SLR -v- Point & Shoot

[alan]

This is an all too frequently asked question, but I'm looking at it from the opposite end this time.

The only time I have been at WDW, I took my (then) brand-new dSLR. I got a load of pictures ranging from awful to okay. Some were quite good.

Now I'm planning for July 2009. I have learned much more about the dSKR, and have a selection of decent lenses.

And I'm thinking about not taking the dSLR, but getting something like an FZ28 and using that instead. Why? Dramatically lighter, more flexible (that amazing zoom range), and competent video is just a twist of a mode dial away.

Has anyone else, competent in the use of a dSLR, opted for a P&S? Did you regret it, or decide it was an good move?

regards,
/alan

 

[DueyDooDah]

The last time I went to WDW, all I had was a P&S. I have been wanting to return ever since. This time with a dSLR. Next year, the 30D is going.

But, I have been to DL with the dSLR. It was worth the lugging around.

 

[Chikabowa]

I think it really depends on WHY you are taking a camera to the parks. Are you taking it just to capture just little snapshots of the family doing fun stuff? Or are you practicing a serious hobby while on vacation? Or are you trying to go for super artistic pictures? Do you want the flexibility?

All those questions play into what camera you bring with you. For me, my camera is an extension of me and taking photos on vacation is 1/2 my fun! So I choose to bring my massive camera and lens collection so I can accomplish that goal. But if I just wanted little snaps of my dd running around, I'd totally just do my P&S.

 

[boBQuincy]

We would not take the P&S to WDW as our only camera, DW tried it about a year ago and was not happy. We have a Kodak DC4800 (old but good) and a Canon SD1100 (much newer) but neither will get the photo nearly as often as the SLR will. They are just too slow or not sensitive enough to get a high percentage of decent images under anything but good lighting conditions.

I certainly understand the quest for small & light but under less than optimal lighting the P&S just will not work nearly as well as the SLR.

 

[Groucho]

One thing that's usually overlooked in these discussions is the fact that a DSLR will take the photo more quickly than a PnS, especially if you leave it "on" and with a lens hood on and lens cap off. This makes taking a spur-of-the-moment photo as short as literally just 2-5 seconds (raise camera to eye while half-pressing shutter to wake it up, composing, taking photo, lowering camera)... much quicker than it would be for most any PnS.

 

[broberts]

Why not take both, that way if you are unsatisfied with the P & S, you can break out the DSLR?

 

[wenrob]

When we went to San Diego this summer I had the same dilemma. I took both, my D40 w/18-200 VR (fairly heavy lens) and my S2 IS just in case I didn't feel like hauling the D40 around. My S2 IS never came out of the kids backpack we'd tucked it in. Granted, we had a stroller I could drape the camera bag on and had set up so all I had to do was reach in but I would say I probably carried/wore the camera 75% of the time.

Re: What Groucho said. Once you get used to the speed of a DSLR a point and shoot is beyond frustrating when you're trying to snap away.

 

[WillCAD]

I know that hauling an SLR around is a daunting prospect, but when I look back on my Disney trips, the thing I love best about them is my photos. I greatly regret not taking more photos on my trips in the years before I got an SLR, because those memories are fading, but memories of trips where I took a lot of photos are staying fairly sharp.

Having a very nice camera with you, particularly a digital, encourages you to take more pics. My average was about 1 roll (24 shots) per day when I shot film, but now that I shoot digital, that's gone up to over 100 pics per day. Those memories are priceless to me!

So even when I developed back trouble and found the camera strap causing me agonizing pain after only a few minutes of wearing it, I didn't go with a P&S camera; I simply found another, more back-friendly way to carry my SLR and soldiered on.

Not many P&S cameras can take shots like these:

[Click the pics for full-size versions]

 

[Groucho]

Actually, I think those are the kind of shots than a PnS can take, if the owner bothers to use a tripod and a shutter delay. It's the low-light moving stuff that is tricky...

 

[alan]

Thank you for all the replies - sorry I lost internet access very soon after posting!

Anyway, I'm now back, and have enjoyed reading what you've been saying.

I certainly see a theme here that people who are used to an SLR find the restrictions of a P+S are enough that they want to have the SLR with them. That is probably the bulk of the answer I was looking for. I am a competent SLR user and have become used to what it will do for me. I suspect that I too would find a P+S restrictive, so I probably have my answer right there.

Many thanks,

regards,
/alan