advertisement


Quandry: P&S vs. DSLR

Mike Hanson

Mike Hanson

Trying to understand...
I bought a Canon G9 a little over a year ago. This past week, it decided not to wake up. I tried everything (fresh batteries, different memory card, web search, etc.) and it's about the go to Canon for servicing. Unfortunately, it's a little over a year since its purchase, so it won't be under warranty.

I'm not sure how long it's going to take, so I'm pondering buying a second camera in the meantime. I don't think there's any sense in buying a cheap P&S, because it will never be used once the G9 has returned. Instead, I'm considering a DSLR.

Neither my wife nor I are "avid" photographers, mostly for lack of time. However, we both begrudge the limitations of the G9 (mostly shutter lag, and poor ISO performance). I'm considering entry-level DSLRs, probably a Canon.

Initially I figured I should get the latest Rebel T1i, because of the movie mode (which we use on the G9). It would cost roughly CAD$1000 for the kit. Alternatively, we could get the older Rebel XS, which can be had for CAD$550. Supposedly it takes better pictures than the T1i, but doesn't have movie mode, "Live View", and a few other bells and whistles. Since our G9 can handle movies, that one's not a big issue. Having to look through the viewfinder to snap a picture will be a blast from the past. ;)

My biggest concern with a DSLR is the size. The G9 has a really nice form factor, and I've been pondering why they can't solve issues like poor high ISO performance and shutter lag with a P&S. Apparently the size of the sensor has an impact, but the Sigma DP2's big sensor still results in noisy images and it doesn't use a zoom lens. Shutter lag seems to be an issue with anything except DSLRs.

So my questions are:
  • Am I expecting too much from a P&S, or is there something out there that performs as well as a DSLR?
  • If I have to get a DSLR, am I going to be disappointed by settling with an older Rebel XS, or should I just plump up for the latest entry-level DSLR?
  • Is there another DSLR that I should be considering? I monitor dpreview.com, so I'm basically familiar with most things, but I don't pore over each and every post, so I may have missed something amazing.
Thanks guys!

Mike Hanson
 
I think the Olympus 620 is the smallest dSLR at the moment. Not much bigger than a Canon G10. Or you could wait for the upcoming Olympus Micro4/3rds camera.
 
Mike, there are currently two point and shoots which boast low noise and high ISOs. One is a Fuji (F200EXR) and the other is a Ricoh (CX1).

If you want a small DSLR then look no further than the Lumix G1 which is even tinier than the tiniest Olympus

If you have to have a movie mode then get the Lumix GH1

cheers
Cliff
 
guybat said:
I think the Olympus 620 is the smallest dSLR at the moment. Not much bigger than a Canon G10. Or you could wait for the upcoming Olympus Micro4/3rds camera.
Click to expand...

Announcement on the 14th June or thereabouts, I believe....
 
The Fuji F200EXR looks interesting, as does the Ricoh CX1. However, both have noteworthy troubles with high ISO noise (not as good as DSLRs, but better than my Canon G9). They also have various shortcomings that make them less acceptable than the G9.

I tend to shoot more with telephoto versus wide-angle, so a DSLR (even the Micro 4/3's units) will require a honking big lens. Consequently, I won't be able to stuff it in my pocket. If it won't fit in my pocket, then it doesn't really matter if it's Big or BIGGER. Therefore, the Lumix G1 is in the same bucket as a Canon Rebel.

Mike Hanson
 
Mike Hanson said:
The Fuji F200EXR looks interesting, as does the Ricoh CX1. However, both have noteworthy troubles with high ISO noise (not as good as DSLRs, but better than my Canon G9). They also have various shortcomings that make them less acceptable than the G9.

I tend to shoot more with telephoto versus wide-angle, so a DSLR (even the Micro 4/3's units) will require a honking big lens. Consequently, I won't be able to stuff it in my pocket. If it won't fit in my pocket, then it doesn't really matter if it's Big or BIGGER. Therefore, the Lumix G1 is in the same bucket as a Canon Rebel.

Mike Hanson
Click to expand...

Mike, because of the lack of a mirror box, the lenses are 2/3rds the size of the 4/3rds lenses. The crop is 2.0 rather than the 1.5 of the Canon, so the lenses are 3/4 the size again - ie for the same reach the lens will be half the size of the Canon lens.

You can easily stuff the G1 with tele-zoom in the pocket of a poachers overcoat or similar. The 45-200 (90-400 in 35mm terms) is 4 inches long.

The canon Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM is 7.4 inches long and 3.5 times the weight
 
Mike,

Low noise at high ISO is rarely included as a parameter on the design brief with P&S cameras, since manufacturers seem more interested in slapping a 10MP+ sticker on the box than in trying to design a better, lower noise sensor.

If low noise at high ISO is what you're after buy a D-SLR. Ye cannae change the laws of physics.

Joe
 
Mr Cat,

I'm pretty sure that one of the Ws in www is short for world, but I could be mistaken.

Joe
 
Mr Cat said:
ah...it's easy to assume that most people here are uk based... :)
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I should have spoke up sooner. :) Yes, I'm in Canada.

I'm getting the G9 fixed regardless, as I really like it. The problem is that I may need a camera before it returns. I suppose I could dust off my old Minolta Maxxum 7000 film camera, but I figured this was a good opportunity to consider a new digital camera.

Mike Hanson
 
Joe Petrik said:
Low noise at high ISO is rarely included as a parameter on the design brief with P&S cameras, since manufacturers seem more interested in slapping a 10MP+ sticker on the box than in trying to design a better, lower noise sensor.

If low noise at high ISO is what you're after buy a D-SLR. Ye cannae change the laws of physics.
Click to expand...

That was my first thought, although I was hoping that someone realized that there was a market for compact cameras that work really, really well. I realize that this would eat into a company's DSLR sales, but they would be selling like hotcakes, which should make up for it. Besides, there are always gearheads who would demand a DSLR, for the extras that they offer.

Me, I just want a camera that can record what I see, without too much fiddling.

Mike Hanson
 
OK, I'll stand up and take the flames.
Unless you are in the Hasselblad/Sinar price zone there are really only two contenders for quality at 35mm: Nikon D3x and Canon D5 mk2. Everything else is a compromise, technologically speaking.
Personally I am in the Nikon camp with a cupboard full of fine lenses and if I were starting anew I might swing towards Canon. But my D3 hits my compromise point for now and ergonomicly it's superb.
But:
My dear wife however has a point'n'shoot Sony DC-something with which she continually outshoots me on auto everything when we vacation together. Damn but it's annoying. To the point at which she actually had a publication of a filer re a news event in London's Daily Mirror last week in preference to my fine art submission.
Aaargh..
Seriously, it's the eye that makes it, not the camera. Be there, see it, record it. The means are (almost) irrelevant.
My vote is for a p'n's.
 
My wife also tends to have a better eye than I do, regardless of my superior technical ability. :p Regardless, she sees the same strengths and weaknesses in our G9 as I do.

I'm starting to lean towards the Panasonic G1 micro four-thirds. It does look much smaller (although certainly not small enough to fit into any of my pockets; I guess Cliff's pockets are deeper ;)). I'm still mulling...

Mike Hanson
 
Patrick Dixon said:
No, this is a good opportunity to buy a Rolleiflex or a Hasselblad or something similar.

But buy a new digital camera as well if you like ....
Click to expand...

Although that's a romantic thought, I would rather have one camera that does everything. The only reason I'm considering getting a second (in addition to the G9 under repair) is that both my wife and I can take pictures at the same time.

Also, having a P&S is good for some things (pocketability, movie mode, etc.) while a DSLR is bulky but capable. It's the best of all worlds.

I would prefer to go for a better DSLR, but I'm not willing to spend that much money on something that won't get enough use to justify the purchase price.

Mike Hanson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top