# TO THE BEGINNERS



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

i guess none of you know what a point n shoot is capable of... Ive taken and seen MANY point n shoot pics that blow SLR pics out of the water. its the eye, the time, and the settings, not just the label and cost of a camera.. you guys will soon learn that..  People are to quick to go out and buy a 2k camera when they havent even mastered a polaroid.. 

moral of this post when i see post saying (wow thats a nice shot cant believe its from a PnS)  you look stupid to me... 

Thanks..


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

btw im not saying this to come off like a jerk.. but its the truth and im sure all the long timers from here will agree.


----------



## Sebastian 16 (Oct 17, 2008)

i use a PnS it takes amazing photos


----------



## tirediron (Oct 17, 2008)

Your camera is simply a recording device; whether it cost $20.00 or $20,000.00 it's sole purpose is to record the scene you see. The reason that many serious photographers move from PnS to higher end SLRs is because of the increased versatility they offer, NOT because they "take better pictures". A good photographer can take a good picture with a $20.00 camera; a bad photographer can't take a good picture with a $20,000.00 camera.


----------



## sdesha (Oct 17, 2008)

I agree with you both! I know my friends father bough a 3,000 dollar camera, and all the pictures are crap! Its a great camera, but he has no idea how to use it...Its too much camera for him.

I use a fuji s700, Its a great starter for learning to set your settings, ISO...ect. My husband is upgrading me to a Rebel XTi, which I think is a good upgrade for me.


----------



## ATXshots (Oct 17, 2008)

Well thats good to know  ....but how much settings can you really change on a pns? I have a pentax optio....crap or will it do?


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

sdesha said:


> I agree with you both! I know my friends father bough a 3,000 dollar camera, and all the pictures are crap! Its a great camera, but he has no idea how to use it...Its too much camera for him.
> 
> I use a fuji s700, Its a great starter for learning to set your settings, ISO...ect. My husband is upgrading me to a Rebel XTi, which I think is a good upgrade for me.




how do you like the s700 take a look at my avatar pic.. what a surprise its me and a s700 lol.. its my main go to point n shoot i love it.. i have a slr nikon d40 but i think i pull out the fuji just as much..


----------



## icassell (Oct 17, 2008)

ATXshots said:


> Well thats good to know  ....but how much settings can you really change on a pns? I have a pentax optio....crap or will it do?



I've seen some pretty amazing photographs done with a pinhole camera -- no settings at all!


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

ATXshots said:


> Well thats good to know  ....but how much settings can you really change on a pns? I have a pentax optio....crap or will it do?



u can change many settings on a point n shoot. and its the eye as well. as stated about a crappy camera with nothing but a shutter speed change, can take a good picture. take time to get to know that camera. search tutorials for it i do that with all my cameras.. youll be amazed with what your camera can do that u dont know yet.


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

tirediron and icassell thanks was really hoping for other ''long time'' tpf members to back me up.. not that im being bossy just dont want kids and adults alike thinking they need a 2k camera to take a nice photo.


----------



## icassell (Oct 17, 2008)

There is a point-and-shoot thread here on TPF -- take a look at some of those great images!


----------



## ATXshots (Oct 17, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> take time to get to know that camera. search tutorials for it i do that with all my cameras.. youll be amazed with what your camera can do that u dont know yet.



LOL....I have had my camera for 3 yrs, only used it in its 'normal' settings. Yesterday (thanks to ya'lls advice) I figured out how to use the Macro setting :mrgreen:

Let me ask you....do you guys have a still hand, or do you use tripods a lot?


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

ATXshots said:


> LOL....I have had my camera for 3 yrs, only used it in its 'normal' settings. Yesterday (thanks to ya'lls advice) I figured out how to use the Macro setting :mrgreen:
> 
> Let me ask you....do you guys have a still hand, or do you use tripods a lot?



i have a fairly still hand.. but i would never count on my hand over a tripod. aka TRIPOD is always in my back seat lol.


----------



## ATXshots (Oct 17, 2008)

icassell said:


> There is a point-and-shoot thread here on TPF -- take a look at some of those great images!



thanks! I found it...for anyone else, here it is  http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=76841&highlight=point+shoot&page=2


----------



## icassell (Oct 17, 2008)

I never trust my hand to be still on important images.  Tripod and/or monopod always nearby.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 17, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> i guess none of you know what a point n shoot is capable of... Ive taken and seen MANY point n shoot pics that blow SLR pics out of the water. its the eye, the time, and the settings, not just the label and cost of a camera.. you guys will soon learn that.. People are to quick to go out and buy a 2k camera when they havent even mastered a polaroid..
> 
> moral of this post when i see post saying (wow thats a nice shot cant believe its from a PnS) you look stupid to me...


 
Part of my problem with your original post is it smacks of the kind of thing someone says when they have a chip on their shoulder about the fact that they don't have a DSLR.  "I don't need that, I can take great pictures... oh and yours suck!  What good is your big, snazzy DSLR now, eh?"  I see this a lot on the forums, and it does get a little tiresome.

That being said, you're right in your statements, _but_... I think the general "can't believe it's from a P&S" is a pretty valid comment, and I'll tell you why.

Most P&S cameras suffer from a few major flaws compared to most DSLRs... 

Significantly slower response time from when you click the button to when an image is captured, so it's very easy to "miss".
Significantly more challenging controls for if/when you want to set things manually.
Smaller sensor, resulting in lower quality image capture.
I could also toss in lack of ability to change lenses, but some of the P&S cameras have REALLY nice lenses, so that's a little shaky.

So, as you and tirediron both said... yeah, you _can_ get great images with a P&S camera, no doubt.  It is, however, frequently harder to capture the image than it would be with a DSLR.

Now, that being said, it's also generally way easier to screw up an image with a DSLR.  A lot of DSLRs are perfectly happy to let you massively mess up your images, whereas a lot of P&S cameras will do a lot of the thinking for you and rescue you from your own mistakes.  (this is assuming you're not in manual mode, obviously)

This is massively oversimplifying things, and kind of glazes over things like "landscape mode" or whatever on many of the transitional DSLR cameras.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with your original point, I'm just augmenting it a bit.


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 17, 2008)

good cause as i stated in my post i OWN a Nikon D40, and a PnS. and as i said in second post i didnt wanna come off rude. but going threw these beginner threads, and seeing how these people talk DOWN on a PnS is disturbing..


----------



## zubin (Oct 18, 2008)

haha, this thread is as bad as the OP's grammar (check website for reference)

dude, you're 21. I used to think i had all the answers back then, too. No need to condescend. Dude above me basically said what i wanted to say. Seems lke you are just tryng to justify your cameras, although  don't even see why it matters. Thanks for the "knowledge" haha


----------



## jwsciontc (Oct 18, 2008)

my powewrshot s5 has done me very very well, just need some lenses haha


----------



## sxesweets (Oct 18, 2008)

This has been an interesting read for me. I was using a DSLR until it was stolen. I was learning to use it and loving it. I haven't decided with camera to replace it with up to this point and at what level so I am still using a P&S. I have two of the wannabe SLR style ones and even with the tons of reading I am doing still finding major challenges with setting the aperature and shutter speeds but am I ever learning a lot.  I'm going to keep at it for a while longer likely with the P&S only because it is challenging me to really know what it all means, terms settings and everything. Thanks to the OP for starting this discussion


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 18, 2008)

A point and shoot is simply not as capable a camera as a dSLR.


----------



## monkeykoder (Oct 18, 2008)

zubin said:


> haha, this thread is as bad as the OP's grammar (check website for reference)
> 
> dude, you're 21. I used to think i had all the answers back then, too. No need to condescend. Dude above me basically said what i wanted to say. Seems lke you are just tryng to justify your cameras, although  don't even see why it matters. Thanks for the "knowledge" haha



To paraphrase from a well known source "Even a fool is thought wise who knows to hold his tongue."  Another paraphrase/quote from the same source "Let he who is without sin among you cast the first stone."


----------



## Thunderwolf (Oct 18, 2008)

i can see where kalmkidd i coming from, by which i mean you can take very good pictuures with a P&S.

but like manaheim said they have their issues just like the DSLR's have

personaly i think it comes down to preference, but i also think you should start small, before spenting alot of cash on a DSLR


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 18, 2008)

zubin said:


> haha, this thread is as bad as the OP's grammar (check website for reference)
> 
> dude, you're 21. I used to think i had all the answers back then, too. No need to condescend. Dude above me basically said what i wanted to say. Seems lke you are just tryng to justify your cameras, although  don't even see why it matters. Thanks for the "knowledge" haha




first of all  johny 9 post b4 you talk about me get to know me.. im 21 does that mean something. im also married with 2 kids and a Iraq vet. does that mean something 2? number 2 i OWN a Nikon d40 so saying it out of ''jealousy'' is something that now made you sound stupid.. Number 3 i was not harsh or talking down on anybody i was stating simple facts and anytime you wanna have  a ''shoot out'' you can pick the scenario and use your SLR and ill use my PnS, and we will see who has better results..


----------



## lostep3 (Oct 18, 2008)

I actually started shooting with an A95, which I thought took great pictures. I used that for about year, using M, Tv, Av modes just trying to used to    costum settings. Then I got a Rebel Xti, which I love. I think its easier to take better quality pictures with an SLR, but I have seen some really good pictures for the new P&S.


----------



## Paul M (Oct 18, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> ...moral of this post when i see post saying (wow thats a nice shot cant believe its from a PnS) you look stupid to me...


I think this is the disturbing part of the original post. Although I agree with everything said, calling people stupid just screams for controversy. However, the key words are "_to me" _which everyone's entitled to an opinion. I can't say I haven't said to myself "I can't believe it's from a P&S" but maybe that's only because I was comparing someone's P&S results from any of my P&S results. My P&S doesn't allow for manual settings, interchangeable lenses, or much of anything, the menus to change the lighting are hard to get to but it takes tack sharp snaps (it's a pocket sized P&S). Some P&S shots I see posted impress me and it just surprises me that such great results can come from a P&S. When I have thought this to myself, I in no way meant it in a derogatory fashion.
Off topic, I thought the same thing when I saw a VW Rabbit GTI take a Corvette in the 1/8th mile. That was something you had to see in order to believe, although not common it is possible.


----------



## chrisburke (Oct 18, 2008)

Paul M said:


> My P&S doesn't allow for manual settings, interchangeable lenses



i havent heard of any P&S that allowed interchangable lens' (thats what SRL's are) however there are LOTS of P&S that have manual settings.. they are great for people who want the functionality of an SLR, but arent ready to move to an SLR


----------



## Thunderwolf (Oct 18, 2008)

Paul M said:


> That was something you had to see in order to believe, although not common it is possible.



nothing is imposible....its just hard 


just like you can take a P&S and make it take a picture you can sell for a nice profit, camera is a tool that is good with the right technique. which comes for the phone cameras aswell


----------



## ksmattfish (Oct 18, 2008)

35mm film SLRs are available on Ebay for under $50.  Canon is selling refurbished Rebel XT DSLRs with a lens for $400.  

Normally I'm the first to preach "It's the photographer, not the gear", but to be honest, I really think all currently available digital compact cameras suck big time.  It's 2008, but compact digitals have me feeling like 1908 when ISO 100 was fast.


----------



## rufus5150 (Oct 18, 2008)

Walmart's giving away D40's if you believe other threads...


----------



## Dao (Oct 18, 2008)

It all comes down to what you want to achieve. If you are satisfied with the result the P&S camera delivers, by all mean, use the P&S camera.  It is easier to use, lighter in weight and ....


However, if you want to capture something and find that the camera is the limitation, you may need to find something better in that aspect. 

I 100% agree that the person behind the camera is the key to a stunning photos.  (That includes choosing the right gears for the right moment)


----------



## zubin (Oct 18, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> first of all  johny 9 post b4 you talk about me get to know me.. im 21 does that mean something. im also married with 2 kids and a Iraq vet. does that mean something 2? number 2 i OWN a Nikon d40 so saying it out of ''jealousy'' is something that now made you sound stupid.. Number 3 i was not harsh or talking down on anybody i was stating simple facts and anytime you wanna have  a ''shoot out'' you can pick the scenario and use your SLR and ill use my PnS, and we will see who has better results..



Jealousy? You're quoting words i didnt even use. Re-read my post. Who looks stupid now:mrgreen: Good for you being an Iraq vet, married with children. You chose a different path than I did and thats fine. I'm not here to criticise your life choices.  You still come across as condescending in your posts. 

How can you even correlate post count to photgraphy skill? To be honest i had a long response that i typed out to your comments but i feel as if most if it would be lost on you. Take care:hug::


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Oct 18, 2008)

Advanced point and shoots are great too. As their optics are a little better and  they usually have a ton of features in them. Plus some of them have extra add on zoom lens..


----------



## dormfab (Oct 18, 2008)

chrisburke said:


> they are great for people who want the functionality of an SLR, but arent ready to move to an SLR



You brought it up and Dao touched on it, but as a noob who has only ever known P&S, when would someone know they are being held back by their equipment without ever having used it to know the difference?


----------



## Paul M (Oct 18, 2008)

chrisburke said:


> i havent heard of any P&S that allowed interchangable lens' (thats what SRL's are) however there are LOTS of P&S that have manual settings.. they are great for people who want the functionality of an SLR, but arent ready to move to an SLR


 
I know what you mean...When I'm on my bike and going to events, I usually take the P&S, even though I am very limited with it. However, that's why I got my DSLR, for the times that I am _not _on the bike, I can be creative and hace fun.


----------



## Dao (Oct 18, 2008)

dormfab said:


> You brought it up and Dao touched on it, but as a noob who has only ever known P&S, when would someone know they are being held back by their equipment without ever having used it to know the difference?




From what I read in here or other forums, someone may start a thread and ask how to accomplish certain tasks. And learned that their current system was not capable of doing it.  

For example, after seeing a photo of  a person spiking a volleyball inside a indoor stadium.  And he/she would like to learn how to take a photo of that type of low light action shot. And of course, there are a lot other examples regarding a limitation of a Point And Shoot camera.

However, I do not mean Point and Shoots are no good.   Some of them are amazing.  For general purpose or all around type of photography, they are just great.  And I agree with the original poster's point of view of mastering the photography does not mean just need to get a expensive camera.  The person behind is very important such as knowledge of lightning control and composition ...  Owning a DSLR or other high end camera system do not equal to creating stunning pictures.      But point and shoot cameras do have limitations.  And I am sure you can find some more examples in here, just need to do some search and digging.


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 18, 2008)

dormfab said:


> You brought it up and Dao touched on it, but as a noob who has only ever known P&S, when would someone know they are being held back by their equipment without ever having used it to know the difference?



I'm not sure I'm a big help because I went from borrowing a film SLR to a digital SLR rather than point and shoot to SLR, but I would say that when you can look at your images and see places where they are being lessened by technical aspects that you cannot control. Some examples that spring to mind are autofocus speed, frame rate, dynamic range, depth of field, sharpness, local contrast (the kind that comes from the lens, not the camera/photoshop), lens width or length, lens speed, control of flash/off camera flash, etc etc. Now it's certainly true that some of these things are also problems with introductory level lenses and SLR cameras. However, on a point and shoot you will never be able to overcome those things, whereas you can find just the right combination of equipment to suit you on an SLR.

For example, here's an image that would be flat out impossible with a point and shoot camera:


----------



## paxye (Oct 18, 2008)

Just touching on a few points that I read on this thread... 

I am new to having a DSLR but I have been using the Canon G series for a few years now and there is a LOT that you can do with them...

The one that I have now is the G9 and though it does not have interchangeable lenses exactly like a DSLR, it does have interchangeable converter lenses... like these... which make it very versatile...

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Canon-WC-DC58B-Converter-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000JILHFU/ref=pd_sim_p_1[/ame]
[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Canon-TC-DC58C-Converter-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000JILHF0/ref=pd_cp_p_2?pf_rd_p=413862901&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000JILHFU&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0DKGQAHAP002XB48F29Y[/ame]

Also... with the G9 you have quite a few options.... of course Auto... but also you can go completely manually, or use  Shutter Priority, Aperture Priority as well as a few other options...  you can also control ISO from 80-1600... shoot macro, shoot RAW, control white balance, exposure, flash output and sync and it has a hot shoe for external flash for any canon flash... etc.. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong9/

And of course it is also a video camera with no limit of video length (just space on the sd card)


just saying... P&S have their ranges also...


----------



## sunlioness (Oct 18, 2008)

To be honest, when I first entered the forum (I think it was May) I did it because it was the first time I had held a camera and I was thrilled. It was an ordinary PnS I had borrowed and I had made some shots I really liked and most importantly, I really enjoyed it.
But then, in this forum (and don't ask me how I got this impression, it was in the "air")I got the impression that if I was to take that hobby more seriously (and be taken more seriously here) I would have to move up to dSLR. Months passed, I had to buy a new laprtop etc and by not having the money to buy a dSLR I gave up on photography (learning more stuff) and this forum.
A few days ago, I realised how much of a mistake that was. I shouldn't shoot because of my camera, or the great pictures I can take with it. I should shoot just because nothing from the things I've done gives me so much pleasure. 
And I know that a lot people in these forums are dreaded by "newbies" that know nothing about appertures and focal lengthes but some of them have a great eye or great taste. And I have seen such people here being ignored just because some other groups feel elitistic about their cameras and "knowledge".
This is not one of the most friendly corners of the internet and though I met some really interesting people that's why I left. BUT there's great knowledge here and a lot of experienced people so I'm back to keep learning.
Sorry if a got a bit off-topic, I had to get it off my chest 

/end of rant


----------



## mrodgers (Oct 18, 2008)

First thing, what is meant by P&S needs to be determined.  Too many refer anything other than an SLR as a point and shoot.  But there are more than 1 type of camera that would not be an SLR.

I look at these as point and shoot cameras:






Then we have an advanced P&S or perhaps you could call them a bridge camera.  They are what paxye comments on with the G9, manual controls, RAW capability, hotshoe, etc.  Most or all of the features of an SLR except for interchangeable lenses or sensor quality:






Third we have what would be a superzoom or they can be called a bridge camera as well.  The main difference between the advanced P&S above and the superzoom is the zoom function is a much larger range.  They also have full control of most or all features of an SLR.  This is the type I have.






Everyone lumps these 3 types of cameras into the same category of "point and shoot", which they are not the same at all.



dormfab said:


> You brought it up and Dao touched on it, but as a noob who has only ever known P&S, when would someone know they are being held back by their equipment without ever having used it to know the difference?


If someone is interested in photography over snapshooting pictures at the family functions and vacations, they will seek out information just as most have in this forum.  From the knowledge of photography they gain from their searching and joining forums such as this, they learn very easily what limitations their "point and shoot" camera is giving them.  I've never used a dSLR, yet I fully understand the limitations of my "point and shoot" and know what is holding me back from the images I'd like to create.  But economics rule and I know I have to stick with those limitations and work around them.  That doesn't mean I don't know the difference.



sunlioness said:


> And I know that a lot people in these forums are dreaded by "newbies" that know nothing about appertures and focal lengthes but some of them have a great eye or great taste. And I have seen such people here being ignored just because some other groups feel elitistic about their cameras and "knowledge".
> This is not one of the most friendly corners of the internet and though I met some really interesting people that's why I left. BUT there's great knowledge here and a lot of experienced people so I'm back to keep learning.
> Sorry if a got a bit off-topic, I had to get it off my chest
> 
> /end of rant


You posted the same feeling that I get from many in this forum.  According to members of this forum, since I have a "P&S", I will never achieve a good photo.  According to members of this forum, since I can't shoot RAW, I _can not_ adjust the white balance of my images.  According to members of this forum, since I can't shoot RAW, I _can not_ change the exposure in post processing to my images.

Now, of course I understand that with RAW data, it is easier to adjust these things with a resulting better quality image, but that doesn't mean it is impossible, which members of this forum speak here as if it is.  That is just one example of the elitist attitude I see on these forums.


----------



## maulrat (Oct 19, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> btw im not saying this to come off like a jerk...




Sure sounded like a jerk to me... after reading your initial post.  Now let me go and read the rest of this thread... 

...to be continued.


----------



## maulrat (Oct 19, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> first of all  johny 9 post b4 you talk about me get to know me.. im 21 does that mean something.



Ok, is this a question?



kalmkidd said:


> ... number 2 i OWN a Nikon d40 so saying it out of ''jealousy'' is something that now made you sound stupid..



After reading this sentence, I wonder who the so called "stupid" really is.



kalmkidd said:


> Number 3 i was not harsh or talking down on anybody i was stating simple facts and anytime you wanna have  a ''shoot out'' you can pick the scenario and use your SLR and ill use my PnS, and we will see who has better results..



Please excuse me.  I have to read this very long statement at least 5 more times to understand what is really being said, due to the lack of punctuation.

I really don't like saying this because I am not an English teacher or anything but... Kalmkidd, your grammar sucks much ass.  Yes, I was blunt but it is the truth.  You really sound like a kid that wants to start a pissing contest.  I understand that you are upset because many people say, "Wow, I cannot believe that photo was taken by a point and shoot camera".  So what!  Honestly, if I were to get a comment like that regarding any of my shots with a P&S, I would take that as a compliment.  It only means that the photo is "bad ass" enough to compete with expensive DSLR shots.  Perhaps you should take your aggressive behavior and use it more constructively rather than create conflict with others.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 19, 2008)

To OP: here's an idea... stop judging others, and they'll stop judging you. For example, I'm thinking maybe calling people "stupid" isnt' the best way to gain people's respect.

To anyone who thinks you need a P&S to be taken seriously...

This has been said before, I will say it again. This is a photography forum. People here are generally concerned on some deeper level about producing high quality images (whatever that means to them). Generally speaking, this usually means that they're going to wind up needing or wanting a DSLR... because a DSLR _is_ the best tool for the job. Can you paint a money using condiments and a paper towel? Possibly. Would it be easier to do with better tools? _YES_.

People here don't judge you for a lack of having a DSLR, people here will often tell you that you might get better results _with one_. There's no judgement in that... there is merely the offer of help.

You don't have a DSLR? Can't afford one? Don't want one? Fine. I 100% guarantee you that if you say that, most people here will go "ok, cool!" and then do their absolute best to help you. Sure, there are some idiots here that will come down on you regardless, but I can think of a whole LIST of some of the most capable and qualified people on this forum who will COMPLETELY accept your situation and do their very very best to help you.


----------



## Ron Evers (Oct 19, 2008)

tsaraleksi said:


> .
> For example, here's an image that would be flat out impossible with a point and shoot camera:


 
I think I could do it with my S5 IS which to me is like a dSLR without the fliping mirror.


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 19, 2008)

Ron Evers said:


> I think I could do it with my S5 IS which to me is like a dSLR without the fliping mirror.



Not without a sensor that is close to the size of 35mm film and a lens at f/1.2 your couldn't.


----------



## Overread (Oct 19, 2008)

lets not get into a long argument about what can and can't be done in a hypothetical situation 

as for point and shoots and advice on the forum (And comments on photos as to skill) - the only time I shy away from giving advice is when I see a camera in the point and shoot area and don't know if its a compact or a bridge I will refrain from exposure comments since I don't know if they are possible for the OP to be able to reproduce.
I have seen people with compacts take better shots than those with DSLRs and I have seen the reverse too - a tool is a tool and nothing more. A better tool is a better tool - but of course one must know how to use a tool to get the best use out of it


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 19, 2008)

Overread said:


> lets not get into a long argument about what can and can't be done in a hypothetical situation
> 
> as for point and shoots and advice on the forum (And comments on photos as to skill) - the only time I shy away from giving advice is when I see a camera in the point and shoot area and don't know if its a compact or a bridge I will refrain from exposure comments since I don't know if they are possible for the OP to be able to reproduce.
> I have seen people with compacts take better shots than those with DSLRs and I have seen the reverse too - a tool is a tool and nothing more. A better tool is a better tool - but of course one must know how to use a tool to get the best use out of it



Right, but the point I'm making is that there is a very real difference in what can be done with the different cameras. Obviously very nice photographs can be taken with point and shoot cameras, and an SLR in no way guarantees that your photos will look good. However, it's a fools errand to argue that an SLR won't let you achieve things that a point and shoot cannot do.


----------



## Jon_Are (Oct 19, 2008)

To the OP,

(I almost don't know where to begin)

I can understand some of your original points, but you express them so poorly it does take some effort. Based on your inability to communicate effectively, and your delusional sense of superiority (which is actually quite ironic), it's difficult to view you as anything other than a whining child. 

The fact that you were in Iraq (lots of people were/are), are married (ditto) and fathered children (ditto), means absolutely nothing to me, at least within the context of this discussion. Nothing at all.

And your website - and much of the photography on it - well...I'll be kind and just say that it needs some fine-tuning.

I suggest you save this thread, seal it in an envelope, and open it once you've grown up a bit. Let us know how that goes and we can all have a good laugh.

Best of luck.


----------



## TBAM (Oct 19, 2008)

I'm sorry, i'm not going to hold back. You (The OP) are an idiot, and stupid. All the things you judge others to be.

dSLR's and P&S' are all CAMERAS. 

They all expose photographs by way of a digital sensor. They all do the SAME THING, though have different features and different levels of customisation.

They all take photos.

We can all run, but should we all tie our legs up and try and run on our knees? Then get overjoyed and condemn "normal" runners because we can run just as far and just as fast on our knees? Should we go onto athletics forums and say how stupid people are because they're surprised that we can run on our knees, even though it may be more difficult.

Even though, we were given fully functioning legs that are easier to run on than our knees?

Making a post calling people stupid and then bignoting yourself because you use your P&S to take photos more than your dSLR and that you can still get good quality images out of is ignorant, and blatantly condescending (regardless of whether you chose to write a secondary post trying to excuse the way you come across).

All cameras are on a scale of ability, quality and technical potential. Does using the worst camera available to get a photo that could be taken with a camera further up the scale make you better than anyone else?

If anything, it makes you look more stupid than anyone else. If you want to take photo's of the quality that a dSLR provides, WHY NOT JUST PURCHASE A dSLR?!

Just because you achieve the same results as someone else through more difficult or "lesser" means garners you no more respect other than your own unwillingness to do the logical thing.

Sure, you can take great photos with even the oldest and cheapest P&S cameras, however if you have the budget and are interested in photography to the point where you want to take better photographs or photographs with a more consistent level of quality, why stay with a P&S, buy an SLR?

It's like being a millionaire, purchasing an old used car, and taking it to a track and eventually winding it out to 180km/h over a number of hours going round and round. Then calling people stupid for spending more money to get to the same speed, even though they do it in a fraction of the time.

If you have the money and want to get a better quality camera, then get a better quality camera. Don't get a sh*t camera, throw away the money and then try and get the same kind of shots that you could have taken with the higher quality camera.

These kind of posts, are just a waste of time and get people fired up, and show your own ignorance and tall poppy syndrome more than anything else.


----------



## kundalini (Oct 19, 2008)

tsaraleksi said:


> Not without a sensor that is close to the size of 35mm film and a lens at f/1.2 your couldn't.


 But yet the sky is blown as well as highlights on the ground, there is a tilt of the horizon, the top of the hedge is running through their heads, dead leaves that cover the hem of her gown and I would think an f/1.2 lens would produce a much more buttery bokeh than shown.

Could someone with a P&S get a better composition?  Most likey.


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 19, 2008)

kundalini said:


> But yet the sky is blown as well as highlights on the ground, there is a tilt of the horizon, the top of the hedge is running through their heads, dead leaves that cover the hem of her gown and I would think an f/1.2 lens would produce a much more buttery bokeh than shown.
> 
> Could someone with a P&S get a better composition?  Most likey.



Wow where in my post did I ask for a critique? While the nitpicking you seem to eager to hand out is in fact, quite minor, the bigger issue at hand is that it's pointless bordering on trolling. The image served to illustrate my point and nothing else.


----------



## sunlioness (Oct 19, 2008)

Oh God, I missed this place and the thrills it provides!
I would really love it if once debates (if you could call this a debate) could be held without the whole range of insulting words and phrases that are usually being used.

Come on, guys! I'm sure you can defend your stance and opinions without losing it. I know it's not always easy to be mature about things, but let's just keep it civilised....please? If you don't like someone's post either answer in a well-mannered way or just ignore it.

/that goes mostly to the ones saying or alluding that certain things, actions or people are _stupid _or {_enter preferable word here_}...


----------



## TBAM (Oct 19, 2008)

kundalini said:


> But yet the sky is blown as well as highlights on the ground, there is a tilt of the horizon, the top of the hedge is running through their heads, dead leaves that cover the hem of her gown and I would think an f/1.2 lens would produce a much more buttery bokeh than shown.
> 
> Could someone with a P&S get a better composition? Most likey.


 
I didn't think the picture was posted as a C&C, and the points you raised are not isolated to DLRs or P&S. 

The point was that the depth of field that was created in that shot would be very difficult to obtain on a normal P&S (for point sakes, I am talking actual P&S, not SLR-Like fully manual cameras)

Could someone with any camera get a better composition? That is entirely up to the person behind the camera, and really is irrelevant to the topic at hand.


----------



## TBAM (Oct 19, 2008)

sunlioness said:


> Oh God, I missed this place and the thrills it provides!
> I would really love it if once debates (if you could call this a debate) could be held without the whole range of insulting words and phrases that are usually being used.
> 
> Come on, guys! I'm sure you can defend your stance and opinions without losing it. I know it's not always easy to be mature about things, but let's just keep it civilised....please? If you don't like someone's post either answer in a well-mannered way or just ignore it.
> ...


 
That's fair enough, but I would argue that it is stupid to use a broken shovel to dig a hole then call other people stupid when they are surprised that a normal shovel wasn't used.

Furthermore, I would also argue that it is prudent (verging idiotic) to then insult other people and consider yourself better than others on a public forum, because you did something the difficult way and others would prefer to do it the logical and easier way.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 19, 2008)

I stand by my original point...


I like bunnies.


----------



## tirediron (Oct 19, 2008)

tsaraleksi said:


> I'm not sure I'm a big help because I went from borrowing a film SLR to a digital SLR rather than point and shoot to SLR, but I would say that when you can look at your images and see places where they are being lessened by technical aspects that you cannot control. Some examples that spring to mind are autofocus speed, frame rate, dynamic range, depth of field, sharpness, local contrast (the kind that comes from the lens, not the camera/photoshop), lens width or length, lens speed, control of flash/off camera flash, etc etc. Now it's certainly true that some of these things are also problems with introductory level lenses and SLR cameras. However, on a point and shoot you will never be able to overcome those things, whereas you can find just the right combination of equipment to suit you on an SLR.
> 
> For example, here's an image that would be flat out impossible with a point and shoot camera:


 Agree with the points in your post, by what about this image makes capturing it with a P&S impossible?


----------



## kundalini (Oct 19, 2008)

tsaraleksi said:


> While the nitpicking you seem to eager to hand out is in fact, quite minor, the bigger issue at hand is that it's pointless bordering on trolling. The image served to illustrate my point and nothing else.


The whole point of this pissing contest of a thread is the image quality of P&S versus dSLR, right?

My point, which has been weaving in and out through 50 odd posts, is that with a couple of hundred or even with several thousand dollars worth of equipment in your hand, technical and compositional issues can arise from any type of camera. You seemed to have dismiss even the slightest chance that Ron could have taken that shot with his S5 IS "*Not without a sensor that is close to the size of 35mm film and a lens at f/1.2 your couldn't*". I have no evidence whether the S5 is capable or not and TBAM seems to think it would be very difficult to get the depth of field. However, he may not have had the issues I raised earlier about your photo either. As we all know, (in unison everyone) it's the photographer, not the camera. 

I suppose considering my nitpicking to be *quite minor *is subjective. I would think when posting an image to illustrate a point, it should be top shelf.




tsaraleksi said:


> Wow where in my post did I ask for a critique?





TBAM said:


> I didn't think the picture was posted as a C&C,


 
BTW,


> *Photography Beginners' Forum & Photo Gallery* Brand new to photography, or brushing up on some of the basics? Dont be shy! Talk to other beginners and ask all your basic photographic questions here. *Show us some of the photos you have taken so far and get some review - so you can learn where there is room for improvement!*


----------



## Dao (Oct 19, 2008)

kundalini said:


> The whole point of this pissing contest of a thread is the image quality of P&S versus dSLR, right?




I thought this thread talked about the capability of a point and shoot camera and DSLR camera, not image quality or C&C.  Maybe I miss something.


----------



## kundalini (Oct 19, 2008)

Dao said:


> I thought this thread talked about the capability of a point and shoot camera and DSLR camera, not image quality or C&C. Maybe I miss something.


It is certainly quite possible that I misinterpreted the OP, but when I read in post #1





> ... Ive taken and seen MANY point n shoot pics that blow SLR pics out of the water.


I took him to mean Image Quality.


----------



## TBAM (Oct 19, 2008)

Dao said:


> I thought this thread talked about the capability of a point and shoot camera and DSLR camera, not image quality or C&C. Maybe I miss something.


 
The point of this thread as far as I can read, is the OP thinking he is better than newbies who purchase dSLR's before mastering P&S cameras, because he has a fuji S700 and takes photos with manual settings.

As for what Kundalini said, well, I would think it is fair common sense to say that dSLR's would provide better "quality" images than a P&S merely due to the lenses used, sensor type, Megapixel yada yada. If you're talking about quality as a technical term, and not in relation to aesthetic quality.

However one thing I think that should be clarified here is the overly general term "Point and Shoot Camera". As someone else has stated in this thread, there are many kinds of P&S camera.

Because in some ways, an SLR on auto mode is a point and shoot. You point it and press the shutter. 

Perhaps some new terms should be identified, like:
 - SLR
 - dSLR
 - Snapshot camera (most comonly referred to as a P&S)
 - SLR-Like (manual setting with adjustable Aperture, Shutter Speed and focus, however an Electronic Viewfinder)

Because technically speaking, what some people here might be considering as a P&S is actually very close to an SLR, except it does not have a detachable lens, has an electronic viewfinder, and the settings are adjusted via buttons rather than dials and rings on the lens.

Saying that a photo taken on a Fujifilm finepix s5500 (for example) with manually set shutter speed, aperture, ISO and focus is on par with an SLR and thinking it is an achievement for P&S photography, is a bit naive.

Wheras you have other people here who consider a P&S camera to be a snapshot camera with only the settings: ISO, Auto, Night, Portrait, landscape, Macro, with no manual focus, no manual shutter or aperture. 

So essentially we have people arguing on different premises. 

So perhaps we should clarify that:
Any camera where you can manually adjust the majority of the settings is capable of producing images that are aesthetically on par with the quality of a dSLR. 

Any camera where the settings are not easily altered, will have great difficulty achieving the same aesthetic quality of a dSLR.

Although, technically speaking, a dSLR with a higher megapixel count, a more dynamic full-framed sensor and an expensive lens will always outperform any other camera where those options are not available. E.g. a camera where lenses are not interchangable, a camera without a full-frame sensor, a camera with a lower megapixel count, or a camera with no control over the exposure aside from automated settings.

Anyways, i think this is all a big misunderstanding perpetuated by the OP who set the tone for the whole post with his arrogant and condescending attitude.


----------



## Kegger (Oct 19, 2008)

I understood what he was trying to say perfectly... But maybe it's cuz I speak "Joe".

And I actually understood his initial argument. I think all he's trying to say is that you shouldn't bash someone's photography based on the type of camera it was taken with.


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 19, 2008)

tirediron said:


> Agree with the points in your post, by what about this image makes capturing it with a P&S impossible?



With the smaller sensors on point and shoot cameras, combined with the fact that there are not interchangeable lenses, you couldn't get the shallow depth of field in such a scene.


----------



## tirediron (Oct 19, 2008)

tsaraleksi said:


> With the smaller sensors on point and shoot cameras, combined with the fact that there are not interchangeable lenses, you couldn't get the shallow depth of field in such a scene.


 
You might not be able to duplicate in from exactly the same position, but I would submit that you probably could come up with very similar image using a P&S and a little effort.


----------



## TBAM (Oct 19, 2008)

Kegger said:


> I understood what he was trying to say perfectly... But maybe it's cuz I speak "Joe".
> 
> And I actually understood his initial argument. I think all he's trying to say is that you shouldn't bash someone's photography based on the type of camera it was taken with.


 
I don't know how you came to that conclusion. Noone's bashing anyone's photography based on what camera you use.

He's saying that people who are surprised that you can get good photos out of a snapshot camera are stupid.

He's saying that people who purchase dSLR cameras when they don't even know how to use their snapshot cameras are stupid.

He's saying that you don't need an SLR to take good photos (which is true). However he also says that given the same circumstance, you can take just as good a photo with a snapshot as you can an SLR.

That he uses his Fuji s700 as much if not more than his d40.

He's saying that snapshot photos blow SLR's out of the water.

He's saying that people only look at the cost and label of a camera.

He's saying that it's the eye, the timing and settings that make a good photo.

Some of the above points, noone is arguing. It's him calling people stupid for either being surprised at the quality of snapshot photos, or purchasing SLR cameras before mastering a polaroid camera, as well as his attitude that people have a problem with.

Then it is people subsequently arguing that intrinsicly an SLR will output better quality photos than a snapshot camera.

None of the above, has got anything to do with people bagging someone because of the camera they use. If it has any relation, it's the OP bagging SLR users, saying he is better than they are with a "snapshot" camera, when he is essentially imitating what an SLR does anyway.

As for the wedding photo, I'm with tsaraleski, I would say getting that depth of field natively from the camera would be nigh on impossible from that distance, and without any PP in photoshop (from a snapshot camera, or even an SLR-like camera for that matter unless the in-built lens had quite a low aperture. Which is the point tsaraleksi is making, that ultimately that picture would be impossible without the appropriate lens, which is only available to SLR cameras)


----------



## tsaraleksi (Oct 19, 2008)

tirediron said:


> You might not be able to duplicate in from exactly the same position, but I would submit that you probably could come up with very similar image using a P&S and a little effort.



Perhaps, but probably not, not without photoshopping the background. My general point is that it's much more difficult to get shallow depth of field with a point and shoot or even bridge camera than it is with an SLR. This is because the sensor is much smaller in even a high-end all-in-one (I think this is a better general term than "point and shoot") than in an SLR camera. Considering that even my 1.6x crop sensor camera can't do DoF this shallow, I'd say it's a fair claim to make that no, you could not replicate the shot with an S5IS. Perhaps I didn't pick the best example, so I'll throw up a different one to make my point. I'm not sure why there is so much argumentation on the idea that it is difficult if not impossible to achieve low depth of field on an 'all-in-one,' it has nothing to do with the ability to set an aperture manually or anything like that, it is only an artifact of the size of the sensor.  







This was shot at 85mm, f/2.0. If someone can show me a shot with similar settings and apearance done with a point and shoot, then I'll admit there is something to the other side of the argument. I was not 'tearing down' others or anything like that, and I'm a bit puzzled why some seem so eager to take offense.


----------



## maulrat (Oct 19, 2008)

Hey, what happened to the OP?  I haven't heard a peep out of him in a long time.


----------



## manaheim (Oct 20, 2008)

maulrat said:


> Hey, what happened to the OP? I haven't heard a peep out of him in a long time.


 
His work here, was done... he created a flame war and is sitting back reading and laughing his head off.


----------



## paxye (Oct 20, 2008)

I don't think that he liked the responses to his other thread either...
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=141936


----------



## Amber_Cullen (Oct 20, 2008)

Yep, I've seen some awesome shots taken with PnS, I plan on getting one so when I go places I don't have to lug my big one around...

BUT dslr's have advantages over point and shoots, which is why so many people want them


----------



## Dionysus (Oct 20, 2008)

he has a problem w/ the word "since".  From his website and his postings "since" is always written as "sense"


----------



## Village Idiot (Oct 20, 2008)

Basic P&S cameras are crap. You can take good pictures with them but a knowledgable photographer will be able to take a better quality picture with a modern DSLR and a quality lens. Give me a $300 Canon P&S and I guarantee that I couldn't take it to the local road course and use it for panning shots of motorcycles. They generally don't have the capabilities and flexibility of a DSLR. Plus the sensors are tiny.

Sizing for web and showing off doesn't count. View full resolution and you'll be able to see the difference, even with the DSLR shooting in RAW mode.

Bridge cameras can take pictures that look as good as photos from a modern DSLR with a quality lens, just minus the image quality. David Hobby of Strobist.com shoots with a G9 on occasion. It has a hot shot. He uses wireless flash. It's also 9mp or so. Basically unless you viewed the exif or the full sized full resolution file, then you'd never be able to tell the difference.


----------



## ksmattfish (Oct 24, 2008)

I may not be a fan of compact digitals, but check out this $500 digital compact vs. $40,000 digital medium format shoot out.  

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

Most of my complaints with compacts have to do with the tiny sensors; in particular poor quality at ISO 400+.  Once Canon or Nikon introduces an APS format compact it'll never leave my side.


----------



## Village Idiot (Oct 24, 2008)

Some one just posted that. Blow both images up to 30"x45" and then compare. Why spend $40,000 on a 40mp digital medium format camera just to shrink the images to 800x533.

And besides, those images don't look very good. I've seen smaller images from that Hasselblad that you can pretty much pick out as MF work.


----------



## Mystwalker (Oct 24, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> i guess none of you know what a point n shoot is capable of... Ive taken and seen MANY point n shoot pics that blow SLR pics out of the water. its the eye, the time, and the settings, not just the label and cost of a camera.. you guys will soon learn that.. People are to quick to go out and buy a 2k camera when they havent even mastered a polaroid..
> 
> moral of this post when i see post saying (wow thats a nice shot cant believe its from a PnS) you look stupid to me...
> 
> Thanks..


 
What you say is true, BUT very misleading.

In your hands, can you take a better picture with PnS or with SLR?
Assuming you are not a pro ... in hands of pro, will better picture come from PnS or with SLR?

I'm a newb and I can tell you, I can get more out of DSLR's green box mode (auto) then I can ever get out of PnS.

Do you have to "master" go-kart, Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, BMW (or whatever hierarchy you have in mind) before you are allowed to buy a Lamborghini?


----------



## UtahsRebel (Oct 24, 2008)

*My general point is that it's much more difficult to get shallow depth of field with a point and shoot

 Ok, I'm probably going to open myself up for something I'm not ready for but, this was taken with a Canon A560 and I think I have done OK with the DOF.






*


----------



## RebelTasha (Oct 24, 2008)

Nice picture Rebel!!

Most all of my pictures in my album are taken with the S5, I do struggle with shallow depth of field unless i'm really close to the subject and shutter speed or lag time when I really need a good action shot..
However I could not handle the bulk or expense of keeping up with a DSLR, I needed a new computer that could handle the RAW files, then buying lens after lens and everything else.. 
With the kind of photography I like to do it was almost impossible dragging everything with me I was ALWAYS needing to change lenses for the optimal shot..

So I sold my DSLR with the money I bought a new laptop with a huge harddrive, I bought an S5 and I bought an 'old film Canon AE-1 with 3 lenses, 50mm 1:4, 80-200mm zoom and a 28mm wide angle, speedflash...
etc for $46 off ebay..'

So both have their drawbacks, both have their good points.. I dont' think it's fair to say they are the same, if they were the same then neither would have a place in the market.
I love my S5 I had the S3 before the DSLR and regretting having sold it..
At this point I have no regrets I'm happy with what I have it suits my needs..
That is what is important.. is what you have practical for you?


----------



## UtahsRebel (Oct 24, 2008)

Thanks, but I guess I should clarify a bit. 

While I am using a P&S currently, I am wanting and saving for a dslr. I am currently trying to make sure that I learn composition, lighting, angles and other photography basics before I buy an expensive toy.


----------



## kalmkidd (Oct 29, 2008)

maulrat said:


> Ok, is this a question?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



if u cant read that one time and understand it.. you win the idiot award.. im almost certain my 9yr old brother would read it without issue..


----------



## maulrat (Oct 29, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> if u cant read that one time and understand it.. you win the idiot award.. im almost certain my 9yr old brother would read it without issue..


 
Woohoo!  Yay to me! :lmao:


----------



## iflynething (Oct 29, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> if u cant read that one time and understand it.. you win the idiot award.. im almost certain my 9yr old brother would read it without issue..


 
Go read a book. Learn legible AMERICAN English. Come back. Let us know how you did.

You have F***** yourself over. Arguments can be fun but not little $H!T like this. Figured I'd get in here before the thread was closed, because it will happen sense (  ) the original poster was kalmkidd

This forum does not like you



maulrat said:


> Woohoo! Yay to me! :lmao:


 
Congratulations on your win!

~Michael~


PS. Go read another book


----------



## manaheim (Oct 29, 2008)

Wow, he actually came back???  And posted???

Mind boggling.


----------



## DRoberts (Oct 30, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> anytime you wanna have a ''shoot out'' you can pick the scenario and use your SLR and ill use my PnS, and we will see who has better results..


 
I'll take you up on that challenge.


----------



## maulrat (Oct 30, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Wow, he actually came back???  And posted???
> Mind boggling.



Perhaps the reason he took so long to come back was so that he could proof read his comments prior to making them.  That way, he could make grammar and punctuation corrections using a 3rd grade English book instead of making himself seem illiterate.



kalmkidd said:


> if u cant read that one time and understand it.. you win the idiot award.. im almost certain my 9yr old brother would read it without issue..



... then again, perhaps not. :lmao:


----------



## Dubious Drewski (Oct 30, 2008)

I don't know, I think it's a pretty simple problem with a pretty simple answer.

A person with low talent will take equally bad/good photos with a PointnShoot and a $1500 SLR.

Only a talented person will be held back by the considerable physical limitations of the PointnShoot.

If you think pictures of equal quality can be taken with both systems, then you don't have an understanding of the difference; there are important differences, which only a knowledgeable person will be able to take advantage of.


----------



## DRoberts (Oct 30, 2008)

Ok the truth now! There is no difference. It is all the photographer. I remember just last Sunday watching the foorball game, all the sport magazine photogs had PnSs on the side lines. Oh yeah! I also noticed the last time I read National Geographic that all those African wildlife photos were taken with a PnS.

OP...Had you stopped by saying that it is possible to take a good photo with a PnS you might have had a chance. Everything after that just blew your entire case.
Not to mention, you really showed your ignorance to the very people you were trying to "impress" with your wise statements...The profesional BUSINESS photographers who for no apparent reason invest $1000s and $10,000s when all they had to do was buy a $200 PnS.


----------



## shed301 (Oct 30, 2008)

this thread should be changed to *PnS vs DSLR*, Mainly because that's all it's been. Everytime i see a thread with the words *beginner* in the title i think. cool another thread to learn off... so far the only *learning* thats been done here is how to petty squabble amongst ourselves, which i'm sure 99% already know how to do quite sucessfully. The *point* is no matter what the camera is.. it's what you do with the camera that counts in the end. 

  one thing i don't know after reading this thread in particular... is. what the hell does OP mean? 

thanks


----------



## rufus5150 (Oct 30, 2008)

Original Poster.


----------



## shed301 (Oct 30, 2008)

rufus5150 said:


> Original Poster.



Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh thanks dude


----------



## Braomius (Oct 30, 2008)

I agree I passed a college photographer course with a Sony point and shoot and got great shots. A+ in the course. I did have to use the manual settings alot and a tripod for half of the pictures that wouldn't have needed one with an slr.


----------



## Dubious Drewski (Oct 30, 2008)

There shouldn't even be a debate here; I don't understand how this thread grew so quickly and attracted such passionate opinions.


----------



## mrodgers (Oct 30, 2008)

Boredom?  Perhaps everyone has gone insane?  I have finally gone insane tonight.  Seriously.  I'm ready for the loony bin.


----------



## iflynething (Oct 30, 2008)

shed301 said:


> one thing i don't know after reading this thread in particular... is. what the hell does OP mean?
> 
> thanks


 
It took me super many posts and about three different threads to put three and two together to figure out what that meant

~Michael~


----------



## Greg Oden (Oct 30, 2008)

im not the best photographer by far, but i guarentee my d90 takes a better picture then your P&S.  if you shot with your camera and then used mine you would understand.  dont act like your camera is awesome because you dont want to spring for new technology.  I understand that older cameras are great in there own way, i love them and i own them. slr's kill them.  LAI    learn about it


----------



## manaheim (Oct 31, 2008)

Dubious Drewski said:


> I don't know, I think it's a pretty simple problem with a pretty simple answer.
> 
> A person with low talent will take equally bad/good photos with a PointnShoot and a $1500 SLR.
> 
> ...


 
Well said.

I would like to nominate Drew's post the thread-ender.


----------



## Sim (Oct 31, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Well said.
> 
> I would like to nominate Drew's post the thread-ender.



I second that motion


----------



## BoblyBill (Oct 31, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Well said.
> 
> I would like to nominate Drew's post the thread-ender.


 
I'll second it...

Let's stop the name calling, biting, and clawing and get back to discussing photography please...

It seems to me that there are certain things that PnS's have over DSLR's (size, portability, overall ease of use) and certain things that DSLR's have over PnS (noise (I don't know of any PnS that can produce a large printable shot at 6400 ISO where I know of at least three DSLR's that can), versatility, and overall image quality especially when put under difficult shooting conditions (low light comes to mind, and anything over 8 second exposures). A camera takes pictures. That's its job, but you buy different cameras for different uses. If you NEED to be able to put your camera in your pocket, and not have to worry about settings as much then it would SEEM silly to think of buying a DSLR just because it's bulk alone. However if you need a camera that can shoot from 10mm-1200mm and perform well in low light and handles noise well then it would also SEEM silly to get PnS.


----------



## Do'Urden's Eyes (Oct 31, 2008)

kundalini said:


> But yet the sky is blown as well as highlights on the ground, there is a tilt of the horizon, the top of the hedge is running through their heads, dead leaves that cover the hem of her gown and I would think an f/1.2 lens would produce a much more buttery bokeh than shown.
> 
> Could someone with a P&S get a better composition? Most likey.


 
This could start getting ugly.

And kalmkid, KALM DOWN. Stop tooting your horn about being twenty one with two kids and an iraq vat. cool. but it says NOTHING about your ability to take a photo. and this forum is not about competition, having your so called 'shoot off' is ridiculous. 

stop being such an arrogant prick and be nice like all of us.


----------



## Do'Urden's Eyes (Oct 31, 2008)

im surprised this hasnt been closed yet.


----------



## DavidSR (Oct 31, 2008)

Do'Udren's Eyes said:


> stop being such an arrogant prick and be nice like all of us.


 
I don't think this was very nice


----------



## Alex_B (Oct 31, 2008)

kalmkidd said:


> i guess none of you know what a point n shoot is capable of... Ive taken and seen MANY point n shoot pics that blow SLR pics out of the water. its the eye, the time, and the settings, not just the label and cost of a camera.. you guys will soon learn that..  People are to quick to go out and buy a 2k camera when they havent even mastered a polaroid..
> 
> moral of this post when i see post saying (wow thats a nice shot cant believe its from a PnS)  you look stupid to me...
> 
> Thanks..



a nicely composed and exposed p&s photo will of course beat a badly composed and badly exposed SLR image.

Still I myself am able to produce some images with an SLR which I cannot produce with a p&s (maybe others could? who knows, I cannot).

With a Ferrari you will win a race against a Ford ... but only if you are able to drive!


----------



## Do'Urden's Eyes (Oct 31, 2008)

DavidSR said:


> I don't think this was very nice


 
haha Well i figured id give him a little of it back. after reading what he said to some people i decided it wasnt too harsh.


----------

