cameras, old dslr vs newer compact?

[ufkacbln]

I use all 3

I run a Pentax K50 for its weatherproofing and adaptability, an Olympus Pen EPL5 as a more compact option, and finally a small Olympus SZ31 for pocket use.

On an average touring day, I can use all 3

 

[Cyclist33]

I run a Sony dslt and a Sony compact ilc, the compact has the same sensor size, can take a multitude of bloody great lenses and the picture qualitys better. It's also a third the size. Once you get to know them, mirrorless ilcs are ace. I use the lcd screen as it doesn't have a viewfinder. However However, it does give you live exposure and colour readouts and a histogram you can trust. Post processing takes care of everything it doesn't do, and it does everything the dslt does.

I believe they are the future and slrs have had their day, it's a shame that laypeople look at someone with an slr and assume they're "proper" photographers. Give it a few years tho!

 

[Cyclist33]

Seconded. Photographer is indeed the most important, but most of us haven't a clue.

I have an old 'Fuji' S9500 'bridge' camera (didn't realise it was a bridge until tonight), which is bascially a compact but it is the same size as a DSLR. It can be fully automatic, or indeed manual.

Get it right and it can take some fantastic photo's. They have a much better lense than a compact, but you lose the compact size. DSLR if you want the ability to change lenses and get more creative. My camera is better than me. Even though it's old, it's fast, takes great pics (only 9 megapixels - enough) but it is bulky. It is still point and shoot.

All this crap about phone cams having xxx megapixels, maybe, but the lense is crap and tiny.

The only advantage of a bridge camera is they are big enough to make people stand still for a bit in the belief that you're a proper photographer.

In all other respects they're a big box with a small sensor so you're lugging round extraneous kit... and you can get huge zooms in a much smaller package these days!

 

[Melvil]

How tall are you? Do you have big hands? (seriously) - some smaller cameras are very fiddly for people like me with big famers hands. Also if you ever do landscapes with cameras you'll be out in the cold and wearing gloves, buttons are very hard to press then.

Those minor points aside, good work. Photography is a brilliant hobby that is endlessly fascinating. As your skills increase you will become your friends and family's new best friend at every significant occasion ;-)

Compact cameras are a great place to start, have flexible zoom lenses, reasonable resolution and can teach you good basic skills. In fact a good smartphone camera these days can be used to very good effect and have the added bonus of being able to share your work very easily.

If I was entering the game now, as opposed to being saddled with Nikon SLR's and lenses, I would not bother with SLRs. They are a (slowly but surely) dying breed. As Cyclist33 says above, SLTs and mirrorless cameras are the future. On the high-end, Sony's excellent A7 II is heading in the right direction for a full-frame camera and the Olympus OMD series is a great, relatively cheap and very portable Mirrorless camera.

At the end of the day, there are no 'best' cameras. Only the best for you. As a wise man said 'the best camera is the one you have with you.' I've seen masterpieces made from pinhole cameras made from a matchbox and a piece of film. Getting the 'eye' for a shot is much more important. And getting out into the world is a close second. If I had a choice of spending £300 between a new lens and a holiday to Venice, I would take the holiday to Venice because I can take shots in my home city at any time, whereas I will only see and take pictures of Venice once.

P.S. See my photo website here: www.flickr.com/semi-detached and I challenge you to tell me (without checking) which shots are made with a phone and which with an SLR :-)

 

[Cyclist33]

Mind you, there are plenty of people in Venice already with cameras, and what makes you think you'd do a better job than them lol?

Nice website.

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence about the controllability of dslrs, on the other hand I find the array of buttons no less bewildering than digital menus or post processing, to put it another way these are the tools of the 21 century and I feel it's ludditism to insist in the manual side of slrs when there is as much, if a different, skillset in the digital arts.

I have lost as many shots through pressing the wrong combo on my slr, as I have through misnavigating my compact.

 

[KneesUp]

P.S. See my photo website here: www.flickr.com/semi-detached and I challenge you to tell me (without checking) which shots are made with a phone and which with an SLR :-)

Nice photostream!

I know you could have done it in post-processing (although I've checked and you haven't) but to me it's obvious the cobbles are taken with a dSLR because of the way the focus fades away - and the out of focus buildings in the 'Je suis Charlie' pictures are also a give away.

Cobbles on the shore...(sunshine on Leith) by Semi-detached, on Flickr

Holding up the pen - #jesuischarlie by Semi-detached, on Flickr

Compact cameras or phones that give you the control over exposure to do this are few and far between

Angel fire on the beach by Semi-detached, on Flickr

And there is something about this one that says 'phone' to me - it might just be the instagram filter, but I think it's in the way the sharpness falls off so dramatically from the centre.

Frozen comb by Semi-detached, on Flickr

(I only looked at the EXIF after I'd decided which were which - I didn't get any wrong, but there are a large number where I wouldn't be prepared to say either way, so for a lot of shots you are correct - certainly for the size of image shown in the flickr photostream)

 

[Arrowfoot]

One is a road bike and the other a mountain bike. Both operate very well in their respective domain. I would take along a DSLR for open and confined spaces, landscapes, changing lights, wildlife, sports, movement, low light, wide spectrum use, portraits, nightlife. I would use the compact for urban, cafes, restaurants, city use, people, family event, everyday stuff.

For DSLR, whole range of Nikons and Canons. For Compact, go for the mirrorless with Olympus and Fuji leading. The Olympus OM-D E1 is outstanding. Discreet, quiet and awesome quality.

 

[Scoosh]

Some lovely, wonderful, beautiful pics there, @Melvil - thanks.

 

[KneesUp]

For DSLR, whole range of Nikons and Canons. ....

And there is also Pentax if you want a good one

 

[Melvil]

Nice photostream!

I know you could have done it in post-processing (although I've checked and you haven't) but to me it's obvious the cobbles are taken with a dSLR because of the way the focus fades away - and the out of focus buildings in the 'Je suis Charlie' pictures are also a give away.

Cobbles on the shore...(sunshine on Leith) by Semi-detached, on Flickr

Holding up the pen - #jesuischarlie by Semi-detached, on Flickr

Compact cameras or phones that give you the control over exposure to do this are few and far between

Angel fire on the beach by Semi-detached, on Flickr

And there is something about this one that says 'phone' to me - it might just be the instagram filter, but I think it's in the way the sharpness falls off so dramatically from the centre.

Frozen comb by Semi-detached, on Flickr

(I only looked at the EXIF after I'd decided which were which - I didn't get any wrong, but there are a large number where I wouldn't be prepared to say either way, so for a lot of shots you are correct - certainly for the size of image shown in the flickr photostream)

Good work - yes, I guess the depth of field is a bit of a give-away though I've managed to get fairly shallow depth of field with the iPhone with especially close objects :-) - that's me proven wrong.

 

[Melvil]

Some lovely, wonderful, beautiful pics there, @Melvil - thanks.

Thanks Scoosh

 

[Melvil]

Mind you, there are plenty of people in Venice already with cameras, and what makes you think you'd do a better job than them lol?

Nice website.

There is plenty of anecdotal evidence about the controllability of dslrs, on the other hand I find the array of buttons no less bewildering than digital menus or post processing, to put it another way these are the tools of the 21 century and I feel it's ludditism to insist in the manual side of slrs when there is as much, if a different, skillset in the digital arts.

I have lost as many shots through pressing the wrong combo on my slr, as I have through misnavigating my compact.

Ha ha true about Venice, certainly - but you get my point - you got to get out to get the photos. They won't come to you.

In terms of SLR controllability - it's essential for some things that just cannot be replicated by post-processing. Long exposures are something that have to be done at the time, no second chances. Same with use of flash for portraits.

But definitely, for most shots, there are a vast amount of post-processing choices in Photoshop and Lightroom and that's half the fun, isn't it. Some pictures, with a few minutes of fiddling, just start to really pop in a way that you wouldn't have thought while taking them.

 

[KneesUp]

...there are a vast amount of post-processing choices in Photoshop and Lightroom and that's half the fun, isn't it. Some pictures, with a few minutes of fiddling, just start to really pop in a way that you wouldn't have thought while taking them.

And that's where the ability to shoot RAW is priceless - again, not a feature many phones or compacts have.

 

[Melvil]

By the way, getting back to the OP, along with a camera I would buy an editing program - and if so I would definitely recommend Adobe Lightroom over Photoshop. It's about £100 now, which is fairly cheap for what it is, and very powerful, as well as non-destructive to your photos. For more advanced editing alongside Lightroom you can download something like GIMP, which is free and open source.

 

[Melvil]

And that's where the ability to shoot RAW is priceless - again, not a feature many phones or compacts have.

Funnily enough, I find that phones like the iPhone have a non-destructive in-house editing capability in the 'photo roll' which in some respects behaves quite like RAW - though in a much more basic way of course.