DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Professionals and consumer models
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 25, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/28/2005 12:18:46 AM · #1
I read an article here not long ago, I'm gonna look to see where I read it because I don't remember off the top of my head, that stated more and more professionals are using high end consumer model digicams mainly because of the super zooms they are putting on some models. (With some up to 380mm equivalents to 35mm cameras) They said they liked them because there was no need to carry alot of different lenses. How do you feel about high end, high resolution, super zoom cameras like the new Fuji S9000 soon to be released with 10.7x wide zoom and 9-megapixel resolution or even the one I have, the Fuji S5100, that has zoom equivalent to 370mm? Do these cameras have sub-par lenses that would inhibit good, clear, accurate photos?
08/28/2005 12:21:19 AM · #2
The desired result is the driver for what sort of camera you can use in any given situation. There are many shots where a simple point and shoot camera will do the job.
08/28/2005 12:26:27 AM · #3
Originally posted by dsmeth:

I read an article here not long ago, I'm gonna look to see where I read it because I don't remember off the top of my head, that stated more and more professionals are using high end consumer model digicams


The word professional has many conotations. I don't think you will find too many portrait, sports, nature, or landscape pro photographers using a P&S as thier primary camera.
08/28/2005 12:47:50 AM · #4
They may have been referring to local newspaper reporters. I noticed that our local weekly reporter was shooting a P&S like those mentioned at the lasst festival in town. I know the guy from the county daily (larger circulation) uses the full meal deal Nikon digital SLR.
08/28/2005 12:55:00 AM · #5
In all honestly if L glass super zoom lens which retail for $1000+ still have some optical flaws and image quality issues how can a built in zoom lens on a p&s that retails for sub $700 come close? I guess it all depends on what the definition of 'professional' is...
08/28/2005 02:07:54 AM · #6
Originally posted by nico_blue:

In all honestly if L glass super zoom lens which retail for $1000+ still have some optical flaws and image quality issues how can a built in zoom lens on a p&s that retails for sub $700 come close? I guess it all depends on what the definition of 'professional' is...


I don't know that's why I'm asking. But I will tell you this,
a $300 washing machine will wash your clothes just as effective as a $800 machine.


08/28/2005 02:17:15 AM · #7
Originally posted by dsmeth:

Originally posted by nico_blue:

In all honestly if L glass super zoom lens which retail for $1000+ still have some optical flaws and image quality issues how can a built in zoom lens on a p&s that retails for sub $700 come close? I guess it all depends on what the definition of 'professional' is...


I don't know that's why I'm asking. But I will tell you this,
a $300 washing machine will wash your clothes just as effective as a $800 machine.


And a Yugo will get you to the grocery store on less gas then a Porche.

What has that to do with the quality of a lens?
08/28/2005 03:15:36 AM · #8
The contrary case
08/28/2005 03:23:34 AM · #9
Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by dsmeth:

Originally posted by nico_blue:

In all honestly if L glass super zoom lens which retail for $1000+ still have some optical flaws and image quality issues how can a built in zoom lens on a p&s that retails for sub $700 come close? I guess it all depends on what the definition of 'professional' is...


I don't know that's why I'm asking. But I will tell you this,
a $300 washing machine will wash your clothes just as effective as a $800 machine.


And a Yugo will get you to the grocery store on less gas then a Porche.

What has that to do with the quality of a lens?


In all honesty it has nothing to with anything. Guess you can't pull the wool over a guys eyes that owns a MARK II can ya. I'm trying to make an informed decision on what kind of camera I would like to purchase and more isn't always better for everybody. In my opinion just because you have an $8000 camera doesn't mean you can take any better pics than a guy with a $2000 camera. So if you don't have any constructive comments keep your 2 cents to yourself. And by the way I bet I can get to the store on less gas in a Porche than Yugo.
08/28/2005 03:45:17 AM · #10
wow calm down there wasnt anythin harsh in there firebreather
08/28/2005 04:07:13 AM · #11
Originally posted by rgo:

The contrary case

This photographer gets brought up a lot. Sure this one guy is a great photographer and he happens to use a P&S camera but that doesn't really tell us how many working professionals use P&S cameras, it only tells us that one guy does. Are there real statistics to find information like this?

PS: I can get to work on my bike too... and use no gas! I win :-P
(what a stupid side argument)
08/28/2005 04:35:21 AM · #12
Originally posted by dsmeth:

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Originally posted by dsmeth:

Originally posted by nico_blue:

In all honestly if L glass super zoom lens which retail for $1000+ still have some optical flaws and image quality issues how can a built in zoom lens on a p&s that retails for sub $700 come close? I guess it all depends on what the definition of 'professional' is...


I don't know that's why I'm asking. But I will tell you this,
a $300 washing machine will wash your clothes just as effective as a $800 machine.


And a Yugo will get you to the grocery store on less gas then a Porche.

What has that to do with the quality of a lens?


In all honesty it has nothing to with anything. Guess you can't pull the wool over a guys eyes that owns a MARK II can ya. I'm trying to make an informed decision on what kind of camera I would like to purchase and more isn't always better for everybody. In my opinion just because you have an $8000 camera doesn't mean you can take any better pics than a guy with a $2000 camera. So if you don't have any constructive comments keep your 2 cents to yourself.


Actually under many cicumstances yes it does mean I can take better pictures with a $8000 dollar camera then I can (or you can) with a $2000 dollar camera. For all I care you can go take you pictures with your $300 washing machine, but you asked a question. When someone mentioned that a thousand dollar lens cost more then a P&S for a reason you got all bent out of shape.

Look, if all you were doing posting this thread was looking for someone to agree with your already made up decision to buy a P&S, then here - buy a point and shoot. They are every bit as good as any DSLR and profesionals all over the world win Nobel Prizes with them every year. Is that better?

Oh, and just to clear that wool thing up, I own 2 Mark IIs.

Message edited by author 2005-08-28 04:40:00.
08/28/2005 05:00:23 AM · #13
For all I care you can go take you pictures with your $300 washing machine, but you asked a question.text

You're right I asked a question. Actually 2 questions and here they are: How do you feel about high end, high resolution, super zoom cameras like the new Fuji S9000 soon to be released with 10.7x wide zoom and 9-megapixel resolution or even the one I have, the Fuji S5100, that has zoom equivalent to 370mm? Do these cameras have sub-par lenses that would inhibit good, clear, accurate photos? and the most intelligent response you could come up with was:

And a Yugo will get you to the grocery store on less gas then a Porche.

What has that to do with the quality of a lens? text

And whoever said I was buying a P&Stext
08/28/2005 05:38:53 AM · #14
I own a c750 point and shoot, with a zoom range similar to 38-380.
Here are my thought comparing those big zoom p&s to dslr:

pros:
*Very light. After a few hours, it makes a big difference against a dslr.
*weight associated with long zoom: because it is light, during daylight I have no problem using the 380mm eq without tripod. With an heavier camera, using long zoom usually requires a tripod.
*versatile zoome range
*Great depth of field. This can be a big advantage for some kind of shots.

cons:
*Small sensor. The small sensor is quite sensitive to noise. On mine, everything higher than 200 iso is not really usable. For long exposures, I usually use iso 50 in order to reduce noise.
*wide angle not wide enough (at least on my model). For some architectural shots, this is problematic.
*slower focus
*manual focus hard to properly achieve (on my model), as you have to use numeric commands instead of a manual ring
*small resolution lcd eye-viewer: it is quite hard to properly see details. On night, the eye viewer is quite unusable
*small depth of field hard to achieve

If you are asking yourself about point and shoot vs dslr, I think that you should have a look at cameras similar to the Minolta A200:
*bigger sensor than most point and shoot -> less noise
*higher resolution eye viewer
*manual zoom/focus ring?
*adjustable lcd screen (with a dslr, how would you soot a mushroom from a ground point of view?)
08/28/2005 05:41:32 AM · #15
About lenses quality:
point and shoot/"bridges" have smaller sensors than dslr. It means that you can build smaller lenses, whith partially explain the cost reduction compared to dslr lenses.
No, point and shoot usually do not have pristine quality lenses, but honestly they are not bad at all.
08/28/2005 06:23:01 AM · #16
The noise is the biggest thing by far that turn me off P&S
a mate has some panasonic P&S, 5MP, 7fps (till the sd card is full), very good lens (leica), but theres some shots where its just not suited at all.
It has its own IS in it (which they claim better than all other makes) and is very good, but its iso speed is very small, its apature is nothing incredible, its focusing is not that fast (if you want to quicly snap need to leave it on servo), Max shutter is not real long, EVF is awful when compared to SLR, you need to trust it to be in focus, cos how can ya tell focus from a couple thousand pixels?

Not what I'm after, way more than enough for most people.
08/28/2005 09:18:03 AM · #17
Originally posted by dsmeth:


You're right I asked a question. Actually 2 questions and here they are: How do you feel about high end, high resolution, super zoom cameras like the new Fuji S9000 soon to be released with 10.7x wide zoom and 9-megapixel resolution or even the one I have, the Fuji S5100, that has zoom equivalent to 370mm? Do these cameras have sub-par lenses that would inhibit good, clear, accurate photos?


No super zoom lens is best. You can only make a lens most effective at a certain focal length, or range of focal length. A 18-300mm lens just isn't going to get the job done -- whether it's $5000 or comes attached to a dinky ponit and shoot camera.

And yes, you're correct, the lens on your s5100 is sub-par.
08/28/2005 09:51:41 AM · #18
Originally posted by deapee:

And yes, you're correct, the lens on your s5100 is sub-par.


?! That's being a bit harsh o nthe s5100 inthe context of the original question don't you think?

It all depends on the purpose. Going back to the original question about a 'pro' using a p&s super zoom camera, there is no reason a pro photographer couldn't use a s5100 for their job, if they were taking only photos of road signs on bright sunlit days.

Probably not a very good example, but the camera is just the tool, and what a 'pro' does with any tool is dependant on what they are paid to do. Certainly the s5100 will be no good for night time sports, or in flight bird photography, but if the tool is appropriate for the task the 'pro' could make money using it. If they specialised in small product shots for websites it'd be more than up the task.

A case in point from my own experience is the chap who shoots the local rugby games for the 'other' small paper here. (I shoot for the Central Canterbury News, he shoots for Canterbury Times). He uses a Minolta Z2, I use the 20D and L glass.

While most weeks over winter my photos were polls ahead of his in 'photographic' terms, I'm sure he gets paid. I believe he's a 'real' pro, I'm just freelancing part time. His target market for those photos dosn't need the high end gear, so he dosn't use it. Why purchase, and then insure $10k worth of gear and lug it around all afternoon if a $500 p&s will get you the same paycheque for the job?

As always, just my 2c worth.

Cheers, Me.
08/28/2005 10:12:46 AM · #19
Originally posted by KiwiChris:

Originally posted by deapee:

And yes, you're correct, the lens on your s5100 is sub-par.


?! That's being a bit harsh o nthe s5100 inthe context of the original question don't you think?


uh...nope...that's my opinion. Would you like me to lie?
08/28/2005 10:15:02 AM · #20
Originally posted by deapee:

Originally posted by KiwiChris:

Originally posted by deapee:

And yes, you're correct, the lens on your s5100 is sub-par.


?! That's being a bit harsh on the s5100 in the context of the original question don't you think?


uh...nope...that's my opinion. Would you like me to lie?


Well, now that you ask... :-)
08/28/2005 10:22:09 AM · #21
Originally posted by KiwiChris:


Well, now that you ask... :-)


ok...the lens on the s5100 is NOT sub-par. It is of excellent quality and is super sharp throughout its entire 10x zoom range. It's actually quite a miracle lens...it's like the equivalant of a $5000 lens all put together, shrunk down, and mounted onto a camera all for like $450!!! There is no need to trade in your s5100 if you decide to shoot fine art, weddings, landscapes, sporting events, or anything else...it's the best camera and lens in the world.
08/28/2005 11:20:19 AM · #22
Amen. As somebody already mentioned, the biggest problem with P&S is the high noise amount. That was my number one reason of upgrading to D-SLR. P&S (the good ones) sure do just fine in good conditions (direct sunlight etc), but when things go bad and you still have to take the photos you promised.. that's when you decide to go for slr.
08/28/2005 12:00:45 PM · #23
Another problem with P&S cams, even the mid-range prosumer cams, in my experience (and this is an issue of lens quality) is that they all seem to exhibit noticeable amounts of barrel distortion in the wide end of their zoom. Some people may not care but this really, really bothers me. This, coupled with noise issues, plus the lack of true wide-angle seeing, is what pushed me into dSLR.

But for everyday work these cameras can be marvelous, no question about it. If you're a decent photographer you'll get a lot of very nice images with these cameras for a small investment. I certainly did, for several years.

Robt.
08/28/2005 12:39:11 PM · #24
' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/357/thumb/202365.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/357/thumb/202365.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Taken with my $500 S2.

' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/357/thumb/202341.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/357/thumb/202341.jpg', '/') + 1) . '
Taken with a 20D and 100-400 L lens right along side me at the same time.

Point and shoots are getting much better.
08/28/2005 01:22:15 PM · #25
It's worth bearing in mind that part of the equation is the desired end product. For sure, if all you do with your images is make smallish prints and otherwise post them up on the web for people to look at, then the consumer camera is a VERY good tool. Especially on DPC with its 640-pixel limit.

But if, like me, you regularly make prints in the 20 inch-and-up range, then the larger sensor becomes a significant factor in the quality of the result. Shoot, my 10-22mm is resolving details I can't even SEE on the screen; when I zoom in on the original file it appears to get sharper and sharper as I magnify more and more and the details come into focus. Sometimes my first impression when I download pictures is "eww, SOFT!" but then when I PRINT them they are sharp as a tack.

Robt.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/26/2020 01:06:43 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/26/2020 01:06:43 PM EST.