Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

SLR Dilema


2 Dec 2012 9:03AM
Moved over to CSC's NEX7 and 5n with 55-210 18-55 and 30mm macro plus RX100

candids, street,travel and flora are my special interests. The cameras haven't let me down and, quite honestly, the results at times are quite stunning. I would like to have a DSLR back in my kit and am looking at Canon 650D with a decent zoom lens . Not necessary for serious wildlife or sports action so therefore I am told 650D would suffice against the more robust and faster frames per sec. of the 7D
Probably will look on the S/H market
Tops of say, 600.00 to spend.
Any recommends

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed 5 4.6k 1 Scotland
2 Dec 2012 2:06PM
Why?

Why not spend the money on another decent lens for the CSCs to expand your scope with that system?
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
2 Dec 2012 2:57PM
What do you think is lacking in your CSC.
SueEley 8 271 96 Wales
2 Dec 2012 5:40PM
I use Olympus Pen - would not use on a beach in high weather (my oldish Nikon D300 does that) and it wouldn't work well for birds (my oldish dah-di-dah...) But your special interests don't sound 'extreme'. If you do decide to get a more robust camera, you could actually opt for an older model 2nd hand which will have a more durable body - the higher price tends to go with better weather proofing. Watch out for how many cycles it's been through. So it depends what you want, and why.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
2 Dec 2012 6:28PM

Quote:and it wouldn't work well for birds


Film camera`s worked perfectly well in the day, and without autofocus, focus points and tracking Smile
User_Removed 5 4.6k 1 Scotland
2 Dec 2012 7:28PM

Quote:and it wouldn't work well for birds

Film camera`s worked perfectly well in the day, and without autofocus, focus points and tracking Smile



I got some great bird shots using an Olympus E-PL3 and a Panasonic 45-200mm lens. At the high end it is equivalent to a 400mm lens on a 35mm camera.
ChrisV 8 882 26 United Kingdom
3 Dec 2012 3:31PM
I like my Panny CSC's. But there are compromises and reading these forums you'd be forgiven for thinking they don't exist.

Case in point yesterday, indoors, poor light 100-300 Panasonic lens on a G3, wide open. Head of a little dog, auto focus, low contrast. Not a chance. Wondered if I was too close for the macro range so panned down to a newspaper a foot in front and click, it was there. I was only messing about, but it illustrates a point.

The G3 and GX1 I have do focus very quickly in the right conditions, but I know in that situation any of my older phase-detect DSLRs would have snapped to focus with no problem whatsoever.

I also know at higher ISOs that 16mp m4/3 sensor is approaching [but not quite] as good as my three year old 550D. None of this takes into account the [commonly] faster lenses available for APSc and 35mm sensor cameras. Even if I were to invest in the newer Panasonic premium fast lenses [and I may well at a future point when they becoming somewhat more sensibly priced], I'm still going to have to accept less control over shallow depth of field.

If none of this were any sort of limitation my 5DII and expensive, heavy Canon glass would be up on eBay now - I frankly don't enjoy lugging around all that weight. But it is and they're not.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
3 Dec 2012 3:49PM

Quote:Case in point yesterday, indoors, poor light 100-300 Panasonic lens on a G3, wide open. Head of a little dog, auto focus


What is the point in using a slow 200-600mm equ lens indoors to photograph a dog, unless its the only lens you own Smile

A while back Pete got a picture of a deer in bad light (fog or mist) the dslr he was testing refused to focus, but his OMD nailed it.

I`m not sure how well the later Pens compare to Panasonic CSC`s in this department but from memory the older Panys focused better in good light, but the Pens better in poor light or at night.

Today the differences between DSLR and CSC is pretty small.
ChrisV 8 882 26 United Kingdom
3 Dec 2012 4:08PM
Like I said, I was 'messing about'.


Quote:Today the differences between DSLR and CSC is pretty small.


With all due respect, without context that's a fairly meaningless statement. In good light I'd defy the majority of people to distinguish between the output from my GX1 and 5DII with lenses on each stopped down a few notches. But there again most people wouldn't detect a lot of difference between a compact and an expensive DSLR when shooting in undemanding conditions.

It is at the more challenging extremes when the difference can become a big thing and it really should only matter to those who need that slight edge/usability or stretch their equipment to the limits.

If it were not for these fractional advantages CaNikon would be selling bugger-all of their higher-end cameras. They're in no danger of going out of business in the forseeable future.
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
3 Dec 2012 4:16PM

Quote:It is at the more challenging extremes when the difference can become a big thing and it really should only matter to those who need that slight edge/usability or stretch their equipment to the limits


People are too quick to blame the equipment when problems arise, nothing beats good technique.
ChrisV 8 882 26 United Kingdom
3 Dec 2012 4:20PM
So all these Pros who've bought [or been supplied with] cumbersome big bodies and heavy lenses are merely compensating for their poor technique? Tongue
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
3 Dec 2012 4:30PM

Quote:cumbersome big bodies and heavy lenses are merely compensating for their poor technique?


Hand any pro a cheap point and shoot and he/she will still get good results, but we are not talking about pro`s.
ChrisV 8 882 26 United Kingdom
3 Dec 2012 10:29PM
Who are these pros who will always get good results from cheap cameras? And why do they go to the trouble of buying expensive kit? It seems like an awful waste of money and energy to me if you can get the goods using a 100 pocket camera. Not very professional throwing money away like that.

Next time I'm at a night time shoot I'll tell them all they're just spendthrift masochists, shall I? I'll laugh at them as I cover up my dodgy technique with my pricey juggernaut that's foolishly lacking scene modes. I suppose I must've been stupidly lucky so far.

I'm sure Leonardo could have created something brilliant by finger painting, but its funny how much expense and trouble he went to to get the right brushes, carefully mixed pigments and meticulously prepared surfaces (OK he did screw up the base of The Last Supper - but no-one's perfect).
Paul Morgan e2
13 16.1k 6 England
3 Dec 2012 11:07PM
You do like to rattle on Smile
ChrisV 8 882 26 United Kingdom
4 Dec 2012 11:25AM
As I said, no-one's perfect.

(Which applies as much to cameras as it does to forum poster's... posts.)

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.