A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Nikon Prosumer vs DSLR

Featured Equipment Deals

Missing Pages: Depth of Field Read More

Missing Pages: Depth of Field

Jon Sienckiewicz offers a juiced-up User Guide for creative people via his "Missing Pages" column on Photo.net. This month covers the topic of Depth of Field.

Latest Equipment Articles

The Week in Photography News Read More

The Week in Photography News

November 15-21, 2014: Hear the latest goings-on in the photography world, from product releases to event and campaign announcements and more.

Latest Learning Articles

Introduction to Creating an Album in Lightroom - Part I (Video Tutorial) Read More

Introduction to Creating an Album in Lightroom - Part I (Video Tutorial)

Learn to create an album in the Book Tab of Lightroom that you can publish and present to clients.


Nikon Prosumer vs DSLR

vyas sreenivas , Dec 28, 2006; 10:13 p.m.

i have seen that some times prosumer cameras give better pictures or crispness while compared to DSLRs...is that the way they are?

Responses


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

vyas sreenivas , Dec 28, 2006; 10:14 p.m.

or could this be because of some mismatch between the lens and the DSLr or something like that?

Fredrik Calabrese , Dec 28, 2006; 10:20 p.m.

It think it has alot to do with the default settings. Many prosumer cameras apply much more sharpening and increase saturation.

Bueh B. , Dec 28, 2006; 10:26 p.m.

A lot depends on the skill on the photographer -- how he uses the equipment and overcomes its shortcomings by selecting the best picture mode, flash mode, framing and composition.

dSLRs with old and cheap consumer lenses have possibly worse image quality than the better digicams available today. Shooting in high-contrast or severe back lighting is a recipe for bad images for most amateurs regardless of equipment.

But since you asked... Modern brand-name prosumer digital compacts offer quite a lot (like Canon's IS technology) what cheap dSLRs with kit lenses don't. But for best image results everyone uses a dSLR with high-end lenses. That's the way it is.

Lex Jenkins , Dec 28, 2006; 10:34 p.m.

I'm not sure about so-called "prosumer" dSLRs like the D50, but high end P&S non-interchangeable lens digital cameras seem designed to produce high quality JPEGs that result in excellent prints from minilabs. No post processing necessary.

I've compared my D2H NEFs with JPEGs taken with my cousin's Coolpix 8800 at the same events. Her photos invariably appeared to be just as sharp with the same color accuracy and overall appearance.

NEFs from my D2H always need post processing. Unless I'm very careful even my JPEGs will need some tweaking before minilab printing.

So why bother with a heavy, bulky, pro dSLR? Actually, there are plenty of times we don't need anything more than a good P&S.

But a good dSLR can probably autofocus more quickly and accurately in most situations. It will certainly zoom more quickly and conveniently than those toggle switches on some P&S digicams. A dSLR also gives us more flash options than most P&S digicams. Many of my cousin's family photos with flash have that "deer in the headlights" look and more redeye than I get with my SB-800 flash.

Still, there are plenty of occasions when I wish I had just something like an 8700 or 8800. I have an older, fairly comparable Olympus C-3040Z with a fast zoom but it uses SmartMedia, won't take many high rez TIFFs and does so slowly.

Scot Steele , Dec 28, 2006; 10:50 p.m.

If I shoot something with my pocket camera (Canon A85) and then shoot the same thing with my DSLR (Nikon D70), and then import the images into Photoshop, the difference between the images is apparent: If I click "auto levels" on the A85 image, nothing much hapens usually. But doing so on the D70's image produces a huge improvement. All of which proves that, yes, images from the pocket cameras (at least this one)require less fiddling than those from a DSLR (at least, this one.) Under simple conditions, the A85 is all I need. But when things get tough (wierd lighting, uncooperative subjects, etc.)...god, I love that D70. --Scot

Edward Ingold , Dec 29, 2006; 12:41 a.m.

A skilled photographer can get good results with nearly any camera, but it's a lot easier with a pro DSLR, and under a lot more difficult conditions. Even if you don't have time lag (up to 3/4 second in a P&S), you still have an aggravating problem - how to make the camera STOP doing something programmed to make taking pictures easier (like automatic flash, beeping noises, etc). With my DSLR I have shutter speed, aperture and focus. If I want "portrait" mode, I turn the camera on end. If I want flash, I stick it in the hot shoe and turn it on. There are no cute, undecipherable symbols for shooting modes, and the controls I need are available without going through menues.

vyas sreenivas , Dec 29, 2006; 01:57 a.m.

Thank every one for your replies.....i was just thinking about this because as i got to use a Coolpix 8800 from my friend and compared the images to my D80....i found the pics taken from the 8800 to be very clear...think it has VR....also i feel that the picture taken in the prosumer is more clear when i digitally zoom into it when compared to the pic take from my DSLR...could this be because of the absence of VR in the DSLR cam...or some problem with the way in which i click

james martin , Dec 29, 2006; 07:25 a.m.

I am not doubting what you see, but I find it difficult to belive your digitially zoomed photos are bettwer then those from your D80. This may be the case on the screen, but enlarged I wonder if you would get the same results? Again, I am not suggesting you are wrong as I have found the optical zoom on many P&S cameras to be very good, but the digital zoom to be poor.

Luis de la Orden Morais , Dec 29, 2006; 07:38 a.m.

Keeping it difficult

I think it would be very good to hear more about this subject, I believe that all the arguments given are good but if they are the only ones, SLR photography be it digital or film-based risks to be debunked very soon.

I have been reading lots of books and magazines on photography from Bryan Peterson to Popular Photography, and it seems to be a recurrent remark that SLR cameras are not more "automated" and better because of feelings of inadequacy from experienced phtographers who prefer to chip out as many helping tools as possible from machines than coming to a point that they could be confused with an amateur by using or simply having a camera with those features enabled. It is a miracle auto focus made it to the present day. It is a macho thing this camera feature evolution, one has to confess, but with Flickr, Picasa and even more compact cameras offering images bigger than 8MP, one has to seriously think if this kind of attitude is in sync with the digital age.

As far as I have read, SLRs still give the phtographer more control on exposure and space for creative manipulation through the lens than compact cameras. What is becoming more and more apparent is that people want this control to create pictures with the same quality and impact compact cameras can already produce.


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses