I know that may sound stupid BUT...

mentos_007 · May 4, 2005

... I just want to know your point of view. As some of you know, last time I'm walking around and checking prizes of DSLRs. Actually I noticed two cameras that interest me (Nikon d50 or Canon 350d). they cost more less $900 (+$100 for a kit). Then... ok... let's imagine I buy one of those cameras (nevermind which one) and then if I need a zoom I have to buy a tele-lens or something like 70-300 mm and that costs again. Then if I want to shoot macro I need another lens (so extra costs). BUT on the other hand, the market is full of, I'd say, combo cameras like for example Fuji s7000 Zoom (I know it's quite old camera) but: it has the same resolution as Nikon d50, it has "built in" macro mode, huge zoom, but only one not-changed lens (so lower further costs). So my question is... why to buy DSLRs ???

Thanks in advance for replies, and sorry if this kind of question was already asked here, but now I completely don't know what to do and how much ca$$ I'll need.

MDowdey · May 4, 2005

well for me mentos, the sensor on the DSLR is way bigger, so you get better color, and crisper more defined pics.
hope that helps a little...

md

thebeginning · May 4, 2005

good question, i once thought the same thing. they also dont have the features that dSLRs do (if i remember correctly). dSLRs can get filters, a wide array of different lenses, and have better 'expandability'. If you ever decide to go get a more expensive dSLR, provided you are getting the same brand, you will already have lenses, and they also can get add-on flash systems. and the sensor is much bigger, as MD said. my big beef about non SLR's: no manual focus.

Big Mike · May 4, 2005

I hear you...some of those small digi-cams can do a lot of things that would cost quite a bit to do with a DSLR.

As Matt said, sensor size is the important difference. That means better quality in terms of color, noise (especially at higher ISO), resolution. You will get much better photos from a 6MP DSLR than an 8MP digi-cam.

Another big factor is flexibility. I know that you can't afford to buy all of the different lenses that you would want...but at least you would have that option in the future. And lenses will hold their value and can be used on different cameras. Once you buy a digi-cam...you are stuck with it and the lens that is attached to it.

Yet another big factor is shutter lag. Most digi-cams are quite slow to actually record the photo after you press the button. That is terrible for sports, action or people photos. Start-up time is usually faster with the newer DSLRs too.

mentos_007 · May 4, 2005

no manual focus

well actually I found some of them that have manual focus, also as a ring on the lens (fuji s7000) or by pressing buttons (fuji s5000).

I didn't know about difference in sensor and all those ISO questions, and I also didn't know about colour differences between dSLRs and digi-cams

Big Mike, you mentioned the delay between pressing the button and capturing the shot. So how it is with dSLRs? they don't have any delay??

Sergiozal · May 4, 2005

I own a Canon A-70 3.2MP non SLR camera, it is wonderful what you can do with it, and its resolution is enough for prints with 20x25cm.
It has a complete manual mode as well, and I have some attachments, a 2x zoom, a .75 wide angle and close-ups lenses, you can see for some of my posts (or clicking in my signature's link) that the big problem is always the photographer than the camera itself

.
But there are limitations, I want true macro lenses and I am not able to do everything I want, for macroshots for example the smaller aperture is only f/8 limiting my DOF, for 1:1 magnification the lens get only 25mm from the subject, what is terrible if you want to shoot some insect, or picture a shiny subject without have the reflection of the lenses, (and your own face reflected on it)
ISO speeds are 50-400 which shold be enough for most pictures, but when using 200 or 400 the noise is very strong.
There is also some limitations regarding the use of external flashes.
The luminance of the lenses is also limiting, and so on.
If you want to do a professional job you will have to go to DSLR, otherwise the good compacts are a good choice. As always, you need to know exactly what you need before buy it.

Ant · May 4, 2005

Unless you really are short of cash I'd definitely recommend a DSLR. Those all-in-one camera lenses aren't that great, you notice the difference if you've used both. You'll get chromatic aberration at long zoom. You also won't be able to use DOF very well. Because they've got such short focal lengths their DOF is huge, even wide open. My Olympus C750 has as large a DOF at f2.8 as my D70 with a 70-80mm lens at f11.

Sigma make a 70-300mm zoom with Macro for about £150, and it's pretty good too, so you don't really have to spend a fortune on lenses if you don't want to.

If you're still interested in an all-in-one zoom camera though let me know. I don't use my Olympus at all any more and you can have it for the cost of P&P. At least you'll have something to use until you get your DSLR

SLOShooter · May 4, 2005

The quality from a do-it-all lens is not going to be as high as that from a right-for-your-needs lens. There is a reason why the pros shot with SLR's and it's because they need that extra quality. If you don't, then maybe saving the cash and getting a more all-purpose type of system is better for you.

K_Duffer · May 4, 2005

Besides better lenses, bigger sensor, more flexibility, better performance in low light situations (I agree with what everyone said above), here is one more thing to consider:

Even if a P&S camera has some of the manual control features of a dSLR, I find it difficult to use on the fly as the controls are not built in an efficient manner. For example, I have a Sony P&S which allows me to have some minimal control over the aperature, but (1) the controls for changing the aperature is awkward at best and (2) you have to set the matching shutter speed manually (why they don't have aperature priority is beyond me). On my d70, I can just change aperature, shutter speed, or whatever I need on the fly, quickly. In fact, I just got my d70 yesterday but I was up and shooting as soon as the batteries charged. Granted, I've owned a film Nikon SLR before, but with my Sony P&S, even though I've had it for over a year now, I find it not as intuitive to deal with the controls.

catweh00 · May 4, 2005

Oh my goodness! There is no delay on the dSLRs!!! It's awesome. My d70 shoots faster than my n75 film. It's great. I cannot imagine going from a dSLR back to a P/S digicam. I used a Canon A95 the other day. My finger felt like it was frozen in time as I was waiting for the picture to take. Whew, it was bad.

Regular digicams are great until you try a dSLR. They are just completely different--of course, bigger and heavier as well.

The thing I truly love about dSLRs--lenses and their lifetime value. You will change camera bodies over the year(s) as new technology comes out. So you get screwed with digicams because the technology is out so quickly and you can't trade in. I have 8 great nikkor lenses--and the best part is, I can use them forever! My d70 will last me awhile (I hope and pray). But after that, when I newer, much cheaper and highre performing nikon dSLR comes out, I'll jump all over it (in like 10 years).

And my lenses will work well. It's all about buying into a system, and once youre in that system, its not a big deal to change bodies after several years--your lenses retain their value and they still do what they are supposed to do.

CRaig

mentos_007 · May 5, 2005

If you're still interested in an all-in-one zoom camera though let me know. I don't use my Olympus at all any more and you can have it for the cost of P&P. At least you'll have something to use until you get your DSLR

thanks Ant, but I'm still using my s5000 so I'm not in pursuit of a next non-dslr camera

thanks for your replies

I'm definitely going for dSLR now

but still I can't decide which one

catweh00 · May 6, 2005

Well, now get out and try them in your hands. Especially the nikon d70 and Canon Rebel XT. I purchased the d70 after feeling both in my hands. I am a man, though, and my hands may be (hopefully, for my sake) bigger than yours. I did not like the petite size of either Rebel. I took pictures with both and I feel they are the same, image quality wise out-of-the-box. I'd be surprised if anyone thought that either one was "oh so much better" than the other.

It came down to feel for me (and old nikkor glass, which I have some great ones--ebay is awesome!), and I chose the d70.

I would stick to either Nikon or Canon, even though other cameras are great, simply because they have a wealth of lenses and products geared towards their two lines. I love nikon's wireless ittl flash system too, so if you do a lot with flash, that might appeal to you.

Take care, and remember, now you are buying into a "system," so think about all the accessories, not just the camera body you'll use for the next 3-5 years or so. And since you may have very little (or nothing) in either brand, you can build up your system, one piece at a time (its cheaper that way, but not cheap, haha).

Good luck, and have fun,
CRaig

DocFrankenstein · May 6, 2005

Good for you.

The bokeh on a DSLR is way better than that of a digicam. Compare blur that zenit's helios 58/2 can give you and what a digicam can... the difference is amazing. Now imagine the bokeh on 85/1.4 which gives you REALLY shallow depth of field.

Lenses... I know it costs more money, but then you have the lenses "forever" and you can use them with the next body... You'll be able to use them with an AF body of the same system too. And good lens hold their value.

What else? Pretty much everything is better... You can use your M42 lenses on 350D too with an adapter. Don't know if you can use them on a nikon.

Oh yeah... you actually have a viewfinder...

And even though it costs more, you don't need ALL of the lenses to try different stuff. For macro, you can reverse the 50mm prime... For tele the 70-300 is a cheap option...

But if you go DSLR, then prepare yourself to post process your images. Especially if you shoot RAW, you'll need at least a 1.5 ghz computer and some knowlegde of software...

But you'll be able to print 16*20 with almost unnoticeable pixelation.

Good luck