«

Dudley Hanks wrote:

> It would seem Canon never got that memo. With the introduction of the
> Powershot SX 1 / 10 cameras, it has that market covered.

Yes, I was referring to the high end P&S cameras like the G10.

> By the time you
> pick up a p&s camera, a wide angle and tele converter, you will likely have
> shelled out more than the cost of either of these models, and your pics
> won't be as good.

Yes, it's true, but the SX1/SX10 leave out other important features like
the ability to use filters, though perhaps a third party will make a
tube that mounts to the grooves for the lens hood attachment. At least
with the G10 you can use a lens tube and have filters in addition to the
junky converter lenses.

> Also, with the SX 1 / 10 cameras, you can start building up some flash
> accessories which will work with EOS DSLRs, should your interest in
> photography develop as your skills increase...

Same with the G10 (as far as the flash).

It's just silly to try all these work-arounds when something like the
XSi is so much more capable for not much more money. You're building a
system that will grow with your skills from the get-go, rather than
spending a ton of money on interim solutions. I was one of those people
that tried the converter lenses. You get decent results in some
circumstances, but it's a huge kludge. A ZLR is a better choice if you
need wide-angle or telephoto, but it's an interim step to a D-SLR which
solves the inherent limitations of a P&S.

Dudley Hanks wrote:

> Also, with the SX 1 / 10 cameras, you can start building up some flash
> accessories which will work with EOS DSLRs, should your interest in
> photography develop as your skills increase...

Yes, it's true that at least the SX1 and SX10 obviate the need for those
horrid tele-converter and wide-angle adapters.

But the SX1, with the CMOS sensor, will be about $650 (and it's not
being released in the U.S. for now). How big is the market for a large,
$650, point and shoot camera, when D-SLR bodies are available for under
$400? Apparently Canon doesn't think it's too big since they aren't
marketing it in the U.S..

Love that 28mm-560mm lens, at least on paper, but those types of zooms
invariable have quality issues at each end, while doing okay in the
middle. Plus you're still putting up with all the other drawabacks of a
P&S, such as the poor dynamic range and the slow AF.

When D-SLRs were over $1000, there was a big market for those super-zoom
P&S models. Now they don't sell well because they were selling them
mainly to enthusiasts that have upgraded to SLRs. Selling expensive P&S
super-zooms to people that don't understand anything about photographic
equipment may not be the best marketing plan.

RichA wrote:
> ALL p&s's have sub-par lenses, all of them. That won't change.

But the lenses may be adequate for the job, even if not reaching your high
standards.

David

glen thomas <> wrote:

> Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
> bullshit.

1. P&S cameras only have 3x zoom range, at most.
2. P&S cameras cannot reach range nor aperture of SLRs, and
where they can, they still cannot compete.
3. P&S cameras have shitty dynamic range.
4. P&S cameras are cheap. Not price worthy, cheap.
5. P&S cameras are badly built and inconvenient to use.
6. P&S cameras have annoying fake shutter sounds.
7. Some P&S cameras have a ridiculous display lag of half a
second or worse.
8. P&S cameras are so slow to focus and to show what they see
right now, a negative shutter lag is commonly needed.
9. P&S cameras have terrible weak flashes and no hot shoes.
10. P&S cameras suffer from heavily distorting lenses.
11. When being off the beaten path, P&S cameras have empty batteries
all the time. Changing them often drops the camera into salt
water, on rocks or in the mud.
12. P&S cameras can't produce macro shots, only dark, distorted
close ups --- and they need ugly direct flash to produce
even that.
13. P&S cameras include video and audio modes designed to
frighten small children by their quality. If they'd been
filming the Hindenburg or Kennedy, all one could see would
be Kennedy bursting into flames or the Hindenburg parading
through streets.
14. P&S cameras have no viewfinder, though a few have a 'dark
hole'.
15. P&S cameras give up focussing at LV6, making them unable to
focus indoors even in daytime.
16. With the need to use their ineffective, puny flash in all
situations, a P&S shooter was trampled to death by an irate
moose.
17. Due to their distortions, CA, rolling shutter effect and
complete colour inaccuracy, people needing even a minimum
of acuracy abhor P&S cameras even more than the devil abhors
holy water.
18. P&S cameras have miss and miss autofocussing, using slow and
painful and noisy lens movements to zero in. P&S also cannot
switch off any of their automatic, misguessing mechanisms.
19. An electronic viewfinder as found in most P&S cameras, is a
terrible source of lag and shows what you'd have gotten had
you pressed the shutter release half a second ago.
20. P&S camera bokeh and 'shallow' DOF isn't in intercontinental
missile range compared to DSLRs.
21. P&S cameras are perfect noise generators for cryptographic
needs.
22. P&S cameras will not allow you to make stunning photographs
unless you can make even better ones with SLRs.
23. Have you ever shown a P&S troll a SLR snapshot? Try it.
See him rotate like mad trying to produce something similar.
Watch him invent new swear words for lag, bokeh, DOF, and
so on.
24. Did we mention always flat batteries and inability to see
anything in sunlight and noise-only shots without direct
sunlight yet? Watch them carry more P&S and more expensive
gear than a full collection of all Canon lenses and still fail.
25. A good P&S camera is one that's stolen so you can buy a
real camera. Unfortunately, even street beggars will give
you money because they pity you and your P&S crap.

> There are many more reasons to add to this list but this should be more than
> enough for even the most unaware person to realize that P&S cameras are just
pure crap, unless you want to go begging in the streets.

> The phenomenon of everyone yelling "You NEED a DSLR!" can be summed up in just
> one short phrase:

"Take a P&S when you *don't* want to take photos."

-Wolfgang

bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
> Eric Stevens wrote:
>> ... there is a down side.

> In other news there is NO ultimate camera.

> Resolution, sharpness, convenience, ease of use,
> weight, cost, speed of response all vary,
> and in some cases conflict.

I'll take a slice of bread as a camera. It's not very good at
taking pictures, but at least it's easy to eat, conveniently
bought, cheap, light, and fast eaten. Who needs resolutions or
a sharp crust?

See, a slice of bread beats a P&S camera hands down. :->

-Wolfgang