot camera.