Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography

Progressiveabsolution wrote:
[]
> 2) Can any non-dslr camera compete with a dslr in image quality?
> Again, another image quality question since I'm only interested in the
> quality of the photo.

Mike, that's another of those "how long is a piece of string?" questions.
If you have a good non-DSLR, and you use it at its minimum sensitivity
setting, sensible lens settings etc. you might be hard pressed to tell the
difference on an A4 print (for example).

You could equally contrive photographic situations which suited one camera
or the other far better, and get a different answer. At higher ISO
settings DSLRs win, but with a size, weight, bulk and cost penalty.

If quality is your prime concern, some would say to forget 35mm. Where
are /you/ going to draw the line?

David

"You could equally contrive photographic situations which suited one
camera
or the other far better, and get a different answer."


Hi David. What situations would both be equal at and in what
situations would one excel over the other? I'm trying to get a clear
idea for my own personal use with photography to make the decision one
way or the other. I like taking photos of
flowers/nature/landscapes/night photography if that is possible with
P&S cameras, etc. For example, MOST of my photos with my Olympus C4000
were of the sunset. I don't do any action photography. Thanks for
your comments/help!

Progressiveabsolution wrote:
> "You could equally contrive photographic situations which suited one
> camera
> or the other far better, and get a different answer."
>
>
> Hi David. What situations would both be equal at and in what
> situations would one excel over the other? I'm trying to get a clear
> idea for my own personal use with photography to make the decision one
> way or the other. I like taking photos of
> flowers/nature/landscapes/night photography if that is possible with
> P&S cameras, etc. For example, MOST of my photos with my Olympus
> C4000 were of the sunset. I don't do any action photography. Thanks
> for your comments/help!

For example, the swivel LCD finder on many cameras allow you to place the
camera at ground level and makes flower photography much easier - you
don't need to have your eye also at ground level. DSLRs can't have such a
swivel finder (but they may offer an angle attachment for the eyepiece).
The Nikon Coolpix range have a reputation as the best non-DSLRs for macro
photography.

Action and perhaps low-light level candids might suit the DSLR.

With night photography, the higher sensitivity of the DSLR might help, but
with both cameras you can use long exposures on a tripod (and dark-frame
subtraction to remove fixed-pattern sensor noise).

DSLRs and heavier and bulkier - maybe that matters to you.

Cheers,
David