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
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
A dSLR has many, many advantages over a point-and-shoot camera. Low
light photography, stop action, bokeh, etc. Point & shoot cameras, especial 10 Megapixel ones, are horrible at anything above 200 ISO. But in perfect lighting (ie studio) with a stationary subject, would an expensive point-and-shoot like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 (10 MP, $480) produce a crisper, more detailed A3 print than a D70 (6 MP, approx $1000) with a 50mm prime lens? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
wrote in message ups.com... A dSLR has many, many advantages over a point-and-shoot camera. Low light photography, stop action, bokeh, etc. Point & shoot cameras, especial 10 Megapixel ones, are horrible at anything above 200 ISO. But in perfect lighting (ie studio) with a stationary subject, would an expensive point-and-shoot like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 (10 MP, $480) produce a crisper, more detailed A3 print than a D70 (6 MP, approx $1000) with a 50mm prime lens? There's issues about stuffing small sensors with lots of pixels. I returned a Canon S3 and went with a K100D. The noise, CA, and fringing were unreal on the S3. I really liked that cam but it was the small sensor is punishment. And the EVF for me, sucked. And you can't shoot RAW. Best to take your flashcards and go try these cams. See if you get the results you want. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
Bob H wrote:
[] There's issues about stuffing small sensors with lots of pixels. I returned a Canon S3 and went with a K100D. The noise, CA, and fringing were unreal on the S3. I really liked that cam but it was the small sensor is punishment. And the EVF for me, sucked. And you can't shoot RAW. Best to take your flashcards and go try these cams. See if you get the results you want. The Canon does not have the best lenses in its class, so please don't judge all non-SLR cameras by the results you got. Many cameras can shoot RAW, even if Canon choose not to provide that facility. Of course, the noise is simply a limitation of the smaller sensor, and such cameras are best used on low ISO settings. The EVF is an area which could do with improvement, and the VGA-resolution finder on the Minolta A2 is the best I've seen, and it was a delight to use. A lot better than many. What do you particularly like about the Pentax? David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
Ian Riches wrote: You can download some studio-type test shots from dpreview.com and print them yourself and see... http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx2/page6.asp http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page22.asp I looks to me like the 10 megapixel point & shoot has more detail than the 6 megapixel dSLR. The labels on the battery and the wine are much more legible on the Panasonic. Maybe the megapixel wars isn't all that bad afterall. For all the complaints about these cameras, people forget that noise only becomes an issue at higher ISOs. But when taking photos in bright light, I can see the appeal of these point & shoot cameras. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
In article om,
wrote: Ian Riches wrote: You can download some studio-type test shots from dpreview.com and print them yourself and see... http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx2/page6.asp http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page22.asp I looks to me like the 10 megapixel point & shoot has more detail than the 6 megapixel dSLR. The labels on the battery and the wine are much more legible on the Panasonic. Maybe the megapixel wars isn't all that bad afterall. For all the complaints about these cameras, people forget that noise only becomes an issue at higher ISOs. But when taking photos in bright light, I can see the appeal of these point & shoot cameras. I'd disagree with that assessment. Take a look at, for example, the Gretag Macbeth color chart in the example you quote above; the P&S has quite a bit of obvious in the dark areas. And that's with the in-camera noise reduction in operation. It depends what you want, of course. There's no doubt that a P&S is more convenient to use; I occasionally take my wife's Casio Exilim rather than dragging around a DSLR. But for anything more than a quick snapshot I think it's worth starting with the cleanest image direct from the sensor. Bear in mind, too, that Phil's reviews are mostly done with the camera set to the default values. That means you aren't really comparing the camera directly - different manufacturers will have very different default values for noise reduction, sharpening, &c. That's appropriate for someone who is just going to use a camera straight out of the box, without ever exploring the menu options. If you applied the same amount of post processing to the image from a DSLR, I'm sure you'd see significantly less noise. Note, too, that there's quite a bit of sharpening being applied; this leaves quite visible halos around the colour swatches. you'd probably be able to get close to the amount of visible |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
In my experience the top Sony EVF cameras, the late 828 and the current
dscr1are the only "p&S" cameras that compare in quality to dSLRs, and that is stretching the definition of P&S. However opinion and taste trump technical quality so whatever floats your boat . . . |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
John Francis wrote: I'd disagree with that assessment. Take a look at, for example, the Gretag Macbeth color chart in the example you quote above; the P&S has quite a bit of obvious in the dark areas. And that's with the in-camera noise reduction in operation. Yes, there's more noise, but the question was which will produce a criasper print. I think it is clear that, in the photographs linked, the compact has more detail than the SLR. The noise does not reduce resolving power enough. In lower light, it would be a different story. Bear in mind, too, that Phil's reviews are mostly done with the camera set to the default values. That means you aren't really comparing the camera directly - different manufacturers will have very different default values for noise reduction, sharpening, &c. That's appropriate for someone who is just going to use a camera straight out of the box, without ever exploring the menu options. Yes, but the point here is that under these conditions (good light etc) the compact records more details. Yes, there is more noise, the image isn't as clean etc (so probably you could print at a lower dpi from the DSLR and get a good result). If you applied the same amount of post processing to the image from a DSLR, I'm sure you'd see significantly less noise. Note, too, that there's quite a bit of sharpening being applied; this leaves quite visible halos around the colour swatches. But in this case, noise does not play a significant role in how "crisp" a print will be. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
"bmoag" wrote:
In my experience the top Sony EVF cameras, the late 828 and the current dscr1are the only "p&S" cameras that compare in quality to dSLRs, and that is stretching the definition of P&S. The quality of the results from the Sony DSC-R1 compare with those from DSLRs for a very good reason - it has an APS-C sized sensor. I use one. Used within its limitations, it is a fine 10 MP camera with a superlative lens. It is an excellent studio camera, and works very well indoors. However, it is almost unusable in daylight as the otherwise excellent LCD is far too dim, and the electronic viewfinder is about as woeful as electronic viewfinders get. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
6 MP dSLR -vs- 10 MP point & shoot
"David J Taylor" wrote in message .uk... Bob H wrote: [] There's issues about stuffing small sensors with lots of pixels. I returned a Canon S3 and went with a K100D. The noise, CA, and fringing were unreal on the S3. I really liked that cam but it was the small sensor is punishment. And the EVF for me, sucked. And you can't shoot RAW. Best to take your flashcards and go try these cams. See if you get the results you want. The Canon does not have the best lenses in its class, so please don't judge all non-SLR cameras by the results you got. Many cameras can shoot RAW, even if Canon choose not to provide that facility. Of course, the noise is simply a limitation of the smaller sensor, and such cameras are best used on low ISO settings. The EVF is an area which could do with improvement, and the VGA-resolution finder on the Minolta A2 is the best I've seen, and it was a delight to use. A lot better than many. What do you particularly like about the Pentax? David Shake reduction works great. 3200 yields usable shots. Price. Hotshoe. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Low end DSLR or High end P&S | [email protected] | Digital SLR Cameras | 22 | April 9th 06 05:23 AM |
Didital Point and shoot vs SLR | Denny B | Digital Photography | 25 | January 14th 06 01:13 AM |
Need a low shutter lag point and shoot digital | Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) | Digital Photography | 27 | December 14th 04 06:11 PM |
Digital Point and Shoot Question | Art Salmons | Digital Photography | 19 | October 27th 04 02:42 PM |
For Sell --- SLR camera and a Point & Shoot APS Camera: Toronto | slrcamera | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 4 | April 1st 04 09:59 PM |