DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

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. 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.

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.

So yes, the advancements of the P&S camera are definitely the death-knell to the
DSLR. Why would anyone need lens interchangeability if all those ranges,
precision, and capability were built into one dust-free sealed lens? Nobody
thought that an 18x high-quality zoom lens was even conceivable just a short 5
years ago. It's just foolish to duplicate in many parts what can be accomplished
with just one. Speaking of all-in-1 options, CHDK is clear proof of that. You
can do all the same things, and even more than, what was one time only possible
by tethering your camera to a bulky and energy-hog computer. Now you don't even
need the expense, bulk, travel limitations, and power-requirements of a computer
if your camera can run CHDK.

Lens interchangeability and the high-ISO performance are the *only* two thing to
which the DSLR advocates are still tentatively holding onto. And at what cost?
Dust problems? Noise? Camera shake from the mirror and shutter? Slow mechanical
shutter limitations? Bulk? Weight? Do I need to list all the drawbacks?

Ultra-zoom lenses are already making one of those "benefits"(?) obsolete. They
are grasping at straws now trying to hold onto the high-ISO performance. When
it's already been clearly shown that if your long-zoom P&S lens has enough
aperture then even that is not the holy-grail to owning a DSLR.

Yes, the DSLR *IS* going bye-bye. It's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of
"when". And to my findings the sooner the better. They're a waste of time, cost,
weight, materials, research, and labor. Based on a design that is half a century
old with all the same limitations that were inherent in that format from way
back then. The only ones still clamoring to wanting a DSLR appear to be those
more bent on status, peer pressure, and acceptance by those around them than
actually wanting to increase their chances at getting a decent photo. You know,
the ones who are still emotionally insecure, the ones that have to run with the
mindless herd for fear of getting lost.

The DSLR will have about the same fondness in 15 years as we do when looking
back on the flash-cube Instamatic from the late 60's with all its inherent
faults, drawbacks, and limitations. The phrase "I can't believe we put up with
those DSLRs back then," will be commonly heard.

In article , Helmsman3
wrote:

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. 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.

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.

and which two p&s cameras might those be?

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:46:03 -0800, nospam wrote:

In article , Helmsman3
wrote:

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. 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.

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.

and which two p&s cameras might those be?

One would think that a resident-troll like yourself with the experience of any
well-versed arm-chair photographer of your caliber would be able to figure it
out from the precise clues already supplied for you. Just figure out which
features belong to which two cameras.

Get to work!

You really need to start earning your resident-troll and arm-chair photographer
pay without someone always handing it to you for free all the time.

:-)

Helmsman3 wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:46:03 -0800, nospam wrote:

In article , Helmsman3
wrote:

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. 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.
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.
and which two p&s cameras might those be?

One would think that a resident-troll like yourself with the experience of any
well-versed arm-chair photographer of your caliber would be able to figure it
out from the precise clues already supplied for you. Just figure out which
features belong to which two cameras.
In other words - he hasn't worked it out yet either!

The 2 half-clues are CHDK - which is a basic toolkit for
some Canon cameras with Digic chipsets - and "18x", which at
this stage is available on the Oly SP550/560, Pana FZ18, and
the Fuji S8000. Considering the potential cameras, it makes
the trolls claims even more laughable.



Get to work!

You really need to start earning your resident-troll and arm-chair photographer
pay without someone always handing it to you for free all the time.

:-)

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:42:35 +1000, Doug Jewell
wrote:

Helmsman3 wrote:
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:46:03 -0800, nospam wrote:

In article , Helmsman3
wrote:

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. 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.
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.
and which two p&s cameras might those be?

One would think that a resident-troll like yourself with the experience of any
well-versed arm-chair photographer of your caliber would be able to figure it
out from the precise clues already supplied for you. Just figure out which
features belong to which two cameras.
In other words - he hasn't worked it out yet either!

The 2 half-clues are CHDK - which is a basic toolkit for
some Canon cameras with Digic chipsets -

Yes, CHDK was mentioned later on, but not in reference to the 2 above mentioned
cameras. Pay attention, resident-troll. How do you ever expect to be a better
troll if you can't even manipulate obvious data better than this?

and "18x", which at
this stage is available on the Oly SP550/560, Pana FZ18, and
the Fuji S8000.

Again, pay attention. An 18x zoom lens was mentioned in P&S camera's
capabilities but not in reference to the two cameras in question. Anyone reading
this thread can now see you making an obvious fool of yourself.

Considering the potential cameras, it makes
the trolls claims even more laughable.


Considering your pathetic resident-troll skills you're not even laughable, not
even mildly amusing. There's absolutely nothing interesting about you nor your
reply. A resident troll that's not even mildly interesting? Usenet's usual packs
of resident-trolls in every group are just not what they used to be anymore.



Get to work!

You really need to start earning your resident-troll and arm-chair photographer
pay without someone always handing it to you for free all the time.

:-)

"Helmsman3" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:46:03 -0800, nospam wrote:

In article , Helmsman3
wrote:

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. 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.

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.

and which two p&s cameras might those be?

One would think that a resident-troll like yourself with the experience of
any
well-versed arm-chair photographer of your caliber would be able to figure
it
out from the precise clues already supplied for you. Just figure out which
features belong to which two cameras.

Get to work!

You really need to start earning your resident-troll and arm-chair
photographer
pay without someone always handing it to you for free all the time.

In a lot fewer words than those, you could have just answered the question.

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:09:18 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote in
:

"Helmsman3" wrote in message
.. .

[HUGE SNIP]

In a lot fewer words than those, you could have just answered the question.

And spared us all the insults. Amen!

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

Helmsman3 wrote:

Let us for a moment presume there is a sealed-lens/sensor design that doesn't
allow in any dust.

A minor point.

Takes images in absolute silence.

Nice.

The lens range is a full 180-degree fish-eye to an extremely long
zoom,

What if I want a wide angle that does not distort like a fish
eye?

What about lens qualities, like flatness of field, vignetting,
resolution, CA, and all the myriad things that can make an image
less than appealing? Especially in soupzooms like the one you
describe such things are prevalent --- even in really goood ones
(for the class).

all with either an aperture or sensor ISO high enough to capture even
the most difficult of hand-held situations in any settings.

f/1.0 and ISO 6400 or equivalent?
At the same noise of any good DSLR at ISO 400?

Hey, come on, full moonlight is only LV-5, so that's f/1.0 at
1/2s --- not handholdable.

The body is of a titanium shell for extreme durability.

Weight?

Few moving parts allows operation in deep sub-zero environments.

Inbuild battery heaters?
Battery capacity (CIPA)?

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.

Technically impossible. You cannot exceed light speed, so
any EVF will be slower than optical, and will thus provide
worse feedback. No EVF currently on the market in consumer
cameras is able to math the resolution and dynamic range of
the human eye.

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.

How about the capabilities of a macro bellows or the MP-E or
just a common 100mm macro lens?

This of course is dependent on an EVF system because no optical
viewfinder in the world can accomplish this.

People have been shooting IR with *film* cameras long before
there was a EVF or even a digital sensor. So your 'of course'
is of course, wrong.

Oh what the heck, while we're at it throw in high quality video

HDTV?
2k?
4k?
And on which terrabyte medium will you store that?

and CD quality stereo sound recording

What microphone are you using?


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.

"inaccurate and dim OVF". Interesting. What OVF have you
been using?


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.

What was that word again? Image quality?

I've already had thousands of photos published with this combo.

Ansel Adams managed to get the odd photo published and sold,
even though he had much more restrictive gear. Of course you can
produce good images with a P&S, if you know what you are doing,
and if you don't, the most expensive camera will not rescue you.

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.

Ah, which P&S were that again? And which lenses?
How much shutter lag do they have?
How fast is the AF?

So yes, the advancements of the P&S camera are definitely the death-knell to the
DSLR. Why would anyone need lens interchangeability if all those ranges,
precision, and capability were built into one dust-free sealed lens?

I can name a few good reasons.

Nobody
thought that an 18x high-quality zoom lens was even conceivable just a short 5
years ago.

My gear spans a 28x zoom range in excellent quality, and if I
want to stretch it a bit, 140x is within my capabilities.
200x or 300x is not unheard of.
Does your lens offer that?

Lens interchangeability and the high-ISO performance are the *only* two thing to
which the DSLR advocates are still tentatively holding onto.

Let's add:
- Excellent zoom range (see above: 100x is not a problem)
- excellent macro gear (5:1? No problem! 20:1? What's a
macro bellows for?)
- very fast focussing, hence very low lag
- 6+FPS and deep deep buffers
- optical view finders --- try your EVF in moonlight
- very good long exposure image quality
- really good image quality and yet a portable system is
possible
- I can use my lenses as a makeshift club and go on shooting
with them. No problem.
- f/1.0, f/1.2, f/1.4 ...
- DOF of 2 sheets of paper (as in, the tip of the nose and
the base of the nose are already outside the DOF, but the
middle of it is razor sharp.
- intelligent, automatic remote multi-flash system

And at what cost? Dust problems?

No problem.

Noise?

Little if any.

Camera shake from the mirror and shutter?

Not really a problem.

Slow mechanical shutter limitations?

x-sync 1/250s, I don't think that's a 'slow' limitation.
Does your P&S offer better values?

Bulk? Weight?

Not necessarily a drawback.

Do I need to list all the drawbacks?

Yes.

Ultra-zoom lenses are already making one of those "benefits"(?) obsolete.

Nope.
They add another choice, something P&S don't have. Many P&S
don't even allow their users to choose exposure and/or aperture.
Practially none of them can change important parameters without
going through a menu. Which is all right, if you stalk buildings
--- except during earth quakes. Most of them don't move much
faster than you can go through your menues.

They are grasping at straws now trying to hold onto the high-ISO
performance.

Show me one P&S that allows me to shoot at handheld at LV -1 or
-2 ... without washing out details nor drowning in image noise.

When
it's already been clearly shown that if your long-zoom P&S lens has enough
aperture then even that is not the holy-grail to owning a DSLR.

f/0.7? f/0.5? Less?

Yes, the DSLR *IS* going bye-bye. It's not a matter of "if", it's a matter of
"when".

In a couple billion years, when the sun turns into a red giant,
we probably won't be using DSLRs on Earth any more.

Based on a design that is half a century old with all the same
limitations that were inherent in that format from way back then.

Compared to P&S, which are based on on the box cameras, like
"the Kodak" from 1888 ("You press the button - we do the
rest."). They still have all the limitations inherent in
that format from, uh, a full century and 19 years ago.


The only ones still clamoring to wanting a DSLR appear to be those
more bent on status, peer pressure, and acceptance by those around them than
actually wanting to increase their chances at getting a decent photo. You know,
the ones who are still emotionally insecure, the ones that have to run with the
mindless herd for fear of getting lost.

You really run out of arguments early-

The DSLR will have about the same fondness in 15 years as we do when looking
back on the flash-cube Instamatic from the late 60's with all its inherent
faults, drawbacks, and limitations. The phrase "I can't believe we put up with
those DSLRs back then," will be commonly heard.

Sure, and you will be crowned "King of the World".

-Wolfgang

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message
...
Helmsman3 wrote:

Let us for a moment presume there is a sealed-lens/sensor design that
doesn't
allow in any dust.

A minor point.

Takes images in absolute silence.

Nice.

The lens range is a full 180-degree fish-eye to an extremely long
zoom,

What if I want a wide angle that does not distort like a fish
eye?

What about lens qualities, like flatness of field, vignetting,
resolution, CA, and all the myriad things that can make an image
less than appealing? Especially in soupzooms like the one you
describe such things are prevalent --- even in really goood ones
(for the class).

all with either an aperture or sensor ISO high enough to capture even
the most difficult of hand-held situations in any settings.

f/1.0 and ISO 6400 or equivalent?
At the same noise of any good DSLR at ISO 400?

Hey, come on, full moonlight is only LV-5, so that's f/1.0 at
1/2s --- not handholdable.

The body is of a titanium shell for extreme durability.

Weight?

Few moving parts allows operation in deep sub-zero environments.

Inbuild battery heaters?
Battery capacity (CIPA)?

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.

Technically impossible. You cannot exceed light speed, so
any EVF will be slower than optical, and will thus provide
worse feedback. No EVF currently on the market in consumer
cameras is able to math the resolution and dynamic range of
the human eye.

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.

How about the capabilities of a macro bellows or the MP-E or
just a common 100mm macro lens?

This of course is dependent on an EVF system because no optical
viewfinder in the world can accomplish this.

People have been shooting IR with *film* cameras long before
there was a EVF or even a digital sensor. So your 'of course'
is of course, wrong.

Oh what the heck, while we're at it throw in high quality video

HDTV?
2k?
4k?
And on which terrabyte medium will you store that?

and CD quality stereo sound recording

What microphone are you using?


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.

"inaccurate and dim OVF". Interesting. What OVF have you
been using?


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.

What was that word again? Image quality?

I've already had thousands of photos published with this combo.

Ansel Adams managed to get the odd photo published and sold,
even though he had much more restrictive gear. Of course you can
produce good images with a P&S, if you know what you are doing,
and if you don't, the most expensive camera will not rescue you.

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.

Ah, which P&S were that again? And which lenses?
How much shutter lag do they have?
How fast is the AF?

So yes, the advancements of the P&S camera are definitely the death-knell
to the
DSLR. Why would anyone need lens interchangeability if all those ranges,
precision, and capability were built into one dust-free sealed lens?

I can name a few good reasons.

Nobody
thought that an 18x high-quality zoom lens was even conceivable just a
short 5
years ago.

My gear spans a 28x zoom range in excellent quality, and if I
want to stretch it a bit, 140x is within my capabilities.
200x or 300x is not unheard of.
Does your lens offer that?

Lens interchangeability and the high-ISO performance are the *only* two
thing to
which the DSLR advocates are still tentatively holding onto.

Let's add:
- Excellent zoom range (see above: 100x is not a problem)
- excellent macro gear (5:1? No problem! 20:1? What's a
macro bellows for?)
- very fast focussing, hence very low lag
- 6+FPS and deep deep buffers
- optical view finders --- try your EVF in moonlight
- very good long exposure image quality
- really good image quality and yet a portable system is
possible
- I can use my lenses as a makeshift club and go on shooting
with them. No problem.
- f/1.0, f/1.2, f/1.4 ...
- DOF of 2 sheets of paper (as in, the tip of the nose and
the base of the nose are already outside the DOF, but the
middle of it is razor sharp.
- intelligent, automatic remote multi-flash system

And at what cost? Dust problems?

No problem.

Noise?

Little if any.

Camera shake from the mirror and shutter?

Not really a problem.

Slow mechanical shutter limitations?

x-sync 1/250s, I don't think that's a 'slow' limitation.
Does your P&S offer better values?

Bulk? Weight?

Not necessarily a drawback.

Do I need to list all the drawbacks?

Yes.

Ultra-zoom lenses are already making one of those "benefits"(?) obsolete.

Nope.
They add another choice, something P&S don't have. Many P&S
don't even allow their users to choose exposure and/or aperture.
Practially none of them can change important parameters without
going through a menu. Which is all right, if you stalk buildings
--- except during earth quakes. Most of them don't move much
faster than you can go through your menues.

They are grasping at straws now trying to hold onto the high-ISO
performance.

Show me one P&S that allows me to shoot at handheld at LV -1 or
-2 ... without washing out details nor drowning in image noise.

When
it's already been clearly shown that if your long-zoom P&S lens has
enough
aperture then even that is not the holy-grail to owning a DSLR.

f/0.7? f/0.5? Less?

Yes, the DSLR *IS* going bye-bye. It's not a matter of "if", it's a
matter of
"when".

In a couple billion years, when the sun turns into a red giant,
we probably won't be using DSLRs on Earth any more.

Based on a design that is half a century old with all the same
limitations that were inherent in that format from way back then.

Compared to P&S, which are based on on the box cameras, like
"the Kodak" from 1888 ("You press the button - we do the
rest."). They still have all the limitations inherent in
that format from, uh, a full century and 19 years ago.


The only ones still clamoring to wanting a DSLR appear to be those
more bent on status, peer pressure, and acceptance by those around them
than
actually wanting to increase their chances at getting a decent photo. You
know,
the ones who are still emotionally insecure, the ones that have to run
with the
mindless herd for fear of getting lost.

You really run out of arguments early-

The DSLR will have about the same fondness in 15 years as we do when
looking
back on the flash-cube Instamatic from the late 60's with all its
inherent
faults, drawbacks, and limitations. The phrase "I can't believe we put up
with
those DSLRs back then," will be commonly heard.

Sure, and you will be crowned "King of the World".

-Wolfgang

Come on mate, you are not going to let all these facts get in the way of a
good troll are you? ;-)

What bloody rocks do these idiots crawl out from under???

I really loved the "thousands of photos published", riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight,
LOL!

"Pete D" wrote in message
...


I really loved the "thousands of photos published",
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight,

That is a huge stretch. Maybe he will tell us how they were "published."
(Perhaps right after he identifies the magical P&S cameras?) He rates a
plonk.