High end Compact vs DSLR old stock

K

Kagemusha

Suspended / Banned
Messages
147
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
I have a minor predicament....
I own a Lumix DMC FX-500 (a present from my g/f a couple of Christmas's ago), but want a DSLR - I have been looking at the EOS 350d & EOS 400d camera's (2nd hand ofc). I have done a comparison on Dpreview.com and I can't see much difference spec wise between what I currently have and what the 400d would offer.

This would be my first dabble into the DSLR market, having never used one before (I used an SLR at school for a course years ago) I'm now struggling to justify the cash on a DSLR.

I know I have a lot more scope for taking shots with different lens' etc etc with a DSLR, but as a beginner, would I really benefit or see much difference in my shots?

I think what I'm trying to ask for advice on is whether or not to take the plunge into DSLR's.

So, I am opening up the floor to the TP community.....help!

Cheers
K
 
Spec might be similar but how they are to use and the results will be hugely different, in my eyes there is no comparison between a point and shoot and a DSLR if you enjoy photography, it would certainly help you learn and progress, but equally if this is instead of the Lumix you might get frustrated at carrying around a bigger lump than just a pocket sized camera.
 
I think you should be asking yourself what it is you think you can achieve with a DSLR over your current kit. If you are finding you are into action or wildlife and struggle to get shots at the long end, then a DLSR (and some cash on the lens of course) will help you achieve this.

If you want to try the creative side with the shallow dof that you just can not get with your camera, then it's worth a punt with a DLSR and the 50/1.8.

Be honest with yourself - How do you think your current camera is holding you back? Getting a DLSR isn't going to make you take better pics straight away, but in time you will be able to do things that you can not do at the moment - Maybe that's not what you want / need.

Hope that helps in some way.
 
I have a Pano FX500 and, for a compact, it is excellent. I also used to have a 350D.

But the Pano is a compact, and therefore has a (very) small sensor. The sensor in a DSLR is many times bigger than any compact, and that is the whole point. Image quality is miles better (forget pixels, largely irrelevant marketing nonsense) and the other big thing is that you can control depth of field with a bigger sensor, to great creative effect.

Of course all this costs. Both in terms of money and size/weight, but what you get in return is both quality and creative control.
 
I get some great shots with what I have currently, but both myself and g/f enjoy macro photography - to a certain degree we can achieve this with the Lumix.
We have a small but fantastic garden & pond, so being able to setup with a tripod, compose & back away and use a a remote would be good too. The ability to play about with RAW images intrigues me aswell, rather than using jpgs my compact churns out.

I guess I'd like to think of getting creative with shots too, long exposures etc.
 
Kagemusha said:
I get some great shots with what I have currently, but both myself and g/f enjoy macro photography - to a certain degree we can achieve this with the Lumix.
We have a small but fantastic garden & pond, so being able to setup with a tripod, compose & back away and use a a remote would be good too. The ability to play about with RAW images intrigues me aswell, rather than using jpgs my compact churns out.

I guess I'd like to think of getting creative with shots too, long exposures etc.
Click to expand...

Ah, right then. Hold on a minute.

The depth of field thing and macro. At normal focusing distances, people and places etc, the larger sensor size of a DSLR is great for controlling depth of field, but when you get close, depth of field reduces dramatically and if you're into macro then there is a lot to be said for having a smaller format sensor to start with in order to get enough of the image in sharp focus.

If the quality of the output form a compact is good enough for you, then this might be a consideration. There are a few high end compacts out there (and bridge cameras, which are glorified compacts underneath) that have full manual controls, can shoot Raw etc.

Of course you can do it with a DSLR, you can do anything with right lenses and technique, but maybe think about that for a moment.

One idea might be a 4/3rds format camera. They are basically DSLRs but the sensor is a bit smaller than most, with correspondingly more DoF. Might be a good compromise. Olympus, Panasonic etc.
 
Kagemusha said:
I have a minor predicament....
I own a Lumix DMC FX-500 (a present from my g/f a couple of Christmas's ago), but want a DSLR - I have been looking at the EOS 350d & EOS 400d camera's (2nd hand ofc). I have done a comparison on Dpreview.com and I can't see much difference spec wise between what I currently have and what the 400d would offer.
Click to expand...

I guess you're looking at the amount of megapickels, etc?

Well older SLR cameras won't appear to have a high spec but the sensor will be much bigger than your compact and the lenses too will help deliver better quality images.
 
Aside from image quality, for me the biggest change was the difference in responsiveness between the my last compact and the DSLR I have now. Now when ever I take the compact out (If I don't want to carry the full kit) the lag between pushing the button and the shutter activating, the slow AF, taking forever to power on - it all makes a really frustrating experience.
 
well, not all compacts are like that. My IXUS powers on just as fast as my 1Ds does in realistic terms and in good light the AF is pretty quick too.
 
In celebration of my 100th post I thought I would update on my situation regarding purchasing a DSLR.

I'm now (or will be when it arrives) the owner of a Canon 500D, bought after a trip to a well known high street seller of white goods. What I wasn't expecting when I got there was that there was a Canon representative in the shop, the rep was was very helpful and honest, and to be honest I was quite impressed with his knowledge and helpfulness - despite my initial '"no I'm fine thanks - just looking" standard response when asked if I'd like any help when visiting such shops, thinking he was an employee of the retailer.

If you are the Canon rep who was in the Doncaster branch of Curry$ over the weekend....cheers fella!

After initially looking at a DSLR over 5 years ago, I've now taken the plunge and can't wait to get cracking!

Thanks to all who write on these forums and answered my (rare) questions.
 
What macro lens did you go for or is that next on the list?

PS the 500D is a cracker, got one myself
 
iancandler said:
What macro lens did you go for or is that next on the list?
Click to expand...

I just went with the kit 18-55 IS lens, mainly because the 400D was at the thick end of my budget, so the little I have left will have to go on cards, tripod and a decent bag.
 
If you want macro on the cheap with the kit you have bought, look for a Raynox 250 (I think) close up adapter.

Also, for close up work don't buy the cheapest tripod you can. Get something solid and well built - you won't regret it when you can keep shooting in a slight breeze!
 
Cheers for the heads up Richard - I've searched the forum, and the Raynox really looks a decent peice of kit for the money, some of the shots I've seen are fantastic!
 
I've said it before, the advantage of a compact is you'll probably have it with you. My DSLR is taken out when I want to take photos. My wife's compact is in her bag & is much more discreet, handy if you see an opportunity something you want to record. So it partly depends on the sort of pics you take. I like having the slr, but carrying it around, being unable to leave it is a bit of a pain in the neck (literally)
 
Strangly enough i did exactually what you were orginally planning, went from the lumix to a 350D.

The main reason for me to upgrade was after using my folks dslr`s i realised how much quicker and easier it was to alter the zoom and manual focus while taking pics, something i really stuggled to get spot on in a hurry with the comapcts limited controls.

Just thought i`d add my 2 pence worth as their seems to be so many diffrent reasons people change to a dslr.
 
Late last year I sold my dSLR and thought I would just use my Lumix compact.

Big mistake. Image quality aside, there was one thing that I missed about a dSLR - the response of the shutter button.

I found that on the compact I was missing shots due to waiting for the camera.

So I bought another dSLR and I haven't looked back.

They are different beasts - a compact will never be a dSLR.
 
we just got back from a few nights in vegas and a couple of weeks in st lucia, wife had a lumix p+s and i had my 20d with a 550ex

little lumix was great for holiday snapshots of the hotel, surroundings etc and the quality was quite good.

But when you started getting into the low light/flash situations the quality of the 20d was far greater with nice sharp photos especially with the 550ex, the lumix really struggled to focus sometimes and the flash was very harsh.

but as a few people have said a p+s might get more use on holiday as it's smaller and lighter, and the 20d was heavy to carry around and i looked a "burk" with the 550ex and diffuser on when sitting down to an evening meal, but the photos were good!
 
well done on buying your first DSLR. You wont be disappointed.
I havent made a full transition from compacts, i shoot with a whole series of cameras for different things.
With regards to shooting macros, I use my Canon SX1 with the Raynox DCR-250 attatched. The Raynox is an excellent clip on piece of kit and will turn your 18-55mm into something else. The insect photos on my Flickr were all shot using the Raynox, and with the beauty of full HD video on the SX1 i've been making some nice extreme macro video.

As has been said already, dont waste money on a £20 tripod, you'll need a solid base for macros.
 
well done on buying your first DSLR. You wont be disappointed.
I havent made a full transition from compacts, i shoot with a whole series of cameras for different things.
With regards to shooting macros, I use my Canon SX1 with the Raynox DCR-250 attatched. The Raynox is an excellent clip on piece of kit and will turn your 18-55mm into something else. The insect photos on my Flickr were all shot using the Raynox, and with the beauty of full HD video on the SX1 i've been making some nice extreme macro video.

As has been said already, dont waste money on a £20 tripod, you'll need a solid base for macros.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top