digital SLR cameras

[Guest CJS2]

Nikon set there SLR's to be slightly dull/underexposed as a precaution, expecting the user to PS the photo even if its basic contrast/colour adjustment. Guards against burnout, a slightly under exposed picture generally has all the detail in tact just needs some encouragement to blossom, a picture that is a tad bright, overexposed has lost the highlights never to be retrieved?

 

It is commendable that compacts and the intermediate crossover type cameras do such a good job, but there will be the od occasion that they get caught out, not often, but just occasionally.

 

SLR's are heavy and bulky, the price you pay for lens quality and the versatility that lens switch ability offers. go deeper and technicalities will blind you

 

As one who owns and enjoys using an SLR, I can confirm, I use a compact more than 90% of the time. Not because I think its better but, life style, time, practicality, and a first class result says I can. The majority of my pictures are held on computer files and are only viewed in that medium. If I do any commissioned media work, rare these days the SLR is first choice. Most of my 'AN' competition entries are with the Compact, quality is of a reasonable standard and I am an opportunist where photography is concerned. Compacts sit in car glove compartments and stuff in pockets very conveniently. I have a habit of using the compact on 'auto P' as well, laze? No, I often dont have the luxury of time to fiddle.

 

Take a look at my photos on site, quite a few at present, never mind the composition quality, I'm still a numpty and learning, but they are almost all taken with my Canon S50, pocket size compact. Judge for yourself? I think there-in lies a point, just cos you got a fancy camera, dont make you a fancy photographer!

 

Unless you are so committed to photography as a hobby? A modern compact or crossover is all you will need for a long time. Just my humble opinion you understand

 

CJS2

[Steve Burke]

Some really informative posts here!

 

In my 35mm days I had both an SLR and a digital. Because of the size and weight of the SLR and its accessories I found myself more and more taking only the compact.

 

This was one of the reasons why I went for just a compact when I switched to digital. If I had just a dSLR there would be days when I wouldn't take a camera at all - which rather defeats the object!

 

Additionally this time I couldn't afford both, especially as I'd have had to buy new lenses as my 35mm ones were redundant. And of course dSLRs are very much more expensive than compacts anyway.

 

My choice was the Canon S2IS, the forerunner of the S3IS. It's still available at quite a saving on the later model. The 3 main differences are it has 5mP rather 6, it has a slightly more limited ASA range and a smaller screen.

 

Both models have a 12x zoom with a 35mm equivalent of 36-432mm, and both take wide angle and telephoto converters. The lens focuses extremely closely, and best of all has image stabilisation that makes hand-holding a viable proposition. I certainly rarely take a tripod, so again have less to carry, except for self-portraits. Having said that the image stabilisation should make it viable to use just a bankstick and a mini ball and socket head. I'm just about to experiment with this.

 

For me having a camera for trophy shots of fish is vital. So a revolving screen that makes self-portraits a doddle is essential. As far as I'm aware no dSLR yet has this feature.

 

This alone disqualifies a dSLR for me.

 

Each of us buys a camera for a different reason. For me the Canon S2IS is perfect, although if I were buying today I'd choose the S3IS.

 

Others may prefer the marginally better picture quality and the extra versatility of a dSLR.

 

In other words there's no perfect choice. Just what's the near perfect compromise for each individual photographer.

Edited October 21, 2006 by Steve Burke

[Andy_1984]

steve i think everything im looking for in a camera is prety close to your own and im liking the looks of the S3SI better each time i hear about it but im scared of the batteries, few points id like to clear up with you steve or anyone else who can answer todo with S2 or S3 or generaly

 

1. how well do the batteries do in the S2 or S3 SI do they have a long life

 

2. How well does it re-charge and how stream lined is it (simply plug cable into cam to charge them or remove batteries insert them all into a external charger)

 

3. can you explain a little more detail on "ide angle and telephoto converters"

 

4. on the S2 or S3 can the revolving screen be swung out revolved and placed back in so that its like LCD on back of camera and not stickin out like an ear

 

thanks everyone you have all been truly amazing, keep the posts coming though im sure they may be helping other people. that dpreview site is excellent steve cheers

Edited October 4, 2006 by Andy_1984

[Steve Burke]

steve i think everything im looking for in a camera is prety close to your own and im liking the looks of the S3SI better each time i hear about it but im scared of the batteries, few points id like to clear up with you steve or anyone else who can answer todo with S2 or S3 or generaly

 

1. how well do the batteries do in the S2 or S3 SI do they have a long life

 

2. How well does it re-charge and how stream lined is it (simply plug cable into cam to charge them or remove batteries insert them all into a external charger)

 

3. can you explain a little more detail on "ide angle and telephoto converters"

 

4. on the S2 or S3 can the revolving screen be swung out revolved and placed back in so that its like LCD on back of camera and not stickin out like an ear

 

thanks everyone you have all been truly amazing, keep the posts coming though im sure they may be helping other people. that dpreview site is excellent steve cheers

 

1. Canons have class-leading battery life.

 

2. The batteries need taking out to recharge. I'm interested in seeing how well the new type of batteries that Leon has bought perform. These aren't supposed to discharge nearly as quickly when not in use. Any news yet, Leon?

 

3. The wide angle converter has a 35mm equivalent of 27 to 324mm, the telephoto 54mm to 648mm. I haven't used either of these so I'm afraid I can't comment on them.

 

4. Yes, the screen can be completely folded away upside down so to speak so that you can view it without it sticking out. It can always be turned the other way around so it's protected when closed. It can be tilted to any angle so making it easy to take pics over the heads of people in front, or low to the ground - especially useful for close-ups. And of course it can also be tilted for self-portraits. In each case the image orientation is automatically corrected.

 

For a review see http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S3IS/S3ISA.HTM

 

For best UK prices go to http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/photography/d...s/567072/prices

 

For accessories such as memory cards, cases etc try http://www.7dayshop.com/catalog/default.php?cPath=777

Edited October 4, 2006 by Steve Burke

[Andy_1984]

your some man steve thanks alot the S3 is top of my list at the momment

[RobStubbs]

your some man steve thanks alot the S3 is top of my list at the momment

That does look pretty good I'll agree. Is it good for auto focussing in the dark Steve ? I know my non digital EOS can be a real pain and just refuses to take a photo in the dark (i.e. night time fish trophy shots) ? It just keeps trying and failing to focus on anything even with additional light on the subject (and a separate flash).

 

Cheers,

 

Rob.

[Steve Burke]

Is it good for auto focussing in the dark Steve ?

 

Very good indeed. And, yes, it's vital for fishing. As I've mentioned on other topics Canon digitals are especially good for this. On the other hand some other makes are hopeless! Thankfully the situation is improving, but too many otherwise good cameras are very poor choices for us anglers.

 

BTW, when looking at specs the feature to look for is called "focus assist".

[RobStubbs]

Steve,

Many thanks for that - I've taken the plunge tonight! (The S3IS).

 

Rob.

[poledark]

Just in case anyone is interested in the Nikon 8800, there are a coouple on Ebay, might be able to get one for £200

 

Den

[Peter Sharpe]

The Nikon 8800 is supposed to be just about the best one you can get for taking photos in very low light conditions without introducing image noise. Its lens only goes down to 35mm though (although you can buy others - at a price) and I need something with wide-angle capability, although not extreme. The Canon looks useful so I will investigate further. Thanks.

 

p.s. I had a look and the Canon has a similar lens to the Nikon. Oh well.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Peter Sharpe