# A heads up for those..



## pooma (Apr 12, 2008)

Thinking "I want a DSLR"

Make sure it really is the piece of kit for you.

Here's the story.

My cousin come to me not long since stating he wanted a camera and really liked the looks of some of the pics I was getting of my kids(with my a230), and as he has a little one of his own wanted something to get equally good pics.
So I asked what else he wanted from it. "Nothing really" came the reply, just good quality pics of the bairn. So I tried to advise him to get a good quality compact or even a bridge for point and click but still getting good images, especially as his wife will be using and all she wants to do is point and click.
Against my recommendation he went out and bought a sony a390 and is really struggling with it. I was sitting tonight tying to explain f stops and lighting and shutter speeds, also that shooting without the on board flash where ever possible would be better but could see him glazing over and really not grasping it.

He really has no intrest and I think he's wasted a whole heap of cash when for his uses a good compact would be getting better results.

Just a heads up really that if you're not wanting to spend time using a camera as a hobby then dslr really isn't the way to go as to get the best from these things you have to be prepared to put the time in.

Sorry to ramble on but we see so many "which dslr" threads from people that should be looking to compacts or bridges at a psh.


----------



## blurb (Feb 13, 2008)

Good advice.
I always suggest a decent compact unless you are serious about your photography.
You can upgrade later if you get into it, and then use the compact to grab those fleeting shots when you don’t have all the kit to hand.


----------



## beginner101 (Jan 19, 2010)

i have seen beter pics from a mobile phone than a dslr, its the person that takes the pic and a good photographer will make a cheap compact that stunning pics


----------



## butcher (Sep 3, 2010)

It's his money. Stick it in auto and leave him to it.

Unfortunately SLRs are synonymous with pro photography and great photos. And despite whatever you say, most people won't be told otherwise.


----------



## pooma (Apr 12, 2008)

I know it's his money but even he was admitting last night that he felt he'd made a mistake and he should've got a bridge or a top end compact.


----------



## robj20 (Jan 20, 2009)

The fact is though if you have the money and are not bothered about the size a DSLR will still be better even in Auto than a point and shoot.


----------



## ant_s (Jan 29, 2009)

^^ is this true? i've often wondered if it is?


----------



## robj20 (Jan 20, 2009)

The larger sensors give you a good advantage in low light, giving you less image noise. The autofocus is miles faster and more accurate, zoom is also much faster as its on the lens as apposed to a button. Things like that just add up to make it better if you have the money, or get a bridge camera.


----------



## jamie_s (Jul 10, 2009)

pooma said:


> Thinking "I want a DSLR"
> 
> Make sure it really is the piece of kit for you.
> 
> ...


I agree that people should be sure. I have a bit of interest in photography now starting from seeing some of the good quality pics on here.

But because I have no knowledge of f-stops and shutter speeds and all that I asked for a TZ-10 for crimbo. Which is brilliant for point and shoot but also has some good manual controls to experiment with I can learn but still take good pics and maybe upgrade to dslr when Im ready. I would never just jump in at the deep end :lol:


----------



## butcher (Sep 3, 2010)

robj20 said:


> The larger sensors give you a good advantage in low light, giving you less image noise. The autofocus is miles faster and more accurate, zoom is also much faster as its on the lens as apposed to a button. Things like that just add up to make it better if you have the money, or get a bridge camera.


A DSLR has more perks. No doubt. And if you have a serious interest in photography, then it's probably the way to go for most people.

For someone who takes a few snaps once in a while however, those perks will be barely noticable. And it's my understanding that most compacts do some amount of 'post-processing' (sharpening, contrast, saturation, etc) within the camera, negating the need for fiddling around in programs that leave you scratching your head. And thus the end result of the supposedly 'inferior' compact will 9 times out of 10 be better than that of the DSLR for the casual user.

I'm happy to be corrected on this.


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

butcher said:


> A DSLR has more perks. No doubt. And if you have a serious interest in photography, then it's probably the way to go for most people.
> 
> For someone who takes a few snaps once in a while however, those perks will be barely noticable. And it's my understanding that most compacts do some amount of 'post-processing' (sharpening, contrast, saturation, etc) within the camera, negating the need for fiddling around in programs that leave you scratching your head. And thus the end result of the supposedly 'inferior' compact will 9 times out of 10 be better than that of the DSLR for the casual user.
> 
> I'm happy to be corrected on this.


Agreed. 
My sister-in-law is another case; she's got a K-X with an 18-250 on the front and isn't using half the capability. OTOH, she asked for this and has seen that an external flash will make a huge difference. Which is a start...she also listened and is trying to understand what works.

Bret


----------



## Naranto (Apr 5, 2007)

Excellent well balanced posts folks. The gap between a good compact and DSLR is getting smaller.

From my experience I use a 6+ year old Canon G2. It more than fulfils my expectations, though like most cameras of that era it does have a couple of niggles, namely a delay when trying to take a moving shot and poor low light exposure. I could shoot manually, adjust exposures, use RAW etc, but the auto set up is so convenient, I rarely use the othe options. I have thought about changing it but it works as well today as it did all those years ago, so why bother?

Some examples here:
http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=195804&page=3

And the 'latest' taken over the Christmas break

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=198543


----------



## Matt. (Aug 26, 2007)

I think i've made a mistake too. 

I bought the HX5 just before crimbo, while it is a good camera i wish i had gone for the NEX5 which is on offer at £350


----------



## beginner101 (Jan 19, 2010)

guess what i took this on?


----------



## Katana (Mar 31, 2007)

pooma said:


> he wanted a camera and really liked the looks of some of the pics I was getting of my kids (with my a230)


A professional race driver can do an excellent lap in good time with lets say a high powered ferrari (the dslr for this example), now suppose he gave the keys to you and told you to do the same lap, you couldn't as you haven't the same level of skill acquired through much practice. Even using your own personal car, let's say something like a ford focus (a digital auto compact), the race car driver could drive it much better than you could even though you drive it all the time.

The point is that your pictures look better because you know about exposure, how to use the camera, and have put in the practice. A DSLR is designed for control freaks who want to tweak everything for that perfect exposure, if you just want a camera to do the work for you, you need a camera that was designed with you in mind.

He would have been better off with something like a Canon S95, has a f/2 lens, zoom, excellent low light abilities, and i've yet used a canon camera that can't do superb colours in auto mode.

I have a DSLR (Nikon D5000) and many other cameras, but the ones i normally take out with me most of the time are compacts, at the moment an Olympus mju-II with a roll of black and white film in it.


----------



## dubnut71 (Jul 25, 2006)

beginner101 said:


> guess what i took this on?


Ok I'll bite, a telephone? the exif data is corrupt when I import it but it shows a focal length of 3.5mm for some reason, thats why I am plumping for mobile.

Not to underestimate the usefulness of a mobile phone as a camera, talk photography has a whole "phoneography" section and I use my I-phone with the instagram app which I find quite pleasing.


----------



## beginner101 (Jan 19, 2010)

that was my mobile phone, damm i thought i stripped the exif. i have done a sample from my phone my old 7mp cam and my new 12mp cam, i showed someone and they could not notice a diffrence between them


----------



## pringle_addict (Jan 2, 2008)

All good advice, the only thing I miss from my bridge camera is the ability to play with depth of field. From what I can make out, the smaller the CMOS sensor (as per compacts and bridges) the less depth there is. They are now marketing compacts whith 'background blur', so maybe the sensors are getting bigger.


----------



## Thomsen! (Jun 7, 2010)

mattastra said:


> I think i've made a mistake too.
> 
> I bought the HX5 just before crimbo, while it is a good camera i wish i had gone for the NEX5 which is on offer at £350


I've just bought a 2nd hand (practically new condition) for £350... are you saying you can find a new one for £350? If so, go for it!

I've used a P+S for a few years, and consider myself a moderate camera user, but this Nex is a very nice piece of work.

I'm itching to get out with it, but the practice photos I have done inside with poor light have been amazing - the P+S would never produce the same quality.


----------

