Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jürgen Exner, Nov 7, 2008.

  1. "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <>
    wrote:
    >Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?


    Because without a mirror it would be a dSL without the R.

    jue
     
    Jürgen Exner, Nov 7, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jürgen Exner

    Me Here Guest

    "Jürgen Exner" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <>
    > wrote:
    >>Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    >
    > Because without a mirror it would be a dSL without the R.
    >
    > jue


    Yet Consumer Reports calls the Panasonic G1 a dSLR, gives them no credence..
     
    Me Here, Nov 7, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jürgen Exner

    SMS Guest

    Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <>, Jürgen Exner
    > says...
    >> "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>> Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    >> Because without a mirror it would be a dSL without the R.

    >
    > Most people probably don't know this fine distinction and would consider
    > any camera with a large sensor and interchangeable lenses a DSLR.


    This is true, even though it still has some of disadvantages of a P&S,
    it at least has the larger sensor. Though if someone could make a ZLR
    with a larger sensor, and a wide zoom range, it'd be better than the G1.
     
    SMS, Nov 7, 2008
    #3
  4. SMS wrote:
    > Alfred Molon wrote:
    >> In article <>, Jürgen Exner
    >> says...
    >>> "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>> Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?
    >>> Because without a mirror it would be a dSL without the R.

    >>
    >> Most people probably don't know this fine distinction and would
    >> consider any camera with a large sensor and interchangeable lenses a
    >> DSLR.

    >
    > This is true, even though it still has some of disadvantages of a P&S,
    > it at least has the larger sensor. Though if someone could make a ZLR
    > with a larger sensor, and a wide zoom range, it'd be better than the
    > G1.


    They did - Sony made the R1 but it ended up having less zoom range, and
    being a brute of a camera becuase of the size of the sensor. Did it sell?

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 7, 2008
    #4
  5. Jürgen Exner

    SMS Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:

    > They did - Sony made the R1 but it ended up having less zoom range, and
    > being a brute of a camera becuase of the size of the sensor. Did it sell?


    It runs into the same problems as all of these ZLRs. By the time you put
    on the long lens, and in the case of the R1 the larger sensor, you're
    just not saving much in manufacturing cost versus using a lens mount and
    a mirror, plus you still have all the other disadvantages of the P&S to
    contend with. You've saved no weight and no size, and very little money,
    and you end up with decidedly inferior results compared to a D-SLR.

    You often see inquiries as to why "they" can't make a D-SLR without
    interchangeable lenses, just include a wide-range zoom like the 18-200
    IS. But the cost of the lens mount and the electrical connection are
    very low, so it would not result in much of a cost savings, and it
    probably wouldn't sell very well so volumes would be low, increasing
    manufacturing costs further. It's much better they way it's playing out
    now, with D-SLR prices in free-fall. Too bad lens prices aren't
    following that same trend!
     
    SMS, Nov 7, 2008
    #5
  6. SMS wrote:
    []
    > You often see inquiries as to why "they" can't make a D-SLR without
    > interchangeable lenses, just include a wide-range zoom like the 18-200
    > IS. But the cost of the lens mount and the electrical connection are
    > very low, so it would not result in much of a cost savings, and it
    > probably wouldn't sell very well so volumes would be low, increasing
    > manufacturing costs further. It's much better they way it's playing
    > out now, with D-SLR prices in free-fall. Too bad lens prices aren't
    > following that same trend!


    Well, you have to make your money /somewhere/!
    <G>

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 7, 2008
    #6
  7. Jürgen Exner

    SMS Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    > []
    >> You often see inquiries as to why "they" can't make a D-SLR without
    >> interchangeable lenses, just include a wide-range zoom like the 18-200
    >> IS. But the cost of the lens mount and the electrical connection are
    >> very low, so it would not result in much of a cost savings, and it
    >> probably wouldn't sell very well so volumes would be low, increasing
    >> manufacturing costs further. It's much better they way it's playing
    >> out now, with D-SLR prices in free-fall. Too bad lens prices aren't
    >> following that same trend!

    >
    > Well, you have to make your money /somewhere/!
    > <G>
    >
    > David


    That's true.

    In fact I believe that one reason why we don't see better P&S models is
    because they don't want to enable that part of the market. It made sense
    when D-SLR bodies were so expensive that the high end P&S models sold
    very well. Now there's little incentive for them to build a P&S with the
    capabilities of a D-SLR. P&S are high-volume commodities sold to the
    masses based on megapixels and LCD size, and then when the masses
    complain about the P&S results they're told, 'well if you really care
    about things like noise, low-light shooting, fast auto-focus, etc. then
    we have a solution for you.' So they sell you a very capable, low cost
    body and a couple of lenses, and maybe a flash, and they've made a lot
    more money. It's not all that different from the days of film, but with
    film you had some really good P&S film cameras, something that's not the
    case now.
     
    SMS, Nov 7, 2008
    #7
  8. Jürgen Exner

    SMS Guest

    Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <%E1Rk.4040$>, SMS says...
    >
    >> This is true, even though it still has some of disadvantages of a P&S,
    >> it at least has the larger sensor. Though if someone could make a ZLR
    >> with a larger sensor, and a wide zoom range, it'd be better than the G1.

    >
    > Well, with the G1 you have the advantage of being able to change the
    > lens. Usually lenses with a large zoom range are optically less good
    > than lenses with a smaller zoom range.


    Yes that's true. Still, I can't imagine opting for the G1 versus the
    smallest true D-SLR. The size and weight difference aren't all that
    much, and the advantages of the D-SLR are significant.
     
    SMS, Nov 7, 2008
    #8
  9. Jürgen Exner

    TrollSpotter Guest

    On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:40:51 -0800, SMS <> wrote:

    >It runs into the same problems as all of these ZLRs. By the time you put
    >on the long lens, and in the case of the R1 the larger sensor, you're
    >just not saving much in manufacturing cost versus using a lens mount and
    >a mirror, plus you still have all the other disadvantages of the P&S to
    >contend with. You've saved no weight and no size, and very little money,
    >and you end up with decidedly inferior results compared to a D-SLR.


    Spoken like a true virtual-photographer troll who has zero experience in the
    real world. There might be times where a f/.3.5 2000+mm focal length is needed.
    Something that no DSLR in existence can attain. Check out this hand-held 2197mm
    f/3.5 photograph taken with a P&S camera.

    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2124/2999210192_bc589b9887_o.jpg

    Read it and weep:

    Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
    bullshit. You can either read it and educate yourself, or don't read it and
    continue to prove to everyone that you are nothing but a virtual-photographer
    newsgroup-troll and a fool.


    1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
    existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
    wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
    of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
    gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
    range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
    larger format cameras.

    2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
    DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
    high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
    aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
    their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
    180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
    DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
    to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
    edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
    seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
    up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.

    3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
    sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
    APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

    4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
    used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
    Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
    easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
    allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
    only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
    glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and
    done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order
    to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are
    investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
    flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
    outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
    purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.

    5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
    small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
    pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
    pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
    pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
    backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
    stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
    lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
    inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

    6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
    will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
    and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
    alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
    is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
    wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
    photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.

    7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
    allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
    response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
    capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
    evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
    need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
    areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
    back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
    photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
    or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
    that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
    laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
    CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
    list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

    8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
    motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
    artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
    their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
    distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
    DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)

    9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
    of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_&_Flash-Sync without
    the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
    must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
    frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
    light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
    used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
    flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
    is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
    capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
    lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
    1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
    second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
    don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
    be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
    compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
    http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

    10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
    limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
    (focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
    http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
    do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
    from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
    mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
    repair costs, etc.

    11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
    environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
    vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
    worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
    shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
    not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
    gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
    longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
    carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
    much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
    bricks.

    12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
    required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
    destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
    planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
    be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.

    13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
    recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
    still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
    the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
    P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
    chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
    the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
    the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
    there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
    Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
    P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
    valuable part of human history one day.

    14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
    image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
    trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
    overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
    other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
    you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
    do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
    external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
    shot when it happens.

    15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
    settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
    that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
    drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
    using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
    capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
    well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
    without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
    with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
    myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
    stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
    come from.)

    16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
    silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
    nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
    mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
    nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
    reality and nature.

    17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
    degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
    inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
    EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
    electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
    subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
    biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

    18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
    popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
    slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
    In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
    their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
    auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
    faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
    if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
    any camera.

    19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
    the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
    what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
    1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
    of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
    your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
    truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
    use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
    studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
    cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
    amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
    Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
    time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
    lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
    instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
    realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
    wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

    20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
    background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
    own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
    front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
    Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
    has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
    (which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
    by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
    No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
    methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.

    21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
    just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
    and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
    go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
    larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
    when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
    those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
    images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
    at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
    need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
    some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
    ISO1600 and more.

    22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
    determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
    $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
    have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
    a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
    photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
    either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
    camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
    themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
    year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
    better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
    company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
    make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
    begin with. The irony is that by them thinking that they only need to throw
    money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
    problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
    self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
    them their piss-poor photography skills.

    23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
    photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
    They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
    them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
    face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
    sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
    can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
    on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.

    24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
    the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
    ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
    photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
    and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
    that you'll lug it around again some day.

    25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
    advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
    like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
    DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
    needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
    should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
    inexpensive to replace.

    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
    better, all around. No doubt about it.

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

    "If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
    foolish thing."
     
    TrollSpotter, Nov 7, 2008
    #9
  10. On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:57:31 -0800, SMS <> wrote:

    >Alfred Molon wrote:
    >> In article <%E1Rk.4040$>, SMS says...
    >>
    >>> This is true, even though it still has some of disadvantages of a P&S,
    >>> it at least has the larger sensor. Though if someone could make a ZLR
    >>> with a larger sensor, and a wide zoom range, it'd be better than the G1.

    >>
    >> Well, with the G1 you have the advantage of being able to change the
    >> lens. Usually lenses with a large zoom range are optically less good
    >> than lenses with a smaller zoom range.

    >
    >Yes that's true. Still, I can't imagine opting for the G1 versus the
    >smallest true D-SLR. The size and weight difference aren't all that
    >much, and the advantages of the D-SLR are significant.


    What a shame that you haven't educated yourself.

    Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
    bullshit. You can either read it and educate yourself, or don't read it and
    continue to prove to everyone that you are nothing but a virtual-photographer
    newsgroup-troll and a fool.


    1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
    existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
    wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
    of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
    gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
    range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
    larger format cameras.

    2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
    DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
    high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
    aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
    their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
    180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
    DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
    to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
    edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
    seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
    up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.

    3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
    sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
    APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

    4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
    used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
    Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
    easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
    allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
    only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
    glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and
    done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order
    to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are
    investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
    flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
    outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
    purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.

    5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
    small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
    pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
    pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
    pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
    backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
    stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
    lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
    inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

    6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
    will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
    and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
    alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
    is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
    wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
    photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.

    7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
    allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
    response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
    capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
    evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
    need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
    areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
    back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
    photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
    or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
    that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
    laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
    CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
    list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

    8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
    motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
    artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
    their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
    distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
    DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)

    9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
    of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_&_Flash-Sync without
    the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
    must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
    frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
    light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
    used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
    flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
    is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
    capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
    lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
    1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
    second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
    don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
    be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
    compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
    http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

    10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
    limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
    (focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
    http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
    do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
    from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
    mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
    repair costs, etc.

    11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
    environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
    vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
    worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
    shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
    not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
    gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
    longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
    carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
    much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
    bricks.

    12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
    required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
    destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
    planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
    be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.

    13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
    recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
    still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
    the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
    P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
    chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
    the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
    the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
    there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
    Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
    P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
    valuable part of human history one day.

    14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
    image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
    trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
    overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
    other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
    you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
    do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
    external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
    shot when it happens.

    15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
    settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
    that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
    drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
    using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
    capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
    well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
    without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
    with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
    myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
    stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
    come from.)

    16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
    silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
    nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
    mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
    nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
    reality and nature.

    17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
    degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
    inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
    EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
    electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
    subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
    biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

    18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
    popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
    slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
    In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
    their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
    auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
    faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
    if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
    any camera.

    19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
    the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
    what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
    1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
    of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
    your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
    truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
    use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
    studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
    cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
    amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
    Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
    time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
    lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
    instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
    realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
    wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

    20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
    background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
    own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
    front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
    Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
    has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
    (which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
    by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
    No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
    methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.

    21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
    just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
    and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
    go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
    larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
    when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
    those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
    images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
    at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
    need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
    some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
    ISO1600 and more.

    22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
    determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
    $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
    have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
    a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
    photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
    either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
    camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
    themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
    year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
    better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
    company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
    make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
    begin with. The irony is that by them thinking that they only need to throw
    money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
    problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
    self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
    them their piss-poor photography skills.

    23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
    photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
    They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
    them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
    face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
    sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
    can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
    on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.

    24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
    the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
    ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
    photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
    and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
    that you'll lug it around again some day.

    25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
    advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
    like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
    DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
    needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
    should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
    inexpensive to replace.

    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
    better, all around. No doubt about it.

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

    "If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
    foolish thing."
     
    CamptonCornwelll, Nov 7, 2008
    #10
  11. On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:56:15 -0800, SMS <> wrote:

    >In fact I believe that one reason why we don't see better P&S models is
    >because they don't want to enable that part of the market.


    Really? What a shame that you aren't up to date on current technology.

    Many points outlined below completely disprove your usual resident-troll
    bullshit. You can either read it and educate yourself, or don't read it and
    continue to prove to everyone that you are nothing but a virtual-photographer
    newsgroup-troll and a fool.


    1. P&S cameras can have more seamless zoom range than any DSLR glass in
    existence. (E.g. 9mm f2.7 - 1248mm f/3.5.) There are now some excellent
    wide-angle and telephoto (tel-extender) add-on lenses for many makes and models
    of P&S cameras. Add either or both of these small additions to your photography
    gear and, with some of the new super-zoom P&S cameras, you can far surpass any
    range of focal-lengths and apertures that are available or will ever be made for
    larger format cameras.

    2. P&S cameras can have much wider apertures at longer focal lengths than any
    DSLR glass in existence. (E.g. 549mm f/2.4 and 1248mm f/3.5) when used with
    high-quality tel-extenders, which by the way, do not reduce the lens' original
    aperture one bit. Only DSLRs suffer from that problem due to the manner in which
    their tele-converters work. They can also have higher quality full-frame
    180-degree circular fisheye and intermediate super-wide-angle views than any
    DSLR and its glass in existence. Some excellent fish-eye adapters can be added
    to your P&S camera which do not impart any chromatic-aberration nor
    edge-softness. When used with a super-zoom P&S camera this allows you to
    seamlessly go from as wide as a 9mm (or even wider) 35mm equivalent focal-length
    up to the wide-angle setting of the camera's own lens.

    3. P&S smaller sensor cameras can and do have wider dynamic range than larger
    sensor cameras E.g. a 1/2.5" sized sensor can have a 10.3EV Dynamic Range vs. an
    APS-C's typical 7.0-8.0EV Dynamic Range. One quick example:
    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3142/2861257547_9a7ceaf3a1_o.jpg

    4. P&S cameras are cost efficient. Due to the smaller (but excellent) sensors
    used in many of them today, the lenses for these cameras are much smaller.
    Smaller lenses are easier to manufacture to exacting curvatures and are more
    easily corrected for aberrations than larger glass used for DSLRs. This also
    allows them to perform better at all apertures rather than DSLR glass which is
    only good for one aperture setting per lens. Side by side tests prove that P&S
    glass can out-resolve even the best DSLR glass ever made. After all is said and
    done, you will spend 1/4th to 1/50th the price that you would have to in order
    to get comparable performance in a DSLR camera. When you buy a DSLR you are
    investing in a body that will require expensive lenses, hand-grips, external
    flash units, heavy tripods, more expensive larger filters, etc. etc. The
    outrageous costs of owning a DSLR add up fast after that initial DSLR body
    purchase. Camera companies count on this, all the way to their banks.

    5. P&S cameras are lightweight and convenient. With just one P&S camera plus one
    small wide-angle adapter and one small telephoto adapter weighing just a couple
    pounds, you have the same amount of zoom range as would require over 10 to 20
    pounds of DSLR body and lenses. You can carry the whole P&S kit in one roomy
    pocket of a wind-breaker or jacket. The DSLR kit would require a sturdy
    backpack. You also don't require a massive tripod. Large tripods are required to
    stabilize the heavy and unbalanced mass of the larger DSLR and its massive
    lenses. A P&S camera, being so light, can be used on some of the most
    inexpensive, compact, and lightweight tripods with excellent results.

    6. P&S cameras are silent. For the more common snap-shooter/photographer, you
    will not be barred from using your camera at public events, stage-performances,
    and ceremonies. Or when trying to capture candid shots, you won't so easily
    alert all those within a block around, from the obnoxious noise that your DSLR
    is making, that you are capturing anyone's images. For the more dedicated
    wildlife photographer a P&S camera will not endanger your life when
    photographing potentially dangerous animals by alerting them to your presence.

    7. Some P&S cameras can run the revolutionary CHDK software on them, which
    allows for lightning-fast motion detection (literally, lightning fast 45ms
    response time, able to capture lightning strikes automatically) so that you may
    capture more elusive and shy animals (in still-frame and video) where any
    evidence of your presence at all might prevent their appearance. Without the
    need of carrying a tethered laptop along or any other hardware into remote
    areas--which only limits your range, distance, and time allotted for bringing
    back that one-of-a-kind image. It also allows for unattended time-lapse
    photography for days and weeks at a time, so that you may capture those unusual
    or intriguing subject-studies in nature. E.g. a rare slime-mold's propagation,
    that you happened to find in a mountain-ravine, 10-days hike from the nearest
    laptop or other time-lapse hardware. (The wealth of astounding new features that
    CHDK brings to the creative-table of photography are too extensive to begin to
    list them all here. See http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK )

    8. P&S cameras can have shutter speeds up to 1/40,000th of a second. See:
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CameraFeatures Allowing you to capture fast subject
    motion in nature (e.g. insect and hummingbird wings) WITHOUT the need of
    artificial and image destroying flash, using available light alone. Nor will
    their wing shapes be unnaturally distorted from the focal-plane shutter
    distortions imparted in any fast moving objects, as when photographed with all
    DSLRs. (See focal-plane-shutter-distortions example-image link in #10.)

    9. P&S cameras can have full-frame flash-sync up to and including shutter-speeds
    of 1/40,000th of a second. E.g.
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Samples:_High-Speed_Shutter_&_Flash-Sync without
    the use of any expensive and specialized focal-plane shutter flash-units that
    must strobe for the full duration of the shutter's curtain to pass over the
    frame. The other downside to those kinds of flash units, is that the
    light-output is greatly reduced the faster the shutter speed. Any shutter speed
    used that is faster than your camera's X-Sync speed is cutting off some of the
    flash output. Not so when using a leaf-shutter. The full intensity of the flash
    is recorded no matter the shutter speed used. Unless, as in the case of CHDK
    capable cameras where the camera's shutter speed can even be faster than the
    lightning-fast single burst from a flash unit. E.g. If the flash's duration is
    1/10,000 of a second, and your CHDK camera's shutter is set to 1/20,000 of a
    second, then it will only record half of that flash output. P&S cameras also
    don't require any expensive and dedicated external flash unit. Any of them may
    be used with any flash unit made by using an inexpensive slave-trigger that can
    compensate for any automated pre-flash conditions. Example:
    http://www.adorama.com/SZ23504.html

    10. P&S cameras do not suffer from focal-plane shutter drawbacks and
    limitations. Causing camera shake, moving-subject image distortions
    (focal-plane-shutter distortions, e.g.
    http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/chdk/images//4/46/Focalplane_shutter_distortions.jpg
    do note the distorted tail-rotor too and its shadow on the ground, 90-degrees
    from one another), last-century-slow flash-sync, obnoxiously loud slapping
    mirrors and shutter curtains, shorter mechanical life, easily damaged, expensive
    repair costs, etc.

    11. When doing wildlife photography in remote and rugged areas and harsh
    environments, or even when the amateur snap-shooter is trying to take their
    vacation photos on a beach or dusty intersection on some city street, you're not
    worrying about trying to change lenses in time to get that shot (fewer missed
    shots), dropping one in the mud, lake, surf, or on concrete while you do, and
    not worrying about ruining all the rest of your photos that day from having
    gotten dust & crud on the sensor. For the adventurous photographer you're no
    longer weighed down by many many extra pounds of unneeded glass, allowing you to
    carry more of the important supplies, like food and water, allowing you to trek
    much further than you've ever been able to travel before with your old D/SLR
    bricks.

    12. Smaller sensors and the larger apertures available allow for the deep DOF
    required for excellent macro-photography, WITHOUT the need of any image
    destroying, subject irritating, natural-look destroying flash. No DSLR on the
    planet can compare in the quality of available-light macro photography that can
    be accomplished with nearly any smaller-sensor P&S camera.

    13. P&S cameras include video, and some even provide for CD-quality stereo audio
    recordings, so that you might capture those rare events in nature where a
    still-frame alone could never prove all those "scientists" wrong. E.g. recording
    the paw-drumming communication patterns of eusocial-living field-mice. With your
    P&S video-capable camera in your pocket you won't miss that once-in-a-lifetime
    chance to record some unexpected event, like the passage of a bright meteor in
    the sky in daytime, a mid-air explosion, or any other newsworthy event. Imagine
    the gaping hole in our history of the Hindenberg if there were no film cameras
    there at the time. The mystery of how it exploded would have never been solved.
    Or the amateur 8mm film of the shooting of President Kennedy. Your video-ready
    P&S camera being with you all the time might capture something that will be a
    valuable part of human history one day.

    14. P&S cameras have 100% viewfinder coverage that exactly matches your final
    image. No important bits lost, and no chance of ruining your composition by
    trying to "guess" what will show up in the final image. With the ability to
    overlay live RGB-histograms, and under/over-exposure area alerts (and dozens of
    other important shooting data) directly on your electronic viewfinder display
    you are also not going to guess if your exposure might be right this time. Nor
    do you have to remove your eye from the view of your subject to check some
    external LCD histogram display, ruining your chances of getting that perfect
    shot when it happens.

    15. P&S cameras can and do focus in lower-light (which is common in natural
    settings) than any DSLRs in existence, due to electronic viewfinders and sensors
    that can be increased in gain for framing and focusing purposes as light-levels
    drop. Some P&S cameras can even take images (AND videos) in total darkness by
    using IR illumination alone. (See: Sony) No other multi-purpose cameras are
    capable of taking still-frame and videos of nocturnal wildlife as easily nor as
    well. Shooting videos and still-frames of nocturnal animals in the total-dark,
    without disturbing their natural behavior by the use of flash, from 90 ft. away
    with a 549mm f/2.4 lens is not only possible, it's been done, many times, by
    myself. (An interesting and true story: one wildlife photographer was nearly
    stomped to death by an irate moose that attacked where it saw his camera's flash
    come from.)

    16. Without the need to use flash in all situations, and a P&S's nearly 100%
    silent operation, you are not disturbing your wildlife, neither scaring it away
    nor changing their natural behavior with your existence. Nor, as previously
    mentioned, drawing its defensive behavior in your direction. You are recording
    nature as it is, and should be, not some artificial human-changed distortion of
    reality and nature.

    17. Nature photography requires that the image be captured with the greatest
    degree of accuracy possible. NO focal-plane shutter in existence, with its
    inherent focal-plane-shutter distortions imparted on any moving subject will
    EVER capture any moving subject in nature 100% accurately. A leaf-shutter or
    electronic shutter, as is found in ALL P&S cameras, will capture your moving
    subject in nature with 100% accuracy. Your P&S photography will no longer lead a
    biologist nor other scientist down another DSLR-distorted path of non-reality.

    18. Some P&S cameras have shutter-lag times that are even shorter than all the
    popular DSLRs, due to the fact that they don't have to move those agonizingly
    slow and loud mirrors and shutter curtains in time before the shot is recorded.
    In the hands of an experienced photographer that will always rely on prefocusing
    their camera, there is no hit & miss auto-focusing that happens on all
    auto-focus systems, DSLRs included. This allows you to take advantage of the
    faster shutter response times of P&S cameras. Any pro worth his salt knows that
    if you really want to get every shot, you don't depend on automatic anything in
    any camera.

    19. An electronic viewfinder, as exists in all P&S cameras, can accurately relay
    the camera's shutter-speed in real-time. Giving you a 100% accurate preview of
    what your final subject is going to look like when shot at 3 seconds or
    1/20,000th of a second. Your soft waterfall effects, or the crisp sharp outlines
    of your stopped-motion hummingbird wings will be 100% accurately depicted in
    your viewfinder before you even record the shot. What you see in a P&S camera is
    truly what you get. You won't have to guess in advance at what shutter speed to
    use to obtain those artistic effects or those scientifically accurate nature
    studies that you require or that your client requires. When testing CHDK P&S
    cameras that could have shutter speeds as fast as 1/40,000th of a second, I was
    amazed that I could half-depress the shutter and watch in the viewfinder as a
    Dremel-Drill's 30,000 rpm rotating disk was stopped in crisp detail in real
    time, without ever having taken an example shot yet. Similarly true when
    lowering shutter speeds for milky-water effects when shooting rapids and falls,
    instantly seeing the effect in your viewfinder. Poor DSLR-trolls will never
    realize what they are missing with their anciently slow focal-plane shutters and
    wholly inaccurate optical viewfinders.

    20. P&S cameras can obtain the very same bokeh (out of focus foreground and
    background) as any DSLR by just increasing your focal length, through use of its
    own built-in super-zoom lens or attaching a high-quality telextender on the
    front. Just back up from your subject more than you usually would with a DSLR.
    Framing and the included background is relative to the subject at the time and
    has nothing at all to do with the kind of camera and lens in use. Your f/ratio
    (which determines your depth-of-field), is a computation of focal-length divided
    by aperture diameter. Increase the focal-length and you make your DOF shallower.
    No different than opening up the aperture to accomplish the same. The two
    methods are identically related where DOF is concerned.

    21. P&S cameras will have perfectly fine noise-free images at lower ISOs with
    just as much resolution as any DSLR camera. Experienced Pros grew up on ISO25
    and ISO64 film all their lives. They won't even care if their P&S camera can't
    go above ISO400 without noise. An added bonus is that the P&S camera can have
    larger apertures at longer focal-lengths than any DSLR in existence. The time
    when you really need a fast lens to prevent camera-shake that gets amplified at
    those focal-lengths. Even at low ISOs you can take perfectly fine hand-held
    images at super-zoom settings. Whereas the DSLR, with its very small apertures
    at long focal lengths require ISOs above 3200 to obtain the same results. They
    need high ISOs, you don't. If you really require low-noise high ISOs, there are
    some excellent models of Fuji P&S cameras that do have noise-free images up to
    ISO1600 and more.

    22. Don't for one minute think that the price of your camera will in any way
    determine the quality of your photography. Any of the newer cameras of around
    $100 or more are plenty good for nearly any talented photographer today. IF they
    have talent to begin with. A REAL pro can take an award winning photograph with
    a cardboard Brownie Box camera made a century ago. If you can't take excellent
    photos on a P&S camera then you won't be able to get good photos on a DSLR
    either. Never blame your inability to obtain a good photograph on the kind of
    camera that you own. Those who claim they NEED a DSLR are only fooling
    themselves and all others. These are the same people that buy a new camera every
    year, each time thinking, "Oh, if I only had the right camera, a better camera,
    better lenses, faster lenses, then I will be a great photographer!" Camera
    company's love these people. They'll never be able to get a camera that will
    make their photography better, because they never were a good photographer to
    begin with. The irony is that by them thinking that they only need to throw
    money at the problem, they'll never look in the mirror to see what the real
    problem is. They'll NEVER become good photographers. Perhaps this is why these
    self-proclaimed "pros" hate P&S cameras so much. P&S cameras instantly reveal to
    them their piss-poor photography skills.

    23. Have you ever had the fun of showing some of your exceptional P&S
    photography to some self-proclaimed "Pro" who uses $30,000 worth of camera gear.
    They are so impressed that they must know how you did it. You smile and tell
    them, "Oh, I just use a $150 P&S camera." Don't you just love the look on their
    face? A half-life of self-doubt, the realization of all that lost money, and a
    sadness just courses through every fiber of their being. Wondering why they
    can't get photographs as good after they spent all that time and money. Get good
    on your P&S camera and you too can enjoy this fun experience.

    24. Did we mention portability yet? I think we did, but it is worth mentioning
    the importance of this a few times. A camera in your pocket that is instantly
    ready to get any shot during any part of the day will get more award-winning
    photographs than that DSLR gear that's sitting back at home, collecting dust,
    and waiting to be loaded up into that expensive back-pack or camera bag, hoping
    that you'll lug it around again some day.

    25. A good P&S camera is a good theft deterrent. When traveling you are not
    advertising to the world that you are carrying $20,000 around with you. That's
    like having a sign on your back saying, "PLEASE MUG ME! I'M THIS STUPID AND I
    DESERVE IT!" Keep a small P&S camera in your pocket and only take it out when
    needed. You'll have a better chance of returning home with all your photos. And
    should you accidentally lose your P&S camera you're not out $20,000. They are
    inexpensive to replace.

    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
    better, all around. No doubt about it.

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

    "If even 5 billion people are saying and doing a foolish thing, it remains a
    foolish thing."
     
    arnold_ziffled, Nov 7, 2008
    #11
  12. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <Vp2Rk.84291$>, David J
    > Taylor says...
    >
    >> They did - Sony made the R1 but it ended up having less zoom range,
    >> and being a brute of a camera becuase of the size of the sensor.
    >> Did it sell?

    >
    > I bought it and can tell you that it's a fine camera. The only problem
    > is that the sensor Sony chose was not that good at high ISO and that
    > for practical purposes there was no way to extend the zoom range
    > beyond 24- 120, because these adapters were really HUGE.

    []


    It's a pity, because it was a camera I was really looking forward to. The
    size and weight put me off. I suppose its zoom must be similar to the
    16-85mm VR lens I have now (no IS/VR on the Sony, of course), and I do
    find that a good range. It's nice to be able to quickly swap to the
    70-300mm VR (105-450mm 35mm equivalent FoV) for those distant shots,
    though. That's an 18.75:1 zoom range.

    Have you compared the A350/R1/8080 taking the same scene?

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 8, 2008
    #12
  13. Jürgen Exner

    clayton J Guest

    On Sat, 8 Nov 2008 14:23:50 +0100, Alfred Molon <> wrote:

    >In article <lheRk.84480$>, David J
    >Taylor says...
    >
    >> It's a pity, because it was a camera I was really looking forward to. The
    >> size and weight put me off. I suppose its zoom must be similar to the
    >> 16-85mm VR lens I have now (no IS/VR on the Sony, of course), and I do
    >> find that a good range.

    >
    >It's quite likely that the lens of the R1 is better than the Nikon 16-
    >85. Almost sure for what concerns vignetting and quite likely for what
    >concerns resolution.
    >
    >> It's nice to be able to quickly swap to the
    >> 70-300mm VR (105-450mm 35mm equivalent FoV) for those distant shots,
    >> though. That's an 18.75:1 zoom range.

    >
    >I hate swapping the lens, because dust could come into the body. It's a
    >bit tough holding the body down so that dust (hopefully) won't come in
    >and at the same time holding two lenses with the mount side down,
    >quickly so that dust won't come onto the lens lid etc. Some places are
    >quite dusty. Over 99% of the time I use the CZ16-80.
    >
    >> Have you compared the A350/R1/8080 taking the same scene?

    >
    >These cameras have all different resolutions, so you can't directly
    >compare the lenses. But the CZ16-80 has some ugly, non-correctable
    >vignetting when you use it with a polariser filter (and I bought a slim
    >one). Which means that a number of images have to be edited manually
    >with the copy tool (overwrite the blackened sky corners with parts of
    >sky which have a normal brightness).
    >The 8080 had no such problems and the images of the R1 could all be
    >corrected during the RAW conversion, but the vignetting of the CZ16-80
    >is simply too strong.


    You've never heard of filter step-up rings that allow you to use larger filters
    on your cameras? They cost about $4-5 from reputable dealers. I always buy
    oversized filters so I may use the same ones on all my cameras. I have to travel
    light and for great distances with minimal equipment and still provide for the
    most adaptable "anything can happen" configurations. I use the step-up rings on
    the cameras with smaller filter-thread diameters. No vignetting ever, no matter
    how many that you need to stack.

    You people seriously need some remedial photography classes ... or something.
     
    clayton J, Nov 8, 2008
    #13
  14. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > In article <lheRk.84480$>, David J
    > Taylor says...

    []
    > It's quite likely that the lens of the R1 is better than the Nikon 16-
    > 85. Almost sure for what concerns vignetting and quite likely for what
    > concerns resolution.


    Those who are interested can probably check the review Web sites.


    > I hate swapping the lens, because dust could come into the body. It's
    > a bit tough holding the body down so that dust (hopefully) won't come
    > in and at the same time holding two lenses with the mount side down,
    > quickly so that dust won't come onto the lens lid etc. Some places are
    > quite dusty. Over 99% of the time I use the CZ16-80.


    Yes, dust can be an issue, although I tend not to travel to dusty places.
    My current DSLR has built-in sensor cleaning, so that may help, but even
    with my previous DSLR dust wasn't that much of an issue. I did adopt a
    regime of a nightly sensor clean, just with a blower.


    >> Have you compared the A350/R1/8080 taking the same scene?

    >
    > These cameras have all different resolutions, so you can't directly
    > compare the lenses. But the CZ16-80 has some ugly, non-correctable
    > vignetting when you use it with a polariser filter (and I bought a
    > slim one). Which means that a number of images have to be edited
    > manually with the copy tool (overwrite the blackened sky corners with
    > parts of sky which have a normal brightness).
    > The 8080 had no such problems and the images of the R1 could all be
    > corrected during the RAW conversion, but the vignetting of the CZ16-80
    > is simply too strong.


    I appreciate that the resolution may differ, but I am thinking about the
    same scene displayed at the same size, whether on a print, TV or computer
    monitor. I seem to be spared significant vignetting problems with the
    Nikon 16-85mm + 2nd-line polarising filter.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 8, 2008
    #14
  15. Jürgen Exner

    J. Clarke Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > Alfred Molon wrote:
    >> In article <lheRk.84480$>, David
    >> J
    >> Taylor says...

    > []
    >> It's quite likely that the lens of the R1 is better than the Nikon
    >> 16-
    >> 85. Almost sure for what concerns vignetting and quite likely for
    >> what concerns resolution.

    >
    > Those who are interested can probably check the review Web sites.
    >
    >
    >> I hate swapping the lens, because dust could come into the body.
    >> It's
    >> a bit tough holding the body down so that dust (hopefully) won't
    >> come
    >> in and at the same time holding two lenses with the mount side
    >> down,
    >> quickly so that dust won't come onto the lens lid etc. Some places
    >> are quite dusty. Over 99% of the time I use the CZ16-80.

    >
    > Yes, dust can be an issue, although I tend not to travel to dusty
    > places. My current DSLR has built-in sensor cleaning, so that may
    > help, but even with my previous DSLR dust wasn't that much of an
    > issue. I did adopt a regime of a nightly sensor clean, just with a
    > blower.
    >
    >
    >>> Have you compared the A350/R1/8080 taking the same scene?

    >>
    >> These cameras have all different resolutions, so you can't directly
    >> compare the lenses. But the CZ16-80 has some ugly, non-correctable
    >> vignetting when you use it with a polariser filter (and I bought a
    >> slim one). Which means that a number of images have to be edited
    >> manually with the copy tool (overwrite the blackened sky corners
    >> with
    >> parts of sky which have a normal brightness).
    >> The 8080 had no such problems and the images of the R1 could all be
    >> corrected during the RAW conversion, but the vignetting of the
    >> CZ16-80 is simply too strong.

    >
    > I appreciate that the resolution may differ, but I am thinking about
    > the same scene displayed at the same size, whether on a print, TV or
    > computer monitor. I seem to be spared significant vignetting
    > problems with the Nikon 16-85mm + 2nd-line polarising filter.


    A side by side between the G10 and the 50D would be interesting IMO.
    Both approximately 15 megapixels, same generation of technology, same
    manufacturer.


    --
    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J. Clarke, Nov 8, 2008
    #15
  16. Jürgen Exner

    gerald-bante Guest

    On Sat, 8 Nov 2008 21:36:39 +0100, Alfred Molon <> wrote:

    >Sure, but I have already spent 100+ Euro on this high quality slim line
    >polariser filter. And no, Sony didn't tell me that I had to use an
    >oversized filter with a step-up ring. They never mentioned anywhere, so
    >how was I supposed to know that you need an oversized polariser filter?
    >All cameras I've been using previously didn't have this vignetting
    >problem.


    I suggest you test that expensive filter for strength and homogeneity. I test
    all of them that come my way by a simple test against some lab-grade polarizer.
    Turned 90 degrees and held up to a bright and even light you can quickly tell if
    it's worth the money. Some famous brands that I have bought for over $80 fared
    less well than $14 generic polarizers. Until you test them you may have gotten
    ripped off.

    You *never* get what you pay for any more.
     
    gerald-bante, Nov 8, 2008
    #16
  17. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <Vp2Rk.84291$>, David J
    > Taylor says...


    >> They did - Sony made the R1 but it ended up having less zoom range, and
    >> being a brute of a camera becuase of the size of the sensor. Did it sell?


    > I bought it and can tell you that it's a fine camera. The only problem
    > is that the sensor Sony chose was not that good at high ISO and that for
    > practical purposes there was no way to extend the zoom range beyond 24-
    > 120, because these adapters were really HUGE.


    The wide angle adapter was wide and flat, and could easily be carried
    in a coat pocket. And if you carried the R1 with its lens extension
    cradle attached you could add and subtract the wide angle in half the
    time you could change the lens on a DSLR. What's more its optical
    performance was very good indeed.

    Using the R1 in that way was so quick and convenient that I often
    carried it about with cradle on and wide angle in my pocket.

    You're right about the truly enormous tele extension, however.

    > But otherwise, in its 24-120 range the R1 is optically better than most
    > DSRLs in its price range. You would have had to buy a very expensive
    > lens to outperform the R1 optically.


    That was true even with the wide angle extension on it.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 10, 2008
    #17
  18. David J Taylor <-this-part.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
    > Alfred Molon wrote:
    >> In article <Vp2Rk.84291$>, David J
    >> Taylor says...
    >>
    >>> They did - Sony made the R1 but it ended up having less zoom range,
    >>> and being a brute of a camera becuase of the size of the sensor.
    >>> Did it sell?

    >>
    >> I bought it and can tell you that it's a fine camera. The only problem
    >> is that the sensor Sony chose was not that good at high ISO and that
    >> for practical purposes there was no way to extend the zoom range
    >> beyond 24- 120, because these adapters were really HUGE.

    > []



    > It's a pity, because it was a camera I was really looking forward to. The
    > size and weight put me off. I suppose its zoom must be similar to the
    > 16-85mm VR lens I have now (no IS/VR on the Sony, of course), and I do
    > find that a good range. It's nice to be able to quickly swap to the
    > 70-300mm VR (105-450mm 35mm equivalent FoV) for those distant shots,
    > though. That's an 18.75:1 zoom range.


    > Have you compared the A350/R1/8080 taking the same scene?


    I've repeated a few of my best R1 shots with an A350 plus SAL18-250mm
    zoom. There's a slight loss of contrast but the extra detail you'd
    expect from the 14MP is there. At first I thought the loss of contrast
    was a natural consequence of the larger number of lenses in the more
    complex longer zoom, but now that I've noticed the very much wider
    dynamic range in the A350 images, it may be a consequence of that. I'd
    say that generally speaking when compared at pixel level and when both
    lenses are used at their best apertures the SAL18-250 is the effective
    equal in performance of the R1's zoom when used in the same zoom range
    on a 14MP sensor, and up to the extra resolution.

    At its wide and long extremes the optical performance falls off a bit,
    I'd guess down to about 7MP standards, since downsizing to 7MP
    conceals the optical flaws.

    Two improvements of the A350 over the R1 which are very obvious as you
    just wander about snapping things is that the exposure is much more
    accurate. Highlights are very much more rarely blown. The second is
    that not only is the autofocus much faster, and operates well in worse
    conditions, but it's also more often right on the nail.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 10, 2008
    #18
  19. Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > In article <>, clayton J
    > says...


    >> You've never heard of filter step-up rings that allow you to use larger filters
    >> on your cameras? They cost about $4-5 from reputable dealers. I always buy
    >> oversized filters so I may use the same ones on all my cameras. I have to travel
    >> light and for great distances with minimal equipment and still provide for the
    >> most adaptable "anything can happen" configurations. I use the step-up rings on
    >> the cameras with smaller filter-thread diameters. No vignetting ever, no matter
    >> how many that you need to stack.
    >>
    >> You people seriously need some remedial photography classes ... or something.


    > Sure, but I have already spent 100+ Euro on this high quality slim line
    > polariser filter. And no, Sony didn't tell me that I had to use an
    > oversized filter with a step-up ring. They never mentioned anywhere, so
    > how was I supposed to know that you need an oversized polariser filter?
    > All cameras I've been using previously didn't have this vignetting
    > problem.


    It's not a camera problem, it's a wide lens problem. If you want a
    wide lens to operate without vignetting with standard sized filters
    you have to make the lens body wide enough to take the width of filter
    required. Or you can slim it down and require the use of slim filters
    or step-out rings. Since polarisers don't work well with wide lenses
    anyway, because they're so wide the polarisation shifts a lot over the
    image, wide lenses will very often not accommodate the extra depth of a
    polariser, even a slimline one.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Nov 10, 2008
    #19
  20. Chris Malcolm wrote:
    > David J Taylor

    []
    >> Have you compared the A350/R1/8080 taking the same scene?

    >
    > I've repeated a few of my best R1 shots with an A350 plus SAL18-250mm
    > zoom. There's a slight loss of contrast but the extra detail you'd
    > expect from the 14MP is there. At first I thought the loss of contrast
    > was a natural consequence of the larger number of lenses in the more
    > complex longer zoom, but now that I've noticed the very much wider
    > dynamic range in the A350 images, it may be a consequence of that. I'd
    > say that generally speaking when compared at pixel level and when both
    > lenses are used at their best apertures the SAL18-250 is the effective
    > equal in performance of the R1's zoom when used in the same zoom range
    > on a 14MP sensor, and up to the extra resolution.
    >
    > At its wide and long extremes the optical performance falls off a bit,
    > I'd guess down to about 7MP standards, since downsizing to 7MP
    > conceals the optical flaws.
    >
    > Two improvements of the A350 over the R1 which are very obvious as you
    > just wander about snapping things is that the exposure is much more
    > accurate. Highlights are very much more rarely blown. The second is
    > that not only is the autofocus much faster, and operates well in worse
    > conditions, but it's also more often right on the nail.


    Thanks for that, Chris. About what you'd expect considering that the A350
    and R1 have similar-sized sensors. Would the focus difference be due to
    phase-detection (A350) versus maximum-contrast (R1)? The exposure
    metering should be as though, shouldn't it? Or is it that the separate
    focus on the A350 can offer a greater dynamic measurement range than the
    on-sensor exposure metering of the R1?

    SAL - you have me puzzled!

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 10, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Eric Stevens

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    Eric Stevens, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    285
  2. Steve

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    Steve, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    297
    David J Taylor
    Nov 8, 2008
  3. Don Stauffer

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    Don Stauffer, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    420
    dj_nme
    Nov 9, 2008
  4. SMS

    Re: Why do DSLR's still use mirrors?

    SMS, Nov 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    321
    Me Here
    Nov 7, 2008
  5. RichA

    Why DSLR mirrors must eventually go

    RichA, Apr 21, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    46
    Views:
    1,364
    John A.
    Jul 31, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page