I really think Prosumer Camera can take sharper pictures than DSLR + Cheaper lens
- Thread starter soons
- Start date
- Status
night86mare
Deregistered
so this isn't really about whether you want to compare dslr + cheap lens.
it is just about you feeling superior to someone because you seem to take better pictures with your prosumer, than him with his particular cheap lens. :bsmilie::bsmilie:
thanks for wasting my time in bothering to respond. my apologies for thinking that you were actually discussing the topic.
have fun! out of here.
Last edited:
night86mare
Deregistered
btw, let me point out that if you convert all on the same scale, i.e. 300mm equivalent in 35mm film terms; whether using 200mm lens with 1.5x crop factor dslr, or 300mm equivalent with small prosumer sensor..
no, impact is the same, give the same person the same factors, just changing sensor size, smaller sensor isn't going to change anything.
Nope, this is a discussion topic. Cos I really find the point of lens like 75-300 non IS when quality isn't justifiable to DSLR sensor.
Actually for the example you quote.. you advice to him is pretty sound..
Nowadays, PnS can shot a lot of things too.. If he cannot appreciate the prime over the super zooms.. how would he appreciate the DSLR over the PnS....
Nowadays, PnS can shot a lot of things too.. If he cannot appreciate the prime over the super zooms.. how would he appreciate the DSLR over the PnS....
The title of the thread was that prosumer can take sharper pics than DSLR with cheaper lens. Well, the 50mm f1.8 is cheap. It's the cheapest lens in both canon and nikon's lines. LOL. If you're talking about superzoom, of course good quality superzoom lenses are definitely out of the budget of someone who isn't a hobbyist or someone who considers getting a superzoom prosumer camera. But hey, the 70-200 f4 without IS is not THAT expensive, and it takes sharper (a lot) pictures than any prosumer superzoom camera out there.
If your friend doesn't appreciate prime, then yes, I agree with you, he should get a prosumer, because a prosumer can do the job for him. 50mm on a 1.6x crop body is equal to about 80mm, which is the nice focal length for telephoto portrait imo. I've taken many portraits using that lens. Of course it can't take close up pics of the moon :bsmilie:
ricleo
Senior Member
if you look at this thread http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=465404 you will find that even the "superzoom" lens on a dslr can yield decent image quality. IF your friend has already bought the camera with superzoom in place of the prosumer you were recommending, you as his friend should just teach him how to up the ISO when it is dark and also to stop down for better sharpness at the tele-range.
by the way, wonder why the lousy 75-300mm lens was brought into the picture when you are comparing to the all in one 18-200+ type of lens.
by the way, wonder why the lousy 75-300mm lens was brought into the picture when you are comparing to the all in one 18-200+ type of lens.
Those images are stopped down and resized.
The images from 75-300mm will look nice if I resize and stop down.
Most 18-200mm lens aren't very good in quality, with the exception of Canon's 18-200mm.
@TheStig
I never mention anything about 50mm F1.8 not being sharp. You cannot expect me to squeeze more words into the title right?
spheredome
New Member
On point to note is that TS picture was taken at f3.5, so presumed no special setting was done. Front sharp, back also sharp.
Now do the same thing to the dSLR lens, say give it f4, what will happen?
Now do the same thing to the dSLR lens, say give it f4, what will happen?
All have hotshoe, just not TTL. But auto mode works well too, if the flash used has it.
heh TS, there is really a difference, if not i will not sell my 2 months old Canon SX1is for a SLR. I just used my DSLR for a few days but the difference is really so great as compared to my crappy pentax PnS switch to Canon SX1is (Top of the range PnS next to G10/G11)
As least i can now get the effects i wanted, got a 50f1.8 and man i tell u the effects and sharpness of the objects is FANTASTIC!!!!! will post some photos let u see when i got home.
As least i can now get the effects i wanted, got a 50f1.8 and man i tell u the effects and sharpness of the objects is FANTASTIC!!!!! will post some photos let u see when i got home.
mynameisgreg
New Member
pls go and look at price guides. thats why i said imho... *knocks head... its in the same price range when compared to for example a 50d or 5dmkII. the 50% percentage has skewed your perception, we are still in the enthusiast price range... Fine if youre so adament about the price then i will compare an even older model the 450D it has even better noise control than the 500D and its definately in the same price range. dont nit pick just for the sake of it.
@soons, i understand your concern but his ignorance has nothing to do with whether a pns can take better pictures than a dslr. lol... just like that lor... then you can kop his lenses in the future hahaha... CS is totally not the place to vent out your frustration. lol
@soons, i understand your concern but his ignorance has nothing to do with whether a pns can take better pictures than a dslr. lol... just like that lor... then you can kop his lenses in the future hahaha... CS is totally not the place to vent out your frustration. lol
Not really vent my frustration, as I am thinking turning this to a discussion topic.
Don't you think it is more worth it to get a super-zoom prosumer than a DSLR with lens like 75-300mm, 18-200mm non-OS/VC etc
@hoppie, I will appreciate if you can re-read my first post, last line espeically.
hobbit6003
Senior Member
TS, Ok la, you win la, if it makes you feel happier thinking that the prosumer compact is better than a dslr.
Seriously, as I see it, many people I know, who has no inkling nor real interest about photography, have jumped onto the DSLR bandwagon simply because they are affordable. They dun even understand the basics of photography like ASA/ISO, shutter speed, aperture, etc, let alone take a good picture.
Naturally, the pics produced by these DSLR owners (NB: they can't be called photographers) have done their DLR a great disservice. I'd usually tell them to just go and get a PnS, if they just want to shoot for record sake, and they'll get quite sharp picture, from foreground to the background. These are also the usual suspect that complains about getting blurred pictures even when they have put their cameras on night mode.
It's just like the Mac. These days they are quite affordable, and many people who have bought it, actually run Windows on them without wanting to touch the MAc OS!
What I'm driving at, is that the equipment and its product, is only as good as the photographer. Every camera type, is built to suit a specific target audience and for different requirement and situation. In order to potentiate its use, one has to know how to handle them, and use them for the right reason and situation.
Seriously, as I see it, many people I know, who has no inkling nor real interest about photography, have jumped onto the DSLR bandwagon simply because they are affordable. They dun even understand the basics of photography like ASA/ISO, shutter speed, aperture, etc, let alone take a good picture.
Naturally, the pics produced by these DSLR owners (NB: they can't be called photographers) have done their DLR a great disservice. I'd usually tell them to just go and get a PnS, if they just want to shoot for record sake, and they'll get quite sharp picture, from foreground to the background. These are also the usual suspect that complains about getting blurred pictures even when they have put their cameras on night mode.
It's just like the Mac. These days they are quite affordable, and many people who have bought it, actually run Windows on them without wanting to touch the MAc OS!
What I'm driving at, is that the equipment and its product, is only as good as the photographer. Every camera type, is built to suit a specific target audience and for different requirement and situation. In order to potentiate its use, one has to know how to handle them, and use them for the right reason and situation.
flyer
New Member
Are you looking for us to agree with you? Yes, it is more worthwhile to get a prosumer instead of a DSLR with a lens like 75-300, maybe. But the DSLR has the advantage of "Interchangeable Lenses", so the buyer can always get better lenses IN FUTURE. Not the same for a prosumer eh? So with that in mind, which is more worthwhile?
wildsoyabean
New Member
maybe he likes the zoom range too...
if i aint wrong g10 = 28-140mm. compare to 18-200? or even 18-270? further more nikon+tamron+canon VR/IS is inbuilt in lens which is better especically in the longer range.
+ prosumer cant go ask wide as our super zoom lens. and seriously if you put any pictures of the brands mention above at 140mm compare with a prosumer 140mm side by side. I can ensure u...that dslr will win simply due to a larger sensor and better lens quality.
let us not forget that the cost of canon/tamron/nikon super zooms can purchase a prosumer or 2 pns by itself . these lens are definately NOT CHEAP and their IQ is surely better if i choose to pixel peep
to end off who knows he might fall in love with his super zoom, learn more and then later on invest in other lens. if u buy pns...u have to buy all over again.
if i aint wrong g10 = 28-140mm. compare to 18-200? or even 18-270? further more nikon+tamron+canon VR/IS is inbuilt in lens which is better especically in the longer range.
+ prosumer cant go ask wide as our super zoom lens. and seriously if you put any pictures of the brands mention above at 140mm compare with a prosumer 140mm side by side. I can ensure u...that dslr will win simply due to a larger sensor and better lens quality.
let us not forget that the cost of canon/tamron/nikon super zooms can purchase a prosumer or 2 pns by itself . these lens are definately NOT CHEAP and their IQ is surely better if i choose to pixel peep
to end off who knows he might fall in love with his super zoom, learn more and then later on invest in other lens. if u buy pns...u have to buy all over again.
spheredome
New Member
Agree with you in the aspect of size, convenience and yet with acceptable IQ and sharpness. To get a close shot of the tiger with a 50mm will be very dangerous.
A super-zoom prosumer compact will be ideal where situation is uncertain. Such that one don't have to carry a heavy load.
I would consider it as "worth" and not more worth. Nevertheless consumer perception varies, e.g $1000 difference including a similar zoom lens be consider very marginal.
A super-zoom prosumer compact will be ideal where situation is uncertain. Such that one don't have to carry a heavy load.
I would consider it as "worth" and not more worth. Nevertheless consumer perception varies, e.g $1000 difference including a similar zoom lens be consider very marginal.
ProteinLens
New Member
Been following this thread...just wanna say I agree with TS that its more worth it to get super zoom prosumer, but ONLY if the user doesn't intend to buy other lenses. Afterall the biggest advantage of an SLR is lens interchangeability.
Those images are stopped down and resized.
The images from 75-300mm will look nice if I resize and stop down.
Most 18-200mm lens aren't very good in quality, with the exception of Canon's 18-200mm.
@TheStig
I never mention anything about 50mm F1.8 not being sharp. You cannot expect me to squeeze more words into the title right?
Yeah you didn't mention it, but the 50mm f1.8 is one of the cheaper lenses lol. No, I get your point.
Is the Canon 18-200 really good? It's pretty small in size and covers such crazy focal lengths. If it is good, I might consider getting one. Might be a good travel lens (my 24-70 is crazy heavy).
I'm not nitpicking. Just pointing out that everyone's price range, comparison range etc is different. It is all subjective. By saying broadly it is in the same price range is misleading in itself. BTW price guide says 1250. The only one below 1200 is w/o GST.
- Status
Similar threads
