Newbie questioning need for DSLR

[*pixie*]

I have a Canon SD700 that generally works pretty well for me. I would like to upgrade to something though that would allow me to take sports shots of my kids, and a nicer picture quality overall.

Do I need a DSLR for this, or would a high end P&S work?

I really don't want to have to tote around dozens of different lens to every place I go, but if I could find a general lens for sports shots, another one for DW, etc. I could handle that.

I've been looking at the Canon Rebel XS, but I'm just not sure that I need a DSLR.

Thanks for any and all advice!

 

[photo_chick]

A point and shoot will work if you know how to push it to get the most out of it. A DSLR will work as well, but you will have to learn how to take it off auto to consistently get better results than a high end point and shoot.

IMO, the XS, while a great camera for what it was when it came out, isn't really worth buying new anymore. Not when there are DSLR's at the same price point with a lot more features.

 

[disneyboy2003]

While you don't necessarily *need* a dSLR for sports photography and "nicer" photos, a dSLR would certainly make it lots easier.

I don't recall what type of sports you were taking photos of (ie. indoor or outdoor sports). Regardless, though, you'll need a camera that lets you adjust the shutter speed, aperture, and ISO.

If you're shooting indoor sports (or sometimes outdoor sports, too), you'll want a camera (or lens) that has a large aperture (small f-number) to allow more light into your camera, which then allows you to use faster shutter speeds.

If you're shooting outdoor sports, you'll want a camera (or lens) that lets you zoom in to the action.

For sports photography, you'll also want a camera that can take multiple photos very quickly, such as a continuous shooting mode or a burst mode.

Although "nicer" photos is pretty subjective, what makes dSLR photos "nicer" is the larger sensor inside the camera, compared to the tiny, tiny sensor inside point-and-shoot cameras. The larger sensor gives you photos with less noise / grain, especially for high-ISO photos. A larger sensor also gives you blurrier backgrounds (or "bokeh"), which makes portrait photos "nicer".

There are advanced point-and-shoot cameras (or, so-called "bridge" cameras) that have manual controls for shutter speed, aperture, and ISO and that have telephoto zoom, so sports photography isn't impossible with "bridge" cameras. However, bridge cameras typically lack the large apertures and large sensors that dSLR cameras & lenses have. Some bridge cameras have a "burst" mode.

Hope that helps!

 

[AlbertZeroK]

You might take a look at the Olympus PEN camera if you want the option of more lenses later on. If you don't need alot of zoom, I like the Sony NEX cameras. In fact, I've been VERY impressed with my Sony VEX, but you are limited to 2 lenses now, with a third comming soon. The Olympus PEN can use virtually any 4/3 lens.

Both of these cameras have larger sensors and are compact.

 

[Groucho]

Even in Auto mode, I think you'll generally get much better results with a DSLR - like has been said, it's about sensor size. Most DSLR sensors are ~15x larger than PnS sensors - that makes it much easier for it to capture sharp, colorful photos, even in Auto mode and with cheaper lenses. Even the best PnS is handicapped by their extremely small sensors.

You can get lenses that cover a large zoom range so that you rarely if ever need to change lenses but such a lens is usually $300+ and still won't quite have the range of some of the ultrazoom point-n-shoots available now, but will still be a nice setup. A common "kit" is to get the camera with the basic 18-55mm zoom lens that most all DSLRs come with and add a longer zoom - say, 50-200mm, 55-300mm, or so. You can often buy "two lens kits" for decent prices, and you wouldn't need to switch lenses too often. Switching lenses is generally very quick and easy anyway; nothing to be intimidated about.

Now, you don't need a DSLR - but if you are ready to move to another camera and image quality is high on your list, then it's definitely worth serious consideration. Don't forget to check out the others out there - Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and Sony all make modern entry-level DSLRs, and Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung, and Sony make "EVIL" cameras, which are basically DSLRs without the mirror, so they can be smaller but don't have optical viewfinders.

 

[boBQuincy]

I agree with Groucho and DisneyBoy, and have experienced that it is easier to get good photos with a SLR than a P&S.

I have several Canon dSLRs and also a Canon G11, a good P&S that has manual settings. The larger sensor of the SLR will give very good photos under most conditions with little effort, the P&S must be set very carefully in order to get the best from the small sensor.

 

[*pixie*]

Thanks for all the advice! I think, in the long run, I will be happier with a DSLR, even with the learning curve.

IMO, the XS, while a great camera for what it was when it came out, isn't really worth buying new anymore. Not when there are DSLR's at the same price point with a lot more features.

Can you point me in the direction of some DSLRs at the same price point? Also, will the standard 18-55 lens get me by for awhile? Particularly, will I be able to get decent "standard" shots on my upcoming DW trip and cruise in October?

 

[Pugrpooh]

Thanks for all the advice! I think, in the long run, I will be happier with a DSLR, even with the learning curve.



Can you point me in the direction of some DSLRs at the same price point? Also, will the standard 18-55 lens get me by for awhile? Particularly, will I be able to get decent "standard" shots on my upcoming DW trip and cruise in October?

I have an Olympus DSLR which I'm very happy with. Look up the reviews for the E620. At B&H Photo, the Canon XS is going for $550 while the E620 with the 14-42mm kit lens is $570. This includes a $50 instant rebate good until 9/4.

Olympus kit lenses are regarded to be very good quality. 14-42mm with Olympus is equivalent to 28-84mm. You can get the 2-lens kit for $650.

If there's a camera store near you, you can go and handle the different models to see which one fits you best. I thought I wanted a Sony until I picked up the Olympus.

 

[DisDan09]

Take a look at the Sony Alpha for as good entry DSLR. The 330 is a pretty good camera for the price (around $450+/- and has the LCD shot composition. The lower level does not). The body is compact and light enough to not become a second piece of luggage LOL! I was also able to use my Minolta Maxxum lenses from my SLR with it. Big plus for me there not having to buy new lenses.

For my P&S I carry a Panasonic Lumex DMC-TZ5. It would be considered a Bridge camera as you can set it up manually just as a DSLR but without the choice of lenses. Many of the pics I have taken with it rival my DSLR and it is small enough to fit in the pocket of my cargo shorts and pants. After I purchased it I found out it is one of he top three cameras carried by professional adventure photographers. Panasonic has upgraded the model and they generally run in the $250 range.
Doing your research and finding what’s right for you and your price range pays off!

Good Luck!