Question for Any/All DSLR Owners.

[annnewjerz]

Jeff's (GDad) recent post about DHS with his wife's P&S camera got me wondering. For all of you that own a dSLR camera of any brand...how many of you also own and regularly use a P&S or superzoom camera?

There are loads of posts from people who say they'd never go anywhere without their dSLR, and then there are people like Jeff who seem to be comfortable ditching the bulkier stuff for the day and still end up happy with their results.

If you do find yourself going light and using a non-dSLR camera, what is your main reason? Solely for convenience or do you really find your shots from the P&S/superzoom in favorable shooting conditions to be comparable??

 

[GrumpyOne]

You may want to take a look at the following: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

A comparison between a Canon G10 P&S and a Hassleblad P45+. Naturally, the G10 only stands a chance at very low ISO but it seems to come out relatively favorably.

IMO, the key is to understand and be happy with the limitations of the equipment you're using. I don't have a problem with using an advanced P&S for underwater photography but my preference for photos on land is to use a DSLR. In the case of the UW camera, it's primarily because I don't want to invest the huge chunk of change of a real DSLR housing and for tech diving, I have enough to do without having something big and clumsy in my way.

 

[annnewjerz]

IMO, the key is to understand and be happy with the limitations of the equipment you're using. I don't have a problem with using an advanced P&S for underwater photography but my preference for photos on land is to use a DSLR. In the case of the UW camera, it's primarily because I don't want to invest the huge chunk of change of a real DSLR housing and for tech diving, I have enough to do without having something big and clumsy in my way.

That's my issue. I have the underwater point & shoot for rainy days, wet rides and of course, underwater shooting but I really am not thrilled with the look of my pictures during the day.

Maybe I'm just spoiled now that I know how great (at least to me) my own photos can look using the dSLR or maybe it's the fact that my Oly 1030 just really doesn't perform well above water.

That's my only point & shoot at the moment and I'm wondering if people with p&s/superzooms with manual controls really find that they produce better images than your typical p&s with scene modes.

 

[Disneyfreak92]

Jeff's (GDad) recent post about DHS with his wife's P&S camera got me wondering. For all of you that own a dSLR camera of any brand...how many of you also own and regularly use a P&S or superzoom camera?

There are loads of posts from people who say they'd never go anywhere without their dSLR, and then there are people like Jeff who seem to be comfortable ditching the bulkier stuff for the day and still end up happy with their results.

If you do find yourself going light and using a non-dSLR camera, what is your main reason? Solely for convenience or do you really find your shots from the P&S/superzoom in favorable shooting conditions to be comparable??

I do own a p&s in addition to my dSLR's. I use it mainly for places I can't, or don't want to, take the dSLR. I take it to concerts (can't take a camera with detachable lenses to a lot of those) and if we go out with friends to a restaurant, bar, etc. I did take it to the zoo once when I didn't feel like carrying the dSLR. I might use it more if I was happier with it. However...

I have two main issues with my particular p&s (a Fuji FinePix F50fd).
1) It's lack of ability to handle low-light situations. I did research the purchase, and the predecessors (F40fd &/or F30fd) were apparently great low-light performers in that category. However, I ended up buying the newer model (with 12 mp & no owner reviews at the time), and as you might imagine, the photos can come out extremely noisy in low light. It also hunts for focus a lot in low light. I am even more irked by this because I have a friend who is often at concerts with me, and her Sony p&s out-performs mine in low light situations almost 100% of the time.

2) The battery life is just so darn short! I wish it used AA's sometimes just so I could have extras with me. I am having a hard time justifying buying an extra battery for it considering that we just don't use it that often. I just make sure to charge it up right before we go somewhere and try not to use the video feature too much.

Anyway, lesson learned on my part. When it's time to replace this one, I'll probably not purchase an item so new that user reviews aren't available, and I'll also likely go for something with either fewer mp or a larger sensor.

 

[Chikabowa]

I don't have a P&S, but I don't think there is anything wrong with carrying one around with you on a day-to-day basis. Not every single shot you have to take in your lifetime has to be 'perfect' or 'artistic'. Sometimes you just want to grab the moment for whatever that moment holds. So grab what you have handy!!

 

[My2Girls66]

I use my p&s regularly. When we hike I almost always take my p&s, rarely do I carry my Dslr. Canon A560. The D80 is just too much to carry(weight wise) on some of the hikes we do. My DH carries a Coolpix 4600 when he hikes- we are very pleased with the pictures it takes. The A560 also takes nice photos. Of course, its usually nice weather so light isn't an issue. The Sealife UW p&s goes to the beach and on the canoe. More for the health of the dslr than anything. I did take the D80 to the beach in Naples last week and am very glad I did since the birds and dolphins were plentiful. I was VERY careful with it- though, I did lose a lens cap.
On a hiking trip to British Columbia I carried my D50, and a Canon A540 and Dh had the Coolpix 4600. All 3 took very similar quality landscape shots. I have to look at the exif to tell which photo was taken with which camera. Walking around Vancouver I carried my p&s for convenience.

 

[jann1033]

I don't have a P&S, but I don't think there is anything wrong with carrying one around with you on a day-to-day basis. Not every single shot you have to take in your lifetime has to be 'perfect' or 'artistic'. Sometimes you just want to grab the moment for whatever that moment holds. So grab what you have handy!!

i agree with this, to me a "snapshot" is different than a "photo' i don't have a p&s but would probably use someone's( or maybe buy a decent one pre vacation if i had small kids with me) if all i wanted was a memory of the day in a snapshot sized photo or web display. i don't think you could really tell a lot of difference in those average daytime conditions for those uses unless the p&s really stunk . and really who cares, they are to show the folks back home , not sell .
on a day to day basis i take my dslr in case i see something i want to "photograph" but at someplace like disney and i wanted "snapshots" of the kids with the characters, i'd have no problem leaving the dslr in the room most days and traveling light."travel light" is the important theme for me at wdw and usually a wdw vacation is more of a snapshot moment to me. of course for me to not go nuts and totally frustrated using it. the shutter lag time, focus etc would be great on that p&s in this hypothetical land which is why now i go camera-less on those occasions i'd rather just use the money for a new lens for my dslr and remember the times in my head( would be totally diff. if i had little kids with me)

 

[oogieboogieman]

I've noticed that more companies are now producing "higher-end" p&s cameras that allows you to shoot RAW. They have built-in features like IS, hot-shoe for external flash, and alot of megapixels so you can almost edit the same as a dslr. It's a little package with a BIG punch.

 

[Code]

I still use my Fuji F30, but that's because for small prints, it delivers usable results even at ISO 1600. I can't give up the flexibility of being able to go above ISO 400 and not have it look like crap, so I'll probably have my F30 for a long time, at least until manufacturers are able to give up the silly megapixel race and focus more on image quality.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I keep my Canon S3 IS in my pocketbook so I always have something to shoot with even if I don't have my big camera bag with me. I also might grab it if I just want a quick shot of something and know I have the wrong lens on my dSLR, or something like that. I still really enjoy using it.

 

[bob100]

Jeff's (GDad) recent post about DHS with his wife's P&S camera got me wondering. For all of you that own a dSLR camera of any brand...how many of you also own and regularly use a P&S or superzoom camera?
There are loads of posts from people who say they'd never go anywhere without their dSLR, and then there are people like Jeff who seem to be comfortable ditching the bulkier stuff for the day and still end up happy with their results.
If you do find yourself going light and using a non-dSLR camera, what is your main reason? Solely for convenience or do you really find your shots from the P&S/superzoom in favorable shooting conditions to be comparable??

I still have my Canon S5 superzoom but rarely use it in favor of the DSLR. When visiting my brother's family however I did use their Panasonic TZ5 - not as good pics but it could fit in my pocket!

 

[fitzperry]

IMO, the key is to understand and be happy with the limitations of the equipment you're using.

This is exactly right, IMHO. People like to assert that it's the photographer, not the camera. But if that were entirely accurate, there'd be no reason for anyone to spend thousands of dollars on camera equipment. We'd all just use our cell phones. A competent photographer just understands the limitations of the equipment s/he is using and works within them.

That's the thing about that Luminous Landscape article. It's significant that he didn't use the p&s camera to shoot portraits in a studio or a basketball game in a poorly lit gym. And although Jeff's DHS shots were nice, I doubt he's going to give up his D700 (if I'm wrong about that, let me know as I'd be happy to take it off your hands).

To answer the original question, my husband and kids each have a point and shoot camera. I use any or all of them on occasion for snapshots in places where I don't want to schlep my equipment around. They do a decent job in the right conditions.

 

[michellem1118]

I still use my Olympus 1030SW, although that has become DH's camera. On several recent trips to the zoo, DH was able to get photos that were comparable in quality (for small prints/online viewing) as some of the ones I got with the XSi in bright sunlight. In the shade & indoors, the Oly doesn't hold a candle to the XSi, though... unless we need its waterproof feature. We've actually been quite pleased with the IQ on the Oly since day one, both underwater and on land, and its case is attached to the XSi backpack, so if I take one camera, I usually have both of them.

 

[iggbees]

i do use my point and shoot often, because it sometimes is just way too much to carry the dslr. however, my p&s is already 5 years old and i definitely see the difference in quality between the two cameras. i actually prefer my p&s for night time shots sometimes because it gives me great results and i don't have to lug that huge dlsr at night in disney. i love using the gorilla pod with my p&s and it's so easy to haul around, i actually leave it on my camera most of the time.

 

[deletedpenguin]

It's funny to come across this thread, as I'm contemplating picking up a better point and shoot for everyday photography, and when I don't want to drag out 30D DSLR and a backpack full of lenses. Of course, I love having the DSLR around to get those shots that otherwise wouldn't be possible with a point and shoot, but then there are those days that I just don't want all that gear dragging me down.

The last few times I visited Disneyland I took my gear with me. All of it. In the middle of August I was lugging my lenses around the park, all day long. I got some great shots. Some really nice shots. Was it worth it? Sure, I'd say yes, but I don't think I'd do it again. The park isn't changing that much, and if I go back (which I'm set to do in a few weeks time), I'll be taking a point and shoot that can fit in my pocket. I've got the complex shots already, now I want to enjoy the park and get the "snapshots" of the people around me having fun, and me not worrying about my gear and where it's at and whether it'll get wet or not, etc. etc.

While it'll never replace the DSLR, it's nice to be able to switch back and forth, depending on what you're doing. I'm looking at the Canon SD990 and, at 14.7 MP with still a hint of manual control (though no RAW support), it's as close as I'm going to get right now to having a DSLR in my pocket. I thought of going with the G10, but if I'm downsizing to something I can throw in my pocket, the G10 kinda defeats that idea, despite having the draw of being RAW format capable.

Will I be happy with the results that a point and shoot gives me? Probably not completely, especially using a DSLR for so long. I guess ultimately it's a trade off.

Bring a point and shoot and miss the shot, or bring the DSLR and miss the experience? I suppose there's a time and place for each.

 

[pdmedic]

I own a P&S that I still use fairly regularly it is a 2MP Finepix camera that does ok for quick snap shots for the web and such it's nothing to write home about but it does its job. My dSLR is a Olympus E510 so you can definitely tell a difference between the two.

 

[Groucho]

I still use my Fuji F30, but that's because for small prints, it delivers usable results even at ISO 1600. I can't give up the flexibility of being able to go above ISO 400 and not have it look like crap, so I'll probably have my F30 for a long time, at least until manufacturers are able to give up the silly megapixel race and focus more on image quality.

I wanted to get an F31 to replace our Canon SD600 but I just couldn't stomach the idea of being tied to xD cards! So we got the F40. It's pretty good as long as you need the ISO to 400 or lower. The biggest annoyance is that it likes to go to ISO 800 when taking flash photos, which means big noise. I try to make sure it stays in M mode where you can limit max ISO.

Of course, I just about never take any photos with it. Occasionally I'll take video with it, but that's it.

In response to the the original question...
I just can't handle the way a PnS feels. I wouldn't care if it took photos every bit as good or better than a DSLR. I am just so turned off by the little flat plastic box with a few cheap-feeling buttons and holding it away from you because you're forced to compose looking at the rear LCD.

The two PnSs that I used for myself were both big-zoom ones (for the time) with electronic viewfinders. Those were sort-of OK, and a real "crossover" PnS like the Fuji S9000, with real zoom and focus rings, would probably feel fairly good.

But really, I am just so totally uninspired picking up a PnS. For me, the actual taking of the photo - the feel of the camera, the feel of the lens, the mechanical movement, the optical viewfinder, etc - those are where I have most of my fun. That's why it used to sometimes take me literally years to get around to developing film and why I still have hundreds of digital photos from last year that I haven't processed through yet. Heck, I'm much happier using my grandfather's old '50s Kodak rangefinder, with a tiny viewfinder, than a modern digital PnS.

 

[zackiedawg]

I've always had a 2-camera strategy even before I had a DSLR. In 2003, I bought my first serious digital, a Sony 717, which was big and heavy. At the same time, I bought a Sony U20...one of the smallest cameras ever put on the face of the earth. It was a 2mp fixed lens...but I wasn't expecting it to compete with the 717...I was expecting it to fill in the gap when I didn't want to carry the 717 along or for those spontaneous times when you aren't even planning photography but having a camera along gave you the opportunity to get a shot.

I replaced the 717 with an H5 ultrazoom, and replaced the U20 with an L1 ultra-compact. It wasn't quite as small, but had 4mp, a 3x zoom, and a waterproof case. Same system with those two cameras - the L1 was with me everywhere I went, and subbed for the H5 when I didn't feel like carrying the bigger camera.

I now have my A300 and 4 lenses, and also my T100 ultra-compact credit card cam. To give an idea of when the T100 would be used instead of the A300:

- I bring it to work or in the car when I'm driving to a friends house. No plans on photography at all...but I might see something interesting, or the sunset may be nice...and having a camera at the ready is wonderful.

- At Disney, I'll bring the T100 to marketplace when I'm just headed out to Rainforest with the family for a bite. No plans to take pictures...but you never know if you may want to. I'll bring it along when heading out to another resort for lunch or dinner. I'll bring it along to minigolf. At any of those occasions, the DSLR would be a hassle...sitting on the dinner table or hanging around your neck swinging a club. But the T100 sits in a pocket unnoticed unless and until it's needed.

And there have been days when the T100 (or other compact) has gone to the parks for the day instead of the DSLR. For example, I've been up to Orlando on a conference, and decided to pop into the parks after the meetings...it wasn't worth heading back to my resort to pick up the DSLR - I go to Disney many times a year so there's always next time...and the always-convenient T100 was easy enough to slip into a coat pocket that morning and sit unobtrusively with me at all the meetings.

And I don't just consider it for 'snapshots'...I use whatever vestigial skill I have to consider the composition, plan the metering, and land the shot the way I want it, even with the compact.

The T100 is a good companion camera, because it takes decent pics that are printable up to nice 8x10s, solid during the day and usable for lower light (but not truly low light), has some nice features (5x optical zoom, rule-of-thirds grid, spot metering, IS, and super-macro capability that can focus at 0" distance...flush against the lens!), a great LCD, and the battery lasts literally forever.

I'd always recommend for everyone to get a P&S as a convenient backup or second cam. You will get photographs you absolutely 100%-guaranteed never would have gotten without it...because you wouldn't have had a camera with you!

 

[annnewjerz]

Everyone has made some great points. I have my p&s which I am just not thrilled with (like I said--no manual controls, no viewfinder, etc.) and after the past few months of lugging my whole travel bag with camera, 3 lenses and external flash to and from work everyday (and seeing nothing I really want to get a picture of)...I just got to thinking that maybe for everyday "stuff" I might see and want to grab a photo of, a bridge camera would be a good alternative.

I wouldn't need something that fits in my pocket, just something that can fit in my purse and I don't need to carry lenses and accessories for.

I guess it's something to think about, but I doubt I will purchase anything soon. I mean c'mon...almost $400 for the Canon S5 or a new lens??? I know already which one I'll end up picking.

 

[Suburbanmom]

I was all set to shop for a PnS that I could throw in my purse and have for quick snapshots. Instead, I bought a camera bag that looks like a purse and carry my D300 everywhere I go. LOL