P&S vs DSLR - Does this argument make sense?

Discussion in 'UK Photography' started by aniramca, Jul 26, 2007.

  1. aniramca

    aniramca Guest

    I want to buy a DSLR because it is the only type of digital camera
    that has larger size sensor, not because I am looking for more
    flexibility of using (and spent more money on) different types and
    ranges of lenses. As long as it has a reasonable zoom lens, I am
    aniramca, Jul 26, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. aniramca

    Scott W Guest

    A lot depends on the zoom range you believe you will need. If you want
    anything close to wide angle and also close to telephoto you will most
    likely need at least two lenses to cover the whole range. Some people
    don't seem to care about the telephoto end and just leave on a lens that
    has a zoom range on the order of 17- 85mm

    But if you are going to get a DSLR a couple of nice prime lenses are
    also nice to have.

    Scott W, Jul 26, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sounds like you should consider something like a Canon 400D, or other
    entry level DSLR, with a super zoom lens such as a Sigma 18-200mm OS or
    a Tamron 18-250mm. The Sigma gives you optical lens stabilization to
    match many P&S cameras. Another choice would be a Nikon DSLR with their
    18-200mm VR lens. This type of DSLR/lens combination, IMO, beats any
    P&S camera available in a variety of aspects.
    Michael Johnson, Jul 26, 2007

  4. Unfortunately, yes, that's the way it is at the moment.

    I went through the same gyrations shopping for my most
    recent P&S. I was ready to spend serious cash, but
    there really weren't any options. The few I found were
    nearly as heavy (or heavier) than an SLR. (Eg.,
    Lumix DLC-L1K @ $1499.)

    rafe b
    Raphael Bustin, Jul 26, 2007
  5. aniramca

    Trev Guest

    Yes It can have a bigger sensor. But a High end lens attached can produce
    some cracking A3 prints. So its only of benefit if you can see the
    difference in the finished results
    Trev, Jul 26, 2007
  6. aniramca

    Akiralx Guest

    The L1 is a DSLR. The Sony R1 may be a good choice, a bit old now though.
    Akiralx, Jul 26, 2007
  7. I was shopping for a *silent* multipurpose camera earlier this year and
    looked at the Sony R1. Really interesting camera - at the original price
    much too expensive, but it was available at around the £400 price when I
    looked. (It's now back up in the £500+ range so the price I saw may be a
    mistake). But the lens (especially 24mm eqiv) and sensor size made a
    lot of sense, but the max aperture of f4.8 at 120mm worked against it
    for my needs.

    I eventually decided on the Panasonic FZ50 at £299, because I needed a
    longer lens for nature and candid photography and use RAW to rescue the

    But as a long term M3 user, I really hate the sound an SLR makes - which
    is the quietest SLR?


    [The reply-to address is valid for 30 days from this posting]
    Michael J Davis
    Some newsgroup contributors appear to have confused
    the meaning of "discussion" with "digression".
    Michael J Davis, Jul 26, 2007
  8. Why do you want a bigger sensor? (playing Devil's advocate here)
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Jul 26, 2007
  9. aniramca

    aniramca Guest

    It is a good question! Then, perhaps the same question may be asked
    to those who bought medium format cameras, instead of using the
    regular 35mm.

    Perhaps in the digital age, you may have a point there. as an analog -
    124MB SD card and 4GB SD card both have the same physical size, so we
    do not need to make it bigger to fit in more data?. Does a larger
    sensor means more space to store more pixels, and hence creating
    better definition of an image? Perhaps we can hear from the technical
    readers here.
    aniramca, Jul 26, 2007
  10. aniramca

    Trev Guest

    A larger sensor means Bigger Pixels or it could mean more smaller Pixels The
    OP could get a Hasslblad or Mamiya 6 x 7 with a digital back or Sinar p.
    What is not clear to the general user is that the physical size of the
    sensor has a lot to do with the quality and not just the MP count. Of course
    the dont brag about how tiny it is just how many pixels in the marketing
    Trev, Jul 26, 2007
  11. aniramca

    Clive Guest

    I have a Canon S3 IS and a Pentax K100D - both 6mp cameras. Some time
    ago I did some comparison shots (of the same subject). Very little to
    choose at the same exposure when I printed A4, but when I printed the
    same item at A3 - the K100D was visibly better.

    Same number of pixels, but bigger on the K100D - sensor size does make a

    Clive, Jul 26, 2007
  12. aniramca

    DHB Guest

    The age old question "Does size matter?" In terms of
    photographic sensors, it's not so much the physical size as it is "how
    many photos can it record per unit of time!"

    Some sensors with the same physical size have larger micro
    lenses made possible by a more effective shape, layout or circuit
    trace design or even a more efficient filter over them.

    So, does size matter? Yes & no. It's also important to take
    into consideration, things like "read noise" where in most newer
    sensors has decreased, helping to make reasonable results possible
    from very small sensors.

    Just my 2 cents but I think the "average consumer" is willing
    to tolerate a fairly high amount of noise or noise reduction artifacts
    if it provides them with the following:

    <1> Proper focus.
    <2> Good color reproduction.
    <3> Pocket size (for most).
    <4> Results that look good in 5x7" & a rare 8x10" print.
    <5> A large LCD display to frame & view (show others) pictures on.
    <6> Reasonable price, (affordable).
    <7> A reasonable zoom range of 3-4X or (more for some).
    <8> More MP is usually believed to be better!

    In spite of it's faults, I do like my Fuji F11 for it's low
    light performance thanks "mainly" to it's larger than average CCD size
    of (1/1.7" 6.3MP) for a pocket size P&S.

    Respectfully, DHB

    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
    DHB, Jul 27, 2007
  13. aniramca

    Noons Guest

    all else being equal - and that is an important caveat - a larger
    sensor will provide larger light receptors - also called sensels.
    These in turn can receive more photons, which translates
    into better sensitivity and less noise in the resulting image.

    That is why compact digital cameras with small sensors
    and therefore smaller sensels absolutely suck in image quality
    at anything above 400ISO, while dslrs with their larger sensors
    (larger sensels) can produce quality images all the way up to

    Recall that while digital miniaturization has resulted
    in smaller electronic devices, a given colour's photons
    and wavelength remain at exactly the same size and
    that will not change.

    While it is theoretically possible to produce sensors with
    pixels smaller than the light's wavelength, it will serve
    no purpose whatsoever as the sensors will be unable to
    capture any!
    Noons, Jul 27, 2007
  14. Some articles covering this issue:

    Digital Cameras: Does Pixel Size Matter?
    Factors in Choosing a Digital Camera

    Digital Cameras: Does Pixel Size Matter?
    Part 2: Example Images using Different Pixel Sizes


    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Jul 27, 2007
  15. aniramca

    acl Guest

    Then how do you explain that atoms, which are in general much smaller
    than the wavelength of visible light, can interact with it (eg absorb
    it, emit it etc)?
    acl, Jul 27, 2007
  16. On Thu, 26 Jul 2007, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

    TTV> In rec.photo.digital wrote:
    TTV> > I want to buy a DSLR because it is the only type of digital camera
    TTV> > that has larger size sensor, not because I am looking for more
    TTV> > flexibility of using (and spent more money on) different types and
    TTV> > ranges of lenses. As long as it has a reasonable zoom lens, I am
    TTV> > happy.
    TTV> Why do you want a bigger sensor? (playing Devil's advocate here)



    ( If replying by mail, please note that all "sardines" are canned.
    However, unless this a very old message, a "tuna" will swim right
    through. )
    Alan Clifford, Jul 27, 2007
  17. aniramca

    aniramca Guest

    Thanks for the information! I briefly read your article with interest.
    I also visited your website and noticed the beautiful photos!
    I will go and visit back and read the details and its references. Once
    again... thanks!
    aniramca, Jul 27, 2007
  18. aniramca

    Noons Guest

    Simple: I don't take photos of atoms.
    Noons, Jul 27, 2007
  19. aniramca

    acl Guest

    Ha, very clever answer! Nevertheless, what you said,isn't true (although the sensor will indeed be useless, it can capture
    photons just fine).
    acl, Jul 27, 2007
  20. aniramca

    Noons Guest

    Unless you want to discuss the Heisenberg principle
    and the wave/particle nature of light, I'd say
    the above doesn't matter jack.

    Make the sensels smaller than the wavelength
    you want to capture and all you'll get is difraction
    patterns. Simple as that: nature doesn't
    change to match technological progress.

    Noons, Jul 28, 2007
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.