P&S vs. megazoom vs. SLR

[CruiserRose]

hello Camera experts!!

 

I am debating on getting out of the P&S because looking for better quality pictures and inside pics are dark with P&S. Can i move to a mega-zoom and get better quality/inside pics better? or do i need to move to DSLR to notice a big difference.

 

anyone recommend a megazoom?

[CruiserRose]

hello Camera experts!!

 

I am debating on getting out of the P&S because looking for better quality pictures and inside pics are dark with P&S. Can i move to a mega-zoom and get better quality/inside pics better? or do i need to move to DSLR to notice a big difference.

 

anyone recommend a megazoom?

 

BTW, the low light pics that i take that think look like crap are always from the paino bar, from the casino are, ya know inside the ship in the evenings.

[chipmaster]

hello Camera experts!!

 

I am debating on getting out of the P&S because looking for better quality pictures and inside pics are dark with P&S. Can i move to a mega-zoom and get better quality/inside pics better? or do i need to move to DSLR to notice a big difference.

 

anyone recommend a megazoom?

 

Meg zooms are good for those that need / want the reach of a big telephoto without the inconvenience of the larger DSLR+ telephoto. Here is a good write up of the new superzooms and compact superzooms ( http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q209grouplongzoom/ http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q109superzoomgroup/ ) All now of some for of stabilization that help with camera shake and lower light.

 

If you want even better low light or find that focus speed is still to slow then a DSLR is really the answer. Even the best P&S superzoom can't match an entry DSLR for low light / High ISO or for focus. The superzooms can and do match the capability of most DSLR for telephoto reach ( unless one is looking for exotic and expensive greater then 300mm reach ). The reason a DSLR is/will always be better is that they have much larger photographic sensors that capture more light. But, because the sensor is larger the camera is larger and so is the lense. If one isn't a big fan of changing lenses a DSLR still is a superior choice for fast focus and low light and coupled with a all in one lense like an 18-200 one never needs to take it off for almost all shooting.

 

Good luck

[pilotdane]

First I think you have to decide how much camera you want to lug around and how much you want to learn about photography. A very large & sexy SLR is useless if you leave it in the cabin because it is too big.

 

Do you travel to take pictures or do you take pictures when you travel?

[CruiserRose]

First I think you have to decide how much camera you want to lug around and how much you want to learn about photography. A very large & sexy SLR is useless if you leave it in the cabin because it is too big.

 

Do you travel to take pictures or do you take pictures when you travel?

 

 

yes, that is my problem i dont reallly wanna carry around a SLR to most places so wondering if a megazoom is gonna give me much of an improvement in image quality espically low light.

 

i have just been researching most of the day and found that a new p&s camera has recently been released DSC-TX1 it has

 

'"Exmor R" CMOS sensor and boasts stunning low-light performance'

 

but this is only advertised and i do not know much of this technology. there dont seem to be any reviews taht i can find online with someone actually using this technology. CMOS is the 'good' technology incorporated in the DSLR cameras.

 

to answer your question, we probably take pictures when we travel.

[pierces]

The Sony DSC-HX1 is no match for a DSLR for low-light pictures, but it is a huge improvement over earlier superzoom cameras. The Exmor-R sensor is actually new technology and not just marketing hype. If you want a big step over a compact but don't want to lug a DSLR everywhere, a superzoom is a fair compromize and the HX1 has quite a list of features.

 

If you are looking for a low-light compact, the DSC-WX1 uses the same Exmor-R technology in a smaller package (less zoom, of course). I have been looking to replace my Canon SD800 and am currently looking closely at the WX1, mostly because of it's low-light capability and sweep-panorama feature.

 

I shoot mostly with a DSLR, but I always say that the best camera is the one you'll use!

 

Dave

[zackiedawg]

Another point that may be worth mentioning too - all of the conversation so far has been based on high-ISO performance for shooting in low light. However, there are two distinct types of low light photography - 1. High ISO with normal shutter speeds and hand-hold ability, and 2. Low ISO, slow shutter, tripod mounted (or level surface). Most any digital camera, even lowly P&S models, can take nice indoor and low light shots if you use the slow shutter method. The only limitation is in very dark (nighttime) situations, some of them don't allow you to use shutters longer than 1 or 2 seconds...but even a lot of pocketable P&S models can do a 10-30 second shutter speed, and that's plenty for gorgeous low light shots even at night.

 

If you want option 1 - then what everyone above mentioned is true - a DSLR is going to be leagues better than P&S or ultra-zoom cameras. Some compact P&S cameras that are more advanced can do better than the cheapie ones...but none comes close to DSLR territory. So one must weigh precisely how much low light, high ISO ability you need against the size, price, and weight of a DSLR...decide where you want to compromise and how much, and that will tell you whether to stick with what you have, move to a better P&S model, or move to a DSLR.

 

As mentioned, the TX1 and WX1 from Sony both have increased the ability to shoot at high ISO with fairly clean, noise-free results from a compact pocketable camera, and may be worth a look. Canon's new S90 also promises to do better than most compacts as it uses a larger sensor than most compacts and comes with some manual user control. Panasonic's ZS3 is competitive in low light - not quite as good as the Sony twins, but arguably better in daylight with a very good lens. And Fuji's F70EXR looks promising as well in shooting low light from a compact camera.

 

In the ultrazoom area, you get overall a more versatile and convenient camera, with the huge optical zoom range. They aren't really pocketable, but still are far lighter and smaller than DSLRs and may be a solution. They usually don't quite compare to the best of the pocket-compacts when it comes to low light - which sounds illogical - but consider that you can get some good models of pocket cams with 1/1.8, 1/1.7, or 1/1.6 sensors, compared to the usual ultrazoom sensor that is 1/2.5 (read: much smaller). The small sensor is the key to getting such incredible zoom range in a small form factor. Sony's HX1 which Dave mentioned is interesting because though it doesn't really do much better in low light than competitors at pure high ISOs, it does have a trick or two, such as stacking multiple photos in camera to give better low light performance without the usual high-noise results. Canon's G11 also is competitive, as it is a larger camera with a larger sensor that sacrifices some of the ultimate zoom range to provide a bigger sensor and the resultant quality that can bring to higher ISO shots.

 

Finally, one other consideration is the new class of interchangeable-lens, micro-4/3 sensor cameras from Olympus and Panasonic. These are above the typical compacts in quality and ability to shoot low light - they are quite close to the average DSLR in fact. They really are pseudo DSLRs in that they have manual controls and interchangeable lenses - the only difference is they use a slightly smaller sensor that allows for a tinier body and camera, and they remove the mirror system inside which makes the camera thinner too. Instead of an optical viewfinder like a DSLR, you use an electronic viewfinder like a high-end prosumer P&S model. These will perform like a 9/10ths DSLR, but be around the size of an ultrazoom...certainly worth a look!

 

Just a few other ideas for you.

[donaldsc]

yes, that is my problem i dont reallly wanna carry around a SLR to most places so wondering if a megazoom is gonna give me much of an improvement in image quality espically low light.

 

i have just been researching most of the day and found that a new p&s camera has recently been released DSC-TX1 it has

 

'"Exmor R" CMOS sensor and boasts stunning low-light performance'

 

but this is only advertised and i do not know much of this technology. there dont seem to be any reviews taht i can find online with someone actually using this technology. CMOS is the 'good' technology incorporated in the DSLR cameras.

 

to answer your question, we probably take pictures when we travel.

 

If you want good quality in low light, a megazoom will do absolutely nothing for you - your only solutiion is a dSLR. The lenses on a DSLR are faster and you can shoot at higher ISO because the larger sensors have a lower noise level.

 

Unfortunately, you can only push the laws of physics just so far.

 

DON

[zackiedawg]

If you want good quality in low light, a megazoom will do absolutely nothing for you - your only solutiion is a dSLR. The lenses on a DSLR are faster and you can shoot at higher ISO because the larger sensors have a lower noise level.

 

*Unless you use a tripod and a slow shutter for a non-moving scene, of course. In which case even a pocket P&S can pull off a lovely shot!