point n shoot? slr?

To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

There is no real reason I need to know this, its just merely out of
curiousity because in my experience the media tend to talk about either
point and shoot or slr cameras.

"Beck" wrote in message
...
To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

There is no real reason I need to know this, its just merely out of
curiousity because in my experience the media tend to talk about either
point and shoot or slr cameras.


I must say that I consider the 'Point & Shoot' variety to be much more
versatile. The one I have has a tilting screen and can be used like an SLR
and a TLR, very useful when close to the ground or taking candid group
pictures, I use a black cloth in bright light (the one I used to use with my
5x4) They are also very quiet little machines.

But see;
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/mul...id=7-6468-7844
very interesting.

Jem

-------------------------------------
Birmingham Independent Photographers
http://bip.wikispaces.com/

"Jem Raid" wrote in message
...

I must say that I consider the 'Point & Shoot' variety to be much more
versatile. The one I have has a tilting screen and can be used like an SLR
and a TLR, very useful when close to the ground or taking candid group
pictures, I use a black cloth in bright light (the one I used to use with
my 5x4) They are also very quiet little machines.

But see;
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/mul...id=7-6468-7844
very interesting.

That is a fascinating site, thankyou for showing it to me. It also goes to
show that a photographers skills can outweigh a cameras features. Its all
very well having the most expensive up to date SLR, but if someone (like me)
who has no idea on how to set the camera for certain conditions, then an SLR
can be pretty useless.

"Beck" wrote in message ...
To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

There is no real reason I need to know this, its just merely out of
curiousity because in my experience the media tend to talk about either
point and shoot or slr cameras.

The gap between the two gets smaller every year. E.g. Sony's R1
released last November has a huge SLR-type CMOS sensor, but is
a fixed lens P&S (although no movie mode, a feature found on virtually
all P&S cameras today).

The distinction between SLR's and P&S's is evolving more into a
difference of image quality rather than a difference of lens type or
features. Manufacturers are concentrating on stuffing more and more
MP onto smaller and smaller sensors in P&S cameras, a trend that's
both unfortunate and entirely unnecessary. So if you can live with
relatively mediocre image quality, cameras such as the Canon S2 IS
(soon to be S3 IS), Fuji's S5500Z etc have some pretty incredible
feature sets.

"Mark M" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Beck" wrote in message
...
To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is
not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

There is no real reason I need to know this, its just merely out of
curiousity because in my experience the media tend to talk about either
point and shoot or slr cameras.

The gap between the two gets smaller every year. E.g. Sony's R1
released last November has a huge SLR-type CMOS sensor, but is
a fixed lens P&S (although no movie mode, a feature found on virtually
all P&S cameras today).

The distinction between SLR's and P&S's is evolving more into a
difference of image quality rather than a difference of lens type or
features. Manufacturers are concentrating on stuffing more and more
MP onto smaller and smaller sensors in P&S cameras, a trend that's
both unfortunate and entirely unnecessary. So if you can live with
relatively mediocre image quality, cameras such as the Canon S2 IS
(soon to be S3 IS), Fuji's S5500Z etc have some pretty incredible
feature sets.

I do have the Fuji S5500 and I quite like it although my skills in
photography leave alot to be desired. That is my own fault and not the
fault of the camera probably :-)
I have had it a year and still don't know how to use it properly, I only
just found the manual focus :-/
I am sure SLRs would be of exceptional picture quality and at the end of the
day people get what they pay for.

A low end Pentax or Minolta/Konica/Sony, are not that much more than
your 5500, and not much bigger. I believe (I'll be corrected I'm sure)
they both have prism view finders rather than the mirror viewfinders
Canon and Nikon have. Their lenses are well received on these two. My
holy grail is to have the 5K the digital Leica M will cost. If you have
$3500 you can get the Epson rangefinder with a Cosina lens. How Cosina
can make decent lenses for their range finder cameras and terrible
lenses for SLRs is beyond me.

Tom

"Beck" wrote in message
...
To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

There is no real reason I need to know this, its just merely out of
curiousity because in my experience the media tend to talk about either
point and shoot or slr cameras.


Steves digicams is a good place to see the same picture from many different
cameras. He goes out and takes pictures with each camera he reviews and he
always makes one image of a particular building, these can be downloaded,
printed off and compared. I was quite startled when I did a few for
comparison purposes. At a normal viewing distance say standing with a 9" x
6"print on a table the difference between a reasonable 3 megapixel camera
and a 6 megapixel digital SLR was .. nothing.

Jem

----------------------------------------------
Dramatised - Photography Granularised - Photographs
Black and White - Prints Blue and White - Cyanotypes
http://jemraid.wikispaces.com/

"Jem Raid" wrote in message
...

Steves digicams is a good place to see the same picture from many
different cameras. He goes out and takes pictures with each camera he
reviews and he always makes one image of a particular building, these can
be downloaded, printed off and compared. I was quite startled when I did a
few for comparison purposes. At a normal viewing distance say standing
with a 9" x 6"print on a table the difference between a reasonable 3
megapixel camera and a 6 megapixel digital SLR was .. nothing.

Spooky Jem, I am just reading that site. Checking out the review for my
camera. Quite a positive review.
Its a good site actually, I should visit it more. I need to get my skills
up though and learn things more :-)

"Jem Raid" wrote in message ...

"Beck" wrote in message
...
To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

There is no real reason I need to know this, its just merely out of
curiousity because in my experience the media tend to talk about either
point and shoot or slr cameras.


Steves digicams is a good place to see the same picture from many different
cameras. He goes out and takes pictures with each camera he reviews and he
always makes one image of a particular building, these can be downloaded,
printed off and compared. I was quite startled when I did a few for
comparison purposes. At a normal viewing distance say standing with a 9" x
6"print on a table the difference between a reasonable 3 megapixel camera
and a 6 megapixel digital SLR was .. nothing.

That's misleading. E.g. try comparing images at ISO 800 and
get back to us.. :-)

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:19:02 +0100, Beck wrote:

To me, a point and shoot camera has always been of the small pocketable
type that have barely any manual controls and maybe a few set scenes.

SLR would be a camera type (apart from being single lens reflex) that has
full manual controls aswell as auto.

I am curious as to what the middle cameras would be? You know like for
example the Fuji S5500 that has a full range of manual controls but is not
an SLR. Would that still be classed as a point and shoot camera?

I think that the original definition of a point and shoot camera
was a simple film camera that had few controls and was designed
primarily for simplicity and low cost. It evolved to include most
smaller, non-DSLR cameras, although some of the more versatile ones
are tagged as ZLRs. I also have a Fuji S5500 (although on my side
of the pond it's called an S5100). I don't mind calling it a P&S,
although its many controls it's more of a P&P (point and putter).
To further muddy the waters, I'd say that anyone experienced and
talented enough with a DSLR to be able to take good photos rapidly,
even if occasionally making adjustments while shooting, and
seemingly doing it instinctively, without thinking, can be said to
be a Point-and-Shooter. But a very, very good one. g