DSLR or hybrid for newbie

R

rugbyant

Suspended / Banned
Messages
18
Name
Antony
Edit My Images
No
Hi, I've had compacts for some time, latest one being Panasonic tz10. I've a little toddler and not able to get good pics when she's playing or at night.

So ice decided to get a better camera. My perception was that I need a DSLR and being new I was going to get a Canon 550d with still stock lens and 1.8 lens.

I phoned my local who and they didn't have Canine, and said I should consider a hybrid like the Panasonic.

Can anyone shed some light on which way to go? Family, toddler shots. Maybe holidays too. Although hybrid is smaller, you still have the lenses to carry around.

Many thanks. Ant
 
Is a "hybrid" a mirrorless like the m4/3 cameras then? :O
 
You really do need to try an SLR to see if the differences are worth it to you and are differences you would use or notice.
If we ignore image quality (which we almost can when mentioning Nex5) and the like the biggest differences to me are focus speed and the more immediate changes to settings (with dedicated buttons placed to fall under the thumb/fingers)
If you don't play around with settings much (exposure compensation, ISO, MF, Aperture etc,.) then not a big deal however the what feels like instant focus with an SLR is still not matched by the hybrids I have played with.

When I use my SLR it just feels like a proper camera because of the above and generally just feels faster at everything and better thought out.
If the size and weight of the SLR is not a problem I don't see why anyone would have anything else...
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
People seem to be complaining about CSC focus speed yet I have no problem with my (quite old now) G1 and GF1 and the reviews of newer kit seem to be quite positive so it's deffo worth checking current reviews and trying the kit for yourself.

And it's worth remembering that the current fastest focusing camera with a changeable lens is a CSC. That may be in specific instances with a specific body and lens combo but it shows they're no slouches :D Plus when these things focus they do focus, none of this messing about with MA guff :)
 
Many thanks for the responses. Budget around £550-£600. Which is hope get 1 lens. Then build up from as I get better.

Real frustration with current tz10 is really rubbish in anything but daylight and moving objects is a nightmare. I've played with manila ISO settings but pictures become blurred-although mate user :-).

Currently looking at Canon 550d but open to other suggestions.
 
Also look at the Sony SLT55. Some people hate the electronic viewfinder (EVF) but coming from a compact camera you might find it ok and the camera is a great performer. There are lots of nice old Minolta lenses out there on the s/h market that will work well with it.
 
I started out with a Canon 550D and its a fantastic camera. The AF speed will be enough to keep up with most things. I've used it with fast jets at airshows, wildlife, kids and dogs playing etc down to still macro shots. If you get the right lens the body is capable of doing just about anything you want, and if you get a 50mm f1.8 to go with the kit lens you'll be able to get some terrific pics of your toddler.
You might need something like the 55-250 IS lens for your holiday photos though, its a good fast zoom lens that gives great IQ for a very good price. Compared to the EVF's on most small cameras the DSLR is a winner all the way, until you get right to the top end, top price mirrorless cameras and even then I think its about the same.
 
How confusing is choosing a camera. I've read various reviews all over the web and the Sony seems to get better scores and reviews than the Canon.

Think I'll go out tomorrow and try them both.

What will the Sony not do that the Canon can? In lay man's terms.
 
The sony you will have to use the rear screen for pics unless you pay extra for a view finder attachment, i also don't think there is a large range of lenses but you can buy an adaptor to use sony dslr lenses. And i think you will find the af not as good. But other than that it comes down to what you want what you like and what feels nice in your hand.
 
Af being auto focus? Some of the reviews say its excellent. But is that down to camera and lens combos. Or am I missing the point-all new to me so be gently.
 
Last edited:
rugbyant said:
Af being auto focus? Some of the reviews say its excellent. But is that down to camera and lens combos. Or am I missing the point-all new to me so be gently.
Click to expand...
thats right alot does come down to the lens and the motor built in, also haw fast the glass is(ie f1.8 of f4) im not saying the sony is bad because the reviews are very good and the image quality looks as good as the d7000,k5, but it does lack a few things as i said, go try them and see what you think, All the new cams are very capable and some have better performance in certain areas like high iso, af speed,faster frames per secong ans so forth.

from dpreview
Regardless of which shooting mode you're in, the NEX-5N is an able and responsive camera. From power on to first shot is a little less than 2 seconds. The NEX-5N's auto focus system is relatively quick, although not the fastest contrast detection system that we've ever used (that honor belongs to recent Olympus and Panasonic Micro Four Thirds models). We've found that, given good light and contrast the AF system is quite reliable. Automatic white balance works well in a variety of lighting situations and even produces good skin tones under notoriously troublesome tungsten light. The 5N's Multi-Metering mode consistently delivers a good exposure in most environments.
 
Last edited:
After 3 hours trying the Canon and the Sony I'm now more confused. I loved the Sony style, weight and 'metallic' lens. Clear screen was brilliant.

Canon seemed to be more difficult for me to use, but that's because I wear glasses and DSLR restricted with the view finde-although may get used to it.

Next consideration will be lens prices.
 
Ebay for lenses - get a feel for prices, watch a few go past so you get to see the end price.

London Camera Exchange (www.lcegroup.co.uk) might have a nearby store.


When you went to the camera store and played did you try all the brands. Weights, handling, buttons and accessibility etc... You aren't limited just by canon/sony... there are others and pretty much all do a good job image wise!


If you test in store, try AF on something close and far away to guage on af speed. It will be under lights, which although look bright, arent the best when taking pics...

The new nikon J/V might be worth looking at (they are advertising that it takes pics before you actually press the button) which may help with afaster toddler/child.

Otherwise I'd say get to a local camera meet and see what other people are using. Do you know anyone who has a dslr? (only asking as if they are friends with you, borrowing lenses might be an option too).

Good luck in your hunt
 
I tried Nikon as well. The DSLR with my glasses on made it difficult to use. I kept having to adjust my glasses and lot hitting my face! I'm sure is get used to it.

The guys in the shop turned me off the nikon j as he said the Sony out performed it. Although like the preshot shot thingy.

No friends with any extra lenses. Fatheinlaw has Canon 350 but only one lens.

Coming from my 16x zoom Panasonic tz I didn't realise how much a lens would cost to do nearly that amount of zoom.

How many of you use an 18-200 lens?
 
So I went through the lenses I think I'd need or want. Can you tell me which ones I really need?

Family, children, holiday maybe.

50mm f/1.8 Telephoto Lens 55-210mm Zoom Lens Model
18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Zoom Lens 16mm f/2.8 Wide-Angle Lens

Bearing in mind some of these are very pricey. :-)
 
Wouldn't a bridge camera be something like the high end compact models with larger lenses, like the Canon SX40, Olympus SP-810 or Nikon P500?

A mirrorless system like the NEX is much closer to the entry level DSLRs in IQ, versatility and price. The DSLR systems have the edge for low light and high speed photography but I would imagine a NEX or micro four thirds system would keep up with your child just fine. I have the later and haven't had any problems with focussing speed, though imagine if I tried to take birds in flight or formula 1 I'd run in to focussing problems.

However, the main advantage of the mirrorless cameras is their size, so if you're not planning on traveling with it or carrying it around a lot there's isn't too much to separate it from a 550D etc. In some cases those camera are more expensive. You'll notice a big different in quality from the images produced by a mirrorless or DSLR to a compact so I would recommend one of them. Either will allow you to take some beautiful portraits with shallow depth of field. I have more experience with the micro four thirds cameras and would recommend the Olympus 45mm f1.8 lens for taking photos of your child. That lens on something like an Olympus E-P3 will match an entry level DSLR for focussing, check the review of the Olympus E-P3 by Digital Rev on YouTube.
 
But want lenses should i choose?

Can't get my head around the different lenses - being a compact user who has 16x zoom at his disposal (albeit with not so good IQ). :bonk:

Most cameras come with 18mm-55mm lens, which ive played with and it doesn't give me much zoom. The 'packages' tend to offer either the 16mm 1.8 for £70 more or the 55-210mm for £170 more. Then there the super zoom but £600 is a bit too much for now.

Do i need to adjust how i take photo's to accomodate the lenses i have?
 
What do you use within the 16x zoom. Do you use the wide end alot, the narrow end a lot or something in between?
To avoid having to have a houseful of lenses it may be better to go with an 18-200 for general use and maybe a 35 or 50 prime for low aperture stuff (low light, shallow DOF etc,.)
If you are continually zooming in and out between each photo then the 18-200 should almost satisfy that. If you never use wide shots then the 55-210 you mention should cover it, along with a prime as described but maybe a bit wider than 35.
 
rugbyant said:
Hi, I've had compacts for some time, latest one being Panasonic tz10. I've a little toddler and not able to get good pics when she's playing or at night.

So ice decided to get a better camera. My perception was that I need a DSLR and being new I was going to get a Canon 550d with still stock lens and 1.8 lens.

I phoned my local who and they didn't have Canine, and said I should consider a hybrid like the Panasonic.

Can anyone shed some light on which way to go? Family, toddler shots. Maybe holidays too. Although hybrid is smaller, you still have the lenses to carry around.

Many thanks. Ant
Click to expand...

Moving subjects in poor light - that's the key problem. And if you are to have any hope with that, you need a DSLR.

A fundamental difference is that DSLRs have phase-detect AF whereas compacts/hybrids/bridges/mirrorless etc all have contrast-detect*. While that's getting better all the time and manufacturers makes all sorts of claim for how fast it is, they're all pretty hopeless with moving subjects.

Simple test with contrast-detect - focus on someone and get them to walk towards you. See how many sharp pictures you can get - it'll be one or two at best. Try and lock on to a subject that's already moving and chances are it won't lock on at all.

* Yes I know Nikon and Fuji claim to have incorporated phase-detect into a hybrid system reading off the sensor, but it doesn't seem to make things much better. Currently there is nothing to touch a DSLR for focusing speed, accuracy, tracking ability, or performance in poor light. TBH, it's only the better DSLRs with fast focusing lenses that can do servo-tracking reliably.
 
Last edited:
I played again with the 2 cameras (a different shop this time) and i tried the moving object test. The Sony tracked and kept focus as good as the Canon. I discussed this in the shop and the guy said (quoting from somewhere):

Object Tracking AF locks onto a specified object and maintains focus even as the subject moves. All you had to do to lock onto a subject was use the touch screen or the center button of the control wheel.

He also had some excellent night shots with the Sony. Just street lighting and the quality (10x8) was brilliant.

Now could this be because cameras have moved on from my Panasonic TZ10 (2ish years old) or is it because the camer is better.

I tried playing with the focusing and the Canon was slightly quicker - nothing dramatic. Not sure if i did the test right though - all i do was zoom in and out and then half press the button?

Definitley think i'm swaying to the Sony, but still have a little doubt in my mind that i may regret it. The 550d or 60D is in price range, but will offer cheaper lenses - downside is size and weight. Just really like the compactness of the Sony. May try the panasonics tomorrow as i have a store very close that stock just panasonics.

Lenses - think im going to get stock 18-55mm, and maybe a mid zoom.
 
Which cameras are you referring to here?
 
HoppyUK said:
........Simple test with contrast-detect - focus on someone and get them to walk towards you. See how many sharp pictures you can get - it'll be one or two at best. Try and lock on to a subject that's already moving and chances are it won't lock on at all.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is as much of a problem as many make out. I had a Minolta A1 about 5 years ago that could auto focus and shoot perfectly on a dog running towards me with its ( then ) new 3d tracking. A/F has come a long way since then on all cameras, the most developed are probably the new CSC models.( Olympus E-P3 has worlds fastest AF system as of June 2011) DSLR's are fantastic bits of kit with ever faster lenses. Problem is, a good fast lens is either a prime or a heavy zoom, add that to a heavy DSLR body and carry that around all day and you will soon be doing what a lot of people ( including me) have done, and downgraded (?) to Micro 4 / 3rds. Unless you are shooting sports with very fast movement, do you really need a DSLR?

A few other choices for you to look at are Panasonics G2 and G3. Olympus Pens, Fuji X10, Sony NEX C3 or 5N. Have a look on Flickr for images taken by these cameras to see what results they can achieve.

Of course, if you really want a DSLR, then go for it, you will get the best quality images and most versatility with one.

Allan
 
If you like the Sony why not get it. What is stopping you and what will an SLR provide that is stopping your Sony purchase?
Do those additional SLR things actually matter or would it just be a case of it must be better because they are there (even if you don't use them)
 
allanm said:
I don't think this is as much of a problem as many make out. I had a Minolta A1 about 5 years ago that could auto focus and shoot perfectly on a dog running towards me with its ( then ) new 3d tracking. A/F has come a long way since then on all cameras, the most developed are probably the new CSC models.( Olympus E-P3 has worlds fastest AF system as of June 2011) DSLR's are fantastic bits of kit with ever faster lenses. Problem is, a good fast lens is either a prime or a heavy zoom, add that to a heavy DSLR body and carry that around all day and you will soon be doing what a lot of people ( including me) have done, and downgraded (?) to Micro 4 / 3rds. Unless you are shooting sports with very fast movement, do you really need a DSLR?

A few other choices for you to look at are Panasonics G2 and G3. Olympus Pens, Fuji X10, Sony NEX C3 or 5N. Have a look on Flickr for images taken by these cameras to see what results they can achieve.

Of course, if you really want a DSLR, then go for it, you will get the best quality images and most versatility with one.

Allan
Click to expand...

Got to disagree Allan. Your Minolta A1 was an early bridge camera, basically a compact with lots of features and a big lens, but also a tiny sensor which meant depth of field was very generous and therefore very tolerant of focus errors.

Claims that modern contrast-detect AF works fast is very dependent on subject and conditions. The reality is that if it's moving, contrast-detect really struggles and if the light is poor, frankly the hit rate will be low. Even phase-detect DSLRs are far from 100% reliable.

Another thing with almost all cameras without an optical viewing system is that when you're shooting a panning sequence the LCD shows the image that's just been taken, not the one that's currently in front of the lens. The lag ranges from not much to absolutely loads, but either way you're aiming blind.
 
HoppyUK - Sony NEX 5N vs Canon 550d

AllanM - will be looking at the Panasonics tomorrow to compare. After playing with the Canon for 15 minutes (camera to eye up and down repeatedly) i started to notice the weight. I appreciate i would get used to it, but dont know if i want to.
Not sure i want a DSLR.

I think i am considering one as i perceive them to be better, which i'm sure if i had more money and wanted to do more than want i want, then a DSLR would be the way forward.
 
The NEX 7 has just been reviewed on DPReview, though it's significantly more expensive than the 550d and 5N it looks like a really future proof enthusiast camera. They mention the lack of decent class in the NEX system at the moment though.

I think the mFT cameras could really be another option, look at the Panasonic G3 and GX1. I'd be interested to read how you think they compare.
 
Hi Anthony,

Apologies for me probably being a bit dumb here, the Nex 7 is way over budget and looking at the spec's i cannot see why i would go with it?

Same sensor (higher resolution though), shutter speed, screen, worse ISO.

The extra money gets me a pop up flash (although the 5N has a flash on top if wanted), 8MP more and a view finder, which i dont really like using.

Am i missing something?
 
You may well change your mind once you own either of the cameras and use them for a few weeks anyway. The camera that seems on paper to be perfect doesn't always turn out that way after a few weeks use.

That's why I bought second hand until I got a better idea of what I wanted after using each camera.
Started with SLR - liked speed, quality, button function but it is too big to carry around .
casually.
Changed to LX3 - liked size, functions were okay but IQ wasn't
So for me the IQ was important but in a smaller size than SLR. I could live with slower speed as after a few months of photography I discovered that the pictures I like to take are not exactly fast moving (urban, beach, landscape with a bit of street - slower people!)
For me the NEX would do all I need but you may find it goes the opposite way!
 
So now i have made my mind up on the Nex 5N..... do i buy it with the 16mm 1.8 or the 55-210mm zoom.

And anyone bought from UK Digital
 
I went through a similar stage myself and after trying the EVF cameras dismissed them as i prefer the DSLR viewfinder and fast focussing etc.

Just sold my 50D and bought a 550D 2nd hand as i wanted a more portable/lighter camera.
 
Most of this CSC won't focus in low light stuff is very possibly guff IMVHO :D

I've just tried my now rather old GF1 in a dark room, no light on, and it achieved focus lock 4 times out of 6 taking about 1.5 seconds to lock focus when it did. I then tried my 5D and 20D and neither achieved focus lock at all, not once. Granted by 5D and 20D are a bit old now but the GF1 is a bit old too.

Anyone thinking about a CSC of any make should try them for themselves and take what's said on internet forums with a pinch of salt as half the time it's said by people who've never used the kit :D
 
Cheers for the comments, but what about the lens options?

Tried the Sony and like it - didnt like the viewfinder on DSLR's and the Sony focused as quick as the Canon 550d when tried in the shop (im sure it may be marginally quicker, but i cant tell).
 
As for the 16mm, do you use your current camera at it's widest all the time?
Problem is the 55-210 can't go wide at all so may need both if you tend to use a full range of zoom currently.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top