High End Compact Camera Or Entry Level DSLR

I am confused, I want to buy Camera Around Rs.20000 What should I buy ? An entry level DSLR Like Cannon EOS 1000D (Rs. 21800 @ Flipkart) or A High end Compact camera?? I know basics about Photography. If you suggest compact camera than what about Nikon L120 and Fujifilm S3300? I already have Sony DSC-W210
My Preferance are
1. Best Quality Image
2. Close Up Shots
3. Manual control
4. Best if AA size battery used

Answer will depend on various aspects. Like,
1. Are you familiar with D-SLR cameras or do you like using manual mode in high end compact (semi-dslr) cameras?
2. Do you like to have control on everything while shooting picture?
3. Are you interested more on point & shot cameras?
4. Use of camera.
5. Are you enthusiastic about shooting pics with better quality?

P.S. Entry level dlr cameras have a huge disadvantage which is their lack of support for live preview, which takes out one of the main advantages of dslr. So, instead of opting for entry level dslr, opt for dslrs with live preview mirrors.

I would ask another question...

can u spend more money on ur cam...if yes then DSLR else high end P&S

Can u devote time to learn DSLR techniques...if yes DSLR if u want to use in auto mode then P&S

Do u want to carry a saparate bag of lenses flash etc and SLR with u or u want an all-in-one camera

To clear one more thing high end p&S is not same as high zoom or mega zoom cams like SX30IS or sony HX100

High end P&S are panasonic LX3,LX5 canon G10, g12 nikon P7000 etc these have great pic quality, full manual controls and have bigger sensor then p&S

M

@sujoyp-i hv a similar question,i am intersted in photgraphy and cn donate tym to it bt i m kinda cash strapped,and max budget is 20-25k.
so would it better if i go with a nikon p300,p500 or canon sx130,
can u suggest some in this range??
most of the usage will be of party shots,portrait shots,and landscapes.

by reading other threads i got to know that the kit lens is nt very gud for usage,also as an amateur i m nt sure it wuld be best to start with a dslr.

W

maverick.rishi said:
@sujoyp-i hv a similar question,i am intersted in photgraphy and cn donate tym to it bt i m kinda cash strapped,and max budget is 20-25k.
so would it better if i go with a nikon p300,p500 or canon sx130,
can u suggest some in this range??
most of the usage will be of party shots,portrait shots,and landscapes.

by reading other threads i got to know that the kit lens is nt very gud for usage,also as an amateur i m nt sure it wuld be best to start with a dslr.

Have you seen any photo shot from DSLR with kit lens? have you compared those photos with a P&S photo? See, the image sensor of even entry level DSLRs are much larger than highest P&S cameras and there is no comparison between them considering the depth & color representation. DSLRs are way better. But there are some obvious drawbacks (not actually though) like DSLRs are heavier, good lenses are costly and the learning curve is also steep.
In my suggestion if you have time and INTEREST, you should go for entry level DSLR with kit lens. After some time, you will know by yourself which lens you need.

The threads which tells that the kit lens is bad are all professional photographer's forum. For getting reviews and suggestions, go to the 'Newbie' section of those forums.

In your budget you can get Canon EOS 1000D (not 1100D) with kit lens. This lens is enough for portrait and landscapes. When you have some budget, you can go for zoom lenses.

The live view, IMO, is not that required for DSLRs (though the above DSLR has LV). You are not supposed to shoot from live view (at least I can not shoot without using tripod).

M

thnx man,
also i read that u can get 2nd hand dslr cameras and lenses, are they any gud?
shuld i go with a new canon 1000d and after sometym( :sad:

long ) buy a 2nd hand lens to go with it?

hmm soo you have interest in photography and you can devote time and money

(later offcourse)

Then definitely get an entry level DSLR like Canon 1000D with 18-55 IS kitlens...but its recommended to stretch and get 1100D or nikon D3100

But I would also say a similar thing like i tell everybody...purchasing and DSLR is not the end but a beginning...you will have to buy lenses for separate purposes like insect and wildlife, potraits etc
But interestingly a kit lens of 18-55mm will cover your desire for taking excellent party, portrait and landscapes without a problem

and kit lens r very useful to start and optically great...its a misconception that they r useless or u can say thats what professional people with huge pocket think..I always take my 18-55 to a party

And about used goods...join the jjmehta forum...and you will see lots of good deals in buy sell section...Its a pure photography forum and I just love it
jjmehta.com - Index

W

maverick.rishi said:
thnx man,
also i read that u can get 2nd hand dslr cameras and lenses, are they any gud?
shuld i go with a new canon 1000d and after sometym( long ) buy a 2nd hand lens to go with it?

I do not understand why you are thinking about 2nd hand one when 1000D will come within your budget. I don't think it is time to opt for 2nd hand lenses as you will not be able to judge the problem it may have.
That 18-55 kit lens will cover everything other than zoom. For budget constraints you can take Sigma/Tamron alternatives (for zoom obviously).

Optically there is very little difference between 1000D & 1100D. I think rather than going for 1100D keep the money for good lens.

@winzip...I agree with u that getting the first DSLR new is better coz we do not understand anything now....later with better knowledge we can buy used goods and check them properly

like i said before right now 18-55IS is enough for all purpose...later u can add more lenses as per need

S

maverick.rishi said:
thnx man,
also i read that u can get 2nd hand dslr cameras and lenses, are they any gud?
shuld i go with a new canon 1000d and after sometym( long ) buy a 2nd hand lens to go with it?

You should go for the cheapest DSLR camera that you can find from a good brand which could be either Nikon or Canon. One of the cheapest and good cameras are Nikon D5100 and Canon 550D. You should invest on good lenses though. As far as lenses are concerned, 18-55mm kit lenses serve fairly well. You can also have a faster 50mm prime lens. Zoom lenses are also not too expensive. Try having 55-250mm lens and you will find yourself within reach of most of your subjects.

i want to clear one of my doubt.

how is canon s95. is it worth ? i need a compct not DSLR now.

i want to have it as it has f2 and ring control. should i go for it

W

gurujee said:
i want to clear one of my doubt.

how is canon s95. is it worth ? i need a compct not DSLR now.

i want to have it as it has f2 and ring control. should i go for it

Low f numbers mean large aperture which means shallow depth of field. Also S95 has a good low light response. So this is a perfect P&S for portraits and macro photography.
On the other hand, as it has a very low zoom, hence it is not so good for travel photos.

Now it's your choice.

For zoom purpose you can consider Panasonic Lumix FZ 150. It is quite sharp even at high zoom.

@gurujee you can also consider sony Nex series cameras which have similar sensor as nomal DSLRs ...I think Nex 3k cost only 19.5k with 18-55 lens
Its a small package and will give u equivalent clarity

S95 is a very nice compact cam users with great features....but in India it cost too much Around 22k
U can even add additional lens for nex 3k

A

a. DSLR, and live well for some while until you upgrade to another better DSLR or lap out of the habit altogether.

b. P&S with a similar course of action, but you will likely upgrade to a DSLR later.

c. If (a) or (b) saves you some amount on budget, buy a 2nd hand consumer level film SLR camera as an add-on as its resale is also reasonable. You will enjoy it also well, as long as you make sure that you can use the lenses on both the DSLR and the SLR cameras. I believe it is quite educative to know the differences and similarities between the two media.

S

gurujee said:
i want to clear one of my doubt.

how is canon s95. is it worth ? i need a compct not DSLR now.

i want to have it as it has f2 and ring control. should i go for it

Canon S95 is a fabulous camera. Image quality is superior to any other point & shoot camera. If you are not going for a DSLR, S95 could be the best choice. However, Canon has recently released the upgrade to S95 and that is Canon S100. Its zoom range has been increased from 3.8X on S95 to 5X on S100. The lens is widest at 24mm and zooms out at 120mm (35mm equivalent). Obviously, the new version would be more expensive but it would be worth it.

A

Hi Guys

I had a similar query so I thought of adding it to this discussion.

I have a Nikon D60 and a couple of lenses, including a beautiful 35mm f1.8 prime which delivers good bokeh, but I increasingly find that:

A. I do not take out the camera that much
B. Even when I do, it takes some time for me to take out of the bag
C. The Subject is more aware and conscious when they see an SLR
D. I can't find the focal length I want, so I have to change lenses on the field, which of course, increases the chances of dust on the sensor, and wastes time.

In fact, I have taken a lot more of my better photos with my ancient Canon Powershot A80 with a lovely flip-and-twist LCD. Bottom Line: The best photos are not taken by the best cameras, but with the cameras that are with you at the moment.

I realize I need to small (compared to an SLR) compact with good picture quality and a reasonably fast lens, which I can carry with me everyday whenever I go out. It should be able to shoot well in low light and have a decent array of manual controls. I realize that high ISO performance will not match the D60, but that is a trade-off I am willing to make.

Please do not suggest any EVIL cameras (Sony's NEX, Olmypus E-PL1/2/3 etc.) as they are still too big and I really do not want the hassle of changing lenses.
Also, no Superzooms (Canon SX220 / Sony HX9V etc as they arent that great for low light, and I really do not need the huge zoom range all the time).

My budget is around 20k and I shortlisted the following models:

1. Nikon P300
Why?
- It is the cheapest (14.5k)
- Got a nice fast f1.8 at the wide end (but only 4.9 on the tele)
- Is nice small and sturdy
- Has got a nice 920k pixel screen
- 24mm wide angle is good
- 1080p video
Why Not?
- Only a 1/2.3" sensor, compared to 1/1.7" of the competition
- Not really the best photo quality
- No quick menu option for settings
- Mixed reviews

2. Canon Powershot S95/S100
Why?
- Falls within budget and is a well known model (S95)
- f2.0 at the wide-end
- Has 24mm wide angle (S100)
- Is small and compact
- Has very good high ISO performance
- I am used to Canon's menu systems and ergonomics
Why Not?
- Only 720p video with no optical zoom
- Old model and priced high (21k)
- New Model (S100) may be out of budget
- Only f4.9 at the tele-end.

3. Nikon P7100
Why?
- Good value for money (22k vs 32k for its competitor, the Canon G12)
- Chunky and solid
- Good High ISO
- Very versatile zoom range (28mm-200mm)
- Easy access to image parameters
- Tilting LCD
Why Not?
- Bigger compared to previous options
- Not a 24mm wide angle
- Only 720p video
- Lens not as bright (f2.8 at the wide end, compared to f1.8 or f2.0 of the competition)

4. Olympus XZ-1
Why?
- Very bright lens (f1.8 - f2.5 across the zoom range)
- Nice LCD
- Is medium in size
Why Not?
- Not really sure of the brand
- High ISO performance isnt great
- Worst video recording out of all the selected options
- 25k is a bit steep

P.S. The Canon G12 and Panasonic LX5 are 30k and thus automatically out of the running.

W

I understand your problem. Let me put some comments against your points and see if it can convince you or not.

A. I do not take out the camera that much
It is either due to lethargy for handling that heavy thing or the fear that it my break if used roughly. I know carrying a DSLR is problem. But I think you have certainly seen professional photographers taking photos out of a large crowd where they can not even stand properly. They also shoot in some tough environments. Now if you are really interested in photography then don't fear the above. If handled properly it is less likely that you will break the gear. Carry your DSLR in every place you can get a good shooting option. Make this a habit. Gather some courage and try it.
P&S can't come closer to DSLR for similar shooting environment. Photography enthusiasts should not carry P&S at least for the above reason.

B. Even when I do, it takes some time for me to take out of the bag
Try to get a top loading camera bag from which it's easy to take out the body. Put that bag into knapsack while traveling.

C. The Subject is more aware and conscious when they see an SLR
Not really. It is in only your mind. Don't worry about that.

D. I can't find the focal length I want, so I have to change lenses on the field, which of course, increases the chances of dust on the sensor, and wastes time.
Get a general purpose lens like Nikon 16-85 (low zoom but good sharpness) or 18-200 (good general purpose lens with enough zoom but with some weaknesses).

When you already have a DSLR do not buy another costly P&S. Rather, have low cost one for parties or similar situations where you will not be in a position to carry a DSLR.

High End Compact Camera required budget 20-25k Canon S95 good choice ?

The issues avi996r said r genuine and thats the reason most pro photographer have a point and shoot too with them

But look it this way..when u want a advanced cam then use your DSLR but if u just want a cam for party get a sleek small cam that fits your pocket and take descent pics

I would say dont spend more then 10-12k on that get canon IXUS 220 HS...its small and pocketable...and fun to use

S95 is best in point and shoot but only if a person have only that cam..Pics of a DSLR cant be compared to any P&S

A

The point is that the P&S is not going to be used just for casual shots, but also some spur of the moment street photography/candids/macro's. I cannot afford to carry my D60 to office everyday. I was thinking of an IXUS 220 but wanted a bit better image quality. But if cost is too much, I guess the Nikon P300 is a good middle point?

yes P300 have same dimension of S95 its a very good choice

In case u want to compare size of camera somebody told me a very nice site
*camerasize.com/compare/#207,106

winzip said:
Low f numbers mean large aperture which means shallow depth of field. Also S95 has a good low light response. So this is a perfect P&S for portraits and macro photography.
On the other hand, as it has a very low zoom, hence it is not so good for travel photos.

Now it's your choice.

For zoom purpose you can consider Panasonic Lumix FZ 150. It is quite sharp even at high zoom.

sujoyp said:
@gurujee you can also consider sony Nex series cameras which have similar sensor as nomal DSLRs ...I think Nex 3k cost only 19.5k with 18-55 lens
Its a small package and will give u equivalent clarity

S95 is a very nice compact cam users with great features....but in India it cost too much Around 22k
U can even add additional lens for nex 3k

susancts said:
Canon S95 is a fabulous camera. Image quality is superior to any other point & shoot camera. If you are not going for a DSLR, S95 could be the best choice. However, Canon has recently released the upgrade to S95 and that is Canon S100. Its zoom range has been increased from 3.8X on S95 to 5X on S100. The lens is widest at 24mm and zooms out at 120mm (35mm equivalent). Obviously, the new version would be more expensive but it would be worth it.

Thanks for replying.

I think I should go for s95 then.because i dont do any serious travel or landscape photography. i am much into photographying people and some macro...and i am familiar with canon.