P & S cameras

On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 18:01:25 +0000, michaelk wrote:

I own a P&S and an SLR, each has its uses. Recently I could'nt help but
see all these threads that revolve around the question of which type of
camera is "better". Personally I do not see that this is a question
that has any sense as the two types of camera are designed for different
uses. Anyway, has anyone any idea why the pro P&S posters tend to be so
bizarre and quite frankly not quite right in the head, as witnessed by
their somewhat hysterical postings. I am amazed at the emotion,
derision, contempt and even hatred they are able to put in their
postings. Its creepy and fascinating at the same time.
Any opinions anyone? I mean rational opinions, not insults etc. And no
comments on the merits of P/S vs SLR!

It's a bit like the "film vs digital" wars. Quite obviously each has it's
place. I'm willing to grant that ultimately a DSLR may actually take
'better' pictures than a P&S. But, quite frankly, I don't want to pack
thirty pounds of camera gear when I'm out hiking, bicycling or showshoeing.

In article , TaylorSchmidt
wrote:

There is nothing wrong with a P&S if it suits the purpose. However a
DSLR suits a much broader set of purposes

You apparently have a very limited view of the needs of the professional
photographer.

look at all those p&s cameras at the sidelines of ball games and the
olympics. look at all those p&s cameras used for weddings. look at
all those p&s cameras used for portrait and fashion photography.

oh wait. they're all dslrs.

ray wrote:

It's a bit like the "film vs digital" wars. Quite obviously each has it's
place. I'm willing to grant that ultimately a DSLR may actually take
'better' pictures than a P&S. But, quite frankly, I don't want to pack
thirty pounds of camera gear when I'm out hiking, bicycling or showshoeing.

That's quite an exaggeration. The Canon XSi weighs 17 ounces. The Canon
EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens weighs 21 ounces (and there are a lot
lighter lenses as well). These aren't the lightest D-SLRs and lenses
either. You can easily keep it under 3 pounds, an order of magnitude
less than 30 pounds. The real issue that is that it's a lot bulkier.

The Canon G10 weighs 14 ounces. Start adding lens adapters for telephoto
and wide angle, and extension tubes, and you aren't saving much in terms
of weight and volume and you're adding a lot of hassle and getting very
inferior results.

I carry a P&S while bicycling or nordic skiing, but often I'll take the
D-SLR hiking. There's a lot of shots you can't get with a P&S. I was
down at Natural Bridges State Park in Santa Cruz to see the Monarch
butterflies, and a P&S would have been just a joke to try to get any
decent shots using multiple tele-converters. In fact I really wanted one
of those Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM lenses, but it's not in the budget.

P&S cameras are great for "snapshots."

wrote:

I'm wondering wether P&S cameras are going to become a lot less popular
after Xmas. I notice how SLRs are getting cheaper all the time and mobile
phones with built in cameras are getting better all the time. There is a
growing squeeze on the P&S market at the moment and I think sales of these
cameras may have peaked in the last year or so.

It's true that with the free-fall in D-SLR prices, D-SLR sales volumes
are growing at a much faster rate than P&S sales. P&S cameras have
almost reached market saturation, and sales are more for replacements
than first time buyers.

On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:21:15 -0800, nospam wrote:

In article , DaveD
wrote:

Then someone comes along and proves them all wrong.
All that money and supposedly-superior thinking, all gone to waste.

yep, that's what i just did.

You left out the cost of all those lenses that would be needed to have the
equivalent focal-length reach of an inexpensive ($500) super-zoom P&S camera,
not to mention that the aperture available at those longer focal-lengths that
can *never* be attained by the DLSR fan-troll.

kit lenses have comparable or wider range than many p&s (which often
don't go as wide without extra lenses).

Yep, you missed the "prove" point.

Try again.

Read this again, this might enlighten your ignorance:

it's mostly bogus.

1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.)

dslrs can go from 4.5mm to 5200mm before any converters are added into
the mix, and neither system is seamless.


You left off the aperture available, do show your experience with real-world
needs. Thanks.

2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
DSLR glass in existence.

but the smaller sensor is inherently noisier so it's moot.

3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
sensor cameras

absolutely false. all things being equal, a larger sensor will have a
larger dynamic range and lower noise than a smaller sensor. this is
basic physics.

Yes, just stick you fingers in your ears and hum a tune to block out all those
nasty effects of reality. That'll help you in your career.



4. P&S cameras are cost efficient.

they can be, it all depends on the task.

5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient.

yes, they are.

6. P&S cameras are silent.

some dslrs have a silent mode. it's also not generally an issue.

Oh? You mean the "silent" mode where you can't see a thing through the
viewfinder while that annoying and slow mirror is locked out of the way? Yes,
that's a wonderful feature. :-) But you can't get around the "silence" of that
archaic focal-plane shutter. Are you deaf?



7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them,

big deal, it just duplicates functionality that's often included in a
dslr.


LOL! Now I know for a fact that you are nothing but a low-life troll. If you
only knew....



8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second.

very few people use 1/8000th, nevermind faster.

Yes, those that don't know how to do photography that nobody else has ever done
before. That be someone like you. It must be boring duplicating what everyone
else has done before, isn't it. But then, that's how much creativity that you
have and profess by your comment.


9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including
shutter-speeds
of 1/40,000th of a second.

some dslrs can sync at any shutter speed, notably the nikon d50 and d70.

Sure they can. But as proven in the comments that you snipped, those "faster"
shutter speeds are really no faster than the x-sync speed of those focal-plane
shutters. You do know how focal-plane shutters work, don't you?


10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
limitations.

it's *extremely* rare that it's an issue.

Oh, of course, with your limited perception and not realizing that bird's wings
are not unnaturally curved that way, how could you know? These distorted views
that your focal-plane shutter have given you are all that you know about
reality. Your ignorance is forgiven.


11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're
not
worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
shots),

that's why they make super-zooms, and on a p&s, one would have to add
or remove accessory lenses.

Oh? You mean like you have to do with EVERY focal-length change on a DSLR? My,
what a drawback. Claiming this is a drawback only proves that owning a DSLR is
the worst drawback of all.



12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash.

for the same image quality, depth of field is the same regardless of
sensor size.


You must be joking. Have you NO clue about optics and reality? Don't bother to
answer. Your comment here is proof enough.


13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo
audio
recordings,

so do dslrs.

Really? You mean those newer ones that are attempting to duplicate all the
advanced features of P&S cameras that P&S camera owners have enjoyed having at
their fingertips for the last decade? It's about time you DSLR idiots were able
to enjoy the vast benefits of P&S camera owners.

Oh, but do clarify one thing. Just which DSLR is it that has CD quality stereo
audio recordings? I seem to have missed that in any mfg's. specs.



14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
image.

some dslrs do. it's not really a big deal since images are generally
cropped afterwards anyway. film cameras never had 100% coverage, nor
was it important since the film gate or slide mount cropped a little.


Now I know that you don't know what you are talking about. Not ONE dslr has 100%
viewfinder representation in their OVF viewfinder. Please provide a link to such
a fact. :-)


15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light

not as well as a dslr's phase detect autofocus system.

Excuse me? Just how on earth is a phase detection AF system going to auto-focus
on something that it can't detect? My my my, you DSLR trolls will invent
anything, won't you.

:-)



16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it
away

that's rarely an issue and not everyone shoots wildlife anyway.

Oh, but I heard that the only reason to obtain a DSLR is its superiority to
shoot wildlife. Are you now claiming all those fools are in error? They're going
to verbally attack you now, you know this, don't you.

LOL



17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately.

false.

Apparently you've never taken ONE bit of photography that scientists require. Do
continue to express your ignorance.



18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is
recorded.

but they have longer focus acquisition times.

Ah, then you've failed to comprehend how anyone that depends on auto-focus from
ANY camera will lose more award-winning shots in their lifetime than a real pro
who would never depend on some idiot camera manufacturer programmer to decide
what to focus on for them.

You reveal so much about your sub-amateur status.


19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately
relay
the camera's shutter-speed in real-time.

so what? an experienced photographer knows what the results will look
like.

Great. Let me know what a fly's wing-beat will look like in that hand-held
in-flight shot will look like in your final photo.

What's that you say? You can't even focus on a fly in flight, hand-held, with a
DSLR? And that's because of the small apertures that you have to depend on for
enough DOF with image destroying flash? Okay. I understand. You've never used
the superior P&S cameras for this purpose. Don't feel bad.



20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of
its

bokeh depends on the lens, not the camera type.


No **** Sherlock. Isn't that exactly what was stated? Read fully before
replying.


21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
just as much resolution as any DSLR camera.

totally false.

Poor pitiful you. You'll never understand what REAL pros use daily, and how they
accomplish those award winning photos.


Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
and ISO64 film all their lives.
They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
go above ISO400 without noise.

and technology has advanced since then. why restrict oneself to iso
400 when iso 3200 is very, very good?

I've never said that high ISOs were helpful. I only said they weren't needed in
the hands of a real pro using a P&S camera. Can't you follow?


22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
determine the quality of your photography.

nobody said it did. and just as an expensive camera doesn't result in
a better picture (although it does open up opportunities), a cheaper
camera isn't necessarily better either.


Ah, he's finally starting to realize what "talent" means, even if it is outside
the realm of his reality.


24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag,
hoping
that you'll lug it around again some day.

that is true, but in many situations, the extra weight isn't an issue.

25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent.

so is a large dog.

It was a minor attribute of owning a camera, but an important one--to anyone
that travels. Which, apparently, you've never done in your pathetic
basement-living life.

"SMS" wrote in message I carry a P&S while
bicycling or nordic skiing, but often I'll take the
D-SLR hiking. There's a lot of shots you can't get with a P&S. I was down
at Natural Bridges State Park in Santa Cruz to see the Monarch
butterflies, and a P&S would have been just a joke to try to get any
decent shots using multiple tele-converters. In fact I really wanted one
of those Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM lenses, but it's not in the budget.

P&S cameras are great for "snapshots."

I also do a lot of outdoor activity. I'm used to lugging enourmous rucksacks
so carrying an SLR with a number of lens is not so bad for me. I rarely use
my G9. However, if I am on a seriously strenous trip I will take the D80
with say a 12-24mm or 80-400mm lens plus the G9 and a tripod. On these
occasions the G9 has turned out some amazing macro shots of flowers and
plants. Mainly though, I carry it in case I trash the SLR.

"SMS" wrote in message
...
wrote:

I'm wondering wether P&S cameras are going to become a lot less popular
after Xmas. I notice how SLRs are getting cheaper all the time and
mobile phones with built in cameras are getting better all the time.
There is a growing squeeze on the P&S market at the moment and I think
sales of these cameras may have peaked in the last year or so.

It's true that with the free-fall in D-SLR prices, D-SLR sales volumes are
growing at a much faster rate than P&S sales. P&S cameras have almost
reached market saturation, and sales are more for replacements than first
time buyers.

Do you see the camera phone making a dent in the P&S market? I briefly
caught sight of an ad for an 8MP camera phone the other day! Hang on a
minute, I'll just get my list of 25 reasons why the camera phone is best :-)

wrote in message
...
I own a P&S and an SLR, each has its uses. Recently I could'nt help but
see all these threads that revolve around the question of which type of
camera is "better". Personally I do not see that this is a question that
has any sense as the two types of camera are designed for different uses.
Anyway, has anyone any idea why the pro P&S posters tend to be so bizarre
and quite frankly not quite right in the head, as witnessed by their
somewhat hysterical postings. I am amazed at the emotion, derision,
contempt and even hatred they are able to put in their postings. Its
creepy and fascinating at the same time.
Any opinions anyone? I mean rational opinions, not insults etc. And no
comments on the merits of P/S vs SLR!

I won't even attemp to get into the P & S versus DSLR discussion.

It isn't really a discussion at all because there is only 1 person posting
the same over long list of what he considers proofs of the superiority of P
& S Cameras for every possible function. He claims to be a professional
photographer but will never post any images, or specify which equipment he
uses.

I think that in order to get a reasonable explanation of why he is waging
this one man war, you would need to visit
rec. physchiatric.digital.

I just hope he never links up with the MI5 Troll.

Roy G

In article , TheEducator
wrote:

9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including
shutter-speeds
of 1/40,000th of a second.

some dslrs can sync at any shutter speed, notably the nikon d50 and d70.

Sure they can. But as proven in the comments that you snipped, those "faster"
shutter speeds are really no faster than the x-sync speed of those focal-plane
shutters. You do know how focal-plane shutters work, don't you?

they absolutely are faster than the x-sync speed.

12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep
DOF
required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash.

for the same image quality, depth of field is the same regardless of
sensor size.

You must be joking. Have you NO clue about optics and reality? Don't bother to
answer. Your comment here is proof enough.

i'm not joking at all. smaller sensors are inherently noisier and
require a larger aperture for the same image quality. there's no free
lunch.

Now I know that you don't know what you are talking about. Not ONE dslr has
100%
viewfinder representation in their OVF viewfinder. Please provide a link to
such
a fact. :-)

nikon d3:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3/page2.asp

15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light

not as well as a dslr's phase detect autofocus system.

Excuse me? Just how on earth is a phase detection AF system going to
auto-focus
on something that it can't detect? My my my, you DSLR trolls will invent
anything, won't you.

it's more sensitive at lower light levels.

wrote in message
...
I own a P&S and an SLR, each has its uses. Recently I could'nt help but
see all these threads that revolve around the question of which type of
camera is "better". Personally I do not see that this is a question that
has any sense as the two types of camera are designed for different uses.
Anyway, has anyone any idea why the pro P&S posters tend to be so bizarre
and quite frankly not quite right in the head, as witnessed by their
somewhat hysterical postings. I am amazed at the emotion, derision,
contempt and even hatred they are able to put in their postings. Its
creepy and fascinating at the same time.
Any opinions anyone? I mean rational opinions, not insults etc. And no
comments on the merits of P/S vs SLR!

Just use the camera that's best suited for the job. To imply that one type
is universally better than the other is, well, kinda stupid.