Decent alternative to dslr?

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 20:26:05 +0100, Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , Doug McDonald says...

What about macro range?

Compact cameras are generally speaking very well suited for macro
photography, because of the small sensor. Lots of DOF and no need to use
dedicated macro lenses.

Not just well suited for macro photography but smaller sensor cameras greatly
excel at it compared to larger sensor cameras. I purposely chose my last camera
for a smaller sensor size just for the benefits to macro photography. Benefits
that you cannot obtain on a DSLR no matter how you try. The smaller sensor and
larger apertures of a P&S camera finally allow you to get all of your image in
focus. Without having to use the usual DSLR method of smallest of f-stops, super
high-ISOs, long shutter speeds, and flash. The flash of course ruining any
natural quality to your subject and final composition. Using a P&S for macro
photography is an available-light simplicity and hand-held shutter-speeds
pleasure.

On Nov 5, 9:49 pm, samuel sharington
wrote:
(mumble)

'samuel' is of course just another id for 'Gregory'...

So I repeat:
'Greg/Samuel' is the cowardly-name-changing idiot who was traumatised
at childbirth by someone wielding a DSLR. sam/Greg should keep
putting a lot of effort into those posts, and keep abusing people who
use better equipment than him for reasons that he cannot comprehend -
for it keeps him off the streets..

For many users, a p&s or prosumer will give excellent results (and
there are some folks, like Sam/Greg above/below, who can't handle
anything better...), and for possibly 80% of general photography they
are
indeed more convenient and will give results very similar to a DSLR.
But there are reasons dslrs exist, and are popular. Just as there are
medium format cameras, large format...

Can you explain why those formats exist, 'sam/Greg'?

One dullard won't change the facts, 'Greg/sam', no matter how many
different identities you *need* to pretend you have.. And thanks for
*proving* you are a gutless nobody who not only hasn't the courage to
post any images, but needs to create fake identities because no-one
seems to take him seriously.

Golly, I wonder why...

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 04:42:05 -0800, wrote:

On Nov 5, 9:49 pm, samuel sharington
wrote:
(mumble)

'samuel' is of course just another id for 'Gregory'...

So I repeat:
'Greg/Samuel' is the cowardly-name-changing idiot who was traumatised
at childbirth by someone wielding a DSLR. sam/Greg should keep
putting a lot of effort into those posts, and keep abusing people who
use better equipment than him for reasons that he cannot comprehend -
for it keeps him off the streets..

For many users, a p&s or prosumer will give excellent results (and
there are some folks, like Sam/Greg above/below, who can't handle
anything better...), and for possibly 80% of general photography they
are
indeed more convenient and will give results very similar to a DSLR.
But there are reasons dslrs exist, and are popular. Just as there are
medium format cameras, large format...

Can you explain why those formats exist, 'sam/Greg'?

One dullard won't change the facts, 'Greg/sam', no matter how many
different identities you *need* to pretend you have.. And thanks for
*proving* you are a gutless nobody who not only hasn't the courage to
post any images, but needs to create fake identities because no-one
seems to take him seriously.

Golly, I wonder why...

Now why on earth do you feel so threatened by that excellent and factual advice
being given about P&S cameras and how they are better at macro photography?
Anyone that knows the least bit about sensor sizes and DOF knows this. Don't
you?

It sounds like you have some serious issues going on. Are you still doubting why
you wasted all that money on your DSLRs every time someone points out how P&S
cameras have a clear advantage over them? It sure seems that way.

You might want to talk to someone about that. Seek help.

Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Doug McDonald says...

What about macro range?

Compact cameras are generally speaking very well suited for macro
photography, because of the small sensor. Lots of DOF and no need to use
dedicated macro lenses.

That's not the question. One can get DOF and exactly the same
noise performance as a P&S with an SLR by stopping down.

I'll be more precise: what's the lens performance of
P&S superzoom lenses at the setting that provides the
smallest SUBJECT area? I particularly worry about
CA at that setting.

Doug McDonald

Henry wrote:

TIA Henry

I guess the G9 would be the best choice.

To many people, it's not just the superior image quality of the D-SLR,
it's the lack of shutter lag that drives them to get a D-SLR rather than
a P&S.

Henry wrote:
Hi


First, let me pre-empt the flame brigade by saying that I *have* done a lot
of on-line research in an attempt to reach a decision - but I'd like some
thoughts from people who might have hands-on experience.

I've been using dslrs for about three years now - or rather *not* using
them because I very often just can't face all the hassle of carting the
necessary paraphernalia around with me.

I know all the IQ advantages of a dslr over a P&S but I 'd still like
something easily transportable and generally less 'fussy'

So my question is, which is the *best* non-dslr camera out there below 500
GBP??

I'd define *best* for my purposes as

1 - image quality - the lowest noise possible up to 800 iso

2 - features - optical viewfinder is a must-have as much manual control as
possible, decent lens.

3 - size - doesn't have to be 'micro' but generally small and easy to carry
around.

4 - build quality - as rugged as possible

How "much" zoom do you want?

BugBear

On Nov 5, 9:31 am, SMS · wrote:
Henry wrote:
TIA Henry

I guess the G9 would be the best choice.

To many people, it's not just the superior image quality of the D-SLR,
it's the lack of shutter lag that drives them to get a D-SLR rather than
a P&S.


The G9 is a great product but my feeling on these things is that I
would much rather have a small DSLR like the Olympus E-410 than any
large point & shoot, 100% of the time. I am sure there are
environments where the stealth and quiet operation of the G9 make it a
better tool, but for my purposes it isn't really enough of a solution
to a problem to get me to go out and spend $580 (which is the street
price of the G9 in Canada).

NEWS FLASH - DSLR IDIOTS - AT IT AGAIN!


On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 08:36:27 -0800, wrote:

On Nov 5, 9:31 am, SMS · wrote:
Henry wrote:
TIA Henry

I guess the G9 would be the best choice.

To many people, it's not just the superior image quality of the D-SLR,
it's the lack of shutter lag that drives them to get a D-SLR rather than
a P&S.


The G9 is a great product but my feeling on these things is that I
would much rather have a small DSLR like the Olympus E-410 than any
large point & shoot, 100% of the time. I am sure there are
environments where the stealth and quiet operation of the G9 make it a
better tool, but for my purposes it isn't really enough of a solution
to a problem to get me to go out and spend $580 (which is the street
price of the G9 in Canada).

Quick! Which part of the topic of "Decent ALTERNATIVES to dslr?" do you fail to
understand?

All of you DSLR proponents just keep proving the same thing over and over again.
You can't even comprehend a simple topic title, let alone have any respect nor
consideration for anyone else's choices and needs in life. This only goes to
prove again that DSLR buyers are totally unaware and inconsiderate idiots. Hell,
just the noise of their DSLRs is enough to show the world how inconsiderate they
are to everyone. Now that we have ascertained that that is true, that DSLR
proponents = inconsiderate unaware idiots, then it also follows that if DSLR
idiots can't even understand a simple topic title then anything they have to say
about DSLRs is just as ludicrous and absurd.

At least you've all made THAT perfectly clear about the kind of people that
choose DSLRs, why they choose them, and the stupidity of any advice they might
ever offer to anyone about anything.

Thanks!

You do your group SO proud. :-)

You NEVER fail to prove this about yourselves. Anyone could make a fortune by
betting on the stupidity of DSLR buyers. It's that certain of a bet.

Watch them prove it yet again ....

NEWS FLASH - DSLR IDIOTS - AT IT AGAIN!


On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 08:36:27 -0800, wrote:

On Nov 5, 9:31 am, SMS · wrote:
Henry wrote:
TIA Henry
I guess the G9 would be the best choice.

To many people, it's not just the superior image quality of the D-SLR,
it's the lack of shutter lag that drives them to get a D-SLR rather than
a P&S.

The G9 is a great product but my feeling on these things is that I
would much rather have a small DSLR like the Olympus E-410 than any
large point & shoot, 100% of the time. I am sure there are
environments where the stealth and quiet operation of the G9 make it a
better tool, but for my purposes it isn't really enough of a solution
to a problem to get me to go out and spend $580 (which is the street
price of the G9 in Canada).


snip rant
I like the G series, up to the G6.. They went to a micro lens after that
and removed RAW support (though it's back in 9, as I understand)

I still own a G2 and an S3.. The S series is also very nice, with the
12x optical zoom. I've had nothing but good things with it, and it takes
AA batteries so those are nice and simple to swap in/out.

Both fit nicely in a pocket, though I'd tend towards the G series if I
had to choose.


P.

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 17:07:55 GMT, NEWS FLASH - DSLR IDIOTS - AT IT AGAIN!
wrote:

NEWS FLASH - DSLR IDIOTS - AT IT AGAIN!


On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 08:36:27 -0800, wrote:

On Nov 5, 9:31 am, SMS · wrote:
Henry wrote:
TIA Henry

I guess the G9 would be the best choice.

To many people, it's not just the superior image quality of the D-SLR,
it's the lack of shutter lag that drives them to get a D-SLR rather than
a P&S.


The G9 is a great product but my feeling on these things is that I
would much rather have a small DSLR like the Olympus E-410 than any
large point & shoot, 100% of the time. I am sure there are
environments where the stealth and quiet operation of the G9 make it a
better tool, but for my purposes it isn't really enough of a solution
to a problem to get me to go out and spend $580 (which is the street
price of the G9 in Canada).

Quick! Which part of the topic of "Decent ALTERNATIVES to dslr?" do you fail to
understand?

All of you DSLR proponents just keep proving the same thing over and over again.
You can't even comprehend a simple topic title, let alone have any respect nor
consideration for anyone else's choices and needs in life. This only goes to
prove again that DSLR buyers are totally unaware and inconsiderate idiots. Hell,
just the noise of their DSLRs is enough to show the world how inconsiderate they
are to everyone. Now that we have ascertained that that is true, that DSLR
proponents = inconsiderate unaware idiots, then it also follows that if DSLR
idiots can't even understand a simple topic title then anything they have to say
about DSLRs is just as ludicrous and absurd.

At least you've all made THAT perfectly clear about the kind of people that
choose DSLRs, why they choose them, and the stupidity of any advice they might
ever offer to anyone about anything.

Thanks!

You do your group SO proud. :-)

You NEVER fail to prove this about yourselves. Anyone could make a fortune by
betting on the stupidity of DSLR buyers. It's that certain of a bet.

Watch them prove it yet again ....


HAHAHAHA....

Silly me! I forget, someone already IS making a fortune by betting on the
stupidity of DSLR buyers! Every camera manufacturer that sells DSLRs and the
lenses required for them! LOL