Triptoph wrote:.

Does anyone know of any site where someone has taken photos with aDSLR camera, and the same photo taken with a point-and-shoot for acomparison of quality?.

I have seen a few, but considering the vast range that "P&S" covers, the few comparisons don't give a complete or good perspective. For instaqnce, I have seen the R1 compared with the A100. That doesn't help you..

I've been using a Canon PowerShot S2 IS and I love it, it's made melove photography and I want to go further. The Canon PowerShot S5IS looks great, but how would something like that compare inquality to a DSLR like the Canon EOS 30D with a decent lens? Thereare lots of sites where people mention the much better photoquality due to the larger sensor size when comparing a DSLR with asimilar-quality lens to a point-and-shoot, but I've never seen adirect comparison, and would love to see it for myself. Don't getme wrong, I believe they are better! I just like seeing thingsdirectly .

Not trusting other people is good, but it invariably leads to more work. You should simply download the controlled test pix here on dpr and assemble your own comparison..

I am considering the 30D for the good reviews it hasreceived and because I like the selection I've seen of EOS lenses..

Good choice. I'd suggest you go ahead and do it..

I would love to see some kind of comparison between the 30D (orsimilar quality DSLR) and a camera like the PowerShot S5 IS, but asthe two cameras have different markets and price points this kindof comparison is rarely made it seems..

Don't forget that you can't compare cameras well using a computer screen. You need to make big prints..

Another point: Your S2 (or future S5) is intended for a customer who wants impressive pix out-of-the-camera...ie, no or little post-processing. The 30D targets a more educated customer, thus it does NOT normally increase the contrast, saturation, and sharpness the way a compact camera does. If you ry to compare the pix OOC, w/o PP, the cheap camera often wins. If you process the pix from the dSLR, people say that's not a fair comparison. If you adjust the settings in the dSLR to mimic the way the pocket cam works, you again get the complaint that doing this is unfair..

Bottom Line: Don't bother..

Charlie DavisNikon 5700 & Sony R1CATS #25PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htmHomePage: http://www.1derful.info'I brake for pixels...'..

One of few direct comparisons... 20d v FZ30.

Http://www.firingsquad.com/...c_lumix_dmc-fz30_canon_eos-20d_camera_shootout/Telecorder (Dave)FZee5/FZee30+RD-S+OlyTC1.7XDee50+Nikon 35mm F2.0D-AF+Nikkor18-70DX+Tam70-300L+BIGMA 50-500 EX HSMMy Image Galleries.

Http://www.nikonians-images.com/...hp?cat=500&ppuser=121399&password=.

Http://Telecorder.smugmug.com/.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Take a look at my 'Back to the Bridge Camera' gallery link below for a few comparisons with a DSLR. More usefully visit PBase.com and Flikr.com and search for images by camera. That way you'll get to see the kind of material you like to shoot. There's also the useful comparative feature at dcresource..

It is a really bad idea to call cameras like the Canon S series 'point & shoots', they are anything but and are arguably more complicated bits of kit than the DSLRs..

Canon 30D would be an excellent choice, so would the Nikon D200. Both will give you great image quality as long as you mount decent lenses on them. Metering and focusing should be consistent too..

John.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr..

Chuxter wrote:.

I have seen a few, but considering the vast range that "P&S"covers,.

Right, i'm interested in comparing a mid-range DSLR like the 30D with a high-end point-and-shoot like the S5 IS..

Not trusting other people is good, but it invariably leads to morework. You should simply download the controlled test pix here ondpr and assemble your own comparison..

True, I have taken a look at sample images on this site, but I thought i'd check to see if someone had seen a more direct comparison - taking the same photo (or as close as possible) with two different cameras..

I am considering the 30D for the good reviews it hasreceived and because I like the selection I've seen of EOS lenses..

Good choice. I'd suggest you go ahead and do it..

I'm certainly leaning that way, though I'm not sure what lens(es) is should get to start with, probably something with a basic zoom with IS for most situations, and a macro lens of some sort (as I love close up shooting), but that's getting ahead of myself..

Don't forget that you can't compare cameras well using a computerscreen. You need to make big prints..

Well, I can definitely see the difference using a monitor comparing my S2 IS with modern cameras, but it's not much of a fair comparison!  Couldn't you use a monitor to compare two photos by viewing them at 100%? Sure not as ideal, but it should work right?.

Another point: Your S2 (or future S5) is intended for a customerwho wants impressive pix out-of-the-camera...ie, no or littlepost-processing..

That's a very interesting point. I must say I hadn't realized that. Something to consider when comparing for sure, thanks...

Go to http://www.imaging-resource.com/ and choose 'Compare Images' from the left menu. You can select two cameras and directly compare the image quality.Androohttp://Androo.smugmug.com..

Telecorder wrote:.

One of few direct comparisons... 20d v FZ30.

Http://www.firingsquad.com/...c_lumix_dmc-fz30_canon_eos-20d_camera_shootout/.

I recall this being a pretty useless "review". It's pretty obvious the reviewer didn't know his way around cameras..

The studio shots aren't terribly useful either with well lit shots you'll have comparable performance..

DSLRs show their worth in low light situations (dusk, indoors, etc), fast handling, and the ability to pick a huge array of lenses, flashes, etc that are best for a particular purpose (assuming you have the budget...)..

The S5 IS looks interesting because it has an E-TTL hot shoe (same as EOS DSLRs). Put a flash like a 430EX on it and bounce it off the ceiling and you'll solve many indoor shot problems..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

Triptoph wrote:.

Good choice. I'd suggest you go ahead and do it..

I'm certainly leaning that way, though I'm not sure what lens(es)is should get to start with, probably something with a basic zoomwith IS for most situations, and a macro lens of some sort (as ilove close up shooting), but that's getting ahead of myself..

Actually, you should select the lenses first, so you are NOT getting ahead of yourself..

Don't forget that you can't compare cameras well using a computerscreen. You need to make big prints..

Well, I can definitely see the difference using a monitor comparingmy S2 IS with modern cameras, but it's not much of a faircomparison!  Couldn't you use a monitor to compare two photos byviewing them at 100%? Sure not as ideal, but it should work right?.

You could use a monitor. Lots of people do. But it's not a good way..

Expanding on the point, if you only want 4" x 6" pix or only to produce pix for display on a web site, you don't need a camera with a big sensor, which is what a dSLR is. If you need to make big prints (even occasionally) you should print out test shots at the actual size..

Charlie DavisNikon 5700 & Sony R1CATS #25PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htmHomePage: http://www.1derful.info'I brake for pixels...'..

Some thoughts-.

-any comparison done between a p&s and a dslr from the web and done on a monitor is a poor comparison. the monitor web is limited to 72 ppi so no matter how much better a dslr is it may not/will not show on a monitor. you would have to get them printed at say 16x20 and take a look..

-about 3-4 months ago a pro photographer from a major web site went to hawaii and took his camera which was a 20d from canon and the S3 IS and tried to take identical shots of most of mthe scenes. his conclusion was that for 80% of,the shots there was no visable difference on the monitor; BUT BUT BUT for the other 20% there was simply no comparison; the dslr wiped out the S3. those shots were the ones in which the no/low noise ability of the dslr and the ability to change lenses to fit the job(instead of having to make due with the built in lens), plus the general much bigger size of the sensor simply gave the dslr too much of an advantage..

-you also have to consider that in the reviews done by this website or any other all pics are shot in the default settings, as the camera comes out of the box. a p&s is ready to shoot as it comes out of the box, just give it a memeory card and charged battery and you and it are all set. a dslr has to be setup first. it most definately is NOT at it's optimum settings. so in that context the dslr in reviews is not showing it's best pics. but people compare those to the p&s say there is little difference, not knowing that the dslr is maybe at half of it's max image quality..

By setup for a dslr I mean you have to adjust the settings; the satuaration/contrast/sharpness/colormode. this means you adjust 1 setting 1 notch,then shoot a pic outside, check on the monitor(i assume your monitor is calibrated so it gives true colors and brightness/contrast),readjust, reshoot, check monitor,reshoot, etc till the camera is giving best pic it can and you are satisfied..

Noone in a web site is doing this to a dslr for a review, but you the owner/user is expected to do this. the setup would give you very good to excellent jpegs and would be the starting point if you shoot raw and transfer the settings to the raw converter..

-for all the above, I suggest that you just assume that the dslr will outperform a p&s. the question really is do you want to incur the much higher costs of a dslr and it's lenses(you are not buying just one, and they can cost more than the camera), plus all the accessories that eventually you will be getting, in order to get the better pics. for the 20% definately and the 80% if you make any size(8x10) enlargements...

I have a 20D and a 100 - 400 mm lens and an S3 IS. There is a huge difference in IQ if the subject is far away or in low light, where it has not only luminance noise but color noise as well. In good light it's fine except the detail in something not close up like a tree or flower in the background is lacking. I say go for an SLR like the Canon Rebel XTi and the 70 - 300 mm lens which I tried in April when a friend got one and I couldn't tell much if any difference in it and the 100 - 400 with both set about 25p mm shooting birds in my back yard, and it only costs about $550..

I took some pix with the S3 when I first got it at the same time as the 20D to see comparisons. These are kildeer so it was not the exact same from shot to shot due to movement. They are on this page: http://ImageEvent.com/jhowle/kildeerhatchlings.

Numbers 5, 6 and 11 were taken with the S3 using the natural color setting, or whatever was the default when I got it only a couple of days before. The photos on the sunny day were all taken with the 20D.Judy HowleLatest nature photos:http://ImageEvent.com/jhowle..

That was supposed to read 250 mm!.

Judy Howle wrote:.

I say go for anSLR like the Canon Rebel XTi and the 70 - 300 mm lens which I triedin April when a friend got one and I couldn't tell much if anydifference in it and the 100 - 400 with both set about 25p mmshooting birds in my back yard, and it only costs about $550..

Judy HowleLatest 20D photos:http://ImageEvent.com/jhowleDigital Photo Class - Tips, techinques, Photoshop tutorialshttp://digitalphotographyclass.net..

For 'easy' situations, and small print sizes, the SLRs may have no advantage. For some situations, where weight / obviousness (or, perhaps, mirror slap noise if you're distracting performers) are concerns, they may be at a disadvantage....

...but for some situations, such as those involving low light where you aren't able or willing to light the whole scene with a GN 12m @ ISO 100 built-in flash, or where you really need fast response time, or where you need some particular capability best done with a specialist piece of equipment (like a rectilinear ultra-wide, or a fish-eye) there's no comparison..

If you're trying to shoot evening fast-moving sports, for instance, image quality only begins to matter if you can actually get a shot which means that you need to be able to compose, focus and meter pretty darn fast. If you're using a somewhat laggy EVF, that'll hurt your response time; if your camera is using a relatively slow contrast-detection AF method, that'll also hurt. If you have to wait while the motorized zoom lens slowly moves in or out, well, -I'd- be gnashing my teeth in frustration...

Thank you all for your comments, it certainly gave me a lot to look at and think about. I'm amazed at how quickly one can get help on this forum, even in the beginner's section..

From the posted comparison between the D20 and a high-end P&S, although it was obvious the author was biased towards the P&S and didn't really use the DSLR to it's full potential, it did highlight an area where DSLRs are weak that I hadn't really considered: narrow depth of field, which in some cases can be a problem. On the other hand, I rather like the amazing impact a good narrow DOF photo can achieve with a DSLR..

From looking through a lot of material from these links, I'm thinking the advantage to a DSLR is as follows:.

+ Low light situations+ high-speed photography+ narrow DOF for soft backgrounds.

+ lens options (huge plus) with this comes ability to grow as a photographer I would think.+ faster, more accurate AF.

+ investment lasts longer due to lens compatibility (although really, with the cost of high-end lenses and a good body, you could buy many generations of high-end P&S cameras for the same price)+ non-electronic accurate VF.

And the advantages of a high-end P&S:.

+ Easier to carry+ Less ... invasive looking than a large DSLR when shooting people+ price and value for money (fraction of the cost)+ Wide DOF when needed+ swivel out EVFs with stats easily seen on screen available.

Missing anything?..

One thing to add, after looking at a few shots by John Farrar, is that it appears a DSLR with the right lens is able to take much better macro shots than a high-end "do everything" bridge camera. Does anyone disagree with that? I love macro shots, something i'd love to get more into...

Triptoph wrote:.

From the posted comparison between the D20 and a high-end P&S,although it was obvious the author was biased towards the P&S anddidn't really use the DSLR to it's full potential, it did highlightan area where DSLRs are weak that I hadn't really considered:narrow depth of field.

That is simply just another example of where the author of the comparison didn't know how to use a camera. Want wide depth of field? Stop down. There's no DOF advantage with smaller sensor cameras..

Seen in a fortune cookie:Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed..

It would depend much on the design of the Macro on the bridge camera. If it was like the old Minolta D7 series or A series then it was designed so that you could comfortably take macros without it needing to be right on top of the subject. With the Fuji it has to either too far away or way too close..

The Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens is hard to beat. In fact 90-105 macro lenses have usually been very well made. If I was asked to shoot macros I would not choose a bridge camera to do so.Minolta D7i macro:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Minolta D7i closest Macro.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Fuji Macro.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Tamron 90mm Macro.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

And just look how close I can get with it 1:1.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

To do this you would need to screw on close up lenses to the bridge camera with a whole raft of other issues like stability and light degradation.DSLR + Tamron 90 2.8 or similar is the way to go..

John..

John.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr..

Thanks John. I was looking at that 1:1 earlier on your site; it is inspiring...

In many cases a P&S will have similar performance to a dslr. Where they separate though is in low light and control of depth of field. You can blur the background or foreground fairly easily on a dslr, not so on a P&S. Then there is also the matter of shooting in raw...

Triptoph wrote:.

From the posted comparison between the D20 and a high-end P&S,although it was obvious the author was biased towards the P&S anddidn't really use the DSLR to it's full potential, it did highlightan area where DSLRs are weak that I hadn't really considered:narrow depth of field, which in some cases can be a problem. Onthe other hand, I rather like the amazing impact a good narrow DOFphoto can achieve with a DSLR..

At the risk of seeming anal, a shallow DOF is not a characteristic of a dSLR...iit's a characteristic of a big sensor. dSLRs come in several sizes...from the full size EOS-5D to the 1/2 size E-510. That amounts to a 2:1 difference in DOF..

From looking through a lot of material from these links, I'mthinking the advantage to a DSLR is as follows:.

+ Low light situations+ high-speed photography+ narrow DOF for soft backgrounds+ lens options (huge plus) with this comes ability to grow as aphotographer I would think.+ faster, more accurate AF+ investment lasts longer due to lens compatibility (althoughreally, with the cost of high-end lenses and a good body, you couldbuy many generations of high-end P&S cameras for the same price)+ non-electronic accurate VF.

And the advantages of a high-end P&S:.

+ Easier to carry+ Less ... invasive looking than a large DSLR when shooting people+ price and value for money (fraction of the cost)+ Wide DOF when needed+ swivel out EVFs with stats easily seen on screen available.

Missing anything?.

Yes, live preview thru the VF..

Charlie DavisNikon 5700 & Sony R1CATS #25PAS Scribe @ http://www.here-ugo.com/PAS_List.htmHomePage: http://www.1derful.info'I brake for pixels...'..