Is there any point in buying a DSLR?

D

dissatisfied

Suspended / Banned
Messages
18
Name
Natalie
Edit My Images
No
Hi again to all,

I am currently considering buying a DSLR and I have also been offered one on one lessons with a local photographer who owns a studio at which I have had some amazing photographs taken of my children. Obviously this all comes at a price so I am taking my time in deciding what to do/which camera to go for whilst I save the money to allow this.

In the mean time, I am doing plenty of research, most of which involves reading posts on here and looking at images. However, I have come across many posts that say 'the most important thing is the photographer and not the equipment'. Obviously I can understand this and I have seen some pretty good photographs that have been taken with an ordinary P&S.

So my question is - if this is true then is there any point in spending money on a DSLR when theoretically at least it is more about technique than equipment? Does the use of a DSLR really make a big difference to IQ?

Thanks in advance and my apologies if this has already been asked.
 
In a word yes. There are generally gains to be had with a dSLR over a bridge camera or something. One thing you gain with a dSLR and also the mirror less system is more depth of field control as you have the option of shallow depth of field which is almost impossible with a bridge camera unless you shoot macro type work or head shots with the long end of the lens.

Certain things won't improve no matter what camera, that is your eye, your composition, framing etc.

Other gains are in lower light, a dSLR is going to perform better when you need to use high ISO sensitivities which can be a major bonus.

Lastly, you can grow with a dSLR (and mirror less again) system which you can't do with a bridge/superzoom/compact.
 
It depends on how far you want to take your creativity, and to some degree your subject matter. If you want to point and shoot then it would be a good idea to buy a point and shoot. If you want to shoot landcsapes for example then a DSLR is your only true option.

your choice should be governed by what you want to shoot and ultimately how you want to edit your images. The advatages of course with an SLR is that you can apply filters, change lenses, have those extra options that will help you like bracketing, shutter speed etc.

Personally, I think if you are unsure whether you want to get an SLR then you may not be ready or realize what it is you truly want to spend your hard earned money on or what creative route to take.

If you are unsure then there is no harm you buying yourself an entry level SLR (Nikon D3100 for example) and then see where it takes you.

Rgds
 
Hi Natalie
I'm currently in the same boat as you :) Nearly got enough for a dslr & extra lens...just a few more weeks (its dragging!) Previously been using a bridge camera, but it's been put away.

Regarding the one on one lessons. Before you commit with your local photograther, why not shop around to see if there's anything cheaper, better etc..
 
Lens hood to reduce flair, a few hundred different lenses, ability to attach external flashes, more battery power, minimal shutter lag etc etc etc :)
 
I'd say a DSLR is certainly worth getting; whether or not the lessons are depends on your way of learning. I prefer books and videos to give me the basics I need and then trial and error to try it out.

Either way, you will have fun!
 
I always wondered about the "point" of spending what for most people is a lot of money on a camera. But after a lot of distinctly average photos with a Point and Shoot, I made the decision to take a look..

I asked a lot of people which to go for and most said that I should go to a shop and hold a few to find which actually felt right. So I did that and got my Nikon d3100 last December.

Prior to this I'd probably taken 50 photos in 2 or 3 years. I'd guess I've taken a few thousand now, admittedly only a few dozen I'd look at and think "yep, did a good job with that one". I see things differently now - I take more notice of nature, people, buildings etc.

Overall, I don't regret it for a minute. I'm distinctly average but want to learn and am willing to listen to the advice of others.

Go for it:thumbs:
 
mark1616 said:
Certain things won't improve no matter what camera, that is your eye, your composition, framing etc.
Click to expand...

I keep saying to myself to keep stumm when I come on here as I have said some dumb stuff but I have to disagree with that as its the one paragraph that really stands out from your post and one that would most put me off learning more.
I really don't believe that, you can learn things like composition and framing and whilst there is a certain something that will raise an Ansel Adams above the rest of us I think we all have a creativity and certain style within us it's just about finding it.
And BTW I am still taking some real rubbish despite expensively upgrading my equipment but it will come and those odd ones that i nail will be worth it.
 
You should see it as buying into a hobby as well as a system. Like the previous poster I used to hardly ever take photos but since getting into it last year I'm already on my second system. If you put the time and effort into it and spend smartly (difficult at first as you will want everything) then its definitely worth it. If its a passing fad or you just want better snaps then look at a good compact or CSC.
 
Last edited:
hoolio said:
I keep saying to myself to keep stumm when I come on here as I have said some dumb stuff but I have to disagree with that as its the one paragraph that really stands out from your post and one that would most put me off learning more.
I really don't believe that, you can learn things like composition and framing and whilst there is a certain something that will raise an Ansel Adams above the rest of us I think we all have a creativity and certain style within us it's just about finding it.
And BTW I am still taking some real rubbish despite expensively upgrading my equipment but it will come and those odd ones that i nail will be worth it.
Click to expand...

You are right not to keep stumm as I don't even agree with how I wrote that LOL. I shouldn't post just before I go to bed :)

What I meant to say is that having a different cammera isn't going to affect how well you learn to compose, frame etc. All of us have a natural eye and this can be improved with practise. I'm not a natural photographer, I have to study and practise loads to do what I do. So be it point and click, dSLR or medium format, your eye and still be taught the same as the basics of composition/framing are the same across the board.
 
Thank you everyone for your replies.

I am glad that everyone is more or less in agreement that a DSLR CAN help improve one's photography and for listing the advantages.

I have been interested in photography for many years but never bothered to do anything about it because I was unsure of whether it was something I could achieve not to mention the cost.

I am totally sure that I want to do this - I have become a bit obsessed of late actually! I was at a christening yesterday and the hired tog must have thought I was nuts because all I kept doing was watching his technique, spotting his shots, and trying to work out what camera he had!:lol:

I have definately started to see the world in photographs wherever I go and I have taken THOUSANDS of shots on my P&S but am trying to improve on the composition.

I only really want to take photographs of my children that I can be proud of but I have always been concerned that I wont be any good when it comes to it and the numerous posts about technique over equipment have only added to this concern. I mean if I was any good, surely the photos I am already taking should be of a good standard notwithstanding the fact that I am only using a compact. My interest has only recently peaked however, so perhaps I am expecting too much too soon when it comes to good composition etc. I am hopoing that by owning a DSLR I will learn faster and see the results much quicker as I guess I can't be sure that the snaps I have taken so far would have been better had they been taken on a DSLR.

I am considering the Nikon D3100 or maybe the D3000 depending on funds. I just want it now!;) Thanks for the advice guys.
 
I am my worst critic as well so I understand what you are saying. But I really enjoy photography ( even if some may think I'm weird for climbing a tree or crawling under a bridge to get a better view...)
 
There are some things that compacts are just not very good at, or won't do at all.

Most of them are designed to be used in auto modes and if manual control is possible, it is usually limited and/or inconvenient to access. Then they're not much good for action because they're laggy and slow to focus when you zoom for a distant subject. And they're hopeless at creating shallow depth of field effects due to the way their small sensors and lenses work. The small sensor also makes them noisy at high ISO.

A good photographer will be aware of these things and either not attempt certain subjects, or find a work around. For example, if it's no good for distant wildlife moving quickly, get closer and wait for it to stop moving! Or if the light is too low, use flash. That sort of thing.

On the other hand, if you get a DSLR but don't learn at least the basics and how to adapt the settings to different situations and effects, then you've basically got a compact with better image quality. Good basic knowledge is not hard to acquire, all you really need is the willingness to learn.
 
Advantages of a DSLR..
  • Flexibility and adaptability - there's a lens for every purpose
  • Control - a DSLR opens up levels of image control that are not always available with a compact
Disadvantages of a DSLR..
  • Weight and bulk - a camera you never take with you can not help you take better images
  • Flexibility, adaptability and control - there is the temptation to let the finessing of technique get in the way of the fundementals of composition

I don't mention image quality as either an advantage or a disadvantage, because for the most part it's irrelevant to whether or not a photograph is good or not. It's also slightly misleading when put alongside the cost. You can get an excellent compact for £300 or less, and yet to just match the image quality across the full range of the compacts abilities you'd need a DSLR with a wide-angle zoom, walkabout zoom and a macro lens (so that's pushing £900-£1200 for a start). Possibly a telezoom as well, depending on the compact.

The camera is a tool, and it's about having the right one for you. That may be a DSLR, it may be a compact. Either route is capable of producing great images if you are.
 
Ignoring the technical reasons I find a slr more comfortable to use, p&s cameras are just too fiddly what with holding them out in front of you.
 
It raises an interesting question that I guess might have applied to many of us when we were just starting out, and may still apply to some of us many years down the line...
I wonder just how much better I would be if I had spent money on a good course and bought a cheaper camera rather than getting the best equipment and trying to learn myself.
I am sure there is a cross-over point at some stage, but for me, I think a course would have saved me many years of turning out a lot of rubbish with good equipment - I am now at the stage where luck helps out so I do get a few good shots though my gear is still way beyond my skills.
A good thread !
 
Hi all,

I can only speak from my personal experience, but I used to take quite a few pictures with a P&S and thought it worked fine until, just before a stint of long-term travel, I dropped it while running, kicked it across the road and totally smashed it to pieces. I did some hurried research into a replacement and ended up getting a basic DSLR due to the price which at the time was cheaper than some bridge/P&S cameras (£250 for a Nikon D40 w/18-55mm kit lens)

It was significantly bigger than my little pocket camera had been but the difference it made to the way I saw things was instant and signficant. I found myself asking questions I had never considered before and searching for answers led to more questions but more importantly, better images.

The learning curve can be steep, but it opens up so many possibilities. I have never regretted the decision.

I would say go for it!

:)
 
Many people on this thread have said it far better than I have but just to relay my own tale....

I bought a DSLR quite naively really. A friend had a D90 and I had a play with it and couldn't believe how much better the images were than those that I could take with my Canon Ixus Compact. My partner and I were getting married earlier this year so we thought we'd 'invest' in a quality camera to capture our honeymoon.

It was only after I bought a DSLR, that I really started to understand the areas that it excels in. You mention taking pictures of your kids. I haven't seen a compact/bridge yet that can replicate the shallow depth of field that a DSLR can produce, especially when couple to a reasonably fast (though not necessarily expensive I hasten to add) prime lens. It's this shallow depth of field that isolates your subject and turns an ordinary photo of somebody into a lovely portrait.

Another thing I love is long exposure night photography. Even with average kit, the results possible from a DSLR are leagues better than the noisy mess that most compact serve up.

There is also the satisfaction and reassurance of being able to press the shutter button and a photograph instantly being taken rather that the pause you so often get on compacts which results in a shot of an empty sky with a rare eagle just out of shot.

If any of the above sounds appealing, a DSLR will not disappoint.
 
If u don't get a dslr and u want to get into photography, u will want to buy one at some point so I'd just get it now and save the money. I started off with a bridge camera thinking it would be good enough but it wasn't, a sold it and bought a dslr. My dad actually bought it. I told him he should get a dslr but he said it was more than enough for him. He now has 2 dslrs and my mom who had the bridge camera off my dad also has a dslr.

The point is yes knowing the technical aspects and having an eye for it, flair etc is what enables you to make a good picture but a dslr makes it easier for you to get the shot. Following the example through, the Canon 600d, 60d and 7d have the same sensor and roughly the same image quality. Not exactly but take the same shot in most conditions and you would get very similar results, however if you were shooting sports the 7d would give you far more keepers than the other 2 because it makes getting the shot easier by amongst other things its autofocus system
Once you know how to use the camera it actually takes some of the hardness away from getting a good shot that you would have on a compact and leaves you free to concentrate more on what your shooting.
 
Last edited:
The first few weeks after i had bought my DSLR i had the thought i had made a mistake not getting a bridge camera.

Its not easy going from compact to DSLR, i thought about getting lessons but they are expensive most of the time so i joined my local camera club and it has been the best £30.00 i have ever spent.
I have been taught so much by the members i am now really enjoying my camera, and even as a newbie my pictures are 10 times better than anything i achieved with my compact.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top