A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

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



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old November 16th 07, 09:10 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 02:09:33 -1000, Scott W wrote
in :

John Navas wrote:


That's you. A DSLR better suits the way you work, all well and good,
but that doesn't make it a universal truth -- my FZ8 has huge advantages
over DSLR in handling, size, weight, zoom range, and lens speed, that
make it possible for me to get shots I wouldn't get with an SLR. It's
not a matter of experience -- I've used SLRs for decades, and it's a
relief not to have to lug all that gear around.


I can understand the weight and size issues, which is why I do use a P&S
from time to time and in fact in the market for a new one.
The FZ8 lenses has to be fast to make up for it needing to stay at low
iso. And the lens is not all that fast, at the wide end it is a f/2.8,
which is not bad but not great.


It's actually 3+ stops faster than the closest equivalent 35 mm lens
stopped down for comparable sharpness.

When I am in low light I use a 28mm
f/2.8 lens and shoot at iso 800.


But that's presumably a very limited fixed focal length, and without
optical stabilization, which is worth 2-3 stops. With an FZ18 you could
be shooting f/2.8 at ISO 100 or 200.

The best that can be said for the
speed of the lens is it somewhat offsets the height noise of the sensor.


The combination of fast lens speed and optical stabilization greatly
levels the playing field against the best 35 mm lenses, not to mention
the super wide zoom range.

I'm glad that works for you, but I don't think it's a good measure of
photo quality. Do you also think movies with the biggest box office are
automatically the best movies?


What I think about movies is those that are film in I-Max are more fun
to watch then the 35mm version, go see the same movie in both versions
and tell me the camera does not matter


Not a valid analogy, as I'm sure you know.

And with still photograph the camera matters even more, this is no sound
and no acting to aid the image, there is only image.

In some cases it takes more work to use a DSLR, whether that work is
worth the difference between a P&S and a DSLR is what each person
decides, sometime I take the P&S sometime I take the DSLR.


With all due respect, there is no fundamental difference in many (most?)
cases between better compact camera images and comparable DSLR images.

True, there are cases where a DSLR will do a better job,
but then there are cases where a compact camera will do a better job.
There is no one perfect tool.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #112  
Old November 16th 07, 09:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr,rec.photo.misc
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:43:11 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote in
:

"Helmsman3" wrote in message
.. .


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. ...


Don't look now, but "prosumer" level compacts by Panasonic equipped with
superb Leica lenses are going strong.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #113  
Old November 16th 07, 09:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

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)
  #114  
Old November 16th 07, 09:18 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On 16 Nov 2007 11:06:06 -0800, Bill Tuthill wrote
in :

SMS ???????????? ??? wrote:

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.


LOL, high ISO is "arcane usage?"


Yes. Back when I was doing wet photography, the only time I bought
and push-processed 800 speed film (NPZ or Portra) was when my kids
were in a Nutcracker performance, once a year. That's pretty arcane.

For dark conditions there is always flash or tripod. A generation ago
ASA 64 was considered fast film, and they made good pictures anyhow.

The problem of P&S shutter lag has been mostly solved in recent models.


As he would know if he'd actually ever used one, but he'll probably just
continue to pontificate from out-of-date info for some time to come.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #115  
Old November 16th 07, 09:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:02:28 -0800, SMS ???• ?
wrote in
:

Bill Tuthill wrote:


The problem of P&S shutter lag has been mostly solved in recent models.


Nope. It's improved, but it's still present, and it effectively
eliminates the ability for live-action shots.


See what I mean?

One wonder why he apparently can't see how foolish it makes him look.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #116  
Old November 16th 07, 09:20 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John Navas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,956
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:17:10 +0000, Chris Savage
wrote in
:

On 2007-11-15, Bill Tuthill wrote:
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 don't need to be partisan about anything because I have ample evidence
that applying the same 'workflow' to files from my D200 and C8080 will
show the SLR has a clear quality advantage at any ISO under any exposure
conditions.


Then your C8080 must be defective.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)
  #117  
Old November 16th 07, 09:22 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr,rec.photo.misc
Grumpy AuContraire
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?



John Navas wrote:
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:43:11 -0500, "Neil Harrington"
wrote in
:


"Helmsman3" wrote in message
. ..



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. ...



Don't look now, but "prosumer" level compacts by Panasonic equipped with
superb Leica lenses are going strong.




Yes, I have a FZ10 which has served me well for the past three years.
Eventually, I will replace it but not until the capture ccd(s) are bigger.

Meanwhile, I'll use the FZ for routine photography and my old Leica M2
for real serious work...

JT

  #118  
Old November 16th 07, 09:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems,rec.photo.digital.zlr,rec.photo.misc
Peter Chant[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 203
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

Neil Harrington wrote:


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.


Good points, I've not made the jump yet (ignoring camera phones), a nice
compact digital camera, that works like a proper camera would be nice,
possibly thinking of Ricoh GR-D or probally more useful GX100, however an
SLR would offer more, except the pocketableness. Price difference between
the Pentax K10D and those two compacts is not much.

If I buy one the K10D makes more sense.

Pete

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk
  #119  
Old November 16th 07, 09:54 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
owen andersen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:35:19 -0600, Doug McDonald
wrote:

John Navas wrote:


Likewise untrue -- Digital Photography Review characterizes the preview
lag of the FZ8 as "slight", and the measured shutter lag on the FZ50,
including preview lag, was 0.07 seconds.

and seriously bad
noise problems at any ISO setting other than at the very low settings.


Noise is actually good at ISO 200, and easily reduced with Neat Image.


ISO 200 would have been a disaster for me on my last two vacations
on my 30D it stayed at 1600 for very long periods,
and we are talking f/4 and sometimes f/1.4, sometimes f/1.4
for .4 second on a tripod, at 1600.

Doug McDonald


If you're shooting in that dim of lighting, then how much different is it
shooting at f/2.0 at ISO 200 for 2 or 4 seconds? Really, you D-SLR activists
really have some serious problems if you don't realize that any P&S camera can
be used under the same circumstances. The added plus is that I can use that
setting with a zoom lens length at 320mm. Beating anything that's available for
your D-SLR no matter how much that you want to pay. Meaning that I can compose
and frame shots at those exposure settings that are clearly outside the realm of
ANY D-SLR.

But let me guess, now you're going to tell me that only 1/4th second shutter
speed was just the right amount to do the nighttime water-motion blur effect
that you desperately wanted. (How much do you want to bet that this armchair
photographer is now going to use that as his exact excuse, or one just like it.)

Get a freakin' grip on reality, would you? D-SLR = Delusional-SLR

  #120  
Old November 16th 07, 10:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
RealityBytes[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default DSLR vs P&S a replay of Film vs Digital?

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:43:01 GMT, Daniel Silevitch wrote:

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 19:25:29 GMT, John Navas wrote:
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:26:21 GMT, Daniel Silevitch
wrote in
t:

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:34:46 GMT, David J Taylor wrote:
Bill Tuthill wrote:

The recommended DSLR workflow seems like a huge chore, not a fun
hobby, with RAW mode and the continual treadmill of Adobe software
upgrades.

You don't /have/ to use that workflow - I believe in getting things right
in the camera and minima post processing. No RAW for me.

With the right software, RAW adds precisely zero extra work. I use
Apple's Aperture, and Adobe's Lightroom does the same thing. I can shoot
in either RAW or JPEG, and either way the software reads them in,
generates preview thumbnails, lets me twiddle with the white balance,
etc. The only thing special I need to do for RAW is budget more disk
space for the bigger files, and in an era of 1 TB drives, that's not a
big deal.


With JPEG there's no need to do *any* post-processing.


Since I use Aperture to sort and categorize my pictures anyways, I don't
have to do anything extra to get a picture based on RAW up on the
screen. Put card in reader, select a project, hit 'import'. That's it.
Exactly the same as JPG.

The difference is that if I've blown a highlight or screwed up the white
balance, I can do a better job of fixing my mistake if the underlying
image is RAW. I don't have to do any explicit post-processing, but if I
decide to, I can do it better with RAW.

(nb: If desired, replace "Aperture" with "Lightroom". Same basic idea.)

-dms


Hint: This is where the word "photographer" comes into play. If you know what
you are doing in the beginning you don't have to depend on RAW. Get a camera
that adequately does a full dynamic range conversion from the sensor's RAW data
and you won't have to worry about it. Unless you are a crappy photographer in
the first place and need that safety net, or you just don't know how to choose
cameras that do it right in the first place.

These are the same photographers that have to depend on extra resolution too,
because they don't know how to properly frame and compose a shot in the camera.
Or those widely popular machine-gun snap-shooters that drool over the burst
rates of their cameras. Same principle. They think that if they can get enough
of the scene saved to pixels, somehow, later, they'll eventually find a way to
get a worthwhile image out of it. Then they'll blame their editing software when
they can't to it then either.

Try being a photographer instead of a snap-shooter next time.

(Isn't it funny how every argument that the dSLR owner uses on why their camera
is better only reveals their lack of having any skill at being a real
photographer? Damn, this is funny! LOL)

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Film lenses on dslr quess who Digital Photography 4 September 22nd 06 10:07 PM
[IMG] "REPLAY" - Minolta 100mm f/2 with Sony Alpha DSLR Jens Mander Digital Photography 0 August 13th 06 11:06 PM
Film Scanner DPI vs DSLR Megapixels arifi Digital Photography 11 May 25th 06 09:21 PM
Film lens on DSLR? [email protected] 35mm Photo Equipment 9 January 3rd 05 03:45 PM
EOS Film user needs help for first DSLR Ged Digital Photography 13 August 9th 04 10:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.