This is an extremely difficult question to answer. The obvious reply is that it depends more on the photographer than the camera - if you get the composition, exposure and colour balance correct first time round, then you might not need to post process at all. However, photographers who are as good as this are more likely to be using a DSLR than a P&S..

You also don't need very much post processing if you take undemanding photos in good light, only print 4x6, and don't mind if some photos are not quite perfect. If you are this kind of photographer, you are probably using a P&S..

If you take photographs in very demanding conditions, e.g. low light, artificial lighting, high dynamic range scenes, then you are inevitably going to have to do quite a lot of post processing (and a DSLR will give much better results)..

If you take very large numbers of photos as, for example, a wedding photographer does, then you cannot afford the time to do much post processing apart from selecting which photos to print..

Personally, if I come back from a trip with a 1-2000 images, I probably spend 6+ hours deciding what to do with them. I then spend 1-2 minutes per image doing routine corrections to the 100 or so images that I have selected to put into an album. These corrections would be cropping and straightening, adjusting the exposure and colour balance and adjusting the sharpening. However, I spend 30+ minutes per image on the 5 or so images that might be worth hanging on the wall or putting into a competition..

This hasn't answered your question but I hope that it explains why the question is so difficult to answer.Chris R..

Hi Chris...

Thank you. I realize it is a tough question to answer. I currently have a P&S and find myself doing quite a bit of editing to get the photo the way I want... and then, at that, I'm still not completely satisfied. So I'm thinking about getting a DSLR..

But I have heard some say that there is more editing usually done with the DSLR..

So I wanted to just ask..

Your answer is great and makes perfect sense..

Thank you!..

Amy129 wrote:.

Hi Chris...

Thank you. I realize it is a tough question to answer. I currentlyhave a P&S and find myself doing quite a bit of editing to get thephoto the way I want... and then, at that, I'm still not completelysatisfied. So I'm thinking about getting a DSLR..

In general, how is it that you aren't completely satisfied, or is there a problem that crops up more often than others?.

But I have heard some say that there is more editing usually donewith the DSLR..

There can be more editing, but not necessarily. My DSLR, for instance, has much less noise and so I don't frequent Noise Ninja as often as with the pictures from my wifes P&S..

Better metering, better autofocus, and more options and flexability from the DSLR means that I get the picture right, in the camera, more often. Thus less fiddling post shoot..

So I wanted to just ask..

Your answer is great and makes perfect sense..

Thank you!.

A member of the rabble in good standing..

Mostly because of cropping. I'm generally pleased with the color that I get from my camera. But if I want to crop too much, the quality goes. Or in low light. I struggle with trying to bring those types of photos back to even "ok" quality. Frustrating.....

Amy129 wrote:.

Mostly because of cropping. I'm generally pleased with the colorthat I get from my camera. But if I want to crop too much, thequality goes. Or in low light. I struggle with trying to bringthose types of photos back to even "ok" quality. Frustrating....

Processing is not really related to the cropping issue. If you find yourself cropping a lot of the picture away, it's because you're too far away or need a lens with more telephoto. DSLR's are more flexable in getting you the lens that best suits your need for the moment. And because the sensor is larger the quality when severly cropped us usually better, but it's better to not crop too much..

The low light issues will be somewhat amenable the DSLRMost can easily be boosted to ISO 1600 and still yield a very usable picture. The only post processing here is probably the application of a little noise suppression..

All in all you might find that moving up to a DSLR useful and you can probably still take jpegs and have minimal post processing..

I personally like the Nikon D40 or D40x with 18-200 IS or the Oly E-510 dual lens kit..

A member of the rabble in good standing..

Amy129 wrote:.

Hi Chris...

Thank you. I realize it is a tough question to answer. I currentlyhave a P&S and find myself doing quite a bit of editing to get thephoto the way I want... and then, at that, I'm still not completelysatisfied. So I'm thinking about getting a DSLR..

But I have heard some say that there is more editing usually donewith the DSLR..

So I wanted to just ask..

Your answer is great and makes perfect sense..

Thank you!.

Hi.

It seems you do need an dslr. Post processing will probably be required....depends on your needs and the camera you select..

I do as little as possible with my Pentax k100d but I shoot jpeg....mainly because I have an old underpowered computer, I tend to shoot a lot of photos at live music gigs and hate spending hours editing..

The K100d can often provide useable pics from the camera (as can all dslrs). Having said that the Pentax K10d is a better (except in low light perhaps), more expensive (but still cheap in price) camera that is winning many awards. The K10d is pretty much designed to be used in conjunction with post processing..

If you had a much higher budget you could get a fuji S5 which is a camera that boasts out of camera as one of it's attractions for wedding photogs..

ANY dslr made of 4mp or more would be my preference over any point and shoot....there are a few bridge cameras that will do as well ....or even better than some dslr kit lenses...but they tend to cost as much as a dslr anyway..

Neil..

Amy129:.

Which type of camera... P&S or DSLR... usually allows for the least amount of post processing editing..

Both. As Chris R-UK said:.

It depends more on the photographer than the camera - if you get the composition, exposure and colour balance correct first time round, then you might not need to post process at all..

Chris also said:.

However, photographers who are as good as this are more likely to be using a DSLR than a P&S..

I'd respectfully disagree. There are a lot of people who choose not to use DSLRs, people who know their cameras well and don't feel limited by what they can and can't do..

If you take photographs in very demanding conditions, e.g. low light, artificial lighting, high dynamic range scenes, then you are inevitably going to have to do quite a lot of post processing (and a DSLR will give much better results)..

Sorry, don't buy that, either. If you have a pretty good idea what you're doing, like the picture you see in your viewfinder (or LCD) and know your settings are right, you can do some amazing things without PP *or* a DSLR..

Amy129:.

I currently have a P&S and find myself doing quite a bit of editing to get the photo the way I want... and then, at that, I'm still not completely satisfied. So I'm thinking about getting a DSLR..

Before you get rid of your "P&S," are you using it to it's full potential? Will it allow you to do things you may not have tried yet?.

LM2:.

Better metering, better autofocus, and more options and flexability from the DSLR means that I get the picture right, in the camera, more often..

Better than...? Nobody's asked Amy for the make and model of her current camera. What are you using, Amy? Why can't you get close to your subject?.

Neil Holmes:.

There are a few bridge cameras that will do as well ....or even better than some dslr kit lenses...but they tend to cost as much as a dslr anyway..

Attaboy, *but* what will one spend for DSLR lenses that will give you the same focal range of some of the very competent superzooms *and* IS for the tele end/low light situations..

Before we sell Amy a DSLR that she may not need, it might be a good idea to establish her requirements. Make sense?.

Mike marshall: FZ50, Ricoh XR-2..

If the problem occurs over and over again I'd say that the cropping is needed because (a) the viewfinder is grossly inaccurate or (b) it's a question of technique..

But we don't know what the camera is and haven't seen any before and after pictures..

If the problem is mostly solved cropping then the exposure will also be wrong as - by and large - P&S's base exposure on the whole picture and the bit that's removed will influence the final result..

So I'd suggest pausing for a second or two before touching the shutter button and looking at the edges of the picture in the viewfinder and then at the whole scene and then walking a bit closer because my experience is that viewfinders often show less than they take..

Of course, you may be zooming in at this point but zooming in means moving from a wide angle and large aperture to a tele shot and a smalll aperture and that may result in under exposure and darkness and gloom..

So before swoping cameras, I'd experiment by walking closer and zooming less. For the record I know several photographers who think they are taking portraits but who produce what I can a figure in the landscape shot. Add to this an inaccurate viewfinder (most of them are, btw) and you've problems. But walking closer, looking at the screen or edge of the viewfinder as though it was a print and not zooming too much might just solve the problems..

And, of course, I'm assuming that not too many pictures are taken into the light, which older P&S's can't cope with, without a bit of help from the user. Sometimes, with P&S's and with dSLR's, you just have to step in and over-ride the thing's settings. Knowing when to do so is the art..

Regards, David..

Mikemarshall wrote:.

However, photographers who are as good as this are more likely to be using a DSLR than a P&S..

I'd respectfully disagree. There are a lot of people who choose notto use DSLRs, people who know their cameras well and don't feellimited by what they can and can't do..

If you take photographs in very demanding conditions, e.g. low light, artificial lighting, high dynamic range scenes, then you are inevitably going to have to do quite a lot of post processing (and a DSLR will give much better results)..

Sorry, don't buy that, either. If you have a pretty good idea whatyou're doing, like the picture you see in your viewfinder (or LCD)and know your settings are right, you can do some amazing thingswithout PP *or* a DSLR..

There are some things that can NOT be done at all on a small sensor P&S type camera though..

A camera is a tool, no doubt, but a SLR (due to the larger sensor) can be a better tool for most jobs..

Amy129:.

I currently have a P&S and find myself doing quite a bit of editing to get the photo the way I want... and then, at that, I'm still not completely satisfied. So I'm thinking about getting a DSLR..

Before you get rid of your "P&S," are you using it to it's fullpotential? Will it allow you to do things you may not have tried yet?.

Indeed. "Editing" a photo will not change with a slr....so depending on what editing you "have to do" to get the look you want...a slr might not change a thing..

Better metering, better autofocus, and more options and flexability from the DSLR means that I get the picture right, in the camera, more often..

There are a few bridge cameras that will do as well ....or even better than >>some dslr kit lenses...but they tend to cost as much as a dslr anyway..

Attaboy, *but* what will one spend for DSLR lenses that will give youthe same focal range of some of the very competent superzooms *and*IS for the tele end/low light situations.Before we sell Amy a DSLR that she may not need, it might be a goodidea to establish her requirements. Make sense?.

There is more to a lens or lens selection than the zoom range..

I'd take a 400D and a 50 MM F1.8 over ANY p&s camera any day of the week..

Http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen.

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

Since Amy hasn't commented for 2 days, it's possible she has abandoned the thread. If that's the case, it too bad because her issues haven't been resolved, unless it's a simple case of moving in to reduce the need for cropping. My reason for joining the discussion was simple and it's also a point made by a few other posters: Amy doesn't necessarily need a DSLR to solve her problems..

Onimous said:.

There are some things that can NOT be done at all on a small sensor P&S type camera though..

I'm sure there are, depending on the P&S in question and types of pictures taken. For a lot of people, a DSLR is a needless expense. Amy may be one of them, I'm another..

There's no anti-DSLR agenda on my part. After shooting with a film SLR for almost 30 years, that's what I went looking for when the decision to go digital was made. In the end, the Panasonic FZ50 best fit our needs..

There is more to a lens or lens selection than the zoom range..

No argument there but the bridge cameras that were mentioned come with lengthy zooms, 35mm to 420mm on the FZ50, F2.8 to F3.7. To match that in a DSLR, we're talking a lot more money (and bulk, if a single zoom is being considered)..

Mike marshall: FZ50, Ricoh XR-2..

Amy129 had a Kodak C340 when she started this thread. This is what she bought:.

Http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums/read.asp?forum=1011&message=24407794..