new entry level DSLR: anyone help?

Forums › Digital Imaging › new entry level DSLR: anyone help?

1 | 2

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

ID Verified

Trusted

#239733 28-Jul-2009 14:08

RockResearch: I was looking at a new DSLR until I discovered the Canon G10, great point and shoot functionality without having to muck around with lenses. Can even fit in your pocket. Has all the manual functions of the SLR camera as well.

No doubt the G10 is a good camera but it is like chalk and cheese comparing it to a dslr. Image quality, speed and functionality are vastly different.

Have you ever seen a point and shoot sensor chip side by side with a dslr chip? Huge difference in size.

You just can't get the shots with a point and shoot that you can get with a dslr.

I have both and I think this is a good compromise given how cheap point and shoot cameras are now, you don;t always want to lug a dslr around with you whereas a point and shoot fits nicely in the pocket.

meesham

973 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 267

#239762 28-Jul-2009 14:59

RockResearch: I was looking at a new DSLR until I discovered the Canon G10, great point and shoot functionality without having to muck around with lenses. Can even fit in your pocket. Has all the manual functions of the SLR camera as well.

It really depends on what you're going to use it for and what trade-offs you're willing to make. A G10 has a smaller sensor than DSLRs so you're more prone to noise problems at higher ISO. Another issue is it's slower than most DSLRs, 0.7fps - so if you're into shooting sports it's not really suitable (it also has a maximum zoom of 5x). There's also no support for external flashes, has a limited fstop range and a number of other limitations - if you're after complete creative control of your photos a DSLR is the only way to go.

That said I also own a point and shoot which I carry around in my pocket, you never know when you'll come across a photo opportunity and there's no way I'm lugging around my DSLR with me everywhere.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537
Inactive user

#239794 28-Jul-2009 15:36

meesham:
RockResearch: I was looking at a new DSLR until I discovered the Canon G10, great point and shoot functionality without having to muck around with lenses. Can even fit in your pocket. Has all the manual functions of the SLR camera as well.

It really depends on what you're going to use it for and what trade-offs you're willing to make. A G10 has a smaller sensor than DSLRs so you're more prone to noise problems at higher ISO. Another issue is it's slower than most DSLRs, 0.7fps - so if you're into shooting sports it's not really suitable (it also has a maximum zoom of 5x). There's also no support for external flashes, has a limited fstop range and a number of other limitations - if you're after complete creative control of your photos a DSLR is the only way to go.

That said I also own a point and shoot which I carry around in my pocket, you never know when you'll come across a photo opportunity and there's no way I'm lugging around my DSLR with me everywhere.

I too have a small point and shoot, a Sony T-2 that I have with me at all times, it does take good pictures for those spur of the moment, candid ones but for the horse ones the DSLR is the way to go.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#239795 28-Jul-2009 15:38

just note that the LENS provided with entry level body and lens kits are completely inadequate. it really doesnt matter which DSLR body you buy - as long as you go with canon / nikon - it's the lens that handicaps you

alasta

6890 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3364

Trusted

Subscriber

#239918 28-Jul-2009 20:23

joker97: just note that the LENS provided with entry level body and lens kits are completely inadequate. it really doesnt matter which DSLR body you buy - as long as you go with canon / nikon - it's the lens that handicaps you

Completely inadequete? Please share with the group what exactly is wrong with the Nikkor 18-55mm or 55-200mm VR apart from the PF and lack of lens hood on the former.

Sure, it may be worthwhile to invest in better glass if you want the speed and sharpness of a prime or the speed and flexibility of a constant aperture zoom, but for the vast majority of amateur photographers it doesn't make sense to spend well over $1000 on a single lens.

Upskilling is generally far more beneficial than nitpicking over trivial issues with equipment.

Fossie

1240 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#239921 28-Jul-2009 20:28

18-55 is fine....who cares if its a little slow...

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

alasta

6890 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3364

Trusted

Subscriber

#239929 28-Jul-2009 20:45

Fossie: 18-55 is fine....who cares if its a little slow...

Being a 'little slow' could be a major problem if shooting moving subjects in low light, but if you can use it around the f/8 - f/11 range then it's excellent for most amateur applications.

TinyTim

1058 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 167

Trusted

#239930 28-Jul-2009 20:51

alasta:
Fossie: 18-55 is fine....who cares if its a little slow...

Being a 'little slow' could be a major problem if shooting moving subjects in low light, but if you can use it around the f/8 - f/11 range then it's excellent for most amateur applications.

And cameras are getting better and better at higher sensitivities (higher ISO settings) so you can avoid the wide apertures more and more in low light.

alasta

6890 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3364

Trusted

Subscriber

#239939 28-Jul-2009 21:18

TinyTim:
alasta:
Fossie: 18-55 is fine....who cares if its a little slow...

Being a 'little slow' could be a major problem if shooting moving subjects in low light, but if you can use it around the f/8 - f/11 range then it's excellent for most amateur applications.

?

And cameras are getting better and better at higher sensitivities (higher ISO settings) so you can avoid the wide apertures more and more in low light.

True, although I was recently helping someone who was using a couple of kit zooms to photograph her daughter at gymnastics but she wasn't allowed to use flash and she was getting motion blur because most of her shots even at ISO 1600 were metering at 1/125s. A constant aperture zoom would have been ideal and a fast prime might have been an acceptable cheaper option, but she wasn't willing to fork out for either of those so the best suggestion I could make was to use ISO 3200, get up close, use the wide end of the zoom and hope for the best.

Shooting indoor sports is a real pig because it's about the only thing that you can't do well without a significant investment in equipment.

TinyTim

1058 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 167

Trusted

#239948 28-Jul-2009 21:24

alasta:

True, although I was recently helping someone who was using a couple of kit zooms to photograph her daughter at gymnastics but she wasn't allowed to use flash and she was getting motion blur because most of her shots even at ISO 1600 were metering at 1/125s. A constant aperture zoom would have been ideal and a fast prime might have been an acceptable cheaper option, but she wasn't willing to fork out for either of those so the best suggestion I could make was to use ISO 3200, get up close, use the wide end of the zoom and hope for the best.

Shooting indoor sports is a real pig because it's about the only thing that you can't do well without a significant investment in equipment.

A monopod and learning to pan may be useful for some indoor sports (tho probably not gymnastics!) Getting front-on to the action may have helped.

1 | 2