I think I finally understand why dSLRs sell to moms

[Hertz van Rental]

That is where the difference is. In the photography hobby sense you can say the pictures are going to be the same crappy pictures. But in the my-kid's-birthday-party snapshot memory sense, they are going to get better pictures even using auto mode simply because any dSLR, beginner or high end, is going to have a better result. The flash is going to be more powerful, the fact that ISO 200 or above is garbage on a P&S where a dSLR will still have acceptable noise at much higher ISO, the focus is going to be much faster, the low light of birthday parties much better, and the overall image sharpness much better. For a snapshooter and capture of memories, a dSLR is going to produce a better result of image quality regardless of artistic quality.

'Better pictures' and 'better image quality' are not interchangeable expressions although you appear to be using them as such here.
A 'good' image may be improved by better technical quality (though not always) but improving the technical quality of a boring image will not make it any more interesting.
Photography is, after all, about more than just whether the image is sharp or not (or it should be).
At the end of the day the 'quality' of the camera is not what makes the picture. It's all down to the person using it. To be sure, a 'quality' camera can make the job easier but a good photographer who knows what they are doing and what they want will always take better pictures even using a cheap point-and-click than someone who hasn't a clue using a Hasselblad :mrgreen:

 

[KD5NRH]

What happened to AF-assist lamps? Even my older P&Ss tend to have one good for ten feet or so, and my S2IS has been accused of pre-blinding people without the flash.

OTOH, I've always wondered why, when AF-assist gets nothing, the darn camera (including a lot of SLRs) couldn't just assume focus at infinity and no flash. (since if the AF-assist doesn't illuminate anything, it's unlikely that the flash will either -manual flash settings should override this, of course)

 

[stsinner]

The fact is, no matter how you use a particular camera, a dSLR camera is going to have a better quality outcome than a P&S.

Not true.

 

[mrodgers]

'Better pictures' and 'better image quality' are not interchangeable expressions although you appear to be using them as such here.
A 'good' image may be improved by better technical quality (though not always) but improving the technical quality of a boring image will not make it any more interesting.
Photography is, after all, about more than just whether the image is sharp or not (or it should be).
At the end of the day the 'quality' of the camera is not what makes the picture. It's all down to the person using it. To be sure, a 'quality' camera can make the job easier but a good photographer who knows what they are doing and what they want will always take better pictures even using a cheap point-and-click than someone who hasn't a clue using a Hasselblad :mrgreen:

I wasn't talking art or photography here. I'm talking parents taking snapshots of their kids playing ball or in the school play. The thought of what a good photograph is or isn't in the sense of the artistic quality has no meaning here. A blurry snapshot of the kids playing baseball from a point and shoot or a sharp image of the kids playing baseball with a dSLR is the issue. Photography or art has nothing to do with it.

 

[KD5NRH]

Not true.

Precisely; I could leave my DSLR on auto & ISO3200, and do a terrible job compared to some of the shots I've gotten with a P&S.

 

[stsinner]

Precisely; I could leave my DSLR on auto & ISO3200, and do a terrible job compared to some of the shots I've gotten with a P&S.

That's not what I meant. I'll even let you adjust your DSLR (with a standard lens-the statement made was a blanket statement, and it's simply not true) and my Canon Powershot A620 will rival it in every aspect. Sure, DSLR's have attachments available to them which will make them superior, such as L lenses, bigger flashes, etc, but to say that any DSLR will take better pictures than any P&S is simply not true. My Canon takes great pictures.

I also don't understand the lack of AF ability. Maybe this is where price and getting what you pay for comes in, not the fact that the cameras were P&S. Here are two pictures of my son taken IN THE DARK on the ocean with my Canon Powershot:

Of course we're not talking about the pro DSLR's like the 5D MKII. I'm talking about a standard DSLR. They may outshoot the $100 Kodak Eash Shares, but not every P&S.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

A blurry snapshot of the kids playing baseball from a point and shoot or a sharp image of the kids playing baseball with a dSLR is the issue.

You're missing the point.
You can get a blurry snapshot just as easily with a dSLR. In fact, if you don't know what you are doing it's more likely to occur than with a P'n'S.
With simple cameras there is less to go wrong. Auto focus, auto exposure, auto flash and even shake reduction (my pocket digital even has a setting that only lets it take a picture when everyone is smiling ) take care of just about everything. With a dSLR there are a lot of things you can get wrong - unless you put everything on automatic - and then you have to seriously wonder why you have bought a dSLR if you are going to use it as a point and click.
As for the 'good' picture thing.
Snapshots are every bit a part of photography as pretentious 'art' photos - and I would go so far as to say a more important part.
Besides I wasn't talking about 'art' when I made my comments.
Each type of photography has it's own set of criteria that determine whether a picture is 'good' or not. The requirements of an 'art' image are different to the requirements of a snapshot.
The latter is usually taken on the spur of the moment and under difficult conditions with very little time to think about things like exposure and focus. Under such conditions a good point and click will leave a dSLR standing.
Can you operate a dSLR with one hand and without looking through the viewfinder whilst holding a burger and a beer in the other hand? I regularly take pictures like that using my Olympus mju or my Ixus and it often means the difference between getting a shot and getting nothing.
The important thing to remember about snapshots is that they are not 'art'. As long as people are reasonably in focus, mostly in frame and recognisable then it's a good snapshot.
Of course if you are going to go for the posed family portrait then by all means use the dSLR. But for a lot of other occasions you will do far better to leave it at home and use the digital 'instamatic'.
Part of being a good photographer it being able to select the right equipment for the job

 

[Overread]

Hetz I agree with what you say - I definatly feel out of sorts at times with family when I have my huge DSLR and it does get in the way - plus they don't want to wait for me to change lenses
but

and then you have to seriously wonder why you have bought a dSLR if you are going to use it as a point and click

I recall someone here saying that they had just spent god knows how much on a DSLR and could not understand why they should start to use manual modes - the thought was that the auto modes of a bigger and far more expensive camera should be better than those of the point and shoot. This (at the moment) is just not true and DSLRs are mostly safe from having 101 different auto shooting modes - however you can't have failed to see that this is now an expectation of new DSLR owners and the manufacturerss are responding in kind to it. Not with things like liveview and liveview recording - I see those are more evolutions of the digial sensor use - but mor things like "happy face" mode and adding more preset settings to lower end DSLRs.

 

[mrodgers]

You're missing the point.
You can get a blurry snapshot just as easily with a dSLR. In fact, if you don't know what you are doing it's more likely to occur than with a P'n'S.
With simple cameras there is less to go wrong. Auto focus, auto exposure, auto flash and even shake reduction (my pocket digital even has a setting that only lets it take a picture when everyone is smiling ) take care of just about everything. With a dSLR there are a lot of things you can get wrong - unless you put everything on automatic - and then you have to seriously wonder why you have bought a dSLR if you are going to use it as a point and click.

Exactly. As my example that I've mentioned times before, I have a Fuji S5700, which you would call a superzoom, bridge camera, advanced P&S, there are many names people call this type of camera. I use it in full manual and I am learning things about photography by being here and on other sites around the net. On the other hand, my coworker bought a $1500 package of XTi and stuff on ebay the same week I got my Fuji. He uses his as a point and shoot, in full automatic with auto settings, auto ISO, auto focus, auto flash, auto redeye reduction, auto everything. If I handed him my camera and put it into full automatic, they would essentially be shooting identical, everything automatic. If he takes the same snaps all fully in auto mode, his camera is going to be better every time. Just because it is a dSLR, doesn't mean that it has to be shot in manual modes. It is every bit as automatic as mine or any other P&S.

Can you operate a dSLR with one hand and without looking through the viewfinder whilst holding a burger and a beer in the other hand? I regularly take pictures like that using my Olympus mju or my Ixus and it often means the difference between getting a shot and getting nothing.
The important thing to remember about snapshots is that they are not 'art'. As long as people are reasonably in focus, mostly in frame and recognisable then it's a good snapshot.

After playing around with some in the store with the kit lenses attached, I think the answer to that is yes. I picked up the Canon XS and was surprised at how light it was. Actually, it felt like a light plastic POS in my hands in my opinion, comparable to my Fuji. The difference is, I expect that from my $200 Fuji. I don't expect it from a $600 dSLR. I played around with buttons and hit the center one and bingo, the view went to the screen. Thus, you certainly could operate a dSLR with one hand without looking through the viewfinder while holding a burger in the other.

 

[Overread]

I think Doenoe operates his DSLR single handed for macro work! - a canon 100mm macro (if my memory works) is his lens.
The other hand has the flash these days

 

[Garbz]

I also don't understand the lack of AF ability.

You have the Porche of point and shoot cameras. I guarantee my sister's 3 month old P&S will not get those photos of your son on the beach in focus. a) because it has no focusing light, and b) because the algorithm is crap.

Not all P&S cameras are made equal.

I'm staying out of the rest of the comments.

 

[KD5NRH]

Hetz I agree with what you say - I definatly feel out of sorts at times with family when I have my huge DSLR and it does get in the way - plus they don't want to wait for me to change lenses

Just keep a 1500mm on there, and you'll be too far away to hear them whining :greenpbl:

DSLRs are mostly safe from having 101 different auto shooting modes

I suspect you're just not looking very hard; I can't tell you - without looking - how many auto modes there are on my DSLR, since I use precisely two of them, ("Auto" and "Auto -no flash" when I just can't keep up with what's going on and decide to let creativity suffer a bit to get the shots at all) but I know there's a portrait and a landscape and some others. Probably just as many as are on either of my P&Ss. I can think of capabilities I'd rather have, but IMO, having positions on the dial that I don't use really isn't hurting anything as long as I don't bump it to one of them without realizing it.