Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

if compact camera can take such good quality photo, why do we have to spend thous...

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Attention!

This topic is locked.
Reason: Enough Already
TonyCoridan
6 Mar 2013 - 8:36 AM

Beautiful clear image: if compact camera can take such good quality photo, why do we have to spend thousands on high end camera and lenses?Compact v DSLR

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
6 Mar 2013 - 8:36 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

digicammad
digicammad  1121988 forum posts United Kingdom37 Constructive Critique Points
6 Mar 2013 - 8:41 AM

We don't, unless we find that we need to go beyond the limitations inherent in compact cameras.

Compact cameras are capable of producing excellent images within their operational parameters, but those parameters are far wider with an SLR. Faster response, better lenses, etc.

Ian

llareggub
llareggub  4695 forum posts United Kingdom
6 Mar 2013 - 8:54 AM

The image is great but it is in the perfect comfort zone for a compact camera, static subject, great lighting all of which are far from demanding on the camera or photographer. Many photographs are taken in much more demanding circumstances, meaning both the camera and the photographer are far more challenged Smile

SlowSong
SlowSong e2 Member 64429 forum postsSlowSong vcard England29 Constructive Critique Points
6 Mar 2013 - 8:59 AM

Fine tuning Depth Of Field.

thewilliam
6 Mar 2013 - 9:22 AM

don't forget the street-cred!

At FOCUS, you can always spot the "proper photographer"s because they always wander round with expensive cameras round their necks.

Last Modified By thewilliam at 6 Mar 2013 - 9:23 AM
TonyCoridan
6 Mar 2013 - 9:25 AM


Quote: Fine tuning Depth Of Field.

With all due respect, a lot of these can be done with computer soft wares etc


Quote: The image is great but it is in the perfect comfort zone for a compact camera, static subject, great lighting all of which are far from demanding on the camera or photographer. Many photographs are taken in much more demanding circumstances, meaning both the camera and the photographer are far more challenged Smile

I agree!

As I have posted before; most of the time I tell some people I'm a photographer, they show me their smartphone photos. This is not to tell ask me if their photos are good or not, but to tell me that they can take as good photos as a photographer can take with a real camera.

Tony

llareggub
llareggub  4695 forum posts United Kingdom
6 Mar 2013 - 9:37 AM


Quote: Fine tuning Depth Of Field.

With all due respect, a lot of these can be done with computer soft wares etc

Tony

Even the new field and iris blurs in Photoshop CS6 do not really get close to approximating the natural bokeh characteristics of a lens, they have certainly come a long way but they are far from convincing on anything other than the simplest of subjects.

alansnap
alansnap e2 Member 10529 forum postsalansnap vcard United Kingdom22 Constructive Critique Points
6 Mar 2013 - 9:50 AM

It's about versatility and ultimate quality. You can get extensions on compacts to give longer focal length or much shorter, but they are optical compromises and ultimately stop the compacts being compact. Let's talk about sensor size and pixel counts, because non-photographers equate a high density of pixels with quality. With the tiny sensors on most phones and lower end compacts cramming more pixels on board doesn't give a concomitant increase in quality. Large sensors with a lower density of pixels produces less interference and higher quality images.
Higher end compacts with APS-C sensors (e.g. the Canon G1X) produce fantastic results, but ultimately they behave like an SLR with a standard zoom. If that's all the range of focal lengths you want, then you don't need an SLR.
Most people never print their images and seldom even look at them on a anything more than the back of their camera, so for them a compact is fine - a visual notebook, but I want to produce 4ft long panoramas that blow the viewer away, so I use my SLR. I also like photographing wildlife up close - unless you get a cheetah jumping on the bonnet of your vehicle, you can't get close to big cats - they tend to eat you - so give me an SLR every time. I have a G11 which I think is great, but since I bought the 5D Mk II (passť I know), the image quality is so stunning I tend to leave the compact at home.
Alan

Steppenwolf
6 Mar 2013 - 9:52 AM

Try photographing wildlife with a compact, or even a bridge camera with a long lens. To do this you often need very fast focus and high ISO (to stop the motion), neither of which the compact can deliver. But I agree that if you're photographing static subjects in good light within a normal focal length range the average small sensor camera does a very good job. If I could find a compact that could match the output of my Sony A77 (and various G and Zeiss lenses) I would sell it - I don't lug around this stuff for fun.

Metalhead
Metalhead  61875 forum posts England2 Constructive Critique Points
6 Mar 2013 - 10:14 AM

I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned already but the cat image was taken on a Panasonic GF1 with the acclaimed 20mm f1.7 lens which is part of the Micro 4/3 system. It's a "compact" setup but not a compact camera as such.

cameracat
cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
6 Mar 2013 - 10:15 AM


Quote: With all due respect, a lot of these can be done with computer soft wares etc

Yup! With absolutely no camera skill or photographic knowledge required.....!!!

If that's your idea of photography, So be it, But some want to add/create something more individual, Not something knocked up by software that is made by someone else.....Grin

It is not all about how far to push the sliders on a computer screen, The job and the end product start before the shutter button is pressed, A decent image will need little to no software mangling.

This is why some prefer a camera & lens combo that allows/delivers top quality images to be captured by the camera, Not the computer.....Wink

On the other hand you may just want to collect image data, Then bully it into something interesting or nothing like the original.....Smile For this purpose almost anything with a digital image sensor will suffice.....Grin

Last Modified By cameracat at 6 Mar 2013 - 10:16 AM
TonyCoridan
6 Mar 2013 - 10:27 AM


Quote: With all due respect, a lot of these can be done with computer soft wares etc

Yup! With absolutely no camera skill or photographic knowledge required.....!!!

If that's your idea of photography, So be it, But some want to add/create something more individual, Not something knocked up by software that is made by someone else.....Grin

It is not all about how far to push the sliders on a computer screen, The job and the end product start before the shutter button is pressed, A decent image will need little to no software mangling.

This is why some prefer a camera & lens combo that allows/delivers top quality images to be captured by the camera, Not the computer.....Wink

On the other hand you may just want to collect image data, Then bully it into something interesting or nothing like the original.....Smile For this purpose almost anything with a digital image sensor will suffice.....Grin

So, really, what do people look for, here, on EPZ and beyond when the vote for a photo? What are the criteria one look for? Grin

1. Subject
2. Quality
3. Composition
4. Who the photographer is
5. To be at the right place t the right time (opportunistic)
6. Anything else

Regards,

Tony Grin

Pete
Pete Site Moderator 1318443 forum postsPete vcard ePz Advertiser England96 Constructive Critique Points
6 Mar 2013 - 10:31 AM


Quote: So, really, what do people look for, here, on EPZ and beyond when the vote for a photo? What are the criteria one look for?

Here's my criteria Editor's Choice explained

TonyCoridan
6 Mar 2013 - 10:42 AM


Quote: So, really, what do people look for, here, on EPZ and beyond when the vote for a photo? What are the criteria one look for?
Here's my criteria Editor's Choice explained

Is there such thing as personal choice and subjectivity in photography as any other form of art or walks of life.Grin

Can we not be biased, based on some elements that we personally like?Grin

Regards,

TonyGrin

TonyCoridan
6 Mar 2013 - 10:48 AM


Quote: So, really, what do people look for, here, on EPZ and beyond when the vote for a photo? What are the criteria one look for?
Here's my criteria Editor's Choice explained

That's fine; but do you really think people go trough the that?Grin

Is that such thing as personal choice and subjectivity in photography?Grin

Can we be biased in making a choice in photography?

Here Peter says:


"Personal appeal to me for one reason or another.
Yes I do have a liking of certain styles. I think paintings by Salvador Dali and surrealists like him are fascinating. I find Bob Carlos Clarke's pictures highly erotic, I love the infrared work of Simon Marsden, I enjoy the still lifes of Irvin Penn, I admire the landscapes of Ansel Adams. As a youth I was often engrossed in books of birds of prey by Eric Hoskins. I could go on, and on, and on."

He is well within his right!

Regards,

TonyGrin

Attention!

This topic is locked.
Reason: Enough Already