[Guite]

If this question have already been answered here, please point me in the right direction.

In the old film camera days, the biggest advantage an SLR camera has, AFAIK and AFAIC, is "what you see is what you get". That is, what you see at the view finder goes into the film. I am leaving aside optics and feature sets at this point.

In today's digital cameras what you see in the view finder or the LCD screen is what comes through the lens. So my question is: what inherent advantage does a digital SLR camera have over non-SLR digital cameras? Is it just lens interchangeability? Haven't the difference blurred? Will cameras like Canon SX1 IS or Nikon P90 be any less than equivalently spec-ed SLR?

[NetfreakBombay]

Biggest difference is sensor size.

With larger sensor, you can take snaps at lower ISO in low light conditions.

At similar ISO, noise would be less in SLR. Reason is, for each pixel, SLR would capture higher amount of light.

Apart from that, SLR camera have higher RAM/CPU. So that you can shoot quicker.

[v&v]

Originally Posted by Guite

If this question have already been answered here, please point me in the right direction.

In the old film camera days, the biggest advantage an SLR camera has, AFAIK and AFAIC, is "what you see is what you get". That is, what you see at the view finder goes into the film. I am leaving aside optics and feature sets at this point.

In today's digital cameras what you see in the view finder or the LCD screen is what comes through the lens. So my question is: what inherent advantage does a digital SLR camera have over non-SLR digital cameras? Is it just lens interchangeability? Haven't the difference blurred? Will cameras like Canon SX1 IS or Nikon P90 be any less than equivalently spec-ed SLR?

The biggest difference is the Sensor - All digital camera has CCD sensor except the high end like sx1 is , sony hx1 etc has the CMOS sensor. All slr CMOS is stardard.

All traditional digcams the view finder and the lens source are different hence what you see is not what you get in terms of content.

SLR has better control over metering, iso noise, RAW image, Continous shoot, Image stability, better quality of image due to larger sensors. Their processors are fast too.

The next advantage is the lens management - You can have macro lens, telephoto lens, wide angle lens each specialised for respective photoshoot requirements. In normal camera all these are managed by a single lense.

The best way is to go to a store , take pics of a same object form the normal camera and slr, compare the result , you will find the difference there itself in terms of noise, clarity and depth of photos.

[vivekiny2k]

So there is really no difference except the lense changeability.

sensor size small or big, CMOS/CCD is just a matter of construction, not a differentiating factor. there is no standard that says what goes in DSLRS and what goes in prosumers. controls on new prosumer cams are as good as DSLRS. in fact some cameras have electronic view finder in addition to the LCD.

[Guite]

Thank you all for the responses.

Originally Posted by v&v

All traditional digcams the view finder and the lens source are different hence what you see is not what you get in terms of content.

When most image composition is done through the LCD screen, 'what you see is what you get' in all digital cameras.

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

So there is really no difference except the lense changeability.

sensor size small or big, CMOS/CCD is just a matter of construction, not a differentiating factor. there is no standard that says what goes in DSLRS and what goes in prosumers. controls on new prosumer cams are as good as DSLRS. in fact some cameras have electronic view finder in addition to the LCD.

I tend to agree with vivek on this. The basic construction of an SLR camera which differentiated it from compact point-and-shoot cameras was (1) the flip up mirror + pentaprism to achieve 'what you see is what you get', and (2) lens interchangeability. Now we don't need the mirror + pretaprism to "see through the lens". There is no restriction on implementing sensor, optics, controls and feature set of an SLR into non-SLR digital camera.

Please share more insights.

[NetfreakBombay]

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

sensor size small or big, CMOS/CCD is just a matter of construction, not a differentiating factor. there is no standard that says what goes in DSLRS and what goes in prosumers.

I disagree here.

Canon EOS 1000D / Rebel XS Review: 2. Comparison: Digital Photography Review

These are entry-level DSLR camera. All of them have 22.2 x 14.8 mm sensor.

Top of the line "prosumer" from Canon is SX20 IS.

Sensor size is 6.16 x 4.62 mm.


Sensor size drives other things like size of lenses. SX20 IS has 20X zoom. To get similar zoom in SLR, weight of lense itself would be many kilos.

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

controls on new prosumer cams are as good as DSLRS. in fact some cameras have electronic view finder in addition to the LCD.

Yes there is hardly any difference in terms of controls/ features.

I am using Fuji S9000 that was released in 2006. It has everything that an SLR would have in terms of control/features. That includes external flash/raw/flash sync /full manual/focus through ring etc etc.

[NetfreakBombay]

Another post about a prosumer user's POV about SLR:

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/1513424-post1735.html

[anainar]

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

So there is really no difference except the lense changeability.

sensor size small or big, CMOS/CCD is just a matter of construction, not a differentiating factor. there is no standard that says what goes in DSLRS and what goes in prosumers. controls on new prosumer cams are as good as DSLRS. in fact some cameras have electronic view finder in addition to the LCD.

Am sorry, it is not just a matter of construction. These two are totally different technologies that convert light into digital format. CCDs are generally used for video while CMOS sensors are preferred for Digital photography because of resolution and many other factors.

Size of the CMOS sensor is a key factor in the image quality. Most of the P&S cameras uses much smaller sensors which are much prone to noise while larger sensors are not. You may not see mucg difference in post card print, but try printing 10x12 or above and you will notice the difference. Whether one blows up the prints to that level or not their own preference.

And DSLRs generally give the user a lot more flexibility to adopt to different shooting conditions. Not many non-DSLRs come with hot shoe to mount an external flash if required( Canona Poweshot G Series comes with hot shoes, and there are other brands as well, but these are kind of bridge/compromise between SLRs and P&S.

As an enthusiast, when I use my DSLR I always use the view finder and never use the LCD display. It gives a lot more stability to holding the camera and less probability of camera shake.

So, any day a DSLR can beat a nonDSLR in getting better enlargable picture, and color reproduction.

Nainar

[v&v]

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

So there is really no difference except the lense changeability.

sensor size small or big, CMOS/CCD is just a matter of construction, not a differentiating factor. there is no standard that says what goes in DSLRS and what goes in prosumers. controls on new prosumer cams are as good as DSLRS. in fact some cameras have electronic view finder in addition to the LCD.

buddy, CMOS AND CCD there is huge difference in image quality. Also the size of the sensor does matter too.
Just visit DPreview.com and compare two cameras, you will know the difference.

[Guite]

Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay

All of them have 22.2 x 14.8 mm sensor.

I have been hoping to re-use or sell my old Canon EF lens but the size you have mentioned does not seem to fit a 35mm film size.

Sensor size drives other things like size of lenses. SX20 IS has 20X zoom. To get similar zoom in SLR, weight of lense itself would be many kilos.

My original query was at a more theoretical level. Extrapolating further from the expert inputs here so far, I suppose, theoretically a big CMOS (and faster processor, etc) can be put into a prosumer digital camera and match performance of DSLR. Right? At the practical level, manufacturers have not done so for whatever reasons- maybe cost?. From the discussion so far, it appears a 20x zoom prosumer digital camera with big CMOS sensor is theoretically possible but would be impractically huge.

[anainar]

Originally Posted by Guite

I have been hoping to re-use or sell my old Canon EF lens but the size you have mentioned does not seem to fit a 35mm film size.

I think you are going tangentially here. The EF Lens that you used with film cameras can be used in EOS DSLRs also. EF is a mounting terminology used by Canon. You can use all EF mount lenses on Canon DSLRs without any problem. I have SLR film camera( Elan 7E) as well as a digital SLR ( EOS 20D ) and a set of lenses which I used with both of them. Only thing I take care when I use it in DSLR is crop factor as the sensor is not true 35mm and the it adds 0.6X multiplication to the EF lens focal lenght.

To your query, theoritically as well as practically it is possible for the companies to make a P&S cameras using larger CMOS sensors but the practicality of portability of P&S cameras will be lost. See IXUS series from Canon, so portable and will serve the purpose if the user wants to carry it in a ladies hand bag and shot a few pictures which serve the purpose of capturing the moments. Can it capture a great portrait? NOOOOOO! Can it give DOF effects? NOOOO!! Can it go ETTL Flash photography? NOOOOO! But if I dont do all those, it serves the purpose for me.

Nainar

[rajesh1868]

Originally Posted by Gurudatta Nayak

Hi Zenster,

I am finally booking my Panasonic FZ35. I got a good deal from USA for 303.63$ i.e 14495/- with Panasonic USA Warranty. Wht is the price for that Model in Bangalore?

You got this online? can you share the store details?

[vivekiny2k]

Originally Posted by v&v

buddy, CMOS AND CCD there is huge difference in image quality. Also the size of the sensor does matter too.
Just visit DPreview.com and compare two cameras, you will know the difference.

you are still assuming the difference exists. What I was saying is nothing stops prosumers to start using CMOS, it's just a design/space/cost consideration.

unlike old film cameras where the difference between a SLR and a normal cam was crystal clear.

[NetfreakBombay]

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

difference between a SLR and a normal cam was crystal clear.

It is still quite clear. DSLR uses pentamirror (pents-prism on higher end models).

OTOH, compact/prosumer camera use main sensor for live preview.

DSLR have a secondary sensor for live preview so that actual sensor does not heats up (and generates noise) while framing and focussing.

[anainar]

Originally Posted by NetfreakBombay

It is still quite clear. DSLR uses pentamirror (pents-prism on higher end models).

OTOH, compact/prosumer camera use main sensor for live preview.

DSLR have a secondary sensor for live preview so that actual sensor does not heats up (and generates noise) while framing and focussing.

Many DSLRs dont provide live preview in the LCD Sensor. Imagine balancing a 800g camera plus one kg lens far away from the body and framing using the LCD display. No one( atleast I have not seen ) an enthusiast using the LCD display as a replacement to Viewfinder.

So the light gets routed to the viewfinder through the prism and the sensor does not even come into play. Some newer cameras provide preview in LCD display that but the practicality is questionable.

Nainar