Page 1 of Digital Camera surprise. Comparison between SLR & normal digital camera.

I`ve been looking out for a Digital SLR camera for a while. I`ve been looking on site after site & reviews after reviews. Although it`s not final I`m going for either the Canon EOS 350-00 or EOS 400D.

I have a Panasonic Here
I have told the virtues of this camera a few times on this site but I bet no one bought one.

Yesterday my friend came over with his camera here because I want to get used to SLR Lens sizes, so I will have an idea what type of lens I would buy. He also came with 3 different len`s. The one I`m about to talk about is this one here

Without going into loads of detail we took pictures in wide angle & full zoom. We both took them at the same time alongside each other. Together we took about 20 pictures.

I was expecting my camera to be wiped off the planet with the Nikon picture quality...BUT. My camera well stood up to the SLR & outperformed it on most pictures. One of a building about a hundred yards away on full zoom then cropping the pictures my focus was still good on the bricks when his was bluring. My camera is now around £200-00 & has a 10 times zoom and is 5 MP. The Nikon Camera & lens I`m talking about is about £1200-00 or more.

WHY. Am I about to waste money on a SLR. HELP?


Todays The Day. Tomorrow can wait...

Did you take pics using a tripod and remote release? Did you use similar shutter speeds and aperture sizes? Were the lenses properly shielded again flare?

The difference could be purely down to differences in camera shake when taking the pics. It might not be as cut and dried as you think :B

The difference could be purely down to differences in camera shake when taking the pics. It might not be as cut and dried as you think

Totally agree. No we didn`t use a tripod. The reason was my interest was in how close a 75-200 lens (for instance) would look compared to my 10X zoom. To my knowledge most of the Nikon pictures were on auto although I`m sure he did focus a couple of times but not sure which lens. To be fair tripod or no tripod these are the sort of pictures you`d get if you just aim & shoot of which from my experience you tend to do most. It was only while looking at the zoom results that it became apparent there was little difference in the pictures from the cameras. My Panasonic was on AUTO all the time. These results are definatly not conclusive as we didn`t go out to compare cameras & I`m sure if we set focus, shutter speed , ISO etc then the Nikon would look better, no proof it would mind you, but I suspect it would. Alfie, what camera do you have?

Todays The Day. Tomorrow can wait...

As far as SLRs go, the most important thing is brand, because once you buy your body, thats it. You are locked into the upgrade cycle with that brand of camera. Then when you buy your new body, you will still want to use all your old gear, so the first step is the most important.

As I said in that other thread, ive got an EOS 20D and its great. Ive still not mastered it at all, so at the moment, pictures taken on auto look better than manual, but there is a real photography nut at work who had a fiddle around with it and came up with some amazing pictures.

Basically, upgrading from a point and squirt to an SLR is an enormous step up. It will take literally months until you can get decent images out of your chosen kit, but ive seen the results of mastering my camera and its totally worth it.

I know that doesnt really answer any of your questions, but still....I like to have an opinion ;)

Actually Nick I agree I agree with you & looking at other sites I`ve seen pictures taken with both Nikon & Canon that are superb. My mate moved up from a Film SLR with the intention of keeping his old lenses but once he got the Digital camera he carried on buying lenses.

Todays The Day. Tomorrow can wait...

Quote:
Alfie, what camera do you have?
I`ve only got a cheapo point and shoot digital so I can`t really be specific about digital slr`s versus compacts and can`t say much about which are the best cameras out there I`m afraid.

I used to be a photographer and I studied photography so I know a bit about the subject - but that was before digital really became mainstream and only a few professionals were using it. I used to mostly use large format 5x4inch and medium format cameras where image quality and resolution were very high - not a great deal of 35mm. I`ve still got my old Canon EOS 35mm slr. Haven`t used it for years.

With film cameras the lens is everything re picture quality but it`s different with digital because of the different ccd chips and digital processing. You may find that a picture appears sharper but it may just be higher pixel contrast. The slr`s will undoubtedly have better lenses than the compacts - more glass and better correction of aberrations, image and colour distortions, etc.

I have the nikon d70s as my entry into DSLR`s.

I now know for a fact i wont be going back to just digital.

There is so much you can do, and some of the action shots i got compared to just digital are simply beautiful.

Although, if i was just using a cam for general shoots, family and stuff i would opt for normal as its cheaper, quicker and less tecknical. If your going to spend lots of money, you don`t want your camera on auto. this is a waste of so many functions.

I also love the feel, flexibility and :) the 0.2 second start time.

I wish i had your mates camera, but while im learning this will surfice.

I wish i had your mates camera, but while im learning this will surfice.

I know he`s taken some good pic`s with it, I`ve seen them, but this was the first time I could compare & as I said it was only to see how the zoom lenses were. I`m just so surprised that my 5MP camera not only stood up to but surpassed the 10MP SLR...at least in the photo`s we took. Now next time he comes over with it we`ll do some more real tests with a tripod & various settings, can`t wait. It may also be that the Panasonic camera is a lot better than I thought, I know I`ve taken some great shots with it from insects to night photos to long zoom shots & so on. Does anyone have the Canon eos 350 or 400D?

Todays The Day. Tomorrow can wait...

Hi Paull - on the point about camera shake, if the nikon lens had its VR (vibration reduction, the canon version is IS for Image Stabilization) feature turned on that shouldn`t be an issue.

I suspect the issue here is one of aperture / depth of field ie the nikon was focused on something in front of the building and with a wide open aperture the bricks would be out of focus.

The benefits of such a camera are that there are numerous options and controls for the various camera features which allow you to get exactly the look you`re after - the downside is that you need to learn how to use them to get the most out of the camera.

This guide (for your mates camera, and mine actually) gives an indication of things you need to consider:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200/users-guide/index.htm

I`m no knowledge of Canon but I expect the 400D will be an excellent camera. Equally the Lumix cameras are clearly very good at what they do - it`s just SLR`s allow you to be more creative.

The things I suspect you would notice straight away if you got digital SLR would be better battery life, an end to shutter/write lag and better quality shots at high ISO (I believe canon are noted for their low noise in poor light situations).

That said, even if you buy an slr I suspect you`ll continue to use the Lumix simply because it`s such a convenient size to carry around.

Hey thanks for that `Opposable_Thumb_Envy`. I will pass that onto my mate & it was interesting to have your thoughts on the Canon SLRs. The reason I want the 350 or 400 is they are a little smaller & I`m thinking of space when I fly. Thanks again.

Todays The Day. Tomorrow can wait...