Do you need a DSLR? · DIGIT-ARC

I see many buying DSLR or wanted to buy one without knowing much about it or are is it status symbol? Most of the people using their mobile phone for making and receiving calls, yet they spend 30+ grand for a smart phone!!! Does DSLR becoming like that? There may be tons of justifcation, probably I will never get the depth of them.

Coming to the topic... DSLR (Read, interchangeable lens camera)

You looooveee to take photographs. You're shooting with your compact (or mobile) camera, thinking of picking it up as a hobby. And you see this friend of yours showing off his DSLR. You think that DSLR will help you take better photographs. You know... your camera is as good as you get. In fact, it may likely to produce worse photos than what you have been capturing with your compact camera if you don't know how to use a DSLR.

Like every product, DSLR has its own drawbacks. See if you can live with these...

DSLR has more buttons and knobs around the camera. Ofcourse, it's much useful for professional photographers. But is it a must-have for a beginner? I don't think so.

Maintaining a DSLR is like owning a ride. You keep it under regular check, it works best. If not, it's likely to cost more to fix the problem when that happens.

Owning and maintaining a system is expensive. If you want great results, you need quality glass. For different purpose, you need different lenses. You can very well slap an all-in-one 18-300 or even 18-500 (if it comes in future

), but that defeats the purpose of DSLR and the quality of consumer super-zoom optics is not great.

DSLR is bulky and heavy. It's not as portable as compact camera. You can't keep it in your shirt pocket or in your trouser pocket. Unless it's for professional work, taking it everywhere with you is not convenient.

DSLR is little complex to use. Though it's not a rocket science, it needs some effort from the user to make good use of DSLR. Yeah, you can put it in Auto mode, but again that defeats the purpose of DSLR.

Of course, if your skill or work demands a DSLR, go ahead and buy one and use it to its extreme limits. But if you're like most people, shooting when the spirit hits you, or for home use, you're better off with a compact camera.

Nac owning a DSLR is just like owning a Bullet ...you see it with a friend, get impressed, buy it and then got to know how heavy it is ...and maintainence charges offcourse.

lot of people buy it just to get the high quality picture...but the reality is 90% of my pics are edited. yes P&S does not give the quality which can be edited a lot, but out of camera pic of DSLR are rarely superblooking.

The beginners do not estimate the cost of lenses. A guy gets a D5100+18-55 for 25k ..now if he wants to take macro pics of pro quality he needs to get a macro lens which cost almost same as D5100kit. The same guy wants to shoot birds, he will again have to spend equal amount of 25k on a birding 70-300 lens ...soo actually cost of body is negligible.

I have seen the casual shooters putting DSLR very poor way...no maintainence, no clean up...fungus growth in body and lens and no one notice...DSLR need an outing everyweek...even at home-out of the dark box ....a proper storage solution which will be dust proof and airtight ...if you can spend on a 50k dslr then better get a 300 rs lenspen and a 1000rs airtight box with some 200gm silica gel packets.

Okk, so it's because you have started the topic, i am trying to get clear with some thoughts that are revolving in my mind for quite a long time..

DSLR has never been my priority since compactibility is my major concern. But one thing i always wonder is whether Mirrorless would be a good choice..

Now here are my concerns :
(consider compact as modern advanced compact and mirrorless as both mirrorless & dslr)

1. Considering that compact camera now support RAW format, is there any difference (or if yes, how much) between Raw files from a compact camera and that from a mirrorless??
What i am trying to say is that let's assume we capture a raw image of same scene from mirrorless and compact. Is there any limitation in post-processing in the raw file from compact as compared to mirrorless ?? Can we achieve the same image quality level ?? Or type of camera sensor (APSC or micro-third or those in compact) is a major determinant here??

2. Let's say focal range upto 200 mm will be enough for me and i will be mostly using only one lens in mirrorless. What should i go for - mirrorless or compact ?
Yes, as you have mentioned, it defeats the purpose of interchangeable lens camera; but shouldn't it be safe to opt for mirrorless as i still have the option to opt for different lens in future if i need any??

3. Regarding maintenance, how much actually is needed in mirrorless?? Is it similar to dslr or just little more than compact?

PS : Sorry if the whole writing is difficult to read. I am posting it from mobile.

Ok let me answer your queries

1. Image sensor on mirrorless and DSLR are much more bigger and that makes them great for low light image making also quality of RAW image depend on image sensor...and have you ever thought that a compact can carry a 28-500mm lens inside its body but for dslr we need to carry a special bag with 3-4 lenses for same focal length...why? because lens have the ability to capture sharp and contrasty pics...Now if you add DSLR and good lens togather you will obviously get much better RAW pics then any compact cameras....Nowdays 1 inch sensor by SOny fuji,sigma and nikon 1 series are trying to produce dslr/mirrorless quality pics on compact cameras..maybe in 1-2 yrs u will see that kind of compact in budget soon.

2. A mirrorless is although small , but not small enough to carry in your pocket...you will need to carry it in a saperate bag. and if the lens is slightly big then it defeats the purpose of small and handy..If I have to get a mirrorless, it will be with a small prime lens or maximum retractable kit lens possible...else I have lot more choice with my DSLR with lenses ...Mirrorless have the advantage of multiple adapters to use all kind of old lenses in manual mode.but thats a diffrent story and only for advance enthusiasts

I think amlan can answer the 3rd question

U

I do not think there is any maintenance cost as such in any of DSLR or Mirror less but if you have to use your gear to full potential then you will have to spend on various accessories like Tripod, Filters, lenses etc. that may make owning a DSLR or any scalable system more expensive than a P&S but then that is the reason you mostly go for it.

All my friends including me have spent lot more money on accessories than the money spent on the camera.

Thanks for your replies...
Regarding the compactibility of mirrorless, yes, i was also doubtful about it's size..
So, it seems compact is still the way to go for me..

An eye opener that is. I'm not sure if I need a dSLR, but, I surely want one. Maybe, I do not have any clear vision as to whether I'll ever go on to become a pro, but then, I'd definitely would like to try. Having used cellphone cameras, which increasingly have been bridging the gap between a super compact cellphone camera and the compact point and shoots, I guess, my priorities grown beyond using a regular point and shoot, though, no doubt, the quality between the two is really different, with a decent P&S overperforming than the sensor packed insides of our cellphone cameras.

The problem with DSLRs I have encountered is while traveling with substantial luggage , you have to be very careful. Specially if you have pair of lenses.
Also , a DSLR is not easy to use. I don't mean the understanding, I am trying to refer to the complications involved in changing lens kits , putting filters , etc. Its time consuming and requires care.

@upadyay there is maintainence cost...either you keep your gear safe in dustproof place..clean regularly... or u get fungus on lens and dust particle inside body and lens...the cleaning by pro cost a lot

- - - Updated - - -

BTW if I need a compromise between great video, great pics, great size and good price it will be Panasonic GH3 or Sony A6000 ....awesome both

sujoyp said:
BTW if I need a compromise between great video, great pics, great size and good price it will be Panasonic GH3 or Sony A6000 ....awesome both

What happened to the idea of RX100?

I don't see D3100 in your signature. Sold? (Remember you were thinking of selling it...)

Hmm interesting question. And I agree, for most uses a prosumer is better. There are two aphorisms
one is that Amateurs worry about Equipment, Professionals worry about Payment and Masters worry about Lighting.
the other is the best camera is the one available when you need it.

For enthusiast photography, prosumers or bridge are not only good enough, they offer some advantages over dSLRs. They cheaper than dSLRs, but they are also incredibly versatile, you can go from shooting a macro of a flower to a landscape to a bird on a distant tree without having to switch out lenses. You can also put your hand out of a bus or take it close to the water leaning out of a boat, being able to operate it in one hand is an advantage.

Now dSLRs are not replaceable for high quality studio shoots of products, portraits and fashion photography. But it's not likely you will be needing these unless you are a professional. Also it is a lot of investment, not just a body and a couple of lenses. It involves batteries, memcards, flash lights, reflectors, tripods, filters... plus traveling around with all of these is a pain.

I stopped using dSLR because of the bulk and weight and this show off thing. I go on treks regularly, there are anywhere between 10 to 70 people in each. Most have dSLRs, many with one default lense or a zoom lense. The photo albums of all these people, and of all the people who go to the same location are exactly the same. Same framing, same subjects. There was only one memorable picture in 7+ years of trekking, of a disc shaped rainbow, called a glory/ indravajra, and it was taken on one of those Rs. 250 point and shoot film cameras, and the guy who took it got a scan resolution negative.

The most fun I had with photography was with an old FM10

U

Hey Sujoy, Fungus, dust, humidity do not understand the difference of P&S, Mirror less or DSLR. This is a common problem for any camera and lens, it’s just that sometimes P&S owners do not care about the thumb print, dust or fungus on the lenses or dust particles on the sensor.

When you put more money you automatically take more care and you should but that is not a maintenance cost it is all to avoid any maintenance need.

Sensor cleaning & fungus can be easily avoided by taking good care of the equipments.

Nac RX100 is still in my mind ...but A6000 and GH3 are leaders in video and fast focus ...I am not going to buy then anyways

I will go for RX100 only

yes D3100 is sold now..sold for just 11k

current market rate is 21k ..and I had shot 25k already soo gone cheap

R

Wait, are you guys actually agreeing with me on not recommending DSLRs to people because they don't need them?

One other reason I would add to many users not being ready for DSLRs is that they don't realise it is just one component in a system. Many people see a photo taken with a DSLR and assume that the excellent quality is because of the camera and forget the large number of (expensive and bulky) accessories that went into taking the picture.
Even worse, they completely ignore the guy on the other side of the camera. It is very common for wannabes to ask 'Which camera?' rather than 'Who's the photographer?' when they see an impressive picture. They will later try to compensate for this by uploading very mediocre photos from their DSLR to Facebook with a 'First Name Last Name Photography' watermark. Meanwhile, a guy with a mobile phone is taking far better photos because he works on improving himself rather than upgrading equipment.

what I can add to you raja is that commonly people dont really care which lens is used ...many of my friends almost ask me every time if I will carry my expensive 150-500 for picknic

...but they get disappointed when I carry a 4 times cheap tamron 17-50 with me ...LOL ...what and how to explain them ..its almost impossible to tell them all technicalities in 2 mins.

now some guys with incomplete knowledge may laugh at me if they come to know that I have 17-50 , 55-200 50mm prime and a 55mm macro ...why soo many 50mm ranges...and why not just get a 18-200 macro

I mean leave the photographer's ability ...they give 100% importance to the DSLR only...and even buy one with a kit lens...but fail to understand that it need lenses, flash, reflector, tripod, monopod, and what not for producing all those images

DO I NEED A DSLR?????? :twisted:

I can only go to a hiend mirrorless when I reach above 60,till I can carry the load I see no point going the other way. But thats me.

Now I want Canon 8mm fish eye L,14mm ultra wide L, Canon 24L F1.4, Sigma 35mm F1.4, Canon 85mm F1.8,Canon 135mm F2, Canon 200F2 L, Canon 500mm F4 and the 800mm L....... So all of you bless me for the next 5 years. :twisted:

ooh i forgot apart from a few flashes I also want the Canon EF 1.4X III Telephoto Extender for Canon Super Telephoto Lenses for the ucoming...ahem ahem then a Aputure VS-3, Arca Swiss Ballhead and a Gitzo Tripod....please lord listen to this prayer. Amen.

he he he @inci ...may lord kuber help you with your wish

Okay, after some inner turmoil, I agree that the image quality of a dslr cannot be approached by a POS, no matter what.

I have proof:
*i.imgur.com/wWd3ROt.jpg

Left pic taken by a D5100, and taken by a complete newbie who upgraded from a 4000/- pos to that directly, it took him 3-4 secs to take. Right pic taken by me with fz150 after fighting with the AF for minutes and wasting 2-5 clicks. I have a few more samples like this, Though the dslr wielding monkey got a lot of lousy shots due to the auto mode he was using, most pictures came better than mine, specially under low light.

I need a dslr.

R

sujoyp said:
I mean leave the photographer's ability ...they give 100% importance to the DSLR only...and even buy one with a kit lens...but fail to understand that it need lenses, flash, reflector, tripod, monopod, and what not for producing all those images

Exactly. And let us not forget: a couple of assistants to help you carry stuff, set up the shoot, hold the reflector…

I have a colleague with a D3100 who takes his camera to every outing with friends. The large number of out-of-focus images is quite painful to see, especially when you consider they could have very easily been in-focus if someone took a few minutes to understand autofocus points and how to use them. Using a DSLR isn't difficult but you do have to put in some effort.

And then there's the guy who puts down a lot of cash for a DSLR with a kit lens and feel really stupid because all the girls want to take group selfies and his arm just isn't long enough…

[MENTION=52329]tkin[/MENTION] I understand your point...if picture quality is the factor then DSLR is the way to go ...and as I said you should learn the manual settings and modes..its not like all three metering option will produce same pic..or all focus options will give same results ...as a photography enthusiast learn things slowly and deeply..
[MENTION=133607]raja[/MENTION] I know many guys who got DSLR and dont use it 1-2 times after getting it cause its complicated and big ...my own mama and mausi got one after looking at my pics and there dslr in the shelf for too long now..the guy to whome i sold my previous dslr knew nothing about photography and came to me to learn the auto modes

raja manuel said:
Exactly. And let us not forget: a couple of assistants to help you carry stuff, set up the shoot, hold the reflector…

I have a colleague with a D3100 who takes his camera to every outing with friends. The large number of out-of-focus images is quite painful to see, especially when you consider they could have very easily been in-focus if someone took a few minutes to understand autofocus points and how to use them. Using a DSLR isn't difficult but you do have to put in some effort.

And then there's the guy who puts down a lot of cash for a DSLR with a kit lens and feel really stupid because all the girls want to take group selfies and his arm just isn't long enough…

This is true specially for India. Lets consider the career of a photographer here. Unless a photographer is quite successful they will mostly go for mid range slr as full frames cost over 200k. And only rich monkeys can afford a slr like that and show off. I have a colleague who keeps on pointing out how expensive his 5D is, but in fact he takes pictures that can easily be matched by a point and shoot. He keeps on fumbling with settings and ends up taking 100 shots out of which only a handful are useful. And once he proudly declared that the liveview lcd is much better than the viewfinder. He has no idea about focus points, or shutter timings and iso settings. Only thing he learned from me is how to take shots with background blurs. Using that he takes shots that have such a blurred background that the shots end up giving you a headache.

Only a few select number of persons I had ever seen that carry a slr that he truly understands. And for them nothing compares with the cam they are using. I aim to join them soon.

K

I just thought id share my opinion on the topic
I love photography and my first slr was an EOS 500(film camera) with a tamy 28-200mm lens
but i was wreckless and was using it like a normal point and shoot for a long time till I finally got my hands on my first proper camera phone-the Lumia 720 which is one of the best point and shoot cameras ive seen but i wasnt fully satisfied with it because its only downside was grainy images in challenging scenarios(normal for any non-dslr,though the 720s camera is still very capable and fun)

so I decided to get a decent DSLR and decided to take lessons on photography from a close family friend
I ended up buying a 1200D with a 18-55mm and a 55-250mm kit lens and a regular tripod(getting a proper sturdier tripod soon,suggestions are very welcome

) thanks to some of our friends in the forums like sujoy,nac and a few more.
initially I started going to my terrace to take test shots and it wasnt much fun on Auto Mode and AF etc on,the pics were excellent in clarity but lacked a certain touch

then i started seeing more youtube videos,tips from friends etc and now I have kind of "mastered" using my dslr to its full extent and every scenario is a new adventure to manipulate light to take better shots
so i suggest a dslr to people who have a geniune love and interest for photography

R

sujoyp said:
the guy to whome i sold my previous dslr knew nothing about photography and came to me to learn the auto modes

Then there is the opposite extreme who believe that if they have a DSLR every single photo should be taken only in manual mode because apparently not figuring out how to use Av and Tv is something to brag about.

tkin said:
Only thing he learned from me is how to take shots with background blurs. Using that he takes shots that have such a blurred background that the shots end up giving you a headache.

Yeah, that is another pet peeve of mine. So many 'photographers' who get a cheap 50mm for portrait photography because of 'bokeh' without realising that
a) They are referring to depth of focus, not bokeh. Cheap lenses may not have nice bokeh even if their depth of focus is shallow
b) They get so lost in admiring the shallow depth of focus in their photos they overlook the distortion in the subject from using a 50mm focal length for portraiture
c) There are other ways of separating the subject from the background that could be more aesthetically pleasing for that particular scene

I think many people think of DSLRs as part of the same continuum as P&S, where usually you get better picture quality for the same effort when you put down more money. They are not aware that DSLRs are a different category of photographic equipment and you cannot progress from P&S to DSLRs and expect the same price = image quality logic to hold up.

There is nothing wrong in this lack of knowledge and I wouldn't care if they can afford to buy a camera that they will not use, but I see many not-very-affluent guys blowing big money on a camera that is wrong for them because they asked their friends who in turn encourage them to get a DSLR because it is not their money being wasted and they think if this guy gets a DSLR they will have nicer photos of themselves to get more likes on Facebook.

There is nothing wrong in this lack of knowledge and I wouldn't care if they can afford to buy a camera that they will not use, but I see many not-very-affluent guys blowing big money on a camera that is wrong for them because they asked their friends who in turn encourage them to get a DSLR because it is not their money being wasted and they think if this guy gets a DSLR they will have nicer photos of themselves to get more likes on Facebook.

And when I suggest superzooms to people nowdays they taunt me that you have a dslr then why not suggest a dslr at same price...there is no logic that if you are to spend 25k you should spend on DSLR only...if the person wont be spending any more money on camera in future its always good to get a superzoom ...he will be more happy with that

^

Not being able to give much time for photography now and maybe in future too, I decided to get the FZ70 instead of an entry level DSLR.

E

You only need an SLR when you know what it is and what it is capable of doing. Before buying any camera though one should read a lot. The camera will help you to execute what you have read, but without the knowledge of lighting, ISO, aperture, focus etc it's meaningless to invest in any camera, let alone SLR.

K

sujoyp said:
And when I suggest superzooms to people nowdays they taunt me that you have a dslr then why not suggest a dslr at same price...there is no logic that if you are to spend 25k you should spend on DSLR only...if the person wont be spending any more money on camera in future its always good to get a superzoom ...he will be more happy with that

what about an entry level dslr such as 1100D or 1200D or any nikon equavalent(Body only either way) with an 18-55mm or 50mm prime lens so that in future,if any issues are developed with the lens,its an easier fix or if the buyer develops an interest in photography later?
^^im just asking ha,not disagreeing with you , im no expert on point and shoot camera or fixed lens superzooms etc

G

eureka said:
but without the knowledge of lighting, ISO, aperture, focus etc it's meaningless to invest in any camera, let alone SLR.

Auto mode isn't that bad in most cameras.

kkn13 said:
what about an entry level dslr such as 1100D or 1200D or any nikon equavalent(Body only either way) with an 18-55mm or 50mm prime lens so that in future,if any issues are developed with the lens,its an easier fix or if the buyer develops an interest in photography later?
^^im just asking ha,not disagreeing with you , im no expert on point and shoot camera or fixed lens superzooms etc

Not that I want a DSLR, but I had the same question.

kkn13 said:
what about an entry level dslr such as 1100D or 1200D or any nikon equavalent(Body only either way) with an 18-55mm or 50mm prime lens so that in future,if any issues are developed with the lens,its an easier fix or if the buyer develops an interest in photography later?
^^im just asking ha,not disagreeing with you , im no expert on point and shoot camera or fixed lens superzooms etc

This small line says it all

sujoyp said:
if the person wont be spending any more money on camera in future its always good to get a superzoom ...he will be more happy with that

the thing is, an investment in a DSLR is a pretty long term investment, you get gear for it according to use, and the gear is very specific to the kind of photography you want to do. Also, it is not that you buy a body and a couple of lenses at one time and then sit back and take photos, you will need to use a variety of lenses, filters, flash, lights, batteries, memory cards, reflectors, tripods, bags to carry around the gear... and so on. A DSLR is not very versatile, you can't just go from shooting a mountain to a bird to a flower with the same setup. Perhaps by that time you keep your lenses and get an upgraded body, or a second one so as not to keep switching the lenses. The total cost of all of this can be astronomical and is not usually justified unless the device some kind of returns on the investment, which is for professionals.

I

Learning Photography

sujoyp said:
as a photography enthusiast learn things slowly and deeply..

Sir, apart from the sticky threads within the Cameras and camcorders sub-forum, what/where else would you and the other photography veterans, suggest an avid novice such as myself, to look to/at?
:unsure:

As an enthusiast, I continue to enjoy taking photographs using, my Nikon Coolpix L120 point & shoot digital camera and the camera of my Samsung Galaxy Note GT-N7000 Android mobile phone.
:ashamed:

K

Anorion said:
This small line says it all

I didnt get you...

was referring to the next line quoted, by [MENTION=39722]sujoyp[/MENTION]

K

Anorion said:
was referring to the next line quoted, by [MENTION=39722]sujoyp[/MENTION]

ohh ok

Re: Learning Photography

the best Idea I follow is check flickr for the photographs you like...and see the exif details...try to replicate the pics ..try to shoot with those settings in same time..that will improve your photography.

insaneYLN said:
Sir, apart from the sticky threads within the Cameras and camcorders sub-forum, what/where else would you and the other photography veterans, suggest an avid novice such as myself, to look to/at?

As an enthusiast, I continue to enjoy taking photographs using, my Nikon Coolpix L120 point & shoot digital camera and the camera of my Samsung Galaxy Note GT-N7000 Android mobile phone.

K

Re: Learning Photography

sujoyp said:
the best Idea I follow is check flickr for the photographs you like...and see the exif details...try to replicate the pics ..try to shoot with those settings in same time..that will improve your photography.

interesting tip,will try this out myself! thanks

I

Re: Learning Photography

sujoyp said:
the best Idea I follow is check flickr for the photographs you like...and see the exif details...try to replicate the pics ..try to shoot with those settings in same time..that will improve your photography.

@sujoyp, thank you very much.
:thumbs:

Re: Learning Photography

sujoyp said:
the best Idea I follow is check flickr for the photographs you like...and see the exif details...try to replicate the pics ..try to shoot with those settings in same time..that will improve your photography.

I used to do this when i first bought my EPM1 camera. But once I got the GX7, with every control right at my finger tip, i feel the best way to learn is not trying to replicate others, but by trying to experiment yourself. Go out and get a scene to take photo of. Try changing different setting in A/S/M (depending on situation and target shot) mode, and don't stop there. Change ISO, white balance, EV, metering, etc. whatever your camera lets change at ease, and see how the results vary. Just have a basic understanding technically how they are related, and shoot at whim.
I just see the results on my screen while i change and take the pic when i like the results. Offcourse as someone shoots more, he/she will more or less have an idea of what needs to be changed to get the desired effect in different situations.