I consider myself somewhat of an amateur photographer and I’m in the market for a new camera. I’ve been with a point-and-shoot compact film camera for almost a year and I’m finding it a bit of a burden.
My problem is, I seek the convenience of digital (I’ve spent far too much money on film developing and I hardly ever look at the prints, just the CDs) but I also seek the advantages in control of an SLR camera.
You see, I can find either for around $200 or less, but I don’t see hybrid digital SLR cameras for under $800-1000. Why is this? Are there no affordable hybrids? They’re also far more rare, while digital compact cameras are abundant as ever.
I don’t particularly want to settle for one or the other, but it appears I must. Are the advantages of SLRs not as good as I would think?
Thanks in advance for your help. My apologies if this is the wrong forum.
DigiSLR’s are getting cheaper by the month, so that’s good for you. But they are still out of your price range, unless you want to buy second hand (I’d recommend a Canon D30, absolutely awesome for the money).
SLRs have more parts, features, and are higher specced (as they are aimed at serious am’s and pros), so they cost more now, and I suspect they will always cost more. In a few years, I guess they will merge a little.
You don’t say specifically why you want an SLR (as opposed to a high-end viewfinder). All decent newer cameras have manual control of aperture, shutter and ISO, and some even allow interchangeable lenses (tho I’d not recommend investing too much money in cheapie glass that is model specific (Sony comes to mind)).
Hope this helps. If you have specific q’s, hit me, I’d be glad to help. Also, check out www.dpreview.com, an awesome reviews site for digital hardware. They have some very busy discussion boards there, but there’s a lotta anger and and rumours and morals and fights and so on, so I’d recommend steering clear of them.
My olympus camedia C-720 was just under $500…and while it looks like point and shoot, it has manual SLR capabilities. The only problem with the digital camera’s I’ve found so far is focus…the lag and the low light situation.
If you want to see the quality…I hope I’m not out of line here…go to my photography website.
What exactly do you mean by an SLR here? Normally “Digital SLR camera” refers to cameras with interchangeable lenses, like the Nikon D100. They use existing 35mm lenses which are designed for 35x24 mm film. So a digital version needs a detector of this size, or close to it. Such detectors are extremely expensive.
But “SLR” stands for Single Lens Reflex, so technically, any camera that uses a single lens and a retracting mirror to direct the light onto the film/detector and viewfinder is a SLR camera. I believe the Olympus E10 and E20 are SLR cameras by that definition, though they have non-removable lenses.
Then there are cameras that use a single lens and uses an LCD viewfinder. They have most of the advantages of SLR cameras - what you see on the viewfinder is exactly what you get in terms of perspective, filter effects, etc. Most digital cameras sold today have LCD displays that function as viewfinders. Some have tiny LCD displays that look like conventional viewfinders (i.e. you hold the camera to your face and look into it), like the Sony DSC-F717.
I’m not trying to be mean but if you don’t know why SLRs are good, then you shouldn’t waste your money on one before you do a photography course and find out what they are used for and how to use them.
As a side note, SLRs are rare because they are unpopular with the masses who just want to snap photos of memorable moments without wanting to worry about the details of how the camera works. Point. Click. Instant memory. On the other hand, hobbyists and professionals generally want more control over their photos in order to create the right effect or imbue emotion or feeling into the photos, at this stage photography goes beyond the level of happy-snaps into an artform, hence they need the power and flexibility of SLR cameras.