Any point & shoot Canon's as decent as a digital SLR?

[marc515]

My Canon Rebel XT was stolen the other day, and I'm not sure if I want to spend $$ on another digital SLR camera tight now. I only use it for daily family shots and vacation.

Do any of the point and shoot cameras come close to DSLR?

[sandro9mm]

G9 I think is pretty good.

[cricketboy75]

the closest i've seen is the Sigma DP-1 in terms of image quality. it has an APS-C sized sensor which is the same size as the 40D and XTI. the problem with the sigma is that it's shot to shot time is very slow.

[Don1]

I have a G9 and an XSi/450D. I still use mainly the G9 for family shots as it does a good job and needs much less attention to settings to get good results. The XSi is clearly better in low light situations.

[rklepper]

the closest i've seen is the Sigma DP-1 in terms of image quality. it has an APS-C sized sensor which is the same size as the 40D and XTI. the problem with the sigma is that it's shot to shot time is very slow.

Can you post some of your photos? Many would be interested.

[not_timmins]

Here are some samples of the DP-1 from dpreview:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/page22.asp

I think after reading his conclusion, I'd still stick with the G9.

[cricketboy75]

Can you post some of your photos? Many would be interested.
sorry, i don't actually have any pics. i tried it out at my local camera shop. but there are heaps of samples on the net.

[msowsun]

When you ask if there is any Point and Shoot that come close to a DLSR, you should consider the size of the sensor.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y17/msowsun/photo%20stuff/SensorSizes1b.jpg

[JohnJ80]

My Canon Rebel XT was stolen the other day, and I'm not sure if I want to spend $$ on another digital SLR camera tight now. I only use it for daily family shots and vacation.

Do any of the point and shoot cameras come close to DSLR?

No.

G9 is as close as you will get but it is not what I would consider "close."

You can't get there with the small sensors they put in the P&S cameras.

J

[JohnJ80]

Came across this one from panasonic (new)

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-LX3K-Digital-Stabilized-Black/dp/B001CCLBSA?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1216836310&sr=1-1

Here's some more information

http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/2008-07-blog.html#_20080723Trend

J.

[midnight_rider]

No, but here is a list of advanced P&S cameras. As others have suggested I have read a lot of great things about the G9.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/8613/Digital_Cameras_Advanced_Point_Shoot_Digital_Camer as.html

[Phil Light]

No.

G9 is as close as you will get but it is not what I would consider "close."

You can't get there with the small sensors they put in the P&S cameras.

J

I'll play devil's advocate here. ;)

Don't you think it depends on the final product? I've seen some stunning images from point & shoots when they're printed at 4x6 and even 5x7. I think when the light is good, some of these small cameras are really impressive. If all the OP is wanting is to shoot outdoor pictures in good light and maybe family gatherings to record the moment, I would bet a decent p&s would fit the bill nicely. It sounds to me like there is little interest in doing a lot of PP or swapping lenses, etc. Just my opinion.

[BottomBracket]

I'd say that for vacations and family events, the G9 is the better camera. Simplicity and portability allows you to enjoy the events more, instead of focusing too much on photography.

[JohnJ80]

I'll play devil's advocate here. ;)

Don't you think it depends on the final product? I've seen some stunning images from point & shoots when they're printed at 4x6 and even 5x7. I think when the light is good, some of these small cameras are really impressive. If all the OP is wanting is to shoot outdoor pictures in good light and maybe family gatherings to record the moment, I would bet a decent p&s would fit the bill nicely. It sounds to me like there is little interest in doing a lot of PP or swapping lenses, etc. Just my opinion.

the OP didn't specify 4x6 and 5x7. At these sizes almost anything works. Is the image quality the same or almost as good as a dslr. No.

Look closely at a P&S camera's images and they are lacking. Shoot in anything other than good light and they are terribly noisy. If that is acceptable, then that is another issue. Is that the same as a DSLR. No.

I do agree that a dslr is not required for snapshots.

J.

[marc515]

I plan to get the XSI, and the G9. I like the G9 for the simplicity and portability. The majority of my family pics are 4X6, and occassional 5X7. Om rare occassions, I might print an 8X10.

The XSI should be a nice replacement for my XT, but it can get heavy lugging it around with a 17-85IS on it, and that's where the G9 will come in.

It can be a hard trade off, and you'll always know after the fact when that pic should have been taken with the DSLR, but so goes life. I have my health, my family, and all this other stuff is really insignificant.

[BottomBracket]

To sweepingly say that compact cameras are 'lacking' and only good for snapshots is wrong.

[Phil Light]

the OP didn't specify 4x6 and 5x7...

That's true. It was not explicitly stated in the original post. That's why my post included words like "depending on" and "if" etc.

I plan to get the XSI, and the G9. I like the G9 for the simplicity and portability. The majority of my family pics are 4X6, and occassional 5X7. Om rare occassions, I might print an 8X10...

But, reading between the lines, this was the assumption I made based on the intent of the question. With that confirmed, I believe he (?) will be very happy with the G9. Of course, the XSi will be quite a nice upgrade from the XT. ;)

[Phil Light]

To sweepingly say that compact cameras are 'lacking' and only good for snapshots is wrong.

Exactly.

[skid00skid00]

In daylight landscapes, the G9 will be VERY close to a 1Ds with 24-70 or 70-200. Shockingly close. That's when you print both to 13" x 19" full-bleed.

I consoled myself by shooting BIF and indoor available-darkness. :D

...and I make the G9 live in the glovebox...

[BottomBracket]

It is sad that some people take a look at the size of the G9's sensor (or any other compact camera for that matter), and assume that it is only capable of taking snapshots. The G9 is a camera defined more than its small sensor - by knowing its strengths and limitations, one can take excellent photos.

[JohnJ80]

It is sad that some people take a look at the size of the G9's sensor (or any other compact camera for that matter), and assume that it is only capable of taking snapshots. The G9 is a camera defined more than its small sensor - by knowing its strengths and limitations, one can take excellent photos.

it's ultimate image QUALITY is determined in large part by the capabilities of the sensor. You are mixing definitions here and confusing the technical issues with the artistic ones.

Image quality is not equal to good image (i.e. art vs snapshot).

J.

[FlyingPhotog]

I've seen some really nice work done with the G9

[BottomBracket]

I've seen some really nice work done with the G9

Yes, definitely not snapshots, in the hands of those who take the time to know how to use them. Some people are stuck and confused in the notion that since they have small sensors, all they can produce are snapshots. Wrong.

[gkuenning]

You folks should listen to Pio; he regularly gets fantastic shots with G-series cameras. But then he has talent. ;-)

That said, I think it depends a lot on what you need. A G9 can give you great images. It's also portable and discreet (one reason why Pio uses a G for street shooting a lot of the time, and why I plan to return to my G3 for the same purpose). The zoom range is typically great, it has an adequate movie mode, and there are voice annotation capabilities that Canon for some reason refuses to put on most of their DSLRs.

On the other hand, a smaller sensor is inherently poorer in low light. A smaller sensor also has greater effective depth of field, which can be a plus or a minus depending on what you're up to. Although I don't think it's inherent, a typical P&S usually is much slower to focus and has significant shutter lag even if you've pre-focused and pre-metered. (It was the shutter lag, more than anything else, that caused me to buy a DSLR.)

If I had infinite money, I'd definitely have at least two P&S's to complement the bigger guys: a G9 for relatively high quality, and a flat little critter for living in my pocket all the time. In the interim, I'll keep my G3 for the situations where it's perfect.

[denncald]

I like this article;

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

I can see the limits of my G9 at times; like the lag time, low light noise, etc... But more often it's my limitations that are more evident. So, I work to improve my own capabilities, especially in composition, and I also keep working to understand how best to use the G9 capabilities.

I know a DSLR could be better in a lot of situations, but I'm not willing to carry all the equipment, and part with all the money.

Dennis

[Nick_C]

I would go with a no on this one, ive owned a Canon Powershot Pro1 which has an L lens (sort of) & now a A720IS, neither would I say came anywhere near to a DSLR, they both suffer from noise & lack of any real fine detail, I no longer have the Pro1 but when I compare images from my A720IS they look very similar to my old Pro1 images, so it shows how well the newer P&S cameras have come thesedays.

The Sigma DP1 is the closest to a DSLR, but its not without its flaws.

If all you want to do is print 7x4" & 10x8" prints, then I guess a P&S would be ok, but for larger prints you start to see its flaws, also they all suffer from rather limited dynamic range, so you have to watch the highlights even more so.

One area though where I have found a P&S scores higher is macro, I get much better results & easier to achieve them on my A720IS than I do with my 5D + Tubes or 5D + macro lens due to the smaller sensor having a naturally high DOF.

Bottom line is how critical you are about your images, I couldnt use a P&S for my images but then im trying to make a living from this, if however I just wanted something to hang on my walls, holiday snaps etc.. I would gladly go around with just a little P&S, the convenience factor is HUGE!!

[Nick_C]

I like this article;

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

I can see the limits of my G9 at times; like the lag time, low light noise, etc... But more often it's my limitations that are more evident. So, I work to improve my own capabilities, especially in composition, and I also keep working to understand how best to use the G9 capabilities.

I know a DSLR could be better in a lot of situations, but I'm not willing to carry all the equipment, and part with all the money.

Dennis

I agree with what he says about buying new gear wont improve your photography, well SORT OF ;) buying new gear WILL & DOES improve the technical aspects of a photograph, sharpness, colour/contrast, focus accuracy, better large prints etc etc.. but as far as it improving a users skill? well no it cant perform miracles, composition & understanding of exposure is still paramount.

[JohnJ80]

I agree with what he says about buying new gear wont improve your photography, well SORT OF ;) buying new gear WILL & DOES improve the technical aspects of a photograph, sharpness, colour/contrast, focus accuracy, better large prints etc etc.. but as far as it improving a users skill? well no it cant perform miracles, composition & understanding of exposure is still paramount.

I try and avoid reading Ken Rockwell's website. He is kind of a doof in general.

The issue is this - a great photographer can always take a great photograph with any camera from a pinhole camera on up even though it may be difficult. This is because that great photographer understands where the narrow sweet spot is of the compromised equipment and can hit that and make it perform. As one drops down the continuum of photographer skill, then the wider the sweet spot the better results the less skilled photographer will have. Wide sweet spots and ease of use cost money.

J.

[Nick_C]

I try and avoid reading Ken Rockwell's website. He is kind of a doof in general.

The issue is this - a great photographer can always take a great photograph with any camera from a pinhole camera on up even though it may be difficult. This is because that great photographer understands where the narrow sweet spot is of the compromised equipment and can hit that and make it perform. As one drops down the continuum of photographer skill, then the wider the sweet spot the better results the less skilled photographer will have. Wide sweet spots and ease of use cost money.

J.

True, but what about when you hit that sweet spot with a "crappy" camera & your still not satisfied with the results :p

Of course better still is to have some skill + gear that can perform well in all situations ;)

[JohnJ80]

Well, there is that. Then there just is not enough performance to the camera.

All things being equal, which is also not said above, is that for a given photographer, the results will be much better with better equipment. It is a little disingenuous for one to insist that the tool (camera) has little to do with the image.

The other logic trap in the above comments about gear quality is that we get to change the equipment but not the photographer. So, given one's skill level, unless one is willing to let someone else with more skill take your images for you, better equipment will only help.

J.

[adam8080]

I wish that Canon would make a small digital rangefinder with interchangeable lenses!