« [REVIEW—TAMRON SPAF 90mm Di Macro lens] | Main | [ EPSON CX5500 multifunction printer/scanner ] »
August 28, 2007
[ SNAPPY REFLEXES ]
DIGITAL SINGLE LENS REFLEX CAMERAS are the big growth area in camera sales. The Camera & Imaging Products Association of Japan reports that while overall digital sales in the first half of this year are up 27 per cent on last year the growth in DSLRs is 75 per cent.
With Pentax and Nikon offering excellent cameras at under $1000 the price argument against buying an SLR no longer holds. Digital SLRs are now comparable in price with the better compacts, and dollar for dollar they offer so much more that it seems perverse to shun them.
Of course they won’t fit in your pocket, so if portability is your principal criterion in judging a camera then that settles the argument. But if you buy a camera to take photographs then picking an SLR is a no-brainer.
You get a real viewfinder. There is nothing comparable with a through-the-lens magnified view of the world. This is the feature that made single lens reflex film cameras popular in the sixties and seventies. Nothing has changed. Not only are you seeing a bright image but you can also check depth of field and see the shutter speed and aperture displayed in the finder.
Then you get a much larger sensor to capture the image. The compact camera sensor has a diagonal measurement of approximately 10 mm. An APS-size sensor in a DSLR measures 45.7 mm across. This means bigger photo receptors more widely spaced and that means cleaner images with less digital noise. Less noise means that the camera can operate at higher ISO speeds, obviating the need for flash.
A DSLR is responsive. It is ready to work as soon as it is turned on and because of the way the shutter works there is no delay. Compacts these days are much more responsive than of yore, but they don’t have the instant snap of a real camera.
Because DSLRs are designed for serious photographers they have more controls over things like saturation, contrast, colour space and so on. This might sound like more information than most people can be bothered with, but you can choose to use them or not. Even as a point-and-shoot, with the mode dial set to P and leaving the camera to make most of the decisions, you will get better pictures than from a compact.
And DSLRs have interchangeable lenses. You are buying into a system that grows as you become more demanding.
After we have had a compact for a week or two for review we are always relieved to get back to the trusty Nikon D80 because it is easier to use. With the compact we must be assiduous in getting everything just right, but for the shot with the SLR we know that we have latitude to correct minor aberrations in exposure and white balance after the event. And following a moving child or animal with a single lens reflex is easy. With a compact it is hard.
You don’t get movie mode with a DSLR, but if we need to take movies we will use a video camera.
*
Posted by terry at August 28, 2007 01:36 AM
Worth Checking Out
Digital Cameras SydneyTrackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://bleedingedge.com.au/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1351
Comments
Thanks for your reviews. They've had an important influence on my camera purchase last weekend. Being unable to quite make it to a proper (SLR) camera, and wanting some basic video capability, I've chosen a cheap Canon a710is instead of the enticing new S5is, and hope to be able to get something with a bigger CCD next year. The image stabilisation is a revalation, and I'll never go back if I can possibly help it.
Regards,
Andrew
Posted by: Andrew at August 28, 2007 07:21 AM
Andrew: Glad to have been able to help. The a710is is a fine camera -- have fun! TL
Posted by: Terry at August 28, 2007 08:31 AM
Terry,
thanks for all your informative articles over the years. I am about to upgrade from a Canon S60 to my first DSLR although I used to have a Canon AE1 which I adored but did not learn to use fully.
I thought the Canon 400D with enthusiast lens would fill the bill but sadly it does not feel comfortable in my hands and a bit insubstantial. Am now between the Canon 40D with 17-85 IS USM lens which feels good or the smaller Nikon D80 with the 18-200 VR IF Ed lens which also feels good. I take lots of photos of the garden and love macro, and lots of photos of people informally, peoples pets and kids(often close up and in series), and make up slide shows for them therefore 6fps sounds appealing. I also want to take photos of birds in the garden and am sure I will branch out with my new camera into many other areas. I am looking for a good first lens but whichever way I go will be doing some short courses to learn how to use the camera properly and will buy other lenses as I learn what I really need.I currently use photoshop elements to edit my photos. I have spent weeks looking,reading reviews and asking questions but one person advises Canon and the next says no totally inapropriate look at Nikon and I am now confused. Can you assist with this decision as I know you are using both cameras. Are the lenses I mentioned the most appropriate for the photography I described please? I know I cannot have everything in one lens but where do I start?
Are your gallery photos with the 40D all taken with the 17-85 lens or did you use ohter lenses please they look great and I adore the cicada. Many thanks in anticipation. Lindy
Posted by: Lindy at December 11, 2007 08:48 PM
Lindy:
I think you might find the Nikon D80 best suits your intended purpose. It is slightly smaller in the hand and has much better ergonomics than the Canon, particularly for a smaller hand with shorter fingers.
Mind you, I love them all! But most of my bird photos are taken with the D80 or its predecessor, the D70. There also seem to be more, better and cheaper second hand lenses for the Nikon -- third party lenses are about equal for both cameras.
The Nikkor 18-200 lens is OK, but you need to keep in mind that this is a very wide focal length range and the lens is cheap, so something has to give. There is a new Nikkor kit lens of 18-70mm with VR -- that's the one to get. Then look at the Sigma 70-200, not cheap, but very good. Or a second hand Nikkor 180mm -- a lovely prime lens.
For macro the best lens is the Nikkor Micro 60mm or a Sigma/Tamron equivalent macro lens.
All this is starting to add up to very serious money indeed.
The Canon 40D has one small advantage over the Nikon -- it gets better quality pictures in low light at high ISO speeds. Apart from that there is nothing to choose between them in picture quality.
Hope this helps. TL
Posted by: Terry at December 11, 2007 10:28 PM
Thanks very much indeed for so much information which I shall now research in detail.
I am however still curious as to which lens/lenses you used for your gallery photos with the Canon 40D???
Many thanks again
Lindy
Posted by: Lindy at December 12, 2007 08:42 AM
Lindy: Most of the 40D pics were taken with the 17-85 kit lens. Some of the photos of the fair -- dancers, snakes, musician -- were taken with a Tokina 100mm macro. The cicada and a couple of flowers were taken with the Canon 100mm macro. TL
Posted by: Terry at December 12, 2007 10:07 PM