What percent of SLR users do you guys see using their camera like a point and shoot?

I'm a lousy photographer with way too little time taking pictures.

But I disliked some things with the 350D that I solved with a 40D. And I disliked some things with the 40D that I solved with a 5Dmk2. Maybe one day I will solve a couple of more things with a 1Dsmk4. Should I stay with a P&S because I don't have the time to bring the camera 24x7? Or should I get a camera that I really enjoy, for the times when I do bring a camera?

I really don't care about people having expensive toys without being able to use them to the fullest. The only thing that makes me sad, is people who could use better equipment but just can't afford to upgrade.

If people likes to buy expensive cameras and then just use them in green-box mode, then that is fine. At least they have the chance to experiment. Spend some time nudging someone to try something new instead of worrying that they have too expensive equipment in comparison to their knowledge level. But in the end, it doesn't help to be a technical master of the camera without the artistic eye. An artist with a P&S will still produce the best pictures.

Radtech1 wrote in post #9101444
Boy, I hear ya brother!

If only all those other people in the world would just come to understand that I know what's best for them, then they would straighten up, fly right and do it my way. I can't believe that some of them even bought cameras without consulting with me first. Then they use them all wrong. I swear, if everyone would just check with me first and do what I say, then we would all be a lot better off!

Sheesh!



Rad

The sentence right before the one you quoted

lonelyjew wrote in post #9099348
I don't mean to sound condescending or anything like that, I was just really disappointed

3rd post

lonelyjew wrote in post #9100217
Again, I really don't want to come off as condescending, I was just bummed out that there weren't more photogs to talk to.

Did you bother reading anything but that quoted line or are you just looking to start a flame war? I guess I bit the troll bait...

lonelyjew wrote in post #9099348
Anyone have more positive experiences or am I to assume that DSLR user usually doesn't = photographer?

This has been true for a very long time, especially after Canon launched the Canon AE-1 in the frenzy of the consumer SLR!

well, maybe part of the dslr being used as point and shoot may have to do with where they buy their cameras. I was at BB last night, playing with the new touch screen windows 7 (lots of fun), and wandered into the camera section hoping to get a chance to play with the 7D. While looking in the display case, I heard the sales person trying to upsell the customer from a p&s to dslr.

lonelyjew wrote in post #9101937
The sentence right before the one you quoted

You mean the one where you said you didn't want to sound condescending but decided to do so anyway?

ETERNAL wrote in post #9100263
A lot of people use them now as just a camera to have pictures of the family, nothing wrong with it.

I have a question tho. I hear all the time, its the person not the camera. Then read in this thread that if you are shooting in green box mode you should just buy a p/s. How does this make sense?
Does this mean if I go buy a $150 canon power shot and a $1200 50D and set both on a $30 tripod and aim at the same object in auto that the Power shot will take an EXACTLY identical shot as the 50D?

If this is so, what is the point of all these fancy shmancy expensive censors and expensive lenses and all?

(hopefully you can tell I don't think this is so and that the picture out of the 50D will be substantially better. Because obviously depending on the conditions the noise could be terrible on that point and shoot and the 50D should be fairly decent. If this were not the case, (that the better the camera, the better the picture), there would be no need to ever upgrade, just use your abilities and buy to a point that has the PHYSICAL FUNCTIONS to have the adjustments you want, not the capabilities (Higher ISO, Higher MP to print larger, faster shooting,Faster focusing, FPS)

In green box (PushHereDummy) mode, both cameras will provide identical photos, ignoring any benefit of improvements in optics. The fancier camera might provide a wider range of 'auto' control settings to suit a broader range of circumstances, but apart from that one could say there is little true advantage. I have worked professionally using formats from APS-C to 4x5 monorail cameras, and I can say that my old 4MPixel Canon G2 can make photos like my 10MPixel 40D, within the limitations of the focus range and FL range and lens speed that the G2 imposes. Both cameras have a 'spot' meter mode, both have P and Av and Tv...the G2 has shutter lag and is more limited in useful ISO range and has fewer pixels. But when I take the same shot with both cameras, the most noticeable difference is DOF control limitations with the smaller sensor of the G2. I once 'challenged' a forum member to identify 20D shots vs. G2 shots, and he guessed wrong on all six photos I posted!

I am buying my wife a D7 for Christmas, it's great in Green Box mode.

Radtech1 wrote in post #9101980
You mean the one where you said you didn't want to sound condescending but decided to do so anyway?

As someone already said it's hard to bring up the subject and not sound condescending. I wasn't disappointed that these people weren't taking full advantage of their cameras because that's what you should do with an SLR, I just wanted to meet more photographers, people who had an appreciation for the art and who I could talk photography and equipment with.

Lets put it this way, I think the Preservation Hall Jazz band was disappointed when most of their audience at Preservation Hall only stopped in their for a snapshot of the band and to say they had been there and, once they had that, left after the first set. They probably would have preferred an audience who would have wanted to actually appreciate their music rather than just listen to it. Are they so unjustified? I suppose that's not the most appropriate example, but heck, put it in the perspective of a fan, the only fan in the audience, would they be justified in being disappointed that there wasn't a better audience?

Maybe you think no, and that's fine I guess. Hell, think of me however you want, if you want to think I'm an amateur pretending to be a master go for it, your opinion on me doesn't really matter to me; I only care your opinion in regards to any pictures I post in the critique thread .

So what if people don't use their SLRs to its fullest potential? I bet there are a lot of people who lament that people buy expensive computers and don't use it to its fullest potential, buying 4 gigs of RAM to surf the internet, and call the Geek Squad to pay hundreds of dollars for things that can be easily done at home. I'm sure there are also people who spend a lot of money to buy houses with big yards in places with wonderful weather and don't grow gardens, much to the chagrin of the hobbyist gardener.

Great, photography's your thing. If someone wants an expensive camera to preserve their memories, even if they put it on auto, then I support that. I don't believe that a DSLR on green box mode won't take better pictures than a point and shoot. There's so much more sophisticated technology in a DSLR, I just don't see that being possible.

And honestly, a lot of it isn't about learning, it's about convenience. When I first got my camera, I would put it on M, take a picture, then put it on the green box and take a picture, my goal being to take a better picture than a camera. Honestly, it took about a day to figure it out, and I haven't put it on auto since.

However, what that means is that I never take my camera with me when I'm out with a group, because it requires so much more thinking. If I were willing to put my camera on the green box and take it out, perhaps I wouldn't think of photography and time spent with loved ones as mutually exclusive things.

I hope more people buy DSLRs. Maybe then the mere act of possessing one in public won't draw attention and get the owner labeled as a terrorist, a pervert, or a professional trying to take pictures in a public place without a permit.

mike_d wrote in post #9102810
I hope more people buy DSLRs. Maybe then the mere act of possessing one in public won't draw attention and get the owner labeled as a terrorist, a pervert, or a professional trying to take pictures in a public place without a permit.

The way the person using the camera handles themselves has a distinct impact on these kinds of perceptions as well...

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #9099882
Honestly, I've never bothered to look and see how anyone else uses their gear.

I have enough issues with how I use mine and how it uses me!

+1 I have too much to learn to spend time worrying about other people!

If Soccer Mom was asking for my advice, however, I suppose I would encourage her to get out of the green box.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #9102822
The way the person using the camera handles themselves has a distinct impact on these kinds of perceptions as well...

I think Jay, just hit the nail right on the head.

I don't usually care what people are shooting with, or the settings they use. When I see other people doing photography, these are the things that I notice - and if they are doing them right, then my respect level goes up:

• They have a camera bag.
  
• They are carrying a tripod/monopod.
  
• They kneel when shooting kids/pets.
  
• They shoot in portrait mode (camera tuned 90 degrees) instead of landscape.
  
• They look at the settings on top first (or on the LCD) then compose & shoot.
  
• They've got either the info screen or histogram on their LCD.
  
• They shoot the same picture twice, instead of once.
  
• They are shooting something closer than 3 feet away.

DocMike wrote in post #9100033
I'm curious to how one would even know that another shooter is using green-box mode? How can you see what mode someone else is on? Would that imply that you're looking at other photographers rather than what you're supposed to be shooting?

In any event, I remember being out at a concert and handing my Rebel to another Rebel user to take a picture of me with the artist, at which point he looked down at the camera and said, out loud, "Where's the green box mode?" (I would have at least hoped that he'd set it to "P" so I could still have a RAW of that image!)

People are intrinsically curious. Sometimes for the wrong reasons, sometimes for the right reasons. The right reasons are based on what I believe is the threads entire point. Your an enthusiastic photographer at a location with other dslr owners, some of which have some very expensive kit. Assumably they know what they are doing so you have a look to see what their camera is set on. The wrong reason would be to see if they are in auto mode so you can have a smirk. Unfortuneatley so many people run auto mode that when i check out other peoples gear and settings i tend to end up smirking, alot, so try to avoid it as much as possible. Typically my conversations with other random dslr owners are instigated by the other party. I still quietly take note of how other people are taking photos, you can quickly weed the hit from the sh!t. For example i was at a zoo recently where every other group of people had a dslr. Most of these groups where just taking random snaps of the kids etc, but occassionally someone would start firing off animal shots and it was interesting to see some of the angles they were using and the methods they used to shoot through wire etc. So the notion that you should ignore what other photographers are doing is probably a really good way not to learn anything new.

pwm2 wrote in post #9101814
The only thing that makes me sad, is people who could use better equipment but just can't afford to upgrade.

But in the end, it doesn't help to be a technical master of the camera without the artistic eye. An artist with a P&S will still produce the best pictures.

I couldn't agree more. Is it funny and sad that expensive DSLR's are being used for point and shoot? Yes, but it can't be helped. If that soccer dad wants to take a good clear photo of their kid playing and the guy at the store was able to rope him into buying an expensive camera instead of a P/S with a small lens with poor digital zoom then so be it. That's their financial choice.

It is becoming more and more common place for people to buy DSLR's. It's everywhere. Friend's of mine who are not into photography but are interested in taking better photos have asked advice on what to buy for their next trip. Of course it has crossed my mind about whether or not they really need a DSLR but they are enthusiastic about taking better photos, even if it's only on green box.

In the end if their images are just snap shots and they want the capability of taking better photos to remember occasions and have the camera do all the work, that will be their own bill to pay.

What is a struggle to see are those who could use better camera's and have to work their way to better equipment. Some of most inspiring photos I've seen are from a point and shoot just because the user had the eye to capture the image.