#1 phule

Why do we need to pit one tool against another? This seems like a silly and worthless excercise. A tool is a tool. You choose the right one for the job. Some tasks call for a DSLR some call for a SLR-like prosumer and some call for a point and shoot pocket camera.

There is no one true answer here. There's no reason to spend time tearing anothers choice of tools down. It's silly.

3:13 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#2 Itai

Well, I do know there are advantages to both
but they aren't so obvious, that's why I
wrote an article about it (see
http://www.neocamera.com/feature_dslr.html).

Overall, an advanced compact gives great
value because it can incorporate a lens
which covers most photographic needs - for
a low total price. Yes, the image quality
is less per-pixel but it won't matter unless
you print larger than 9"x12". For this
reason, I use a Konica-Minolta Dimage A2
over a Canon 20D unless shooting action.

- Itai

3:20 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#3 Charles Bandes

They all have their place. My serious and professional work is done with a DSLR (D2x) but I never leave home without a point-n-shoot (Fuji F10)

It all depends on the purpose - obviously image quality, lens quality, and freedom to control and compose the image are all much greater with an SLR. But the D2x is big and heavy and conspicuous, not to mention expensive. The F10 does a remarkable job considering that it fits in my pocket and draws nearly no attention.

4:11 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#4 Roger Johnson

I initially had hoped to avoid the need to haul around an SLR and a few lenses when I bought a Nikon Coolpix 5700, which was truly a wonderful camera. However, compared to an SLR, the response time was slow, the EVF left a lot to be desired by comparison, and the lens was relatively slow. So I finally broke down and bought a D70 and am back to using my 80-200 and 28-80 f2.8 zooms. It may be a heavier load to carry, but those lenses and a couple others I own are far too useful to leave sitting in the closet, and none of the EVF cameras can match them. Of course, I don't always have that outfit with me, and that's where my Canon S70 and my wife's Nikon Coolpix 7900 come in handy. They're ALWAYS with us.

5:35 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#5 Leander Urmy

I too like both. I carry a 5 MP Olympus Stylus 500 with me all the time. I like the size and convenience. I use it to capture those moments that come along that are wonderus, but have left the camera at home. With this little jewel, at least I can still capture that moment.

When I do serious work I use my Nikon D100 (just ordered the Nikon D200) because it does offer superior images. It is heavier but provides a choice of lenses that I think are better than my Olympus. Why didn't go higher up the chain than the Olympus, because I wanted something that I could put in my pants pocket. I think they all have their place, it depends on the photographer and his habits/style.

6:33 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#6 GARY POGODA

Interesting comments, but nonetheless, all wrong. :)

The reason we use different cameras for different situations is simply
because the "perfect" all-in-one, ultra-compact has yet to be invented.

Give it time, but then again, don't hold your breath. :)

8:08 pm - Saturday, November 19, 2005

#7 Gordon

I love my pentax *istDS but sometimes I wish I could have the ease of use and small size of a compact camera.

Gordon

12:55 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#8 mike

i am a hiker and always bring a camera with me. despite all advantages of DSLR (especially low noise in dark forest), i chose advanced compact (KM A200) over DSLRs. I couldn't imagine changing lens in the "field" - with dirly sweaty hands under rain/wind/etc. and camera weight is also a concern. however, if there were olimpus DSLRs with "dust-off" and stabilized lens, my choice could be different.

2:59 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#9 Arnold Miller

I already have the KM A-200, and love it for general photography. The Nikon D70 I traded back, was too bulky, and too heavy, and required too many choices for fast picture-taking; and changing lenses on my feet in the field is a clumsy exercise. Now I would rather have two or three compact digital cameras, each having a different strength. Grab the appropriate one and use it for whatever the occasion calls for. Preferences: Sony DSC-R1, perhaps with 0.7x adapter, for landscape and street, my A-200, perhaps with a tele-extender, for telephoto and portrait, and perhaps a Nikon S4 for macro shooting.

Arnold

8:21 am - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#10 Nicholas

Upto 8 x 10 prints, I challenge any DSLR owner to take a stroll with me along a beach, through a garden, on a city street, in a church or museum, or any other location, and to capture on the spot moments that may include macro shots, tele shots, wide angle shots, ground level shots,
flash shots, candid shots, etc. as quickly and effectively as I can with my prosumer Fuji S9000.

At this stage in my photographic learning curve, I don't need to fuss with all the assessories / different lens / dust / weight / EXPENSE, etc., of a DSLR to capture images that satisfy me.

I am even about to replace my Slik tripod with a very small fold up one so I can carry it in my S9000's bag.

I still have my D30, D60 and F-828, but my S9000 is far and above the best of these.

" Try it, You'll Like It" as they say.

Regards, Nicholas

12:56 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#11 Jan

Penis envy might have something to do with how people answer this question, which is really quite stupid.

2:56 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#12 David M

Hey Nicholas,

I doubt any digicam can handle shooting in a dark bar or during disco hour at the bowling alley (two situations that I've recently shot in). I was shooting iso3200 (and pushing to iso6400), f/2, 1/30s. No flash of course, that ruins the scene.

It's really about compromise. A DSLR is by far the most versatile. With that versatility comes the cost of weight, size, and cost. "Pick your poison" is an appropriate cliche when discussing digicam vs. DSLR.

6:03 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#13 GARY POGODA

You'll all be singing a different tune once CMOS technology makes its
way down to 1/1.8" image sensors (for compact all-in-ones) and 1/2.5"
image sensors (for ultra-compact all-in-ones).

When that time comes, you will be able to shoot at 3200 and 6400 ISO
because of CMOS noise reduction capabilities, which stop noise at the
pixel level using hardware (unlike CCD noise reduction, which reduces
noise at the image level using firmware, and which robs an image of its
detail in the process).

When that time comes, speed will not be an issue, since CMOS offers
increased processing speed over the CCD, not to mention the fact that
processors and memory will be even faster, as well.

When that time comes, DOF will not be an issue, since simulated bokeh
effects will have matured.

When that time comes, you will need only to decide between a compact
for its larger (and higher quality) lens, versus the ultra-compact, with its
pocketable convenience.

For now, Fuji image sensor technology is about as close as you can get
to a compact/ultra-compact all-in-one with DSLR quality (i.e., the S9000,
which is not so compact, or the F10/11, which is not so all-in-one with its
3x zoom). The Sony DSC-R1 also comes close, being the only non-SLR
with an APS-C image sensor, but it is humongous, and has only 5x zoom.

9:29 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#14 John W. Cameron Jr

I think this discussion has already been had with somewhat earlier generations...Just with a different media. I had (and still do and use) several 35mm SLR’s including my “beloved” Minolta Maxxum 7. I also have had several 35mm P&S cameras. The same points in the posts above about the benefits of each camera form factor hold true whatever the capture tool is film or CCD/CMOS/Foveon. There is a place for both tools, depending on what you are doing.

I know that this is a discussion of DSLR vs. digital compacts but...(and not trying to fuel a different fire, no really!) it is hard to beat the extended dynamic range of print film...yet.

To summarize my world I use:
Minolta Dimage 7Hi and KM A200...at family get-together’s, travel pals...in the car all the time.
KM 7D DSLR...landscape, birding and animal, Studio, very low light situations where I know I need a higher ISO (anti-shake is wonderful), etc.
Mamiya 645 Pro TL...Having said what I did above I have to add this camera although it is film. To keep this somewhat on topic is hoping to some day be able to afford a digital back for it. Fabulous landscapes, studio and images where I know that I will want very large prints.

So, there’s my 2 cents. A bit convoluted maybe but the point is that there really is no right answer that you can pin on everybody.

Happy shooting;

John

10:11 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#15 GARY POGODA

No argument about digital not being able to beat the dynamic range
of film yet; however, I wanted to point out, dynamic range is another
one of the advantages of CMOS image sensors over CCDs.

BTW, where do you park your car? :)

10:39 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#16 John W. Cameron Jr

Ha Ha...I'm in Fairfield Ca. Come on over, bring your camera, the bar is open, soft drinks, coffee...whatever. I believe in the "honor amongst photographers"...except paparazzi. :coolsmile:

10:52 pm - Sunday, November 20, 2005

#17 AA

1 more year? 2 more years, may be?

I'd say give it 1 more whole year and there won't be any difference between an "advanced compact" with all the trimmings and a DSLR.
In fact, I think everyone knows the DSLR will see a drop off in sales, interest, and use. Why worry about changing lenses and getting dust in there if you didn't have to?
But the so-called "advanced compact" has to have all the trimmings, such as RAW, various flash-sync capabilities, low noise, extremely wide to extremely long lens capability, fast shutters, long battery life, and anything else I've missed that should be standard in "advanced" cameras...

All that stuff we can do in the computer will improve to accomodate the advanced compacts too, I should think.

Sorry to state the obvious...

12:57 am - Monday, November 21, 2005

#18 Hans Van Rafelghem

Since sensor size determines DOF & noise there still is a big difference between DSLR & compacts. That said, I also use both :coolsmile:

--
Hans VR
http://www.hansvr.com

10:52 am - Monday, November 21, 2005

#19 Nicholas

This confirms what I have been talking about.

These words were never applied to a single camera ( DSLR or Prosumer ) until now:

"Fujifilm FinePix S9500 - Test conclusion
Kai Thon, DIWA's test manager comments: "The FinePix S9500 is a compact package that will solve most photographic challenges from virtually any photographer, professional and amateur alike. It is also very budget-friendly, considering the price of any 28-300 mm f/2.8-4.9 zoom lens with super macro capability as close as 1 cm, not to forget the well reputed Super CCD HR image sensor with 9 Mp resolution and many professional-like features. DIWA experts found the FinePix S9500 to be a perfect assembly of imaging essentials built into a user-friendly body at a very competitive price."

Regards, Nicholas

1:44 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#20 GARY POGODA

Like AA said, it has to have "all the trimmings". Do you find that the
S9000's RAW and TIFF modes are fast enough to be usable? And
what about the much publicized poor manual focus response? Are
there any other S9000 flaws that you have found which keep it from
being a true DSLR replacement?

6:42 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#21 Zoltan

I use both a bridge type digicam and a DSLR system. As some other posters have said, it's really a case of horses for courses.

The DSLR wins hands down as regards viewfinder clarity and usability in all lighting conditions (ever tried to manually focus an EVF camera in low light?), focussing speed (SLRs have phase detection sensors while compact digicams use the slower contrast detection method), and lets you, at least in principle, pick the best lens available for any given task.

The main advantages of a high-end compact digicam include a live histogram preview, which makes it almost impossible to screw up the exposure (bar flash shots), and a lighter take-anywhere all-in-one system that usually features a superb zoom lens (the smaller sensor allows lenses to be smaller too - the 12x f/2.8 zoom of the FZ-20 would be enormous if it had to serve a full-frame- or even an APS-C sized sensor).

So as long as you don't need fast focussing, can live without specialty lenses, only shoot when lighting conditions are good, and can put up with not having an optical TTL viewfinder on your camera, you might not need a DSLR at all.

If, on the other hand, you are alienated by EVFs, often shoot erratically moving subjects (kids, pets or football players), like to take photographs in dimly lit places, or simply need ultra-wide or super-telephoto glass or repro-quality macro lenses (not to mention fisheyes, lensbabies or tilt/shift optics), then you can hardly make do without an SLR system.

8:15 pm - Monday, November 21, 2005

#22 Nicholas

Zoltan,

Your comments are very valid Pre-S9000.

You should check the camera out.
The EVF is very good., ISO performance is great, The focus is very high speed as well as the shutter lag. Lens fantastic.

Regards, Nicholas

1:04 am - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#23 Zoltan

Nicholas, if you are happy with your purchase, by all means stick with it.

I used to have an S602Z, and even posted a lengthy user review at http://www.epinions.com/content_127847927428 The world has moved on since then and I am pretty sure the S9000Z has fixed much of what bugged me about the S602Z - but frankly, I don't think it invalidates any of my comments about who needs a DSLR and why. After all, those that want to use a true ultra-wide-angle (say 14, 15 or 18mm equivalent) lens, need true Flat Field Macro or other specialty optics, or want to take well-focussed shots in low light will still have to look for a DSLR. And as far as the EVF goes, it's the same 0.44", 235,000-pixel affair that's found on most current models - while I have no doubt it satisfies many people, it's certainly not up to scratch with a good (or even mediocre) SLR-type finder. I, for one, handled the KM DiMAGE A2, whose EVF has almost 4 times the resolution of the one built into the S9000Z, and still didn't like it. Some people just can't warm up to EVFs, and I'm one of them.

But there are no right or wrong attitudes here, and as I've said, if you are satisfied with your gear, by all means go with it. After all, this is what truly counts.

11:44 am - Tuesday, November 22, 2005

#24 Tim Whatley

What about ruggedness and build quality? Some of the high-end compacts I've seen use cheap plastic point & shoot quality autofocus zoom mechanisms, not to mention their usual lack of weathersealing. With the high rate of breakdown and malfunction being reported for digital cameras as a whole, it's something to consider, at least if you are planning to keep the camera for awhile or plan to rely on it outdoors.

6:08 pm - Friday, November 25, 2005

#25 GARY POGODA

I don't think dSLRs have a monopoly on build quality, but it certainly
is an important consideration. One thing about all-in-ones, you will
normally not have anywhere near the investment you would have in
a dSLR with all its lenses, so it will be much easier to upgrade to the
latest and greatest all-in-one after a good two years, or so, of use.

8:03 pm - Friday, November 25, 2005

#26 Dimitri Kikacheishvili

There are many advantages to DSLR, but I would ephesize one above all. It's the ability to look through the lens and see what you are shooting, and no additional features in a compact camera can replace that. Many compact cameras produce excelent pictures, but it's not only the quality of the final picture that makes DSLR so valuable but rather the ability to identify, frame and measure the scenes that make a great picture.

2:24 am - Friday, December 9, 2005

#27 Nicholas

Hello Dimitri and All,

There are many shots, overhead, on the ground , around a turn, etc., that I would never be able to see through my D60's viewfinder. My S9000 EVF is much better than my F-828's. And it is 100% accurate from 28 mm to 300 mm.

By the way, I did get to shoot a head shot of my friend using his 20D and his new 300mm 2.8 IS Canon prime lens. What I saw through the viewfinder was FANTASTIC. So was the $ it cost him.
He also shot my wife and I and his prints were excellent.

This is not about what is better but whether one can capture moments within his budget.

Regards and Good Shooting, Nicholas

2:44 am - Friday, December 9, 2005

#28 GARY POGODA

Dimitri, excellent point about through-the-lens viewing. I just wonder
how much of its advantage is actually due to your familiarity with the
SLR type viewing, rather than to the inadequacies of LCDs and EVFs
for such purposes, inadequacies which, BTW, are rapidly diminishing
as the electronic screens continue to improve in quality and versatility,
and as noted by Nicholas, at a much lower price point.

6:49 am - Friday, December 9, 2005

#29 Dick B

I RECENTLY GAVE UP MY NIKON 35MM AND MY LARGE FORMAT HASSLEBLAD WHICH I THOUGHT THE WORLD OF. I BOUGHT AN OLYMPUS E-10 SLR WHICH SERVED MY PURPOSES FOR ABOUT A YEAR THEN I LOOKED AT THE NIKON D-200 SLR WHICH WAS ONLY RELEASED A FEW MONTHS AGO AND,I NEVER LOOKED BACK. THIS CAMERA IS A DREAM. EASY TO USE, RUGGED, AND FILLED WITH FEATURES THAT ACTUALLY HAVE VALUE. THERE IS A REASON THAT THEY CAN'T KEEP THEM ON THE SHELVES AND IT'S QUALITY ALL THE WAY. I HAVE HAD THE CAMERA FOR TWO MONTHS AND I CAN'T FIND ANYTHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT WHICH IS A FIRST FOR ME. BY THE WAY I DO NOT OWN STOCKS OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED TO THE NIKON PEOPLE. THE CAMERA IS A LITTLE PRICY BUT IT WAS WORTH IT. I CONSIDER IT AN INVESTMENT.

5:11 pm - Wednesday, March 1, 2006

#30 nick in japan

Dick, I'm a collector, please sell me your LARGE FORMAT Hassy, it would be the crowning glory to my collection!! Should be worth at least 1-2 Million US Dollars!!
I bet your Nikon D200 looks good in your shirt pocket! You are missing lottsa shots if you dont have a 1" thick (or thinner) compact in that shirt pocket, even if they may produce some noise now and then!

10:32 pm - Wednesday, March 1, 2006

#31 Dick B

Nick,
Although I am torn relative letting the Hassy go, I would certainly would like to share with you the history of the camera and would entertain an offer.
You can contact me at: http://WWW.RMBSOUND@AOL.COM
Thank you,

Dick B.

11:48 pm - Wednesday, March 1, 2006

#32 nick in japan

That address is not available for some reason, please contact me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

12:40 am - Thursday, March 2, 2006

#33 Glade 1964

I use 2 bridge cameras (Fuji 9500 and 9600) for wedding work because of the convenience of having a 28-300 lens on tap without running the risk of missing candid shots and the luxury of instant view. No doubt DSLRs are the better option but you have to climb the tree to well over a grand before you get close to the functionality of the 9500 and 9600 and I would want to see a massive advantage to justify the cost.

Where Fuji did screw up was by putting that stupid puny built in flash on them without making them compatible with a TTL dedicated gun (Dunno why, they are teamed up with Nikon for the DSLRs so they could have made them Speedlight compatible) Thankfully, they did build in a trigger voltage tolerance of 450 volts so manual guns such as the early Jap Vivitar 283 aren't a problem to use. OK, so you have to shoot in manual but us old dogs remember the days of the workhorse OM1 and OM2 and can live with it.

Manual focus is a bit of a pain and the AF on the 9500 has been beefed up on the 9600 to work better in low light. Built in flash is still crap though.

All in all, the 9500/9600 are a hell of a lot of camera for the money. I paid £240 for my 9600. Compare that with the £199 I paid for my OM2 in 1982 and it's merely pennies.

I will cross the bridge one day..........when there's something to cross it for.

10:12 pm - Monday, November 5, 2007