It's a good introductory article there and it asks all the pertinent questions to a first-time camera-buyer!
There are a few more considerations I'd like to bring into the the picture (bad pun) or emphasize more:
Price-per-shot: Economics
It is true that the CLASS of cameras we call compacts or Super-zooms, as a whole, is cheaper than the DSLRs. From an economic standpoint - at the time of that purchase - it is cheaper to buy a non DSLR.
We now live in this buy-and-throw-away culture and often forget to consider the long run. However, DSLRs are generally engineered and manufactured to take a LOT more pictures between repairs and breakdown than both compacts and superzooms.
The electrical motors on compacts and super-zooms often have to work lot more, since they often drive the zoom of the lens itself, whereas the DSLRs only drive the focusing - for example.
In the long run, it may very well be a LOT cheaper to buy a DSLR than any of the others, due to longevity.
..and we haven't even started talking resell value.
Simplicity of operation and techno-angst
Compacts and Superzooms are generally easier to pick up and start shooting with than DSLRs. They appeal to the market-segment that are mildly to acutely terrified by too many settings. Those of us who know DLSRs know that they can be used as a point&shoot as well, but on the whole the compacts&SZ's have taken a lot "thinking" out of taking pictures. That can be a great advantage for this segment. Archetypically it might be our "grandparents" who are a little techno-intimidated - and lets face it, the "old school" and very technical terminology still dominates the DSLR market - just look at the name "DSLR" and words such as ISO and white-balance..lol..not very user friendly at all!
Another easily overlook reality is that many shooters are "deceived" - typically males..lol. They love the techno-babble and the quasi-scientific language surrounding the DSLRs (I do too, so I'm not pointing fingers) - but there are many DSLR-owners who operate DSLRs MUCH slower than they would a compact of SZ - and that easily ruin that "grabshot" you intended to take.
Portability and the propensity to take pictures
It is true that a "better" camera has the ability to take "better" pictures - but. However, it is also true that good visual memories on images are a factor of how often you have a camera ready and on your body when that opportunity arise.
Small lightweight cameras can be on your body at all time - DSLRs simply cannot. (heavy-duty, serious, passionate photo-enthusiasts who see the universe in frames do not choose one or the other, but have both).
Another thumb-rule is that the amount of good and great pictures you have is a factor of how many pictures you take altogether. That goes for anyone. Everyone's photography improves over time, from where they were when they started. This does not mean that I will ever become another Ansel - however many shots I take - but my shots will be better if I keep at it. Compacts is a pragmatic way to enable this.
All this pseudo-behavioral nonsense is of course not suitable for an article...lol..but in this forum, it's perhaps OK..
Cheers
[/b]
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
) and am coming from a cultural context which doesn't understand the references. That said, forum members do come from diverse backgrounds and it helps to remember this when posting.
