Prosumer vs. DLSR thoughts

To date, I have really not been very impressed with the price/performance of
DSLRs.
I tend to like the "prosumer" cameras, especially becuase of integral
lenses - my Minolta A1 lens goes and far and wide (the latter is more
important to me) than I've ever needed it to, and wedding the lens and
camera/sensor design seems to have advantages, especially with respect to
size/weight. Until recently buying a "professional" DSLR probably meant
having no built-in flash (great for "emergencies", if nothing else) and also
meant that not all of the light coming though the lens actually fell on the
sensor, while the consumer cams make use of all their leight -- how
riduculous and what a waste of expensive glass! Seems to me you'd have to be
crazy to buy one of those unless you had a significant investmet in lenses
you couldn't do without, or you needed super-fast shot speeds. I'm glad to
see that these things are changing. (Who says a "professional" would't want
the convenience of a built-in flash - if even to ratio in to a more complex
setup.)

It seems to me a 20D with the wider IS lens stuck on there for life (well,
most of the time...) is just what the doctor ordered for me. (The A1/A2 also
has image stabilizaiton.) It still is bit bigger to carry around, but that's
life. I was pretty convinced to make this purchase when I noticed at a
wedding that half of my shots were not taken with the viewfinder, but using
the display, with the camera held above my head or down at waist-level, as
I've also done with previous digicams. (This not only allows for dramatic
shots, but ones you just can't get otherwise. All my great kids shots were
taken while sitting down stealthely using the angled display.) Even for
normal-height shots, this is a welcome repreive from sticking my nose in the
camera. Realizing that I'm going to pay $2500 and loose a major feature is a
real let-down. Does anyone else miss this? (I shot film SLRs for years,
but never had waist-level finder or a larger format display back - I guess
you don't miss it until you have it.)

Why can't I simply press a button on the 20D that will lock-up the mirror
and open the shutter letting me use the display as a viewfinder? Sure it'll
take longer when I press the shutter-release to reset them, expose the shot,
and lock them open again (actually, the mirror could stay where it is), but
I'd be willing to make that tradeoff when I wanted to.

As for the A1, I'm really happy with it, although it occasionally misses a
no-brainer focusing assignment, something they've apparently improved in the
A2.

thanks,
mike

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:42:01 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

To date, I have really not been very impressed with the price/performance of
DSLRs.

Really? the performance of a good DSLR blows any P&S camera out of
the water.

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.
No need to dimishinsh P&S's - a full-blwn DSLR has a Program mode (well most
do), and many "P&S" are as advanced and flexible if not more so then their
big-brothers in many respects. (Of course, they're probably slower in
focusing, buffering, and everything else.)
I still stand (from my own, limited, experience) that DSLR's for
non-specialized use are not worth their price and heft.
I'm not sure it's fair to call the current crop of 8MP cameras from Canon,
Minolta, Sony, etc., point-and-shoot just just because they may not have
removable lenses.
Then again, maybe point-and-shoot is preferrable to
get-camera-out-of-big-bag-and-find-a-lens-and-twiddle-some-stuff-and-point-and-shoot

(Just razzing ya...)

"YAG-ART" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:42:01 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

To date, I have really not been very impressed with the price/performance
of
DSLRs.

Really? the performance of a good DSLR blows any P&S camera out of
the water.

Mike writes:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.

Goodness may be hard to define, but on every realistic basis when results are
tabulated, P&S loses because goodness is easy to measure once defined. I've
lost a good many shots of higher speed action because of fuzzy focusing, missed
focusing in manual because who the HELL can tell what is in focus or not with
an EVF, lost all sorts of low light shots. My DSLR gives me faster, cleaner
results with fewer false focuses and fewer lost shots because of a scrambled
egg EVF (none, of course, because the viewfinder is purely optical).

For your non-specialized use, a DSLR may be overkill and overspending. For me,
it was just overspending, but something I am happy I overspent on. And that's
not to particularly knock the P&S and the prosumer cameras I had before it.

I don't think anyone is calling that latest 8 MP point and shoot cameras, but I
do know at least one person who is changing from a prosumer 8 MP to a digital,
probably a 20D, shortly.

Do you know of anyone going the other direction?

Charlie Self
"It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of
common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever
ineligible for public office." H. L. Mencken

Well, devil-advocating aside, your right-on with all your points.
The whole post originated becuase I'm probably getting the 20D as well.
I was just bitching that I'll lose the really useful (to me anyway) feature
of being able to compose via the display when I need to - seeing it seems
technically possible with an SLR if you beam split or lock up the mirror.
I guess one size never fits all, and I'll need a 20D and a small P&S...

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...
Mike writes:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X
price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.

Goodness may be hard to define, but on every realistic basis when results
are
tabulated, P&S loses because goodness is easy to measure once defined.
I've
lost a good many shots of higher speed action because of fuzzy focusing,
missed
focusing in manual because who the HELL can tell what is in focus or not
with
an EVF, lost all sorts of low light shots. My DSLR gives me faster,
cleaner
results with fewer false focuses and fewer lost shots because of a
scrambled
egg EVF (none, of course, because the viewfinder is purely optical).

For your non-specialized use, a DSLR may be overkill and overspending. For
me,
it was just overspending, but something I am happy I overspent on. And
that's
not to particularly knock the P&S and the prosumer cameras I had before
it.

I don't think anyone is calling that latest 8 MP point and shoot cameras,
but I
do know at least one person who is changing from a prosumer 8 MP to a
digital,
probably a 20D, shortly.

Do you know of anyone going the other direction?

Charlie Self
"It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of
common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever
ineligible for public office." H. L. Mencken

Well, devil-advocating aside, your right-on with all your points.
The whole post originated becuase I'm probably getting the 20D as well.
I was just bitching that I'll lose the really useful (to me anyway) feature
of being able to compose via the display when I need to - seeing it seems
technically possible with an SLR if you beam split or lock up the mirror.
I guess one size never fits all, and I'll need a 20D and a small P&S...

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...
Mike writes:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X
price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.

Goodness may be hard to define, but on every realistic basis when results
are
tabulated, P&S loses because goodness is easy to measure once defined.
I've
lost a good many shots of higher speed action because of fuzzy focusing,
missed
focusing in manual because who the HELL can tell what is in focus or not
with
an EVF, lost all sorts of low light shots. My DSLR gives me faster,
cleaner
results with fewer false focuses and fewer lost shots because of a
scrambled
egg EVF (none, of course, because the viewfinder is purely optical).

For your non-specialized use, a DSLR may be overkill and overspending. For
me,
it was just overspending, but something I am happy I overspent on. And
that's
not to particularly knock the P&S and the prosumer cameras I had before
it.

I don't think anyone is calling that latest 8 MP point and shoot cameras,
but I
do know at least one person who is changing from a prosumer 8 MP to a
digital,
probably a 20D, shortly.

Do you know of anyone going the other direction?

Charlie Self
"It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of
common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever
ineligible for public office." H. L. Mencken

Its a lot more tha 2x "goodness" more like 1000x "goodness" at 10x
price

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:24:17 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.
No need to dimishinsh P&S's - a full-blwn DSLR has a Program mode (well most
do), and many "P&S" are as advanced and flexible if not more so then their
big-brothers in many respects. (Of course, they're probably slower in
focusing, buffering, and everything else.)
I still stand (from my own, limited, experience) that DSLR's for
non-specialized use are not worth their price and heft.
I'm not sure it's fair to call the current crop of 8MP cameras from Canon,
Minolta, Sony, etc., point-and-shoot just just because they may not have
removable lenses.
Then again, maybe point-and-shoot is preferrable to
get-camera-out-of-big-bag-and-find-a-lens-and-twiddle-some-stuff-and-point-and-shoot

(Just razzing ya...)

"YAG-ART" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:42:01 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

To date, I have really not been very impressed with the price/performance
of
DSLRs.

Really? the performance of a good DSLR blows any P&S camera out of
the water.

Its a lot more tha 2x "goodness" more like 1000x "goodness" at 10x
price

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:24:17 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.
No need to dimishinsh P&S's - a full-blwn DSLR has a Program mode (well most
do), and many "P&S" are as advanced and flexible if not more so then their
big-brothers in many respects. (Of course, they're probably slower in
focusing, buffering, and everything else.)
I still stand (from my own, limited, experience) that DSLR's for
non-specialized use are not worth their price and heft.
I'm not sure it's fair to call the current crop of 8MP cameras from Canon,
Minolta, Sony, etc., point-and-shoot just just because they may not have
removable lenses.
Then again, maybe point-and-shoot is preferrable to
get-camera-out-of-big-bag-and-find-a-lens-and-twiddle-some-stuff-and-point-and-shoot

(Just razzing ya...)

"YAG-ART" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:42:01 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

To date, I have really not been very impressed with the price/performance
of
DSLRs.

Really? the performance of a good DSLR blows any P&S camera out of
the water.

Why would you want to compose via the LCD anyway?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:58:27 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

Well, devil-advocating aside, your right-on with all your points.
The whole post originated becuase I'm probably getting the 20D as well.
I was just bitching that I'll lose the really useful (to me anyway) feature
of being able to compose via the display when I need to - seeing it seems
technically possible with an SLR if you beam split or lock up the mirror.
I guess one size never fits all, and I'll need a 20D and a small P&S...

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...
Mike writes:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X
price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.

Goodness may be hard to define, but on every realistic basis when results
are
tabulated, P&S loses because goodness is easy to measure once defined.
I've
lost a good many shots of higher speed action because of fuzzy focusing,
missed
focusing in manual because who the HELL can tell what is in focus or not
with
an EVF, lost all sorts of low light shots. My DSLR gives me faster,
cleaner
results with fewer false focuses and fewer lost shots because of a
scrambled
egg EVF (none, of course, because the viewfinder is purely optical).

For your non-specialized use, a DSLR may be overkill and overspending. For
me,
it was just overspending, but something I am happy I overspent on. And
that's
not to particularly knock the P&S and the prosumer cameras I had before
it.

I don't think anyone is calling that latest 8 MP point and shoot cameras,
but I
do know at least one person who is changing from a prosumer 8 MP to a
digital,
probably a 20D, shortly.

Do you know of anyone going the other direction?

Charlie Self
"It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of
common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever
ineligible for public office." H. L. Mencken

Why would you want to compose via the LCD anyway?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:58:27 GMT, "Mike" wrote:

Well, devil-advocating aside, your right-on with all your points.
The whole post originated becuase I'm probably getting the 20D as well.
I was just bitching that I'll lose the really useful (to me anyway) feature
of being able to compose via the display when I need to - seeing it seems
technically possible with an SLR if you beam split or lock up the mirror.
I guess one size never fits all, and I'll need a 20D and a small P&S...

"Charlie Self" wrote in message
...
Mike writes:

Well, I said price/perf, not just perf. E.g., (2 X "goodness" / 10 X
price)
would not be good trade-off for most users. (If you don't care about the
denominator, that's whole different story.) Of course, goodness is hard to
measure, but still I beleive this to be true.

Goodness may be hard to define, but on every realistic basis when results
are
tabulated, P&S loses because goodness is easy to measure once defined.
I've
lost a good many shots of higher speed action because of fuzzy focusing,
missed
focusing in manual because who the HELL can tell what is in focus or not
with
an EVF, lost all sorts of low light shots. My DSLR gives me faster,
cleaner
results with fewer false focuses and fewer lost shots because of a
scrambled
egg EVF (none, of course, because the viewfinder is purely optical).

For your non-specialized use, a DSLR may be overkill and overspending. For
me,
it was just overspending, but something I am happy I overspent on. And
that's
not to particularly knock the P&S and the prosumer cameras I had before
it.

I don't think anyone is calling that latest 8 MP point and shoot cameras,
but I
do know at least one person who is changing from a prosumer 8 MP to a
digital,
probably a 20D, shortly.

Do you know of anyone going the other direction?

Charlie Self
"It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of
common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever
ineligible for public office." H. L. Mencken