Differences in digital cameras.........PNS vs SLR

Oney

I just wanted to share my experience with 2 types of digital cameras. My first camera was a Kodak 5MP with a 4x optical zoom. I could never get the color correct and I always was adjusting the brightness in software. I decided to purchase a new camera. I bought a Nikon D70 Digital SLR an added a macro lens to the kit. The difference is like night and day. We all understand budget is important, but if you can afford the SLR it is well worth the investment. Below are examples of the same coin with each camera. The first is the Kodak and the second is the Nikon........just sharing my observations.

kieferscoins

Wow! Look at the difference. What is the difference in price?

sellers know that a good pic sells, and the coin on the right will bring more money no matter what because the picture is so much better.

Cameron Kiefer

Oney

Good point and shoots run about $400...SLR kits start at aroung $800. Well worth the difference......like the picture below. I could not get that clarity with the PNS.

ConstellatioCollector

D70 $999.00 (body) 105mm Macro lens ($600.00).

Oney

Macro lens $150........ but with the D70 kit you can achieve similar results just need to further away from object.

KurtHorn

You can achieve similar results with the new Panasonics DMC FZ20... from a recent review: "If there's one feature that defines the FZ20, it's the lens. This is an incredible F2.8 (all the way through the zoom range) 12X optical zoom Leica lens. The focal range is 6 - 72 mm, which is equivalent to 36 - 432 mm. As I mentioned in the previous section, the FZ20 supports both filters and conversion lenses."

About $500 plus upgrade for a bigger SD memory card (I spent $79 for a 1 gig card) and you're ready to rock and roll. Here's a link for the full review...

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/panasonic/dmc_fz20-review/index.shtml

nwcs

An SLR will always have better optics and abilities (when used correctly) but PNS is pretty darn close most of the time. Like with anything else, you have to work to the strengths of the particular camera.

JrGMan2004

<< <i>An SLR will always have better optics and abilities (when used correctly) but PNS is pretty darn close most of the time. Like with anything else, you have to work to the strengths of the particular camera. >>

saintguru

Remarkable results! Too bad there aren't any dealers who can "afford" the technology.

Darkhorse

<< <i>An SLR will always have better optics and abilities (when used correctly) but PNS is pretty darn close most of the time. Like with anything else, you have to work to the strengths of the particular camera. >>



Exactly. Canon's Powershot line of P&S digicams have near SLR abilities. Kodak on the other hand makes terrible digital cameras.

K6AZ

Brian, trying to compare the D70 to the Kodak is like trying to compare a Mercedes to a Volkswagon. And the higher end prosumer cameras are not only point-and-shoot but also allow some pretty advanced manual control.

meos1

I am shooting with a Sony F828 with the macro lense in RAW, its untouchable. Nice PNS features but manual is where it really excells. Realy pleased with the quality, flexibility, features.

nwcs

I also think of what a musician friend of mine said about the first time he played the violin in college. He blamed the poor performance on the violin (a $99 store one, I think he said) so the professor took it from him and played an amazing work. The lesson, he told me, was that it's not the quality or cost of the tool but the talent and ability of the one using the tool that makes the difference.

Oney

Well I'm glad the criticism is flowing freely. Perhaps some people that have left the forum were right. I offered up my experience as just that...my experience, I did not suggest that other options are not available. I think a few of you who took it upon themselves to proclaim that some of us are inept at using digital cameras, no names will be mentioned nwcs, should really think twice before preaching. By the way nwcs, I have probably forgot more about technology than you will ever know. Perhaps you should just accept someones experience as just that and leave you preaching for someone who needs it or someone who asks for it.

Darkhorse

I don't see anything worth getting upset over in any of the posts here, Oney. You offered your experience and that's fine, people offered theirs. What's the problem, here?

mgoodm3

Oney, don't worry about it. Just keep posting nice pictures.

It's true that a good photographer can take nice pictures with any camera, but a good photographer with superior equipment can make spectacular photos, esp. in macro photography.

Oney

The lesson, he told me, was that it's not the quality or cost of the tool but the talent and ability of the one using the tool that makes the difference.

Gee, I do not know. Maybe being called inept.

robertpr

Brian nobody called you inept. SLR's are great, if you have the money for one, and the time and patience to learn to use it. Most of us here are not that sophisticated with a camera. I'd love to go out and get one, but, it's either a nice SLR or more coins.

Darkhorse

He used a pertinent analogy, that's all. And there's truth to it as well. Yet you, inexplicably, took it as an insult.

You can buy expensive camera equipment, and that's fine and dandy. But one could buy a $200 Canon A75 and still take better pictures. Who's behind the camera is the most important factor.

The hard reality is this. When presenting visual imagery you have to learn how to accept criticism. It's not necessarily an insult, you can build off your criticism and learn from it. That's what I've always done in my extensive art and photography experience and I'm all the better for it.

You're not a professional photographer. Neither am I for that matter. But luckily you now have a fine set of tools to learn with.

K6AZ

What Darkhorse said is right on the mark. You can use criticism to your advantage, just don't take it personally. Coin photography is four parts technique and lighting, and one part camera. Just look at the images Russ posts, he shoots those with a camera that costs less than $100. As you take more shots, you will learn how to use the more advanced features. Criticism helps here too, look and see if what is being criticized can be corrected. I had a problem with a part of my shots being out of focus, and after several of my images were criticized, I figured out what the problem was.

Oney

The point you seem to be missing is that I basically said that I overcame the short comings of the old camera by purchasing a new one. I did not say it could not be done with PNS, but I did say that perhaps it was my choice in camera and I think this was backed up by K6AZ, comparing a Mercedes to a Volkswagon.

See the comment by Kiefer, sellers know that a good pic sells, and the coin on the right will bring more money no matter what because the picture is so much better. The biggest complaint most collectors have is that the coin they bought online does not look like the one they received, sometimes for the better most of the time for the worst. I prefer to represent my coins without the need to touch them up in a program such as Photoshop to make them look better.

Sometimes the best person behind the camera can not overcome the limitations of it, so the analogy is not necessarily true. For those who think SLR's are to complex....it is an auto focus point n shoot mode camera as well. I was up and running in less than 30 minutes producing the photos you see.

I'll offer up the question, what good is buying more product to sell if you can not advertise it accurately to your target audience? Perhaps an investment in tools and technology instead of the extra coin would help you sell more, increase cash flow, and better represent what you are trying to sell. If you are a coin dealer who sells many coins than I do not understand why $400-500 extra on a one time expense would not be considered. If you are not a dealer but sell occassionally, then accurately representing your coins may stop the cost of returns from a buyer who states the coin was not well represented in the photograph.

Enough.....I have said my peace. I do what I do because I enjoy the hobby. I come here to learn. Criticism is welcome if it comes across as helpful, not grandstanding.

K6AZ

Brian, I made my comparison in relation to the Nikon brand vs. the Kodak brand. I am a firm believer in Nikon products, I own three prosumer models, the 5400, 5700 and 8800. None of these are point-and-shoot cameras, and all are quite good at coin photography.

One other thing I meant to mention earlier, and that is I think it would be great if you could find a place to host larger images. The D70 can take very large detailed images as you know, and it's a drag to have to shrink them down to size to attach here.

nwcs

>By the way nwcs, I have probably forgot more about technology than you will ever know. Perhaps you should just accept someones experience as just that and leave you preaching for someone who needs it or someone who asks for it

Edited to remove my sarcasm.

I wasn't saying anything about you at all. Not sure why you thought that. What I said applies to me as much as it does anyone else, I think.

stev32k

It's generally true that a gifted photographer can take great pictures with almost any camera. However, taking pictures of coins is a different kind of photography. It does not depend so much on the artistic composition of the image, but more on the technical details of lighting, control of reflections, contrast, hue, and saturation. It is very easy to get "good" pictures of coins - it is very difficult to get accurate images. These are two very different goals. If one is buying coins based mostly on photographs an "artistic" photograph is not called for - an accurate photograph is needed.

DSLR's, and the Nikon D70, D100, D1X, etc. in particular have several advantages over P&S cameras. The most important is the ability to load custom curves, manipulate exposure compensation, and accurate control of white balance. These controls mean that the out-of-camera images are more accurate than the out-of-camera images from a P&S. If one has enough time and enough skill with photoshop the P&S images can be improved to the level of a DSLR. The SLR lenses are also superior to those supplied with P&S cameras. The quality of a P&S lens is not even close to the quality of a good SLR macro lens. The good SLR macro lenses can produce tack sharp images of details that P&S lenses cannot see.

So if the same photographer uses a DSLR and a P&S under the same set of conditions the DSLR will always produce a better final image. Said another way if you take good coin photos with a P&S you will take better ones with a DSLR.

mgoodm3

The two things that steered me to the digi-SLR are not what everbody else talks about around here. The high-end non-SLR cameras can do most that the DSLR's can regarding exposure, WB etc. The two thing that pushed me to get one were:

1) Through the lens view-finder and focusing.
2) Longer lens allow the camera to be much farther away from the coin when shooting. That makes for the best lighting.