DSLR or ultrazoom point and shoot?

[MerleP]

Denyse and All:

One other consideration that's not been mentioned that I think you should look at before purchasing any P&S, Bridge or otherwise, is the shutter lag time, and the time to activate and be ready to shoot after turning it on. That's one of the things that drove me to a DSLR. It's tough taking shots of something that's moving when it takes your camera a long time to open the shutter after you press the shutter release. (Just try taking a picture of hummingbirds at your feeder with such a camera.

[Dave Humphries]

Denyse and All:

One other consideration that's not been mentioned that I think you should look at before purchasing any P&S, Bridge or otherwise, is the shutter lag time, and the time to activate and be ready to shoot after turning it on. That's one of the things that drove me to a DSLR. It's tough taking shots of something that's moving when it takes your camera a long time to open the shutter after you press the shutter release. (Just try taking a picture of hummingbirds at your feeder with such a camera.

Very true Merle,

It gets added into the sensor to viewfinder delay I was talking about.

For some subjects and conditions (e.g. tripod shooting) you can look over the camera and time the shot from real 'live view' but as you say, you still have to anticipate to account for the shutter delay and that will result in a lot of missed the mark shots. Have a look at my cycle race albums in the Picasa link in my signature to see what happens when I tried to get the cyclist crossing the wining line - only in the last race did I get close!

Both this, and the other thing that drove me to a DSLR; the one image RAW buffer, have, I believe, improved a bit since my 2006/7 model Bridge camera though.

In many ways, a capable enough P&S/bridge camera is still a cheaper way into the hobby to learn for oneself, then take a far more personally informed decision on DSLR, which will inevitably (finances permitting) skip the cheapest/entry level sector and take you straight to the advanced amateur sector of the market, is arguably preferable to getting a cheap DSLR and kit lens and having to replace both at a greater loss within a year or two. But that didn't ease the pain that I needed to spend 10 x the Bridge cam value to get the same focal length range in a decent lens on a DSLR

Cheers,

[Denyse]

Thanks for your input. The DSLR I was thinking of, Canon T1i, is available with a two lens kit 55-250 and 18-55 so going by the math they seem to be almost the same as far as range. I probably am missing something here because it doesn't make sense to package together two similar lenses. Also, these both have image stabilization and the 55-250 is the longest telephoto I can find with that unless I want ot take out a second mortgage.I would appreciate it if you could maybe give me a 2 minute lesson here.
I haven't really been thinking about post processing my pictures but I guess it is all part of what you (eventually) do with your pictures when you become more serious. So I don't know what I can get using RAW images as opposed to using a program a program such as Photoshop on jpegs. I've got alot to learn.
I started reading about the Fuji HS10 and Panasonic DMC-FZ100. I was this close to making a decision and now.....

[Dave Humphries]

Thanks for your input. The DSLR I was thinking of, Canon T1i, is available with a two lens kit 55-250 and 18-55 so going by the math they seem to be almost the same as far as range. I probably am missing something here because it doesn't make sense to package together two similar lenses. Also, these both have image stabilization and the 55-250 is the longest telephoto I can find with that unless I want ot take out a second mortgage.I would appreciate it if you could maybe give me a 2 minute lesson here.

Hi Denyse,

In a nutshell, the zoom range; "24x" or "30x" means little on its own, other factors, primarily the angle of view these provide, is more important. However, we don't discuss 'angle of view' in so many degrees, we equate it to the focal lengths they represent on an old 35mm film camera - called the 'equivalent' focal length.

Imagine two cameras with a 10x range, one is 36-360mm equivalent, the other 28-280mm (equivalent).

If you're into shooting wildlife, say birds, the 360mm one would be better, but if you want to shoot groups of people in a typical domestic house as well, it would be almost useless, you'd want the 28-280mm one for that - it would also do for wildlife, you'd just have to crop a bit more. This is the primary criteria to apply, but to differentiate between two lenses of the same angles of view, you need to look deeper - this is really more relevant to choosing a DSLR lens, but should really be applied to choosing a Bridge camera too.

It might take a little longer than 2 minutes, but have a read of some of this tutorial, skip the first bit for now and go straight to the section that starts Influence of Lens Focal Length, from here; Understanding camera lenses
When you've got that understood, the other bits of that tutorial are the things to look for to differentiate between two similar lenses. It will explain some of the unfamiliar words you might see in reviews.

I haven't really been thinking about post processing my pictures but I guess it is all part of what you (eventually) do with your pictures when you become more serious. So I don't know what I can get using RAW images as opposed to using a program such as Photoshop on jpegs. I've got alot to learn.

In short, a much better quality final result - a properly processed RAW from a point and shoot or bridge camera will beat a jpg from a DSLR, all other things being equal (often they aren't, but that's another ball game we have already looked at).

Do you already have Photoshop? That will handle RAW too, but if you have an older version; CS2 or CS3, maybe even CS4, it might not be possible to update it enough to read the RAW files from these newer cameras, there are workarounds though, but let's not get side tracked too far.

I started reading about the Fuji HS10 and Panasonic DMC-FZ100. I was this close to making a decision and now.....

Of those two, personally, I would go for the Panasonic DMC-FZ100: true it has less wide zoom range, but several ergonomic (handling) advantages, plus speed of response and shooting rate, seem to have been addressed - if those things work as one would hope - it would be better in my view (alos probably has the better 'brand' of lens).
BUT that is one person's view from a 2 minute comparison of specs alone - I urge you to do more thorough research.

Cheers,

[benm]

For the camera you are looking at a "normal" lens is approximately 32 mm. A normal lens is one that gives a view similar to what the eye sees, more or less. 32 mm is about the middle of the range of the 18-55 mm lens (55/18 = 3X zoom range). If you set the lens to 18 mm you will get a wide view (where everything looks smaller) and if set to 55 mm you will get a narrower view (where everything looks a little bigger than normal). The 55-250 mm lens (250/55 = 4.5X zoom range) set at 250 mm will give you approximately the view you would see with 7X binoculars.

With a dSLR you will never find a lens that provides 14X zoom range, never mind 35X zoom range.
Dec 10, 2010 - I just discovered that you actually can get a 15X lens for a dSLR - a Tamron 18-270 mm. It doesn't even look very large. Has anyone tried this lens? What kind of image quality can you get. .

[Dave Humphries]

With a dSLR you will never find a lens that provides 14X zoom range, never mind 35X zoom range.

True

... but if you did;
a) you couldn't afford it, plus
b) you wouldn't be able to lift it

[AlanP]

I have three cameras and it may be usefull to compare them. The oldest camers us a Olympus SP-570UZ. It is an older ultra zoom which is too large to fit in my pocket. The next is A fuji F200EXR. It is pocketable with a 5 to 1 zoom. My latest is a Lumix GF1.
Here are my thought as to which camera I will take with me when I go out.

Normal scenery in good lighting - All three will take good pictures. Post precessing will be the same for all three. I like the Fuji because it is pocketable (I use a holder clipped onto my belt).

Wildlife with long lens. The Fuji is out with only 5 to 1. The Olympus has a longer effective telephoto but the quality of the Lumix is much better. The Olympus will not track a moving target when taking multiple shots. The usable ISO is better on the Lumix ane allows faster shutter speeds, ususlly necessary for longer lenses. THe Lumix image stabilization is MUCH better. The Lumix is my clear choice.

Shooting in quiet settings. The Lumix has a focal plane shutter and makes noise which may be objectionable. The Fuji and Olympus are much quieter. The Fuji can be placed in quiet mode and is totally silent.

Night or indoor shots without a flash and without a tripod. The Olympus is out. The Fuji produces good pictures for a pocketable camera. If you want 4 by 6 prints it will produce some good shots. The Lumix is better. If I want to put the camera in my pocket I can if I use the 20mm pancake lens. If i want to use the zoom (18 to 45) mm I can't put it in my pocket. The zoom has image stabilization, the 20mm (f 1.7) does not. They will both produce the same quality if there is not moving subject. The 20 mm will have less trouble focusing. If I am going for snapshots I will use the Fuji. If I want enlargements I will use the Lumix.

Tricky lighting. If the Fuji or the Olympus gets it right there is no problem. If they do not there is not enough data in the JPG images to fix it. I shoot RAW with the Lumix. There is much more to play with if the image needs major work in Phoroshop. Lumix is the clear choice.

Special features. Non SLRs are loaded with gimicks. Here is my take on two in the Olympus.

Pre capture mode. This is neat. If you miss pictures because you pushed the shuter button too late this is the answer. If you push the shutter button half way down the camers stores pictures at 17 frames per second and continuously stores new pictures while dumping the old ones. When you push the shutter button completely the camera takes a burst of pictures including the 17 pictures that where in the buffer before the shutter was depress and 17 pictures after the shutter was depressed. If you are looking to capture a moment like a child blowing out a bithhday cake this is the camera. There is a price to pay. The camera is a 12 MP camera, but it takes 3MP pictures in pre capture mode. It also locks the focus and exposure when you press the button half way down. I have taken a lot of good pictures with this mode, but no really great ones.

Panoramas. The Lumix and Fuji to not have any features to aid in taking panoramas. The Olympus does. If you put the camera in panorama mode you take the first shot and the camera places a target and a cursor in the viewfinder. You move the cursor over the target and when you do the camera takes a second picture. You can quit with two or add a third. The camera then proccess the panorama in the camera. This is really neat. If you don't want to do any post processing you are done. There is a price to pay. The panorams do not contain as much information as you would have if you stitched them yourself. I will take panoramas with either the Fuji or Lumix and stitch them together in Photoshop. It takes a little practice (not much) an Photoshop but the results are better.


There is no ready made answer to the question of a DSLR or a ultrazoom point and shoot. I included my thoughts but you have to answer the question yourself. Cost may or may not be the deciding factor, but you deed to decide for yourself based or your own needs. Make a list of things that you consider to be important and compare the cameras based or your needs. No one else can do that for you.

Alan