I was wondering how point and shoot cameras like the Nikon Coolpix P6000/P5100 or the Canon Powershot G10/G9 stack up to DSLRs like the Nikon D40/60/80 or Canon XT(i)/XS(i).

From what I understand the point and shooters allow you to use the camera in Priority/Aperture/Shutter mode just like the DSLRs. My friend also told me that his Canon Powershot G9 has exposure bracketing where my Nikon D60 doesn't

I know that DSLR cameras take much better quality photographs then your average p/s...but those models I listed look like your normal p/s on steroids

I'm almost regretting purchasing the D60 because if the pics come out similar enough, then I would want the convenience of having a much smaller camera to carry around.

 

Sounds like you didn't know what you were getting into when you bought your SLR.

An SLR is all about control and flexibility. You don't have to go menu diving to change features and you can add on things like flashes and lenses to fit what you want it to do. You also don't have shutter lag.

Most people who have SLRs dont give up their point and shoots because those still fill an important role, which is a small simple camera to bring around.

No p/s using regular p/s sensors can match the quality of an SLR with good lenses. The SLR sensor is simply so much bigger.

 

If you know how to use a DSLR properly you will see a huge difference between your D60 and P&S.

DSLR's have the advantage of having much better picture quality because of the glass (even a kit lens is better then P&S glass), better high ISO (low light) performance because of the much larger chip, the ability to switch lenses, way better usable exposure range (the range of how much will be exposed before being blown out), and the ability to change shutter speed and aperture quickly and easily (instead of having to go through menus).

edit: heh, Wackjum beat me to it.

 

i have seen amazing pictures from the g series as well. I don't think you can really get the bokeh of an slr (except maybe macros), but i've seen amazing pictures. But it is true they are a bit limited in certain aspects.

but for me, if I wanted all out quality, it's worth carrying an slr around. And if I didn't need it, I do have an ultra compact usually with me anyways.

I would kinda like to see something comparable to the sigma dp1, a p&s w/ a aps-c sized sensor, (but w/ a zoom lens) from more companies, but in the end, if you wanted something like that, it's probably easier to just get a bottom end slr w/ a 18-200 VR/IS/OS lens

 

SLR's bigger better sensors cmos vs ccd, though the D60 and D40 still use ccd. But it's bigger a p&s.

SLR's use bigger and better lenses, even the kit lens allow more light a p&s.

Many good things can be done with a p&s, but for overall picture taking SLR's win.

I had a G9, it was only good for taking pictures in good light, anything I shot above ISO 200 wasn't worth it.

 

My gf has the g9 its an awesome camera for her, since i'm spoiled with the luxary of a xti a d80 and a d300 now.

I still like it when she brings out her g9 cuz it beats me carry my heavy gear, when there might not be anything to take pictures of. I bring my camera everywhere for the most part...


People said its all about the sensor, you can get some great images with the g9, but once you compare with your first dslr forget it.

Its just one the most flexible p and s.

 

If a Point and shoot camera can take a particular picture well, imho, it won't look that much better on a DSLR. The DSLR picture, at best, won't be as oversaturated/oversharpened as the Point and shoot camera. ( This, imho, is a good thing, although some people go for that, and add that back in post processing) In some cases, the Point and shoot camera's picture will be even better, due to its high depth of field. This is especially useful in Macro shots.

Point and shoots can have features that some DSLRS don't. As you
mentioned, exposure bracketing. Movie mode was a big one. Some things
are of huge usefulness, like Panorama assist, and sony's 'night mode'. Some things are of less usefulness, like 'smile detection'

Arguably the biggest benefits of DSLR is the expandability. Once you reach
a pictures which point and shoots struggle, you are screwed. With a DSLR, you are not so much buying a camera, but buying into a camera system. And that system in theory allows near infinite range (with infinite $$$$).

But, imho, the best thing about a DSLR is that it allows you to take a picture
how you want, when you want. A DSLR is for photographers. And by photographer, I mean a person interested in photography and so takes pictures with the intent to have it have a particular look and feel. (As opposed to your usual person who doesn't give a damn, as long as person X and object Y is in focus). With a DSLR, (after you switch lenses, ha ha), you just shoot. The best DSLR is the one you don't even think about. It is almost just an extension of your eyes. I want that picture. Got it. Next.

There are 'tiny' subtle things which may not seem a big deal, but for the creative and versatile shooter, are. Examples:
1) Optical viewfinder - The ability to watch something as long as you want and shoot it when it looks nice. No worries about bleeding your camera batteries, or having to look away (and lose your target) to change a setting.
2) Ability to shoot with gloves on. HIGHLY underappreciated until you shoot in winter.
3) Quick autofocus/shutter lag - important for shooting moving objects

etc.

And of course, there are the 'gimmes' like shooting in darker situations without flash, etc.

I have always suggested that people stick with their point and shoots until they outgrow their camera. No need to lug a DSLR around if you are going to shoot technically easy pictures. If you can't take decent pictures with a Point and shoot, you won't be able to with a DSLR either. Point and shoots
have gotten signifigantly better over time.

- Frank

 

wackjum/zguy, i should have stated the obvious. i know about lenses and all that stuff. my bad

osamu, thanks for the recommendation. i was thinkin about gettin a 55-200vr...or a 50mm af-s...or sigma 10-20i have the 18-55vr.

jupitersolo/crazyazn, now i feel justified not buying a g9/g10.

chod, mad info. thanks man. i had been using a lil casio exilim p/s up until about a month ago. i realized i had opportunities to take real nice photos but felt really limited by my p/s. i was just looking at the high end p/s from canon/nikon and was wondering if there was a big difference between them and the low end dslr. i guess not. you said : "The best DSLR is the one you don't even think about. It is almost just an extension of your eyes. I want that picture. Got it. Next."

i WILL get to that levelmy d60 is gonna help me. thanks again

 

It really depends how far you go people who buy dslrs won't have great pictures if they don't get out of full auto modes and presets.

Sure their helpful but doesnt mean it will do everything for you how you want it to.

 

Its easy to get a high DOF, just stop up . Unless you want the shallow dof look you wouldn't be shooting wide open all the time anyway.