[livyodream]

Originally Posted by abhijitaparadh

Sorry if I offended someone.
By no means I can be called a professional.

I just feel, before buying a DSLR, the user should know what he/she is getting into.

I truly feel, if you are going to use DSLR in auto mode all the time, with a big zoom lens, then its "almost" the same as any advanced P&S, barring low light conditions.

Thats just my opinion.

We humans have a bug called Exploring. No matter what we get hands on, we tend to experiment with it. Same applies to a guy wit a DSLR in his hands. initially for a month he will be happy with the "auto" mode. After that he will start exploring, researching or someone guiding him how to use the manual mode (Personal experience).
Your sentense containing "almost" is actually "nothing" when actually comapred how it is supposed to be compared (no offence menat). The joy of using a DSLR is something which cannot be expressed, can only be felt .
Peace

[kaushik_s]

You know what, if there is a word called "interest"ed in photography in your mind. e.g say after seeing the beautiful photos taken by other people you wish you also could take a picture like that, then probably you've an "interest" in photography. In that case go for a DSLR as you know you'll try to experiment a lot with that camera(trust me you'll feel like experimenting with that thing) and learn in the process. You may buy that P&S initially but soon you'd long for something better and anyway end up buying that SLR. So you can buy it on first time itself.
But if you think that carrying a big camera, hanging on neck looks cool and actually on back of your mind give a damn about photographs(i.e. you see a nice photograph you just think, "what's the big deal and better get some coffee") then you better not buy that DSLR. As after few days of honeymoon period with the camera you'll be wary of carrying the camera itself, forget about clicking. And there will go lot of money down the drain.
There definitely will other types of people too but I'm generalizing two extreme traits. Sorry if I offend someone by my extreme points.

[livyodream]

Originally Posted by somspaple

hi liveyodream, 'm planning get the camera from US and prices are cheaper there: with the thanksgiving and christmas around 'm sure there would be some good offers. can you please share some more details about 70-300 lens and its equivalent in optical zoom terms (like 6X etc). my max budget would be at around 20K for now.

@neel and liveyodream,

'm more interested in outdoor photography. i try to capture good sceneries while on trek or tour. i have found that a good zoom really helps in capturing some of the correct and farther details quite clearly. 'm not really sure of difference in quality of pics between manual mode of profuser (say sx10 is) and a SLR. what other major differences one might find like
-performance (speed of capturing the shot with details)
-picture quality
enlighten

The only not-so-good feature about sigma lens is it is a bit slow and noisy COMPARED to Canon lens. Canon has USM (ultra sonic motor) which makes it quick and noiseless, which also makes it costlier.
Ive been using 1000D and sigma 70-300 DG macro APO lens from 4-5 months and im astonished with the results. I was in the same impression befor buying this. I researched a lot and one of a pro photographer also recommended it. I would really recommend it for its value for money.
And the not-so-good feature is seriously nothing when you compre it with photo quality and price of canon lens of the same specification. I must say i like the sound when it auto focuses which camera reviewers do not.

It being a macro lens too is an advnatage when it comes to macrophotography.

[s0uljah]

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

As after few days of honeymoon period with the camera you'll be wary of carrying the camera itself, forget about clicking. And there will go lot of money down the drain.

There definitely will other types of people too but I'm generalizing two extreme traits. Sorry if I offend someone by my extreme points.

This trend is actually good for the serious photographers. Lots of sparingly used lenses and bodies come up for sale

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by s0uljah

This trend is actually good for the serious photographers. Lots of sparingly used lenses and bodies come up for sale

Yeah man, I had that thought in back of my mind while writing it. Actually now I think that I shouldn't have posted it Guys (if there is anyone like that here), ignore my post and go for it, make the kill.

[Samurai]

Not much use for me, nobody buys and sells Olympus equipment here.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Not much use for me, nobody buys and sells Olympus equipment here.

Samurai, you still have time. Transform over to the dark side or embrace Canon
May the power be with you.

[maven]

in Canon camera models -- when shooting in broad daylight do you normally find having to switch EV to near abouts -1 or under most of the time...not doing that generally ends with an overexposed image?

I dont remember having ever gone + on the EV in my canon yet. Wondering if it is me or thats the usual trend in Canon's?

[SPARKled]

I thought this was mainly a problem with lower spec Nikons and not Canons. I always shoot my D50 with a -0.3 to -0.7EV. Canons I thought had exposure pretty much spot on.

[kaushik_s]

Yes Maven, most of the time it'll be half stop adjustment that is needed. That's what I've seen with my film cameras also. Life is bit easier with digital as I can do that during RAW conversion. This adjustment changes from camera to camera, i.e, in 40D you may need 1/3 stop but in 350D it may be 1/2 stop or 1 stop.

[SPARKled]

Originally Posted by kaushik_s

Yes Maven, most of the time it'll be half stop adjustment that is needed. That's what I've seen with my film cameras also. Life is bit easier with digital as I can do that during RAW conversion. This adjustment changes from camera to camera, i.e, in 40D you may need 1/3 stop but in 350D it may be 1/2 stop or 1 stop.

Usually film has a much higher dynamic range than digital so atleast its much better than digital in this regard. For example I have never had washed out skies or over exposed whites with film. I have to be much more careful about these in digital.

[kaushik_s]

Originally Posted by SPARKled

Usually film has a much higher dynamic range than digital so atleast its much better than digital in this regard. For example I have never had washed out skies or over exposed whites with film. I have to be much more careful about these in digital.

You didn't get my point. I'm not talking about dynamic range here. What I'm saying is that it's easy to recover from a slight error in exposure if using Digital. As for films (specially for transparencies) once you take a photo in a particular exposure than that's pretty much about it. You can't salvage it if the exposure goes wrong. Negatives are a different thing though.

[SPARKled]

Oh OK!! I was thinking of EV adjustments to ensure that skies are not washed out due to dynamic range limitations of DSLR sensors.

[maven]

Thanks kaushik_s and SPARKled for your inputs. this helps lay my doubts to rest.

[neel385]

Originally Posted by somspaple

@neel and liveyodream,

'm more interested in outdoor photography. i try to capture good sceneries while on trek or tour. i have found that a good zoom really helps in capturing some of the correct and farther details quite clearly. 'm not really sure of difference in quality of pics between manual mode of profuser (say sx10 is) and a SLR. what other major differences one might find like
-performance (speed of capturing the shot with details)
-picture quality
enlighten

Check out Ansel Adams photographs. He relishes the outdoors and is the kind of photographer who believes in just one shot! Almost all the pics that I have seen are taken in wide angle, and, you can judge the results for yourself.
The Ansel Adams Gallery

In outdoor photography, to the best of my limited knowledge (perhaps Rudrada will correct/improve upon it), the best photographs are those which recreate the normal human field of vision. The 50 mm comes closest.

A SLR will give you better pics as compared to a compact because of the following reasons:

1. Pixel Density : Since a compact will have a smaller sensor as compared to a SLR, for the same resolution, the pixel density of a compact will be more. As a result of which, there will be a loss in the ability to capture detail.

2. Quality of Optics : The lens of a SLR will be better than that of a compact and will also generally be faster. Both these will affect your photographs.