Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 24, 2004, 1:14 PM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2


I used to have an old SLR and then purchased a regular digital camera.Now I want to upgrade so that I can take photos ofarchitectural projects for my portfolio. What are the main reasons in owning a digital SLR as opposed to a regular digital camera.

Thanks in advance!!!

koolaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 24, 2004, 1:33 PM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803

This question has been asked several times recently, you might want to poke around on the general and this forum.

There are loads of advantages and a few disadvantages.

Faster shutter responce, faster AF, better AF, replaceable lenses (potentially high quality lenses) faster writing of data to the CF, better metering systems, better pictures at higher IOSs (less noise.) There are some.

Downsides include higher cost, more accessories, heavier, more things to carry, larger. There are some.

eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2004, 8:55 PM   #3
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 38

This is a good question and not so easy to answer any more, now that the line between SLR's and top-end digitals is becoming very blurred.

The traditional advantages of SLR over compact have been TTL viewfinder and interchangeable lenses. But now the better compacts have an electronic TTL viewfinder, which is nearly as good as the optical viewfinders on SLR's. Also, many top-end compacts have very handy lenses - e.g. the 28 mm - 280 mmL series lens on the Canon Powershot Pro 1. It also has very useful macro capabilities, and has the facility for close-up attachment. So a "compact" such as this has most of the traditional advantages of an SLR, while retaining the lightness and small size of a compact.

I understand that one difficulty with even the better "compact" digitals, is the small image sensor. This can create problems such as purple fringing and graininess, at speeds > ISO 100. However, there are now noise-reduction software packages available, to clean up images in post-production.

One concern with my Powershot Pro 1 is the relatively large smallest aperture - f8. Though I am told that, because the lens is so close to the image sensor, this will give much better depth of field that you might expect. On the other hand, and by the same token, it may be difficult to achieve a shallow depth of field if you want it -but again, most good photoshop packages have a remedy for this in post-production.

I suppose an SLR is always going to give a slightly better result than a compact, but with the top-endmodels now available, that difference is minimal, and probably only of concern to professionals. When I went digital I opted for the "compact" (Canon Powershot Pro 1) and I have no regrets. It's great to set out on a shooting expedition with my one little bag and never having to switch lenses. But each to his own. It's a personal choice.

(Incidentally, the cost differential between SLR and top-end digital is rapidly disappearing, also.)

muskrat sam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 25, 2004, 12:53 PM   #4
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2

Thanks Eric and Muskrat for taking the time for your responses. I'll check out the Powershot.
koolaid is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:29 PM.