Vagueness and the Aftermath - A sporadic diary

[kinboshi]

You can do a lot with many compacts that used to be the sole domain of the SLR (although you still have more control and considerably more scope with lens options), and I think the dividing line between them is blurred now, much like my photos.

Setting aside the quality issues, one of the big practical differences is speed of use. My 10yr old 300D is all but instant whilst pretty much all compacts have significant shutter lag. That means that your subject may have moved before your picture is taken. (this is generally not a problem with pictures of bonfires or scenery)

Very true, also compacts can struggle when the light isn't great as well.

I'll have to post up some photos I took on holiday over the New Year on my compact.

[rex008]

You can do a lot with many compacts that used to be the sole domain of the SLR (although you still have more control and considerably more scope with lens options), and I think the dividing line between them is blurred now, much like my photos.

Setting aside the quality issues, one of the big practical differences is speed of use. My 10yr old 300D is all but instant whilst pretty much all compacts have significant shutter lag. That means that your subject may have moved before your picture is taken. (this is generally not a problem with pictures of bonfires or scenery)

Very true, also compacts can struggle when the light isn't great as well.

I'll have to post up some photos I took on holiday over the New Year on my compact.

The light thing is a big deal - the massive difference between a compact and an SLR is the sensor size. Each sensor pixel on an SLR could be at least 4 times bigger than a compact - which means it gets 4 times the light (and that number is about 30 vs your average camera phone sensor). This in turn means the sensor has to amplify the signal less, which means less noise in the image. All of which means I can take a photo at ISO 3200 on an SLR that looks better than a photo taken at ISO 400 on an average compact. And THIS means I can take that shot of a bird with a shutter speed of 1/1000s, where you'd need 1/125 on your compact to get the same exposure, and that means less blur, and a sharper shot. This is also combined with the fact that your average "super zoom" compact at the long telephoto end will have a high best f-stop; this is dictated by the geometry of the lens - even a cheapish SLR lens will do 300mm zoom at f/6.3 - in layman's terms this means way more light on the sensor, with the same benefit as above. It makes a huge difference to the quality of the photos.

[RED-DOG]

Precisely.

It's like an F1 car v a Mondeo. Better in some situations if you know how to handle it.

[tikay]

Really appreciate all the camera advice, guys, thank you.

Dino - what distance away from the subject were you when you took those photos?

I really want to do this bird/wildlife photography thing, & am prepared to invest time & the necessary cash.

My concern is that very wise & respected judges - as well as Tom - are saying "no point, a compact will suffice for your needs".

To be fair to Tom, (just this once), he knows me better than most, & his real point to me is that I don't have the patience to faff about changing lenses & stuff. An outrageously accurate summing up.

But it's like anything, if you want to do it well, a bit of effort is required. I want to do it well.

As well as birds & wildlife, I'd like to take photos of aircraft parked at Heathrow, or under the flight path at the end of the runway, when they are incoming, very low.

Obviously, no arty nonsense, just proper pictures.

[kinboshi]

You can get an SLR, learn the basics and a lot of the time the automatic mode will suffice.

[tikay]

You can get an SLR, learn the basics and a lot of the time the automatic mode will suffice.

"They" say I don't need an SLR.

So, "you need a SLR because......."

[kinboshi]

You can get an SLR, learn the basics and a lot of the time the automatic mode will suffice.

"They" say I don't need an SLR.

So, "you need a SLR because......."

Lenses are better, sensors are better, etc. (what's been said above really).

What about something in the middle - like a Nikon 1?

http://www.nikon1.co.uk/en_GB_N1/

Interchangeable lenses, but in a more compact format.  Best of both worlds (no expert, and I'm sure people who've used one of these will be able to give the pros and cons)?

[technolog]

You can get an SLR, learn the basics and a lot of the time the automatic mode will suffice.

"They" say I don't need an SLR.

So, "you need a SLR because......."

I want to do it well.

In that case and if money isn't an issue, SLR. You will be equipped (with the purchase of suitable lenses, tripod) to take stunning pictures as opposed to good. With the investment of time to learn, you'll be able to.

Looking forward to seeing the fruits of your labour.

[Dino]

Dino - what distance away from the subject were you when you took those photos?

About 20ft,in the kitchen with the door open,cos the little buggers kept running away.

[mulhuzz]

think about if you were learning to drive again, you could get an automatic license, or a manual license.

both will let you drive cars from A to B and back again, but the manual (SLR) comes into its own when you take it on a track day.

seems like an easy decision if you have the time to invest in learning properly.

[tikay]

think about if you were learning to drive again, you could get an automatic license, or a manual license.

both will let you drive cars from A to B and back again, but the manual (SLR) comes into its own when you take it on a track day.

seems like an easy decision if you have the time to invest in learning properly.

Well I have the money to invest in learning properly. Not so sure about the time, though the intent is there........

[RED-DOG]

I really want to do this bird/wildlife photography thing, & am prepared to invest time & the necessary cash.

In light of this statement, I am prepared to modify my opinion a little, I didn't realise you were serious about it.

Still, taking into account how much technology has advanced in recent years, I'm still not convinced that you need an SLR.

It's like everything else, the choice is huge and the lines between a compact and a full blown SLR are becoming ever more  blurred.


Do a bit of reading Tone, look at what goes in to taking a good photograph.

Also, read a little about the relationship between aperture, ISO and shutter speed, and tell us what you think. Does it excite you, or does it make you cringe?

I'm starting to think you might enjoy an SLR that you can use in full auto mode, or perhaps a bridge camera.

What was that one that Rod's dad was using? perhaps that's worth investigating.

[Tractor]

My daughter has been at college for 2 years studying photography and next year hopefully she will go onto uni to study fashion photography, this has been great for me because i have picked up how to work the dslr and the results imo are great.
I have bought her a decent slr & a few lenses and a decent compact but the results from the dslr are so much better.
Its a really absorbing hobby but quite expensive if you get top of the range body & lenses, go for it!

[Dino]

One of your presenters knows more than a little about photography,you could ask her for lessons.

[RED-DOG]

For clarity, when I say SLR, I'm referring to a digital SLR or DSLR.