"Helmsman3" wrote in message
...
On 15 Nov 2007 09:03:18 -0800, Bill Tuthill wrote:

Arguments over relative merits of DSLR vs P&S digicams
occupy a plurality of current traffic volume on r.p.d.

In many ways it reminds me of the film vs digital debate
of the last many years.

DSLR partisans seem like the defenders of film, because
they don't have a lot of firm evidence that their workflow
is superior, except at high ISO or some arcane usage.

I know DSLRs are selling well, but do these flame wars
indicate the beginning of the end?

Pretty much.

Let us for a moment presume there is a sealed-lens/sensor design that
doesn't
allow in any dust. Takes images in absolute silence. The lens range is a
full
180-degree fish-eye to an extremely long zoom, all with either an aperture
or
sensor ISO high enough to capture even the most difficult of hand-held
situations in any settings.

Pie in the sky. You will never see such a lens.


The body is of a titanium shell for extreme
durability. Few moving parts allows operation in deep sub-zero
environments. Let
us also presume that the electronic viewfinder (LCD and EVF) is high
resolution
enough that its display, feedback, and articulation abilities far exceed
anything that has been implemented so far, optically or otherwise. Lets
also
presume that these P&S camera designers also had the foresight to include
the
options of shooting in the IR and UV portions of the spectrum too. This of
course is dependent on an EVF system because no optical viewfinder in the
world
can accomplish this. Oh what the heck, while we're at it throw in high
quality
video and CD quality stereo sound recording too so you don't even need
your
camcorder as an accessory anymore. Why not.

Why not indeed. Why not "while we're at it" put flapping wings on the thing
as well, so it can just fly out the window and take pictures on its own,
without intruding on your daydreams?


Poof! There goes any need for the cumbersome lens interchangeability,
size,
weight, noise, dust, high-cost, focal-plane shutter limitations,
inaccurate and
dim OVF, and all the other drawbacks to using any DSLR.

Surprisingly I've already found all of these conditions met in only 2 P&S
cameras (minus the UV capability and a slightly higher resolution EVF)
with only
2 inexpensive, small, and light-weight adapter lenses. I've already had
thousands of photos published with this combo. Not one person yet can tell
that
they were done with P&S gear. A whole kit of 1 camera + 2 lenses fitting
into
one large pocket. If these two P&S camera's features were combined nobody
would
think twice about buying a DSLR. I certainly never do.

guffaw!

Please stop. You're getting coffee on my monitor screen.


So yes, the advancements of the P&S camera are definitely the death-knell
to the
DSLR. [ . . . ]

I'm afraid you have it all bass-ackwards. DSLRs have come down in price to
the point that they are pushing high-end compact cameras (I despise the
silly term "P&S") completely out of the market.

I'm sorry to see the "prosumer" level compacts go, but going they are. I
still love my Nikon Coolpix 8400 and 8800, and they will in fact do some
things that my DSLRs will not. But much as I love 'em, they cannot compare
with my Nikon D80 or even my entry-level D40 as far as overall capability is
concerned. It's unlikely we will ever again see Nikon make a camera like the
8800. DSLRs are where it's at, as the saying goes, and will only continue to
gain ascendancy over the remaining compacts.

It's analogous to the SLR vs. RF situation in the 1950s. In those days most
people bought rangefinder cameras because they couldn't afford SLRs, of
which there were relatively few anyway. But within a decade or so the SLR
was killing the RF in the marketplace as far as buyers serious about
photography were concerned. Sure, they still kept making RFs, and some nice
ones too, and when auto-everything came along the little cameras got a new
lease on life -- but they had by then given up even trying to compete with
SLRs as far as serious stuff went. And they never again became competitive
at the higher level.

So it is with digital. They'll keep making compacts (and I love 'em, I'll
keep buying 'em along with DSLRs) but except for the occasional niche
camera, which by definition will be of extremely limited appeal, compact
cameras just aren't going to be taken as seriously as they used to be. What
you'll see in the coming years will be the continued migration of
manufacturers currently making high-end compacts, to making DSLRs.

Neil