High-end vs low-end cameras

In My Humble Opinion
1

AKA–overkill for basic circumstances.
AKA #2–when is it enough?

In this thread:

Drum God is in a position of overkill–he uses a DSLR for simple, basic family photos. And yet he worries that he needs even more: filters and so forth. And to cap it off, the very first response talks about getting a “quality lens”–as if the standard DSLR lenses were somehow low quality.

Digital cameras have advanced so far that pretty much anything other than a very cheap, very bare-bones camera will do just fine in most circumstances when you’re taking casual family photos. Now there are a few specific circumstances where you need something more than low-end in order to get good-quality pictures. But the vast majority of the time, the ONLY determining factor is not the camera, but the user’s skill and knowledge.

I was talking to a professional photographer recently. He said that he has virtually never used a camera that cost more than $800.

I am not a professional photographer, and I likely never will be. But photography is a paying hobby for me–I do family photo sessions, and people pay me for that. Some people would consider my camera to be an entry-level model. I use a Canon Powershot SX160IS.

For those who aren’t familiar with that, here’s the manufacturer’s page.

Now, admittedly, there are some things that it can’t do. I know its limitations. But I also know how to use it. And I take good pictures. I’ve had minor success in photo contests by using that camera, even when I wasn’t as good of a photographer as I am now.

So for those of you who think that you need an expensive camera–unless you’re a professional, or unless you have a special niche, you almost certainly don’t need one. Get a basic camera, and learn how to use it. THEN you can buy a more expensive one.

2

I own a Nikon D5100 with a small collection of decent lenses and a Galaxy S6 (a cell phone). On my most recent vacation, I used each camera in about equal measure.

And you know what? For about 80% of the shots I took, you can’t tell the difference. The cell phone takes fantastic shots that look just as good as the DSLR.

To be sure, there are certain kinds of shots that I can only do with the DSLR. It has better night sensitivity (though the gap is narrower than one might think). Macro shots with a narrow depth of field need the DSLR. A big zoom needs it. But the majority of my shots are wide angle and in good light.

There are also shots I got on the cell phone that I couldn’t have gotten on the DSLR simply because I can have it out of my pocket and on in seconds, whereas the DSLR is likely to be packed away and require a minute or two to prep. The shot is gone by then.

The cell phone does better video, too. It’ll do 1080p60 and 4k@30, and both look really good. The Nikon does 1080p30.

I think I’ll probably leave the DSLR home for the next trip. It’s not worth the weight.

3

This reminds me of a story I once heard of a photographer who was invited to dinner at his mother-in-law’s house.
The mother said “those are good pictures, you must have really a special camera”

And the photographer replied, " and you just cooked a good meal…you must have a really special pots."

:slight_smile:

4

I’m mainly a hobbyist, although I’ve done a lot of company newsletter work and shoot images for the procedures I write/edit, and do occasional real-estate work on the side. For these applications, IMO my kit is perfectly suited and I don’t feel I’d gain much with a high-end DSLR.

My main gear at the moment is an Olympus mirrorless body and two lenses in the Micro Four Thirds format, a top-of the line Panasonic ultrazoom, and Sony ultrazoom selected for its pocketable size. All were in the $400-$600 range (plus lenses for the Olympus

For me, the minimum requirement is that the camera have the capability of fully manual settings and a viewfinder (it’s almost impossible for me to properly compose a photo using the back display in bright light). Otherwise, a lot depends on what you want to do with the photos. Speaking strictly for digital, if you want to make good-quality prints larger than 8 x 10, or if you routinely shoot under low-light conditions, in most cases you will have more success with a higher-end camera of whatever type, due to it having a larger (physically larger) sensor. The Sony I mentioned is small in part because it has a small sensor, and although this allows me to shoot under conditions where I would not want to drag out the bigger iron, basic image quality in anything but bright daylight conditions is…disappointing.

If your photos are likely only to ever end up being shown on a medium-sized computer display or 4 x 6 prints, and are not taken under highly unusual lighting or distance conditions, then a decent point-and-shoot with manual capability will probably be all you ever need.

I hate the ergonomics of phone cameras and have little success producing photos I’d ever want to keep. YMMV.

5

I really love this thread, guys. I’m in the same boat.

I love photography as a hobby, no pay. I take a lot, post a lot, and I get many compliments. I’d say it is my art. I never print anything, it’s all a digital world to me.

Currently using a Cannon SX50, and it seems fine. To me, composition is key. I learned photography on film, and every time I clicked the shutter, it would cost me 25 to 50 cents. Having little money, I learned how to frame up a shot. Now with digital, I’ll take between 2 and 10 of any one subject, and just keep the best one.

6

Why are you intentionally misrepresenting what I said? Here is my quote from that thread that you are referring to:

mmm

7

To this end, I rigged up a “Camera holster” in my truck. When traveling on the road, I can grab the camera and shoot in just a few seconds. This has come in handy quite a few times.

8

This is a completely baffling OP. First of all, how is it any skin off your nose if someone else decides they need an SLR?

Second, a point and shoot Canon is in no way an SLR equivalent, even for casual family photography.

First of all, the focus and shot rate are greatly inferior. Specifically, for the Canon

One shot every second or two is not very good when you’re trying to get a shot of your hyperactive nieces or nephews, or even trying to get the right facial expression in a portrait. A half second plus shutter delay can be the difference between a great shot and nothing.

Then there’s the question of the onboard flash. Limiting yourself to a small direct flash will completely prevent you from anything resembling a professional portrait and will generally result in “red-eye”.

DSLRs aren’t even notably more expensive than high-end point and shoots. The entry level Canons are pretty cheap.

The point and shoot and camera phones have gotten vastly better over the years. But there’s a reason why DSLRs (and their mirrorless cousins) are popular.

9

Some of us enjoy owning and operating high quality equipment. Others enjoy the challenge of pushing “low-end” equipment to the limit. Who am I (or you) to say one is correct and the other is wrong?

10

Those words don’t mean what you seem to think that they mean. You very clearly, explicitly said “quality lens.” Now why would he need to " look into" a quality lens if he already had one? If you thought that he already had a quality lens, your advice would make no sense, because you would be advising him to duplicate what he already has. This obviously means that YOU think that a DSLR standard lens is NOT a quality lens.

If that is not what you meant to say, then you need to figure out how to say what you meant. Until then, I stand by my interpretation of your remarks.

11

That sort of thing is where skill can make a big difference. If you get a high-end camera, and you just snap away because the camera is capable of it – you’re not doing the work; the camera is. You are using the camera as a crutch to compensate for your lack of skill.

A good photographer (perhaps even a semi-good one) learns how to anticipate the picture, and get ready for it, rather than reacting to it and mechanically pushing a button to record it.

12

Yes, that’s the whole point of technology.

A good photographer also learns to take advantage of available technology.

Of course there have always been photographers who insist skills trump technology, and insist the new technology only make photographers lazy and worse. Whether it’s color film, motor drives, auto-exposure, auto-focus, zoom lens, digital, etc.

13

I have to differ there; they’re not equivalent cameras, but they both have advantages and disadvantages relative to each other.

The DSLR clearly is better technically- better lenses, better meter, better internal software. But it’s a big, heavy, clunky sucker that is kind of a pain to lug around.

The P&S is dramatically smaller, lighter and more portable. And for probably 75% or more of your photos, it’s more than adequate, and you’ll never really miss the DSLR. For 15% you’ll actually get them because you’ll have the P&S on you, as opposed to leaving the DSLR somewhere safe, or not wanting to lug it around. The final 10% are where the DSLR shines vs the P&S, but that leaves you with 90% where the P&S is as good or better, and 10% where you want the DSLR.

Maybe as someone who’s a moderately serious amateur or better, it might make a difference. But as someone wanting to take pictures of their kids and grand-kids, the P&S is fine- even advantageous at times.

And I know… I have a Canon T2i and 3 lenses (Canon 28-105 USM, Canon 50mm prime, Sigma 30mm f1.4 HSM) as well as a ca. 2012 Canon PowerShot S100. Both get used, and it’s really dependent on when/where/what as to which one gets taken.

Cell phone cameras do suck, for the most part, but I tend to think of them as the modern-day equivalent of the older disposable film cameras- great to have when you didn’t expect to need a camera, but not a tool that you’d choose to use knowing you intended to take pictures.

14

If he has kit lenses (as his OP implies) he does not have a quality lens.

I hope that clears up your confusion.
mmm

15

I just re-read your OP, Flyer.

Am I correct in saying that folks pay you for portrait work using a Canon Powershot?
mmm

16

Yup.

Mind you, I don’t charge a whole lot–because (A) I’m not a professional, and (B) even if I were, I think that most professionals wildly overcharge for their work.

I’ve had more than one person contact me afterward, to tell me how much they liked the pictures.

17

They’re much better than that these days. The nicer ones are as good as all but the best compact cameras; certainly much better than a P&S from a few years ago.

The Galaxy S7 has an f/1.7 lens, uses phase detection autofocus, and has photosite sizes comparable to mid-range P&S cameras (1.4 µm).

18

Emphasis added. If you amend that to “there are a number of specific circumstances…” I’d probably I agree with you. But “a few” is kinda underselling ILC’s I think. There is a reason they exist and it is not for teensy-tiny niches, but rather for certain broad specializations.

Your basic point that most don’t need them for taking casual snapshots of family and friends in well-lit areas is absolutely on point. But DSLR’s and the like are still perfectly good for taking casual snapshots and if you have or develop interests beyond this they give you a more expandable tool to do so.

I went from a camera similar to yours to a bridge camera to an ILC step by step due to the technical limitations of each preceding model. And I’m on the verge of talking myself into spending thousands on a fancy long lens, because damn it I need it ( really, I want it - technically I don’t even need a camera, it’s not how I earn a living :smiley: ). But then I like shooting wildlife, particularly birds, sometimes under less than ideal conditions.

ETA:

I just got one of those one - makes for a great little point and shoot, really.

19

I think that you are discovering the useful tool called the toxic quote, where by a service provider will charge up to 10 times the normal quote, simply because he or she believes that the recipient of service is flakey, or something else.

Case in point, a friend of mine will charge charitys five times the amount that a person will get quoted off the street, cause they are a pain to deal with.

Declan

20

You also have to factor in the fact that someone gets a new camera, goes on a spree and then is disapointed with the results. Our intrepid new tog, then goes on the web to say why oh why am I getting this result. Most often, at least on POTN, and photocamel, about 15 people will offer advice on what may give him a better result. Most often, glass is offered up as much as fstops for how the newly minted tog can better himself.

Now you have someone who is getting into a high end hobby, and the cost of the glass will exceed the body by three times. At this point, he should now be aware that at minimum, retail glass will exceed a thousand dollars and its time for him to decide if he wants to go DSLR or P/S, which to me, means cellphones and coolpix type image capture devices.

But if he dreaming about running around with the big white whale, no one is going to stop him (GUILTY lol).

There is a lot of things it can’t do, but what it does do, the camera does it very well. The bolded part is the main thing I wanted to touch on, and that requires taking a lot of pictures, up to about ten thousand, which for a digital camera, is not all that hard. In all conditions.

I have been using Canon DSLR’s for a number of years now, and someone handed me a P/S, that had an android operating system on it, and they had almost every single setting turned on. Then asked me take a pic. The shutter button was in a non standard location, and it took the live view a lot longer to stabalize the focus, and it was constantly jumping to different facial recognition locations. But I am sure that if I took the camera for an extended period of time, its secrets would be given up, but i thought it was overly complicated for what it was.

Different people do better with certain types of camera’s, the ergonomics of a canon and a nikon are not the same, similar but not the same. Now put a small camera, in a big guy’s hand and you have an uncomfortable stance, and that will induce focal problems. That same individual with a DSLR or bridge camera, might start getting better results out of the box

Don’t agree

Go to a camera shop and get a feel for the different types of equipment, and then make your choice. That same camera shop should have workshops available for new photographers to get to know their new gear, if not, a community college.

Declan