DSLR vs Compact

[philhoole]

Hi,

I currently have a Pansonic FZ5 that I've had for about 18 months and it's been a great purchase.

I'm thinking of getting something better and have (I think) 2 or 3 options in mind.

I could go up to the FZ50 which isn't a DSLR but would seem to be the best a non DSLR is going to be. It has all the good features I like about the FZ5 such as the 12x optical zoom and image stabilisation and adds more.

My other options are the Canon EOS400D or the SonyA100. I don't want to go over £600 on whatever I do.

I'm not really asking advice for which one to go for but any comments appreciated. My only real question is in terms of image quilaity. What is it instrinsically that seems to give DSLR the edge? Is it they generally have better optics or is it related to the sensors used (CCD vs CMOS) ? Something else ?

Thanks

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

I've seen some direct comparisons between some of the better compacts (e.g. Fuji superfine whatever) and a D70. On static test shots, it was frankly pretty hard to tell the difference.
I've suggest that the key advantages of a D-SLR would be:
- Generally have a MUCH faster start up time
- Improved shutter response time
- Better AF
- Option to change the lens to something more appropriate. The 12 times zoom you mention is the equivalent of a superzoom in D-SLR terms. Those lenses are compromised on image quality to achieve the functionality. A D-SLR allows you to switch to a lens optimised for what you're trying to do with it (e.g. superwide zoom for scenic work, LONG telephoto for birding).

So whilst the compact might actually be able to compete on a static shot, it's capabilities "under fire" will often result in you missing a shot that you might have nailed with a good D-SLR.

Offsetting that is the simple cost and weight of carrying around a D-SLR.

 

[Mohain]

Another advantage of a DSLR over a 'bridge' camera is the DOF control. I have a Fuji s9500 and it's very difficult to get a shallow DOF.

Another thing to bear in mind is that to get the same zoom range you will need to get a telephoto zoom as well as the kit lens (or other wide angle zoom replacement if you dont go for a kit lens).

 

[cmt]

So whilst the compact might actually be able to compete on a static shot, it's capabilities "under fire" will often result in you missing a shot that you might have nailed with a good D-SLR.

Offsetting that is the simple cost and weight of carrying around a D-SLR.

Agreed.

I would get more use from a compact simply because it is ALWAYS with me in my pocket. If (When) i have a DSLR i would have to make the effort to take it out with me.

cmt

 

[FranchiseJuan]

Depends on what you think is compact. I think that a 350D/400D with a canon 35 F2 is very compact, to the point of being pocketable.

The problem I have with most digital PS compacts is the shooting speed. Focus and continous shooting is just too slow on them. Image noise you can deal with in post, and up to A4 both (compact and DSLR) are going to look good.