DSLR vs Konica Dimage Z series

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

Let's title this thread as "I upgraded to a DSLR".

I have some questions for the pros. I am in the market for a new digital camera.

I used to own a Konica Minolta Dimage Z10. That camera took the most AMAZING close up pictures!!! It was great for selling Hot wheels cars and little plumbing parts. It died, and I returned it. Seems a trend among all but ONE of my cameras.

So here is where the advise part comes in. I never had anything but good to say about my little Dimage, until the day it died a premature death of about 2 years. So as I shop on ebay I keep seeing the same sentence... "I upgraded to an SLR". So what is REALLY the difference??? The Dimage series (Z3, Z5, Z6, Z 10 and Z20, etc) takes amazing pictures, so why would one need to spend the large amounts of money on an SLR? Please understand, I'm sure there is a reason, or they wouldn't sell. I'm not badmouthing them, but aside from professional photographers, why would you need anything better? If all your shooting is diecast cars and small parts for craigslist (I use HTML tags and submit my own photos) or occasional vacation photos, what would be the reason for spending so much more money?

What are the pros and cons? As far as these type of cameras are concerned... Are the Canon any better? I'm watching these Dimage series cameras sell for prices in the $60 - $120 range. They look to be a pretty good bang for the buck. I also notice a lot of damaged ones, and though I was thoroughly satisfied with it, are these cheaper cameras prone to a shorter lifespan?

Any and all advise appreciated.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

The short answer is that DSLRs have much, much larger sensors. That improves just about everything in a picture. It's a bit like comparing old 35mm cameras to 110 cameras. In perfect conditions, the difference isn't very large. In difficult situations (low light, rapid motion, lots of contrast), a DSLR will do much better.

There are other advantages and disadvantages. A DSLR gives you more choices of lenses. It can work with better flashes. You can blur the background much better. There is virtually no lag between when you press the shutter and when it takes the picture. You can fire off a rapid burst of pictures with a DSLR. On the downside, they are more expensive, bulkier, more complicated, and require that you change lenses to get the most out of them.

Most people mistakenly believe that a DSLR is harder to use. The truth is that most DSLRs have a full auto mode that does everything for you. Even in that mode, you'll get a lot of advantages over a non-DSLR. To get the most from a DSLR, however, you'll want to learn more than just zooming, pointing, and shooting.

There is one area where DSLRs have a hard time - close up (macro) pictures. Cameras with small sensors use comparably smaller lenses and those lenses can focus close up more easily. You can buy special macro lenses for a DSLR or a filter that acts like reading glasses and then you can get even better close ups than you could with a non-DSLR. Out-of-the-box, however, a non-DSLR will usually outperform a DSLR for really close up shots.

 

[disneyboy2003]

This is a huge topic, so I must apologize in advance for the novel you're about to read. However, looks like MarkBarbieri above already summarized everything I'm about to say into 4 succinct paragraphs.


There are several things that set DSLR cameras apart from point-and-shoot / bridge cameras.

Image quality
First and foremost, the ultimate feature that sets DSLR cameras apart is their much-better image quality! I've owned several point-and-shoot and bridge cameras in the past. However, once I bought my DSLR and saw the photos it took, I made a vow to go back to all the vacation places I'd been to over the past 10 years and re-do all those photos with a DSLR! Yes, the image quality is THAT good!

I'm not a photography pro or expert, but here's what I saw in terms of image quality. DSLR pictures are lots sharper and they have a lot less noise / grain, especially for low-light photos.

There are several reasons for better image quality. The image sensor in your point-and-shoot / bridge camera is actually very very small, perhaps as small as 5.5 x 4 mm (that's millimeters!!!). On the other hand, most entry-level DSLRs have at least a sensor about 23.5 x 16 mm. If you calculate that out, you'll see that the DSLR sensor size is about 17x larger than a point-and-shoot sensor. A larger sensor is a good thing because it allows your camera to gather more light for your photo.

Here's a photo from Groucho (another member on these boards) that illustrates this point:

(the 2 smallest photos would be from point-and-shoot / bridge cameras. The 2 largest photos would be typical DSLRs. The "4/3rd" size comes from a smaller, more compact DSLR only made by Olympus)​

DSLRs are also very good at night & low-light photography. This is partially because of the larger sensor, but also because of larger aperture lenses that are available to you. Your Konica Minolta Dimage Z10 had a maximum aperture of f/3.2. If/When you buy your first DSLR, for an additional $100 you can also buy a 50mm f/1.8 lens. With aperture numbers, the smaller the f-number, the larger the aperture. A lens with f/1.8 will let about 3x more light into your camera vs f/3.2. (And if you have more $$$, a lens with f/1.4 will let in 5x more light...). Photography is all about the light.

Larger-aperture lenses are what you'll need for low-light and night photography. Larger apertures allow you to use faster shutter speeds for the same photo / same exposure. This means that sometimes, you can even hand-hold your DSLR camera to get decent night photos or fireworks photos.

Those numbers that I calculated above (3x more light, 5x more light...) means that you can potentially use a shutter speed that's 3x faster (or 5x faster) compared to your Konica camera, and achieve the same exposure / same photo.

If your child / friend is in theater or performing a show, DSLRs are also very good for this low-light situation, given the right camera settings and lens.

Faster shutter
When people buy their first DSLR, the very first thing they notice is that a photo is taken immediately after they press the shutter button, not 1/2 second later, not 1 second later. The shutter lag time is virtually instantaneous on DSLRs.

This may not be a big deal for taking photos of stationary eBay items. But folks with kids love the faster shutter speed! Your baby makes a cute face, and your DSLR can instantly capture that face. Your child jumps into the swimming pool, and you can capture your child mid-air. Try taking the same photo with your point-and-shoot--your kid will already be out of the pool & drying off by the time your camera finally decides to take the photo.

Sports photographers and wedding photographers depend on this faster shutter feature. Parents whose kids are in sports depend on the faster shutter speeds, too.

Versatility
With DSLRs, you can use different lenses for different situations. Each photographic situation is unique, so you probably shouldn't depend on a one-size-fits-all lens to take optimal pictures of everything. That's why switching lenses for different situations can be a good thing.

If you take macro photos, you'll get the best results by using a macro lens. If you're attending a wedding and want to take photos with your DSLR, take a lens with a large aperture (small f-number) so you can take photos without bothering the ceremony with a distracting flash. If your child is in sports, but you're stuck in the stands, you'll want a telephoto zoom lens (which is also good for Kilimanjaro Safaris at Animal Kingdom). At the Grand Canyon, you'll probably want a wide-angle lens. Different photographic situations call for different lenses.

You mentioned that you were doing product photography for your eBay listings. I'm sure your eBay customers probably don't care about camera lighting. However, with a DSLR, you can invest in an external flash that attaches to your camera and learn to soften the light from the flash. You can also use a technique called "bounce flash" to give some soft, directional light, too. All this will give your eBay product a more even and pleasing lighting, setting your product apart from other eBay sellers. (dealing with crazy eBay customers, on the other hand, is a different story altogether...)

But an external flash can also do wonders to improve your everyday photography, too...even in daylight!
​

A lot of folks who buy their first DSLR already see an immediate difference in their photos, even on the "Auto" setting. They see that their DSLR has a much faster shutter response time (less shutter lag) and their photos appear sharper.

However, to take FULL advantage of your DSLR, you've got to take some time to learn:

1. the principles / basics of photography (ie. shutter speed, aperture, ISO, etc)
2. topics specific to *digital* photography (ie. RAW vs JPEG, histograms, etc), and
3. digital post-processing of your photos (ie. how to use Photoshop Elements / Lightroom / Aperture to develop your photos and make them better)

These are all topics that are covered in any "Intro to Digital Photography" book that you'll find at your local bookstore. They're also covered on hundreds of different Web sites that teach Intro to Digital Photography. These questions also come up very frequently on this message board, too.

There are several disadvantages of DSLRs.

Heavy / not as portable
You can't just slip a DSLR into your pocket / purse and walk around Walt Disney World. You (or your spouse / BF / GF / BFF / whoever) will actually be carrying it with you all around town or all around the parks. My neck and shoulder muscles have gotten a real work-out over the past several years.

You'll also need to invest in a camera bag or camera backpack for your DSLR camera, lenses, and accessories...making it a little (a lot) bulkier for travel.

People think you know a lot more about photography than you really do
I was talking to a guy once who was carrying around his brand new Nikon DSLR and asking me tons of questions about his camera, and I was happy to help him out. I tried to tell him the basics of about shutter speed, aperture, exposure, but all that info seemed to go way over his head.

I gave him some tips on how to focus on a subject by pressing the shutter half-way down. He had a puzzled look on his face, "What's a shutter?" I explained it to him, and he said "Oh, THAT thing? I just call it 'THE BUTTON'."

Later on, he tells me that a bunch of his friends & family members have already asked him to do wedding photography for them! He was in a panic because he knew that his photography skills weren't quite there yet, but his friends & family thought "big camera = good photographer".

Other new DSLR photographers, though, don't know their own limitations, and they really DO go into wedding photography, charge super-super-cheap prices, attract couples with small budget for photography, and produce horrible wedding photos...ultimately to the disappointment of bride & groom. .

Spending
Once you spend the first several hundred $$$ on your first DSLR, don't think that the spending stops right there! You will quickly learn that you want / need additional DSLR lenses and accessories. Certain lenses are better for different types of photography. Your budgeted spending for photography will very quickly balloon into the thousands of $$$$$ over several years (hopefully, not over several months).​

Ultimately, I'd say that if you're already getting and are satisfied with the pictures that you need with your current camera (or with another Konica camera), then you probably should not spend the hundreds or thousands of dollars on a DSLR and its associated lenses & accessories.

As an analogy, my modest 10-year-old Toyota Corolla gets me from home to work and back without any problems, and I can run errands and get around town nicely. However, I see that some people in my neighborhood have upgraded their cars to the latest truck / mini-van / sports car / SUV. Some folks have a need for a pick-up truck / mini-van / sports car / SUV cuz it makes them more productive. But I find that my trusty Corolla does exactly the tasks I need.

However, if you feel like your photography is somehow being hindered by your current camera, then perhaps it is time to upgrade to a DSLR.

Sorry for the super-duper-long post. This "DSLR vs. non-DSLR cameras" is actually a HUGE topic, and I'm sure I'm missing a ton of information, so please read what other folks have to say, too. Hope that helps, and let us know what camera you end up buying!

(and if you buy a DSLR, buy a Canon! )

 

[boBQuincy]

For photographing diecast cars and small parts for online sale photos or for occasional vacation photos there *is* no reason for spending so much more money! As Mark noted, most P&S cameras do that rather well, and when I need a close-up or a photo for eBay I usually reach for my P&S.

However, dSLRs are not just for professionals. For those who visualize a photograph and then must make the scene in front of them match that visualization, there is no other tool to get the job done. The versatility, image quality, and capability in all types of light are what make the dSLR worth buying and carrying.

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

Other new DSLR photographers, though, don't know their own limitations, and they really DO go into wedding photography, charge super-super-cheap prices, attract couples with small budget for photography, and produce horrible wedding photos...ultimately to the disappointment of bride & groom.

LOL I have BEEN THERE!!!! When we got married 17 years ago we hired this really old guy who was listed as a photographer in the yellow pages. He was the cheapest one we could find, and boy did we regret THAT!!! Half the pictures had chopped heads and crooked / swaying people.
I think he was a little too old to be "steady" with the camera. Thats not intended as a stereotype, but almost EVERY picture was HORRIBLE. He retired a couple years later, and not a second too soon IMHO.

(dealing with eBay customers, on the other hand, is a different story altogether...)

We wont go there either. I will note here, that it's amazing how many people are selling decent cameras on ebay, and the picture of the camera they are selling looks like it was taken with a 1990 model cellphone. (You know... 1/2 a mega-pixel... )

I appreciate the responses! I can see I'm going to have to consider all this out. I've been drooling over a Canon Rebel at Costco for months.
I think I'm gonna buy a cheap Dimage for now, and save up for the Rebel at Costco. How does this camera look for a good beginner level SLR?
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Produc...Price|1||P_SignDesc1&lang=en-US&Sp=C&topnav=#

The price is pretty good, and I read lots of positive things about it. Whatcha think? Is it any good? Would it be a good starting point?

 

[disneyboy2003]

LOL I have BEEN THERE!!!! When we got married 17 years ago we hired this really old guy who was listed as a photographer in the yellow pages. He was the cheapest one we could find, and boy did we regret THAT!!! Half the pictures had chopped heads and crooked / swaying people.
I think he was a little too old to be "steady" with the camera. Thats not intended as a stereotype, but almost EVERY picture was HORRIBLE. He retired a couple years later, and not a second too soon IMHO.

Ugh! It always breaks my heart to read wedding photography stories like that.

How does this camera look for a good beginner level SLR?
http://www.costco.com/Browse/Produc...Price|1||P_SignDesc1&lang=en-US&Sp=C&topnav=#

The price is pretty good, and I read lots of positive things about it. Whatcha think? Is it any good? Would it be a good starting point?

I don't think you can go wrong with that Canon Rebel XS that you mention above. However, keep in mind that there have been 2 more Canon Rebel models that have come out since then: the Rebel XSi (July 2008) and the T1i (March 2009).

The Canon Rebel T1i lets you shoot video. If you don't need video, you can go with the older Rebel XSi. However, you also can't go wrong with the Rebel XS, either.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

...Other new DSLR photographers, though, don't know their own limitations, and they really DO go into wedding photography, charge super-super-cheap prices, attract couples with small budget for photography, and produce horrible wedding photos...ultimately to the disappointment of bride & groom. ....

Hey, that'll be me in a couple of months. Fortunately, the groom is a Nikon shooter, so we already know his expectations are low.

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

I have another question, off topic. I once took my JVC HD camcorder to Disney utilizing a big memory card. I intended to use mainly the camera side of my camcorder. I did get a few really good pictures, but most were HORRIBLE!!! The majority of the good pictures were taken from a group of MANY pictures. in other words, most of the good pictures were really good pictures, but it was only one picture that turned out, out of say 12 pictures or so. Mostly blur or lighting problems. Did I miss something? The specs all look like it would make a great camera. Is there a reason why camcorders take terrible pictures? Could it be the lack of flash? (It has a light for night viewing, but thats not the same as a flash.)

 

[handicap18]

I have another question, off topic. I once took my JVC HD camcorder to Disney utilizing a big memory card. I intended to use mainly the camera side of my camcorder. I did get a few really good pictures, but most were HORRIBLE!!! The majority of the good pictures were taken from a group of MANY pictures. in other words, most of the good pictures were really good pictures, but it was only one picture that turned out, out of say 12 pictures or so. Mostly blur or lighting problems. Did I miss something? The specs all look like it would make a great camera. Is there a reason why camcorders take terrible pictures? Could it be the lack of flash? (It has a light for night viewing, but thats not the same as a flash.)

Asking a video camera to take still pictures is like entering a Monster truck in a NASCAR race. Sure the Monster Truck will make it around the track, but it wont be effecient and will be really slow.

A video camera is for video's and an occassional snapshot. Though they are better than they were 8 years ago. But honestly, I'd leave the video camera just for video.

 

[disneyboy2003]

I have another question, off topic. I once took my JVC HD camcorder to Disney utilizing a big memory card. I intended to use mainly the camera side of my camcorder. I did get a few really good pictures, but most were HORRIBLE!!! The majority of the good pictures were taken from a group of MANY pictures. in other words, most of the good pictures were really good pictures, but it was only one picture that turned out, out of say 12 pictures or so. Mostly blur or lighting problems. Did I miss something? The specs all look like it would make a great camera. Is there a reason why camcorders take terrible pictures? Could it be the lack of flash? (It has a light for night viewing, but thats not the same as a flash.)

Hmmm...

I sometimes use a screwdriver to hit nails into a board, and 1 out of 12 times it works great! But that's not what a screwdriver was built to do. (I wonder if that's why my IKEA bookshelves are always crooked...)

A camcorder's main job is to take video. Taking photos is just a secondary feature that manufacturers add, probably for marketing purposes (ie. who *wouldn't* want to buy a camcorder that also takes photos?).

Sounds like you were taking photos in low-light situations. Those situations are already VERY tough for any regular point-and-shoot camera, so they'd be even tougher for camcorders that also claim to take pictures on the side.

You can probably say the same thing for point-and-shoot cameras that also take video. The video quality won't be the same as from a dedicated camcorder, but it's a feature that sells the camera. (On the other hand, I have heard very good things about today's DSLRs that shoot HD video. Smaller filmmakers are using DSLRs to produce pretty good quality movies.)

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

Thanks. Thats kinda what I expected to read.
OK here's another analogy... Like how PS2 was marketed as a DVD player, when in fact it doesn't have a strong enough laser to use it as one. It will work, but it can also destroy the laser in your PS2. (Per the gamers & owners of Hollywood Video who informed all their customers to buy a stand alone DVD player.)

I get what your saying. Thanks.
I can see I need to lurk in this forum a lot more.

 

[disneyboy2003]

Hey, that'll be me in a couple of months. Fortunately, the groom is a Nikon shooter, so we already know his expectations are low.

Oh, if only your groom were a purple starfish...at least he'd be calendar-worthy.

(inside joke, see this thread: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2373554)

 

[Groucho]

I used a Minola dImage Z5 for a little while...

...and couldn't believe the amount of noise in the images. It was very good in many ways but the noise was just terrible. I didn't know about sensor sizes and all that at the time, but it all "clicked" when I found out!

That being said, PnS camera tend to be pretty good at macro shots as you get a larger depth of field and they can usually focus pretty close. A similar shot on a DSLR will often require a macro lens and for it to be stopped down (for larger depth of field) which means a slow shutter speed which means tripod. If you are happy with your product photos, you may end up continuing to use your current camera for them.

For just about everything else... oh baby! DSLR all the way!

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

I have another question if anyone cares to give any opinions.

I found a great looking Canon Rebel EOS DSLR at my pawn shop, with a nice canon bag, 2 lenses (330... does that sound right? its a LONG lens!) a card reader, a 2GB card, 2 batteries, charger, all wires, a separate flash in a separate bag, and a cleaning kit. It works, but it looks like it has spots of mold and some little hairs in the viewfinder. They are only asking $179 for ALL of it.
With the spots, is it worth it? I did see one TINY scratch on the shorter lens, but it was on the outside edge of the lens, against the plastic, and it was REALLY small. Had to squint to see it (and I have great eyesight.) It might not affect anything whatsoever because it's only like 1/16ths of an inch, and its touching the plastic (or metal) of the lens. Probably not even in the range. The spots in the viewfinder worry me. I've read pages that say they are nothing to worry about, but I'm still a bit hesitant. Whatcha think???

 

[ukcatfan]

Sorry to say, but I would stay far away based on a gut feeling. Those people are usually not idiots, so if they are asking only $179, then it probably does not even work and the lenses are crap. Either that or they are clueless!

 

[Daisy14]

Just curious about what little plumbing parts you sell... I'm a plumber and always looking for a better price than my wholesalers can provide!

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

Just curious about what little plumbing parts you sell... I'm a plumber and always looking for a better price than my wholesalers can provide!

This is a one shot deal actually. I am cleaning out my buildings and I have a lot of industrial/new construction plumbing parts that aren't the kind of stuff that I use. I only do residential repairs, and mostly mobile home. These are for new construction, industrial, and business plumbing. Email me if your still interested and I can send you a list. selfemployeddebtfree@gmail.com