diffs b/c point & shoot vs dslr

[Keebler]

hi folks,

i'm looking at maybe upgrading my canon S3 IS to a nikon D40. not knowing enough, i did some research and found this link with some great answers for any of you folks in the same boat as me:

http://www.videojug.com/interview/d...nd-shoot-camera-give-me-higher-quality-photos

 

[Westside guy]

Well... I didn't make it through the whole video - it seemed like a waste of time. It's mostly just a guy standing there, stating the same stuff you can easily find elsewhere on the web. No real point in having a video presentation versus just text.

I'm not saying the information isn't correct - just that the presentation really doesn't justify using video as the medium.

 

[Keebler]

Well... I didn't make it through the whole video - it seemed like a waste of time. It's mostly just a guy standing there, stating the same stuff you can easily find elsewhere on the web. No real point in having a video presentation versus just text.

I'm not saying the information isn't correct - just that the presentation really doesn't justify using video as the medium.

perhaps, but maybe someone will find it useful. i know i did.

 

[arogge]

The S3 is an excellent compact camera. It has some problems focusing in low-light, but there is no dSLR configuration that can be compared to its available focal lengths and f/2.8-3.5 aperture.

 

[miloblithe]

The S3 is an excellent compact camera. It has some problems focusing in low-light, but there is no dSLR configuration that can be compared to its available focal lengths and f/2.8-3.5 aperture.

Depends on what aspect of f/2.8-3.5 you're concerned about. Every 35mm lens on the market could produce shallower depth of field than 2.8-3.5 on 1/2.5" CCD.

a point-and-shoot digital camera with a 1/1.8″ sensor (7.18 mm × 5.32 mm) at a normal focal length and f/2.8 has the same DOF as a 35 mm camera with a normal lens at f/13.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field#DOF_vs._format_size

As for the 36-432 (35mm equivalent) zoom range, that's a similar although not as useful as the 14x range covered by Tamron's 18-250 f/3.5-6.3 (27-375 equivalent):

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/18250_diII.asp

 

[arogge]

Depends on what aspect of f/2.8-3.5 you're concerned about.

The problem with many compact cameras on the market is that they cannot freeze action nor focus accurately, because they have an aperture of f/4.5 or slower on the long end of the zoom. There is no 40-400 mm f/2.8-3.5 zoom lens on the market, especially in the size of the S3.

 

[miloblithe]

The problem with many compact cameras on the market is that they cannot freeze action nor focus accurately, because they have an aperture of f/4.5 or slower on the long end of the zoom. There is no 40-400 mm f/2.8-3.5 zoom lens on the market, especially in the size of the S3.

DSLRs have much better high ISO performance than compact cameras (not to mention higher ISO ranges).

As for size, yes, that's the whole point, compact cameras are smaller.

Also, the big advantage of DSLRs is interchangeable lenses, which would easily allow one to cover this range and more with f/2.8 lenses (or lower)