| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/12/2007 08:26:17 PM · #1 |
I have researched and read for a while now about what exactly makes a DSLR different from a point and shoot camera. I still can't seem to quite exactly figure out what the difference is though.
I have a Canon Powershot SD630 that, as I'm a new photographer, suits me just fine. I will probably buy a DSLR (looking at probably getting Canon EOS-5D or Digital Rebel XT/XTi). I just can't figure out what exactly is so much better though, besides obviously better image quality.
The guess the thing that confuses me most is I always thought the thing that made the two types of cameras so different was that DSLR's have much more "manual" control in usage of them...but other than the "f-stop" in my research I didn't really get what exactly is so different...for example, in my Powershot camera i can manually adjust to many different modes (RGB, greyscale, etc), make color adjustments (Vivid, Sepia, Flourescent), make other such changes (Cloudy, Daylight, Night, Portrait), set it on Macro mode, and change ISO (100,200,400,800,1600, Auto, Hi Auto).
So what exactly would be much different about getting a D-SLR?? Please help me to understand. Thank you very much :) |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 08:44:39 PM · #2 |
| The biggest difference is versatility. I own several cameras of both types and use all of them. My Nikon CP8800 P&S gets frequent use as a 'walking around' camera and also does crude video. The Kodak/Nikon DCS330 is used almost exclusively for IR photography. The Canon 350d (Rebel XT) is used for higher quality shots with a variety of lenses including a 750mm f/6.0 telephoto! The Canon Powershot Pro90 is a superb low light camera and also does video. Of all these, my favorite is the Canon 350d and it is also the most versatile. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 08:53:23 PM · #3 |
Full manual control allows you to change;
- Shutter speed
- Aperture
- ISO
Or any combination of these. Some point and shoots offer manual mode. But dSLRs also have;
- A larger sensor, this means less noise at high ISOs, and allows shallower depth of field to be achieved.
- Interchangeable lenses (allows everything from extreme wide angle to telephoto for sports etc.)
- Professional build quality (weather sealing, alloy bodies)
- High-speed shooting, (multiple shots per second for extended periods of time, or until the memory card fills up)
|
|
|
|
03/12/2007 08:54:10 PM · #4 |
The difference is pretty much purely mechanical.
SLR stands for "Single Lens Reflex", which is the mechanics behind an SLR camera. What this means is that when you look through the viewfinder of an SLR, you see what the lens sees, because of a mirror that reflects the light up into a prism or second set of mirrors (known as pentaprism and pentamirrors respectively). This gives the photographer much more control over their photographs via framing, manual focus, etc, due to the fact that you are seeing (almost) exactly what the lens is seeing.
DSLRs, of course, have smaller viewfinders than typical film SLRs, and as such, generally have lower magnification and viewing areas.. so you don't always see exactly what the lens is seeing, but it's as close as you can get.
"Point and Shoots", on the other hand, do not incorporate these mechanics. Instead, the lens goes directly to the sensor, closed off by a shutter that opens and closes when you take a photo. The viewfinders in these cameras are either Electronic (mini-LCDS) which grab what you see through sensors on the front of the camera, or they are small optical viewfinders that are just direct magnified little "telescopes" if you will, that don't look out through the lens. This, of course, usually means what you see is a little more off-set than what you photograph, and means framing shots can require a little more work.
As for image quality.. DSLRs, so far, generally have better quality because they incorporate larger sensors. Point and Shoots have much smaller sensors. There are exceptions. A couple of more recent "prosumer" point and shoot models have been given the larger APS sized sensors, but still generally lack the same image quality because of fixed lenses that aren't quite as optically proficient as DSLR interchangeable lenses can be.
The last point, the differences in "manual" control, isn't really much of a differential. There are plenty of point and shoot cameras that have almost.. if not as much... manual control as an SLR. The main diffence is in the fine-tuning of said control, which comes about because of the mechanics in question.
Message edited by author 2007-03-12 20:55:34. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 08:54:21 PM · #5 |
Other things that set them apart:
1) Generally, the sensor is bigger and so each pixel is bigger. Usually that translates into higher possible ISO rates with less noise.
2) The larger sensor also gives the possibility of shallower DOF. To me, this makes DSLR the camera of choice for portraits. For landscapes, I could go either way. But for large prints, I'll still go with the DSLR.
3) Shutter lag. On the DSLR there is none.
4) Batter life. The P&S cameras generally chew through batteries, in part due to the live preview.
5) Interchangeable lenses give greater versatility (you're not stuck with whatever lens the manufacturer put on the camera).
Those are some quick ones, I'm sure there are more.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2007 08:55:36 PM · #6 |
Wow, that's a lot of fast replies! :-)
|
|
|
|
03/12/2007 08:57:13 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
Wow, that's a lot of fast replies! :-) |
lol.. I'll say. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:18:24 PM · #8 |
| One thing that drove me to DSLR (finally!) was the fact that the electronic viewfinder...... (drove me nuts!) I could never see the detail when framing a shot, because the viewfinder was so small, and the lcd was always pixellated so much all I could see was vague large shapes, but no fine detail, I resisted going to a DSLR because I did not want to carry all that "hardware" that I remembered from film slr days. and I liked the Idea that I could unobtrusively carry one small camera that had it all.....sorta, ... a macro, a standard lens, and a good zoom. but the previous argument about the larger sensors is very valid, the clarity I am now seeing with my DSLR is incredible! in comparison to the "compact" camera, in short there are reasons for both, and I still carry both.....hope this helps.....Bill |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:18:49 PM · #9 |
Some mentioned the sensor size with regards to larger DOF and Noise at low light.....I mention it again for detail. These may not be the best examples but they are something I readily put my hands on of a subject with a different composition with one taken with the Fuji S7000 and the other taken with the Nikon D70S:
Fuji:  Nikon: 
There you go...Bill said the magic word: Clarity!
Message edited by author 2007-03-12 21:19:45.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:26:57 PM · #10 |
| the difference between dSLR and point & shoot camera is that they both take photographs. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:52:07 PM · #11 |
so is ANY camera that is not a DSLR a point and shoot? ... like take the Nikon Coolpix 8700 ... is that considered a point and shoot ?
I fell down and FUBAR'ed mine ...
|
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:54:24 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Greetmir:
so is ANY camera that is not a DSLR a point and shoot? ... like take the Nikon Coolpix 8700 ... is that considered a point and shoot ?
I fell down and FUBAR'ed mine ... |
In general, yes.. the term point and shoot is given to any camera without the SLR mechanics.
It is very often misleading, of course.. but it has become synonymous. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:54:58 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Greetmir:
so is ANY camera that is not a DSLR a point and shoot? ... like take the Nikon Coolpix 8700 ... is that considered a point and shoot ?
I fell down and FUBAR'ed mine ... |
I don't know all models but a SLR is a technical term. there are some fixed lens cameras that are SLRs but I don't think there are many. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:55:13 PM · #14 |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 09:58:51 PM · #15 |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:02:43 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Greetmir:
so is ANY camera that is not a DSLR a point and shoot? |
If you are referring to 35mm format cameras that are non-dSLR, I think they are better known as compact cameras.
Message edited by author 2007-03-12 22:09:05. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:05:23 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Greetmir:
so is ANY camera that is not a DSLR a point and shoot? |
MF cameras are not dSLR, neither are RF cameras. So according to the general misconception of the term, those would be point and shoot cameras? I dont think that sounds right.
If you are referring to 35mm format cameras that are non-dSLR, I think they are better known as compact cameras. |
Not entirely true. Most Medium Format cameras use SLR or TLR (twin lens reflex) mechanisms.
Anyway, the real point is that "point and shoot" can be used for any camera, as you can point.. and shoot.. using any technology. However, the term as a whole has become synonymous, in the digital world, as any camera without interchangeable lenses.. generally.
*edit* and as I said earlier, can be very misleading.
*edit2* and.. also.. for the record.. the term is used to mean any camera that doesn't require a lot of messing around with in order to use.
*edit3* and.. also also.. I'm hungry.
Message edited by author 2007-03-12 22:09:20. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:08:30 PM · #18 |
Wass MF and RF stand for? ... ok I am stoopid ...
P.S. just LOVE your popcorn gif Cindi!
Message edited by author 2007-03-12 22:08:59.
|
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:09:53 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by Greetmir:
Wass MF and RF stand for? ... ok I am stoopid ...
P.S. just LOVE your popcorn gif Cindi! |
Medium Format and RangeFinder. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:18:46 PM · #20 |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:20:31 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by John Pahl:
Can all DSLR do RAW too? |
Not 100% on that... but most likely.
Many so-called point and shoots can do RAW as well though. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 10:20:59 PM · #22 |
All Canon DSLRs on the market today are capable of shooting RAW.
Edit: It looks like all Nikon DSLRs other than the D40 can as well.
Message edited by author 2007-03-12 22:24:03. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 11:22:53 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by skylercall:
All Canon DSLRs on the market today are capable of shooting RAW.
Edit: It looks like all Nikon DSLRs other than the D40 can as well. |
D40 definitely has RAW. |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 11:25:13 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by skylercall:
All Canon DSLRs on the market today are capable of shooting RAW.
Edit: It looks like all Nikon DSLRs other than the D40 can as well. |
D40 definitely has RAW. |
i think that it is easier to list out which dSLR that dont do RAW :) |
|
|
|
03/12/2007 11:28:29 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Artyste:
Originally posted by skylercall:
All Canon DSLRs on the market today are capable of shooting RAW.
Edit: It looks like all Nikon DSLRs other than the D40 can as well. |
D40 definitely has RAW. |
i think that it is easier to list out which dSLR that dont do RAW :) |
I'm pretty sure there aren't any :) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 11:40:37 PM EDT.
