TO THE BEGINNERS

[Kegger]

I understood what he was trying to say perfectly... But maybe it's cuz I speak "Joe".

And I actually understood his initial argument. I think all he's trying to say is that you shouldn't bash someone's photography based on the type of camera it was taken with.

 

[tsaraleksi]

Agree with the points in your post, by what about this image makes capturing it with a P&S impossible?

With the smaller sensors on point and shoot cameras, combined with the fact that there are not interchangeable lenses, you couldn't get the shallow depth of field in such a scene.

 

[tirediron]

With the smaller sensors on point and shoot cameras, combined with the fact that there are not interchangeable lenses, you couldn't get the shallow depth of field in such a scene.

You might not be able to duplicate in from exactly the same position, but I would submit that you probably could come up with very similar image using a P&S and a little effort.

 

[TBAM]

I understood what he was trying to say perfectly... But maybe it's cuz I speak "Joe".

And I actually understood his initial argument. I think all he's trying to say is that you shouldn't bash someone's photography based on the type of camera it was taken with.

I don't know how you came to that conclusion. Noone's bashing anyone's photography based on what camera you use.

He's saying that people who are surprised that you can get good photos out of a snapshot camera are stupid.

He's saying that people who purchase dSLR cameras when they don't even know how to use their snapshot cameras are stupid.

He's saying that you don't need an SLR to take good photos (which is true). However he also says that given the same circumstance, you can take just as good a photo with a snapshot as you can an SLR.

That he uses his Fuji s700 as much if not more than his d40.

He's saying that snapshot photos blow SLR's out of the water.

He's saying that people only look at the cost and label of a camera.

He's saying that it's the eye, the timing and settings that make a good photo.

Some of the above points, noone is arguing. It's him calling people stupid for either being surprised at the quality of snapshot photos, or purchasing SLR cameras before mastering a polaroid camera, as well as his attitude that people have a problem with.

Then it is people subsequently arguing that intrinsicly an SLR will output better quality photos than a snapshot camera.

None of the above, has got anything to do with people bagging someone because of the camera they use. If it has any relation, it's the OP bagging SLR users, saying he is better than they are with a "snapshot" camera, when he is essentially imitating what an SLR does anyway.

As for the wedding photo, I'm with tsaraleski, I would say getting that depth of field natively from the camera would be nigh on impossible from that distance, and without any PP in photoshop (from a snapshot camera, or even an SLR-like camera for that matter unless the in-built lens had quite a low aperture. Which is the point tsaraleksi is making, that ultimately that picture would be impossible without the appropriate lens, which is only available to SLR cameras)

 

[tsaraleksi]

You might not be able to duplicate in from exactly the same position, but I would submit that you probably could come up with very similar image using a P&S and a little effort.

Perhaps, but probably not, not without photoshopping the background. My general point is that it's much more difficult to get shallow depth of field with a point and shoot or even bridge camera than it is with an SLR. This is because the sensor is much smaller in even a high-end all-in-one (I think this is a better general term than "point and shoot") than in an SLR camera. Considering that even my 1.6x crop sensor camera can't do DoF this shallow, I'd say it's a fair claim to make that no, you could not replicate the shot with an S5IS. Perhaps I didn't pick the best example, so I'll throw up a different one to make my point. I'm not sure why there is so much argumentation on the idea that it is difficult if not impossible to achieve low depth of field on an 'all-in-one,' it has nothing to do with the ability to set an aperture manually or anything like that, it is only an artifact of the size of the sensor.

This was shot at 85mm, f/2.0. If someone can show me a shot with similar settings and apearance done with a point and shoot, then I'll admit there is something to the other side of the argument. I was not 'tearing down' others or anything like that, and I'm a bit puzzled why some seem so eager to take offense.

 

[maulrat]

Hey, what happened to the OP? I haven't heard a peep out of him in a long time.

 

[manaheim]

Hey, what happened to the OP? I haven't heard a peep out of him in a long time.

His work here, was done... he created a flame war and is sitting back reading and laughing his head off.

 

[paxye]

I don't think that he liked the responses to his other thread either...
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=141936

 

[Amber_Cullen]

Yep, I've seen some awesome shots taken with PnS, I plan on getting one so when I go places I don't have to lug my big one around...

BUT dslr's have advantages over point and shoots, which is why so many people want them

 

[Dionysus]

he has a problem w/ the word "since". From his website and his postings "since" is always written as "sense"

 

[Village Idiot]

Basic P&S cameras are crap. You can take good pictures with them but a knowledgable photographer will be able to take a better quality picture with a modern DSLR and a quality lens. Give me a $300 Canon P&S and I guarantee that I couldn't take it to the local road course and use it for panning shots of motorcycles. They generally don't have the capabilities and flexibility of a DSLR. Plus the sensors are tiny.

Sizing for web and showing off doesn't count. View full resolution and you'll be able to see the difference, even with the DSLR shooting in RAW mode.

Bridge cameras can take pictures that look as good as photos from a modern DSLR with a quality lens, just minus the image quality. David Hobby of Strobist.com shoots with a G9 on occasion. It has a hot shot. He uses wireless flash. It's also 9mp or so. Basically unless you viewed the exif or the full sized full resolution file, then you'd never be able to tell the difference.

 

[ksmattfish]

I may not be a fan of compact digitals, but check out this $500 digital compact vs. $40,000 digital medium format shoot out.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

Most of my complaints with compacts have to do with the tiny sensors; in particular poor quality at ISO 400+. Once Canon or Nikon introduces an APS format compact it'll never leave my side.

 

[Village Idiot]

Some one just posted that. Blow both images up to 30"x45" and then compare. Why spend $40,000 on a 40mp digital medium format camera just to shrink the images to 800x533.

And besides, those images don't look very good. I've seen smaller images from that Hasselblad that you can pretty much pick out as MF work.

 

[Mystwalker]

i guess none of you know what a point n shoot is capable of... Ive taken and seen MANY point n shoot pics that blow SLR pics out of the water. its the eye, the time, and the settings, not just the label and cost of a camera.. you guys will soon learn that.. People are to quick to go out and buy a 2k camera when they havent even mastered a polaroid..

moral of this post when i see post saying (wow thats a nice shot cant believe its from a PnS) you look stupid to me...

Thanks..

What you say is true, BUT very misleading.

In your hands, can you take a better picture with PnS or with SLR?
Assuming you are not a pro ... in hands of pro, will better picture come from PnS or with SLR?

I'm a newb and I can tell you, I can get more out of DSLR's green box mode (auto) then I can ever get out of PnS.

Do you have to "master" go-kart, Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, BMW (or whatever hierarchy you have in mind) before you are allowed to buy a Lamborghini?

 

[UtahsRebel]

My general point is that it's much more difficult to get shallow depth of field with a point and shoot

Ok, I'm probably going to open myself up for something I'm not ready for but, this was taken with a Canon A560 and I think I have done OK with the DOF.