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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview
of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. It's not the money that matters to me, I just can't see what the D40 can do better or even what it has in terms of nicer handling or overall luxury/quality/feel It's not like i'm comparing a Punto with a BMW because they're both modest cameras but the theory is that an slr is superior even at this modest level...but where? If the Nikon D40 is better, I can't see it in the samples, in fact the Canon S3 IS samples on dpreview look way superior. Any and all thoughts appreciated. JB |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
Jackson Bryan wrote:
I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. It's not the money that matters to me, I just can't see what the D40 can do better or even what it has in terms of nicer handling or overall luxury/quality/feel It's not like i'm comparing a Punto with a BMW because they're both modest cameras but the theory is that an slr is superior even at this modest level...but where? Image quality, low light performance, range of lenses and accessories (10.5mm fisheye? 12mm wideangle? f/1.4? Extension tubes or bellows?), autofocus speed, shooting rate, general responsiveness. Oh, and flash; to get much useful you need a flash with a tilt/swivel head and which supports iTTL. I've never had an S3, but from what see in general, and certainly from the two P&S and two DSLRs I've owned, the image quality is night and day in favor of the DSLR. The small sensors in the P&S simply can't compete. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
"Jackson Bryan" wrote in message ... I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. Only you can answer this. DSLRs allow lens options and have larger sensors. It's not the money that matters to me, I just can't see what the D40 can do better or even what it has in terms of nicer handling or overall luxury/quality/feel Generally, DSLRs are larger and do feel more robust and are much easier to use when the user decides to take control of the shot. It's not like i'm comparing a Punto with a BMW because they're both modest cameras but the theory is that an slr is superior even at this modest level...but where? Again, lens flexibility, user control, larger sensor. If the Nikon D40 is better, I can't see it in the samples, in fact the Canon S3 IS samples on dpreview look way superior. I'd ignore the samples. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
On Apr 28, 4:31 pm, "Jackson Bryan" wrote:
I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. It's not the money that matters to me, I just can't see what the D40 can do better or even what it has in terms of nicer handling or overall luxury/quality/feel It's not like i'm comparing a Punto with a BMW because they're both modest cameras but the theory is that an slr is superior even at this modest level...but where? If the Nikon D40 is better, I can't see it in the samples, in fact the Canon S3 IS samples on dpreview look way superior. Any and all thoughts appreciated. JB In every aspect of image quality, it will stomp the Canon P&S. Try them both at 800 ISO, it'll make you cry. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
Jackson Bryan wrote:
I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. If it meets _YOUR_ needs then by all means go for it. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. Ever tried to mount a 400mm tele with build-in tripod (aka vibration reduction) or a 10.5mm fisheye or a f/1.2 ultrafast lens to a P&S camera? jue |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
"Jürgen Exner" schreef in bericht news:W7QYh.3026$Hd1.2202@trndny07... Jackson Bryan wrote: I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. If it meets _YOUR_ needs then by all means go for it. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. Ever tried to mount a 400mm tele with build-in tripod (aka vibration reduction) or a 10.5mm fisheye or a f/1.2 ultrafast lens to a P&S camera? I have never tried to mount a 400 mm tele with build-in tripod etc. etc. Same as most DSLR owners have never tried this. Although a DSLR does offer far greater expandibility than a point and shoot. Most DSLR owners stick to the basics. (No 400 mm, no external flash etc.). So although a DSLR has more options, if somebody doesn't plan to use them than those options do not have value. I own a DSLR and have handled an S3. And I must say I was quicker used to the DSLR than I would get used to the S3. So I (that's me personaly) have choosing for a DSLR. Because of the handling, quality and options. (I did allready have lenses and a flash that even works on the DSLR). But the S3 also has advantages over a DSLR, it's easier to take with you, no lens changes, build in vibration reduction, large zoom. (no 28 mm equivalent though). So, if you can't find a reason to buy a DSLR and like the S3 go with your own choice. All those people buying a point an shoot or an advanced camera like the S3 can't be wrong about their choice. ben jue |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
ben brugman wrote:
"Jürgen Exner" schreef in bericht news:W7QYh.3026$Hd1.2202@trndny07... Jackson Bryan wrote: I know the Nikon D40 is an slr but having read the almost glowing dpreview of the Canon S3 IS point & shoot I have to wonder just why I'd bother with the D40. I've wracked my limited brains to decide which is best and still lean towards the Canon S3 IS. If it meets _YOUR_ needs then by all means go for it. Would someone tell me why the slr would be the better choice for an average slightly demanding amateur who believes that some post-processing is often to the good anyway. Ever tried to mount a 400mm tele with build-in tripod (aka vibration reduction) or a 10.5mm fisheye or a f/1.2 ultrafast lens to a P&S camera? I have never tried to mount a 400 mm tele with build-in tripod etc. etc. Same as most DSLR owners have never tried this. Although a DSLR does offer far greater expandibility than a point and shoot. Most DSLR owners stick to the basics. (No 400 mm, no external flash etc.). Okay, if you say so. But I've sure known a lot of people with lenses up into the 400mm range. I first got one (for film) around 1973, I believe. And I don't think I know *anybody* with SLR cameras that doesn't have an external flash. I know *two* people with the Canon 100-400 L zoom (well, one just ordered it, the other actually has it), neither one of whom has photography as a primary hobby. So although a DSLR has more options, if somebody doesn't plan to use them than those options do not have value. Yes, exactly; people not using those options often don't choose to get SLRs. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 23:10:44 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
Although a DSLR does offer far greater expandibility than a point and shoot. Most DSLR owners stick to the basics. (No 400 mm, no external flash etc.). Okay, if you say so. But I've sure known a lot of people with lenses up into the 400mm range. I first got one (for film) around 1973, I believe. And I don't think I know *anybody* with SLR cameras that doesn't have an external flash. I know *two* people with the Canon 100-400 L zoom (well, one just ordered it, the other actually has it), neither one of whom has photography as a primary hobby. I'm somewhere in the middle, here. Using SLRs for too many decades to count, my longest lens was 300. On the other hand, it's effectively 450mm on my DSLR body. I also had several external flashes, from a tiny cheapy to a large Honeywell potato masher, and eventually to the last one, an SB-26. I'll probably add one for the DSLR eventually, but unlike SLRs, most DSLRs include a built-in flash, so I wouldn't be surprised if a smaller percentage of DSLR owners go the external flash route - but most of them would probably be better off if they did. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
Rich wrote:
[] In every aspect of image quality, it will stomp the Canon P&S. Try them both at 800 ISO, it'll make you cry. ... but try holding a 400 mm eq. image-stabilised lens on that D40 for any period of time, or try shots where you need the swivel LCd, or try doing movies. Getting good pictures isn't just about image quality. David |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Nikon D40 v Canon S3 IS
Jürgen Exner wrote:
[] Ever tried to mount a 400mm tele with build-in tripod (aka vibration reduction) or a 10.5mm fisheye or a f/1.2 ultrafast lens to a P&S camera? jue Both my wife and I have cameras which already include a 36 - 432 mm image stabilised telephoto lens, and mine only weighs about 300g so carrying it all day long is no problem.... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nikon D80 or Canon 30D? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 25 | November 9th 06 06:47 AM |
TESTS; Nikon D80, Canon Rebel XTi, Sony A100, Canon 30D | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 2 | October 14th 06 02:53 AM |
Images; Sony A100 ver Nikon D80 ver Canon Rebel XTi ver Canon 30D | Rich | Digital Photography | 0 | October 13th 06 07:45 PM |
comparison photos - Canon 20D, Nikon D70s, Canon 1DMkII, Nikon D2X with FILM | gnnyman | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | July 5th 05 12:09 AM |
Canon Elph SD110, Kodak EasyShare CX7430, Canon Powershots A75 and A80, and Nikon CoolPix 3200 | Shannon | Digital Photography | 8 | August 19th 04 10:03 PM |