What benefits does a DSLR have over a P&S?

[Scotttyd]

This thread is mainly for my education. I know DSLR "takes better pictures", but really, what are their advantages?

1. You have a much larger range of f-stops (although from what I know that is only beneficial when you are taking macro (ie smaller aperature))

2. Longer shutter speeds available - I do not anticipate using anything longer than what my p5100 has avaialbe (I think 8 seconds is my longest)

3. More options for lenses? (what makes the macro lenses on a DSLR better than a high end P&S)

4. What else is available that gives you a better picture (vs. the skill of the photographer?) Is there a better processor? etc?

I do not plan on updating my UW rig anytime soon (I just bought my current rig a year ago), but I am just curious, maybe for topside use?

thanks

 

[scottfiji]

hey Scottyd,

You asked a good question.

The most important difference, is that a dSLR can take different lenses with different focal lengths and quality of optics, while a compact camera has one attached lens.

A dSLR also has a larger sensor than a compact camera, which means less noise and a larger dynamic range.

I discuss more differences in my underwater camera guide.

There can be many differences between two lenses of different qualities, including focal range, maximum aperture, focusing speed, resolution, contrast, focusing range, distortion, etc.

Also, you should remember that the photographer takes the picture, not the camera, so there is no guarantee that a dSLR will take a better picture.

hope this helps,

Scott

 

[bvanant]

From the top.
DSLR's have much better image quality than P&S. Go to DXO labs webpage and you will see that a modern DSLR like the Nikon D90 (released about the same time as the P6000) has about twice the image quality as the P&S version 72 vs 35. Second the noise quality at high iso is far superior on the DSLR. Larger sensors mean bigger photosites which typically mean less noise. Thirdly, you have multiple lens options. If you look at the quality of the Nikon 105VR lens compared to the quality of the lens on the P6000 the 105 is much sharper and much cleaner. With a DSLR you typically have much more capability with regards to shooting styles. For example you can get rear curtain sync for creative lighting effects on the DSLR but not on the P&S.

On the other hand, the whole package is bigger and heavier and lots more $ invested and the P&S system can get pics of critters in small spaces far more easily than a bigger DSLR. At the end of the day, it is all about IQ, and while you can get wonderful pictures with a P&S camera, taking the same scene with a DSLR will usually give you a far "better" picture.

Bill

 

[RJP]

I know DSLR "takes better pictures", but really, what are their advantages?

You're raising a difference without a distinction!

Sure, there are lots of different FEATURES on a dSLR compared to a P&S, but ultimately they all ladder up to "taking better pictures." You can't seperate "advantages" from "taking better pictures."

 

[Nemrod]

A dSLR has a sensor many times larger in area than a P&S like a G10/G11/S90 etc. The G10 has a tiny little bitty sensor of the 1/1.7 size, a dSLR typically as the APS-C size sensor or even a full frame like a real camera. The Canon A series like the A570/590 et al have the 1/2.5 sensor size, even smaller.

The optical quality of the lenses available can be optimal for the job at hand. A dSLR also usually has a fast start time and an almost instant shutter response to pushing the button, again, almost like a real camera.

But, holding a G11 and a S90 in my hands comparing directly to the dSLR Canon T1s, I can adjust settings faster on the P&S unlike a old time film SLR where each control, shutter and F stop had their own control dials and rings, kinda like the Canon S90 P&S.

That said, for an underwater camera, sometimes the compact size, ability to use wet lenses that can be changed on the fly, etc may be mitigating for a casual for fun photographer.

Another issue, manufactures have caught on that the uninformed buyer can be sold on boosting the Mega Pixel count to ridiculous levels. For example, Canon had the G10 at almost 15 MP on a tiny little sensor and yet it's current new T1s dSLR with an APS-C sensor is also only 15 MP. Who is fooling who here. It is kind of like adding "Turbo" to appliances like cell phones and vacuum cleaners because it sounds cool. Remarkably, Canon, realizing some people were on to the game, actually REDUCED the MP count for their new P&S pro-sumer S90 and G11 to 10 MP whilst still "turbo-charging" the MP count of their consumer pocket camies.

Here is another odd thing for modern cameras, the P&S are made out of metal, like the metal cased S90 but the more expensive dSLR T1s is apparently plastic. I dunno. I guess I am just old fashioned and place emphasis on the wrong things. I guess.

N

 

[Scotttyd]

You're raising a difference without a distinction!

Sure, there are lots of different FEATURES on a dSLR compared to a P&S, but ultimately they all ladder up to "taking better pictures." You can't seperate "advantages" from "taking better pictures."

I mean, how do you get the better pictures - what aspect of them give you that, which I can see has been answered by the other posts.

 

[Nemrod]

Here is another consideration. Even though the dSLR is better at image quality, so then, why doesn't everybody shoot a dSLR?

High end dSLR:
Cost as much as a Subaru and is nearly as big
Requires a fleet of porters


Low End dSLR:
Canon T1s 800 dollars
S&S RDX500 housing 1400 dollars
Dome Port about 400 dollars
Tokina or similar lens 600 dollars (dry)
Two strobes (D2000) 1200 dollars
Total 4,300 dollars plus +
Requires a rolling suitcase


High End P&S:
Canon S90 400 dollars
FIX housing 800 dollars
FIX port NA
Lens 250 to 600 (wet)
Two strobes (S2000) 900 dollars
Total up to 2,700 dollars plus +
Requires a small backpack

Low end P&S:
Canon A570 w/DC-12 housing 240 dollars
Ports NA
Lenses 250-600 (wet)
Inon S2000 450 dollars
Total about 1,250 plus +
Requires even smaller backpack or wet case

N

 

[mjh]

Maybe someone mentioned it but with DSLRs there is no shutter lag, less photos of fish butt.

 

[Scotttyd]

Here is another consideration. Even though the dSLR is better at image quality, so then, why doesn't everybody shoot a dSLR?

High end dSLR:
Cost as much as a Subaru and is nearly as big
Requires a fleet of porters


Low End dSLR:
Canon T1s 800 dollars
S&S RDX500 housing 1400 dollars
Dome Port about 400 dollars
Tokina or similar lens 600 dollars (dry)
Two strobes (D2000) 1200 dollars
Total 4,300 dollars plus +
Requires a rolling suitcase


High End P&S:
Canon S90 400 dollars
FIX housing 800 dollars
FIX port NA
Lens 250 to 600 (wet)
Two strobes (S2000) 900 dollars
Total up to 2,700 dollars plus +
Requires a small backpack

Low end P&S:
Canon A570 w/DC-12 housing 240 dollars
Ports NA
Lenses 250-600 (wet)
Inon S2000 450 dollars
Total about 1,250 plus +
Requires even smaller backpack or wet case

N

I agree completely, hence why I do not plan on going DSLR route, I was just simply interested in what the technical differences are. I know very few people who shoot DSLR. My mom shoots a DSLR for topside - pix look great, plus a good zoom lense, which is what I miss with my P&S for topside photo. I love my pix I get from my camera and am more than happy with them. Although I wish the shutter lag would go away.

 

[davelew]

1. dSLRs have lower shutter lag than P&S cameras
2. dSLRs have choices of better lenses, and specialized lenses as opposed to the one-size-fits-all zoom of a P&S
3. dSLRs have better low light performance because more light can hit a larger photosite
4. When you upgrade a dSLR, you can re-use much of your setup (lenses, ports, strobes) while when you upgrade a P&S, you can only re-use the strobes. For the T1i setup above, that would be an extra $2200 for an upgrade, while for an S90 upgrade you're still looking at $1200 to upgrade. The cost difference is only $1000 when you realize what can be re-used and what will last for decades.


On the other hand, P&S cameras are smaller, cheaper, and typically can achieve a better depth of field because of the way optics and f-stops work with the smaller sensors.