Want to upgrade camera...sort of

[tx2tn]

I currently use a Canon A640 Point and Shoot. Overall I am not that impressed with it. I like it's size but not blown away by the quality.

I want the quality of a full blown SLR but I do not want the size. I go to the parks to enjoy the rides and such and do not want to lug around 20 pounds of camera equipment. To me, the rides and attractions come first and photos come second. I wear a fanny pack (yes I know....stylish) and can keep my Canon in it.

So here's my question; Is there a camera or family of cameras that are more professional than my Canon but not so big and fancy as the professional models?

Thanks for your help.

 

[YesDear]

I would look in the bridge camera range. The Canon G10 and the pending G11 are or will be a good one to look at. The are not DSLR's but are known for high image quality.

 

[Groucho]

You can't have SLR image quality (or build quality) in a PnS size. If you could, you'd probably see a lot fewer DSLRs out there.

But you can get pretty close if you look at the new Micro 4/3rds cameras, which have the same sensor as in the Olympus/Panasonic DSLRs (which is a smaller sensor than other DSLRs but still quite a bit larger than a PnS sensor)... the new Olympus EP-1 is the smallest, not much bigger than your average PnS.

The downside? It's $800.

Other than that, your best option is to look for a PnS with a larger-than-usual sensor (say, 1/1.7 or 1/1.8 rather than the usual 1/2.5) and a lower megapixel count. You could also look at some of the small entry-level DSLRs, they really aren't all that/i] large and heavy (though you'll give up some zoom range unless you buy a larger lens.)

 

[IndyShutterbug]

I agree with the above, the new Olympus looks promising.
You might also look at the entry level dslr lineups. I can't speak on Nikon, but I do like the Canon xt/xti/xsi series. They are small and still allow for you to use the "big" lenses if you chose to.

 

[Chikabowa]

There are trade offs... If everyone could get slr quality and functionality out of a little pns, there would be very little reason to have an slr. But the trade off you get by choosing a small, lightweight and easy to carry pns, is poorer image quality and loss of functionality.

The Canon G11 is a great little camera and I'd look into that particular model. But it still has a lot of the same limitations as your current Canon.

The fact is... the people who get amazing imagery take the time and energy to lug a lot of equipment around. And if that isn't high on your priority list, that's totally ok. For me, half the fun of my vacation is having the time and lack of pressure to indulge in my passion and my hobby - which is photography.

Unfortunately there isn't one single model of camera that is going to do everything you could possibly need. So you have to figure out what is the most important to you (size/weight and price vs. functionality and quality) and then make a decision to go that route.

 

[kaffinito]

The Oly EP-1 does look pretty neat and has good picture quality. There is also a new Panasonic Lumix out now, same price as the Oly that also has a good movie mode in it (like the EP-1).

But the downside to having a micro 4/3 system is that you have to use specific lenses which limits avid photographers. The Lumix GF-1 while small with a large sensor, is still limited to only a few lenses to use with it.

My advice for the pns shooter is to go with Lumix models over Canon models. You get better picture quality, better low light capabilities, and not a lot of shutter lag. The Lumix Tz5 is a great little pns for the money, and I've never been unhappy with its performance. The size is right too - I wear cargo shots instead of a fanny pack and can slide the Lumix right into my pocket.

 

[kaffinito]

The fact is... the people who get amazing imagery take the time and energy to lug a lot of equipment around.

I'm sorry, but that simply isn't true. You don't need a DSLR and a ton of gear to take really great photos. You can get amazing photos with the Oly EP-1 or the Panasonic GF-1 which are both DSLR quality cameras without the mirror, making them smaller and easier to pack.

I have also seen some truly lovely photos taken with an old RD-1 and some old TLR's which would knock your socks off. Truth is, the quality of the photo is not in the camera and how large and expensive it was, but in the photographer that uses the equipment.

 

[Chikabowa]

I'm sorry, but that simply isn't true. You don't need a DSLR and a ton of gear to take really great photos. You can get amazing photos with the Oly EP-1 or the Panasonic GF-1 which are both DSLR quality cameras without the mirror, making them smaller and easier to pack.

I have also seen some truly lovely photos taken with an old RD-1 and some old TLR's which would knock your socks off. Truth is, the quality of the photo is not in the camera and how large and expensive it was, but in the photographer that uses the equipment.

I'm sorry - I'm not familiar with either of the cameras you've listed here, so I cannot comment on your statement.

In terms of quality of image - in the case in which this original poster is framing the question - yes, it is true that image quality is going to be better if the equipment is better.

Of course it's the photographer when actually taking the shot... that is a given, but it need not be stressed in this particular discussion because the poster wasn't asking about HOW to get quality shots, but what camera will be able produce a quality shot (regardless of the photographers skill). The image quality on someone's 5DMII or a D3 is simply going to be better than any pns. Period.

Edited to add...
Let's not delude the importance of quality equipment. While the argument of "It's not the camera, it's the photographer" is VERY valid, there are times, when, yes it is the camera. Give me a pns and I cannot produce the same type or quality of imagery that I can with a D3 in my hands. Plain and simple, I am hampered by the lack of functionality and the lack of image quality on a pns. So while I still have skill... yes... the technology of my D3 camera allows me to fulfill my artistic and technical visions.

So when a poster requests information on a pns that is going to produce the same image quality (not necessarily the same skill behind that camera) as a slr camera, I'm sorry, but the valid point still remains and we are talking about camera functionality.

 

[YesDear]

I have to agree with Chickabowa. To use to just under $1000 4/3 format camera's with the average PnS is just not a valid comparison.

A good photographer can always take a better composed and creative picture with an old instamatic because of the skill level, but put a D3 in the same photographers hand with a high quality piece of glass and the image will be better quality.

If you put the D3 in a novices hand, the composition may not be as good and the quality will not be as good because they just do not know how to constantly get the image.

While us photo geeks get into the small details of the techno capabilities of the different cameras, most that visit this board and talk about PnS cameras are looking for the camera that is easy for them to operate and takes a decent snapshot. If they want the caretaker in HM they are not going to get unless the ride stops and they turn the lights on!

 

[boBQuincy]

A Canon Rebel Xsi weighs 1 pound 11 ounces with the 18-55 kit lens, ready to go. While that is light for a dSLR of course it does not compare to a P&S, Canon's G11 (which I have on order) is less than one pound.

A pretty nice dSLR setup, including tripod, could be assembled at less than 5 pounds and would be capable of getting just about any of the photos seen on this board. If that is still too much weight then the P&S path might be the way to go, at some loss of capability.

 

[pjacobi]

You can't have SLR image quality (or build quality) in a PnS size. If you could, you'd probably see a lot fewer DSLRs out there.

Approximately 90% of photography is skill, with 10% related to equipment. In fact, under idea lighting conditions there is very little difference in image quality between a professional dSLR camera and a P/S camera. Read http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

It's easy to solve the equipment problems, but it takes time and effort to improve your photography skills. There are lots of people who take the easy route and lay down the credit card. When they don't get instant results from a pro-grade camera, they blame the equipment.

The Canon A640 is a fine camera. Make sure you know how to use it in Tv, Av and M modes before upgrading. Review your photos to see if the problems are equipment or skill errors.


-Paul

 

[tx2tn]

Approximately 90% of photography is skill, with 10% related to equipment. In fact, under idea lighting conditions there is very little difference in image quality between a professional dSLR camera and a P/S camera. Read http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

It's easy to solve the equipment problems, but it takes time and effort to improve your photography skills. There are lots of people who take the easy route and lay down the credit card. When they don't get instant results from a pro-grade camera, they blame the equipment.

The Canon A640 is a fine camera. Make sure you know how to use it in Tv, Av and M modes before upgrading. Review your photos to see if the problems are equipment or skill errors.


-Paul

I think you make a valid point. I certainly am not as familiar with the Tv, Av and M modes as I should be. I guess the old saying is true here, I want to drink champagne on a beer budget. I want great photos with minimal effort. Perhaps I have not given the A640 a chance, but to be accurate, I have had to have it repaired twice in the year or so since I have owned it.

The bottom line is that I want better than average photos from a below average photographer.

 

[kaffinito]

I think you make a valid point. I certainly am not as familiar with the Tv, Av and M modes as I should be. I guess the old saying is true here, I want to drink champagne on a beer budget. I want great photos with minimal effort. Perhaps I have not given the A640 a chance, but to be accurate, I have had to have it repaired twice in the year or so since I have owned it.

The bottom line is that I want better than average photos from a below average photographer.

Then I'll stick with my original suggestion of a Lumix pns. They do take better than average pics on a not-so-pricey budget.

I'll second what Paul says too. When I was going from a Canon pns to a newer camera, I should have taken the time myself to thoroughly check out the camera I had. But to be honest, the shutter lag and the lack of quality with the Canon pns I had was really starting to irritate me. I'm not at all irritated with the Lumix, and there have been times when I had to check my EXIF data to see which camera took which shot.

If you have a Best Buy or such around you, go and check out the cameras to see which one will give you what you are looking for in a pns.

 

[Frantasmic]

Canon has a new camera out called the S90. It is supposed to be pretty good. It shoots in raw, has a good big lens and goes down to 2.0 aperture.

It's $499.00 or about what you could get a Nikon D40 for. But, it is very compact.

 

[Groucho]

Approximately 90% of photography is skill, with 10% related to equipment. In fact, under idea lighting conditions there is very little difference in image quality between a professional dSLR camera and a P/S camera. Read http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/150-vs-5000-dollar-camera.htm

It's easy to solve the equipment problems, but it takes time and effort to improve your photography skills. There are lots of people who take the easy route and lay down the credit card. When they don't get instant results from a pro-grade camera, they blame the equipment.

Sorry, I have to disagree with your first paragraph. (And linking to Rockwell doesn't help, either. )

Ideal lighting conditions? How many great photos are taken under ideal lighting conditions, at very small apertures (to give comparable DoF between a DSLR and a digital PnS?)

A camera is a tool. It's useless without a craftperson wielding it, but someone with some skill is going to be able to produce far better results with quality tools rather than ones that are not really up to the job. How many professional chefs use plastic knives in the kitchen?

Digital PnSs have serious limitations that simply cannot be overcome by skill - poor low light performance, extremely limited DoF control, sluggish response, no specialized lenses (UWA/fisheye/tilt/macro/etc), lens aberrations, general lack of sharpness except at very small apertures, etc. Then there are issues that can be worked around but are a hinderance - generally uninspiring design, usually horrible manual focus controls, few external controls, no TTL optical viewfinder, weak flash, usually red-eye if you do use the flash, slow push-button zoom controls, usually no raw format, etc.

kaffinito mentions the Epson RD-1 - a 5-year-old digital rangefinder that still trades for well over $1,500, and TLRs, which are usually medium format. Neither one is quite like the pocket-size tiny-sensor digital PnSs that we're talking about here.

Anyway, the point is, yes, there are some decent digital PnSs out there. But with a DSLR, you're talking about a sensor that is 15x larger than most PnS cameras (which is why I mentioned looking for one with a larger-than-most sensor) and the ability to use any number of specialized lenses. My friends, the equipment is quite a bit more than 10% - especially somewhere like a Disney park where they are so many low-light photo opportunities where the PnSs will unavoidably struggle.

 

[tx2tn]

You guys mention the "sensor" and that size does matter here. As I am looking over a cameras specs, how is the sensor represented?

 

[boBQuincy]

Canon has a new camera out called the S90. It is supposed to be pretty good. It shoots in raw, has a good big lens and goes down to 2.0 aperture.

It's $499.00 or about what you could get a Nikon D40 for. But, it is very compact.

BestBuy somehow got the 2 new Canons in stock before anyone else so I went to look at them. The S90 is small, with really good specifications but to me a real camera *must* have a viewfinder so I went for the G11.

For those who do not list a viewfinder as a requirement the S90 (and G11) appear to have really good high ISO performance for a P&S. Canon's decision to reduce pixels in the interest of image quality (if that is really what they were looking for) is somewhat of a landmark.

 

[sdshutterbug]

Sensor size is what gets you better images at higher ISOs and better background blur at comparable focal lengths. There was some mention of aperture here, and that gets you faster shutter speeds in low light, eliminating the need for such high ISO, but it has no bearing on sensor size. The Sigma DP-1 and DP-2 p&s have DSLR-sized sensors with f/2.8 apertures. The G10 and G11 have normal p&s sized-sensors but use some advanced technology that helps them handle noise better. The Canon s90 has an aperture of f/2.0 at its widest end (it's not constant, so once you start to zoom you lose the 2.0), which is great for background blur and low light, but if the lighting conditions are crappy enough you will need to crank up the ISO still.

Basically, if you don't want to lug around a DSLR I would get one of the compact models that are made for pros to take on the go (such as Sigma Dp-1 or DP-2, Canon G series or s90, and probably a few others I'm not thinking of) - you will get outstanding image quality, you can buy adapters to give you a wider or longer focal length (at some loss of image quality), and they will all be about the same size as your current Canon model. They will cost you just as much as an entry level DSLR though (or close to it) - you're paying a price for the compactness.

My take on the Micro 4/3s cameras that are mentioned here is that they are nifty looking but cost as much as DSLRs without all the advanced features. It's definitely something to look into though because they are a bit smaller (when paired with small lenses) and the Olympus EP-1 has been getting stellar reviews.

I used to think I wouldn't want to lug around lots of gear but the more I get into photography, the less I care about lugging gear around. You will get plenty of awesome pictures with a compact camera, but there are some things it just can't do and it cannot be customized with different lenses, so I have gone over to the DSLR side and I'm there to stay!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Oooh, I didn't realize there was a m4/3 discussion going on in this thread.

The Oly EP-1 does look pretty neat and has good picture quality. There is also a new Panasonic Lumix out now, same price as the Oly that also has a good movie mode in it (like the EP-1).

But the downside to having a micro 4/3 system is that you have to use specific lenses which limits avid photographers. The Lumix GF-1 while small with a large sensor, is still limited to only a few lenses to use with it.

I'm an avid photographer and I'm not limited.

As a matter of fact, it's a boon for Olympus dSLR users like me as all we'll need is an adaptor to use any of our designed for digital 4/3 lenses with the micro 4/3 cameras and we will still be able to auto focus and everything.

And just as with an Oly dSLR, you can use the multitude of old Olympus OM lenses in manual focus as well. http://photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00TRvp

Put my pancake on that sucker and I can easily stick it in my pocket.

The sensor in the micro 4/3 is the same sensor that's in my dSLR. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=oly_e510,oly_ep1&show=all

 

[tx2tn]

Sensor size is what gets you better images at higher ISOs and better background blur at comparable focal lengths. There was some mention of aperture here, and that gets you faster shutter speeds in low light, eliminating the need for such high ISO, but it has no bearing on sensor size. The Sigma DP-1 and DP-2 p&s have DSLR-sized sensors with f/2.8 apertures. The G10 and G11 have normal p&s sized-sensors but use some advanced technology that helps them handle noise better. The Canon s90 has an aperture of f/2.0 at its widest end (it's not constant, so once you start to zoom you lose the 2.0), which is great for background blur and low light, but if the lighting conditions are crappy enough you will need to crank up the ISO still.

Basically, if you don't want to lug around a DSLR I would get one of the compact models that are made for pros to take on the go (such as Sigma Dp-1 or DP-2, Canon G series or s90, and probably a few others I'm not thinking of) - you will get outstanding image quality, you can buy adapters to give you a wider or longer focal length (at some loss of image quality), and they will all be about the same size as your current Canon model. They will cost you just as much as an entry level DSLR though (or close to it) - you're paying a price for the compactness.

My take on the Micro 4/3s cameras that are mentioned here is that they are nifty looking but cost as much as DSLRs without all the advanced features. It's definitely something to look into though because they are a bit smaller (when paired with small lenses) and the Olympus EP-1 has been getting stellar reviews.

I used to think I wouldn't want to lug around lots of gear but the more I get into photography, the less I care about lugging gear around. You will get plenty of awesome pictures with a compact camera, but there are some things it just can't do and it cannot be customized with different lenses, so I have gone over to the DSLR side and I'm there to stay!

Well said. Thanks.
What exactly is a 4/3 system?