Comparing my 450D with my wifes FS7

I

Iiyama

Messages
1,733
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been thinking about selling my 450D and all that goes with it. I keep hesitating thinking that I might regret it. So I did a quick and dirty experiment and the results surprised me.

I took several shots with both cameras on full auto from approximately the same position.

Here is the indoor one I did. In my opinion they are not that vastly different. As expected the DoF is better on the 450D. But I think the detail is similar. Which has pushed me closer to selling and buying a TZ7 or S90?

450D
IMG_0574-1.jpg


FS7
P1000034-1.jpg


Or do you disagree?
 
will69 said:
The DoF is FAR better on the 450d shot
Click to expand...

Yes I agree but I think for a point and shoot shot the overall differences are not that great.
 
Depends on what you want to shhot with the camera and if the ability to use different lenses or external flashguns is important to you, or you may want larger prints which the 450D may be better at.
Matt
 
MatBin said:
Depends on what you want to shhot with the camera and if the ability to use different lenses or external flashguns is important to you, or you may want larger prints which the 450D may be better at.
Matt
Click to expand...

Same old tale sick of missing opportunity's because I could not be bothered to lug my gear around.
 
I think just the ability to be able to use depth of field creatively but be enough to swing it for me, without even going in to printing advantages, better shutter speed control, interchangeable lenses etc. Having said that compacts are very good these days and if you look at the weight and portability of compacts as an advantage, then go for it. I know It wouldn`t be for me though. :)
 
I must admit when I had a super zoom I missed the control of DoF and the noise issue irritated me. However, my wife's new FS7 really surprised me therefore I did the comparison. Now we take it with us most of the time when we go out.

I also did a shutter count on my 450D and as if to reinforce the point it has less than 600.

Hence I'm torn :(
 
This isnt surprising, and it just depends on how seriously you take photography (ie, in term of lens choice, use of filters etc) and what you shoot.

If you tried sports with the TZ7 you'd be wasting your time, landscapes without filters would be crap, portraits without decent bokeh would be boring, indoor portraits without an external flash would be horrid....i'm sure you could list more....
 
Blue Eagle said:
This isnt surprising, and it just depends on how seriously you take photography (ie, in term of lens choice, use of filters etc) and what you shoot.

If you tried sports with the TZ7 you'd be wasting your time, landscapes without filters would be crap, portraits without decent bokeh would be boring, indoor portraits without an external flash would be horrid....i'm sure you could list more....
Click to expand...

I agree. But now I tend to shoot landscapes and people in addition to holiday shots. I still like to have some control over aperture and shutter. But I miss out on so many opportunities because I cannot be bothered to take my DSLR with me.

My main point is how far compacts have come and the FS7 is one of the cheaper ones. I would be keen to see how these quick shots would look taken with an S90 or Panasonic FZ38.
 
Iiyama said:
I have been thinking about selling my 450D and all that goes with it. I keep hesitating thinking that I might regret it. So I did a quick and dirty experiment and the results surprised me.

I took several shots with both cameras on full auto from approximately the same position.

<snip>

Or do you disagree?
Click to expand...

In bold, that is the bit that is important. Yes, the cameras make pretty much the same decision when on full auto.

Take a shot in the creative modes on the 450D where you want a specific result then reproduce that to your satisfaction on the compact. If you can do that then yes, sell up. But you really can't compare the cameras based on a shot in auto.

Unless of course you only use auto, if so then the comparison is valid.
 
I know how you feel going thro the same debate myself looking at bridge cameras as like you I dont take my camera out so miss any chance of photo where as my wife takes her point and shoot every where and gets the photos I miss out on go with what you feel suits you best I am
Bob
 
If you use your DSLR like a point and shoot (on full auto) you'll get results like a point and shoot!!

Its not a fair test, as all your doing essentially is testing picture resolution. With a DSLR it depends on a lot of things, one of which is the glass on the front. The results would have been astoundingly different if the 450D had a 10-22 stuck on the front!

For the record, depth of field, colour and sharpness look better with the 450D on this test. Keep the 450D and get a decent walkabout lens (I see you only have the kit lens and the nifty fifty, not really getting the most out of the 450D there!).
 
You didn't exactly do a very good test here. A shot of a teddy on a bed? Even with such a shoddy test the 450d still wins. Compare it to a few landscapes and some portraits and take it out of auto mode to do it then look at the differences.

your fx7 is only really useful for holiday snaps, if thats all you want to take then it makes sense to sell it. But if you want better than this but more manageable camera then go for the 4/3ds models like the panasonic gf1 with a pancake lens
 
Thanks for all of the replies. It was never meant to be a scientific test. As I said from the outset a quick and dirty test. In my opinion is does give some insight into how far compacts have come when compared to a DSLR on auto.

I fully agree with the comments regarding how different it would have looked with a different lens / filter / exposure tweaks.

I did this exercise along with several outdoor shots and macros, all on full auto and the results did surprise me. Yes overall the 450D was better but that's to be expected even before settings etc are played with.

For me personally it is about whether its worth keeping the 450D and buying something I am more likely to carry with me most of the time, with a decent lens and some control over exposure.

Cheers
 
Iiyama said:
Thanks for all of the replies. It was never meant to be a scientific test. As I said from the outset a quick and dirty test. In my opinion is does give some insight into how far compacts have come when compared to a DSLR on auto.

I fully agree with the comments regarding how different it would have looked with a different lens / filter / exposure tweaks.

I did this exercise along with several outdoor shots and macros, all on full auto and the results did surprise me. Yes overall the 450D was better but that's to be expected even before settings etc are played with.

For me personally it is about whether its worth keeping the 450D and buying something I am more likely to carry with me most of the time, with a decent lens and some control over exposure.

Cheers
Click to expand...

with this in mind then it says to me that a standard compact is really not want you want as they don't do this, they just take snaps. Sounds more like a 4/3rds is what you need like the gf1 or the olympus pen
 
DSLR's offer the clear advantage of much faster focussing and the ability to change lenses for some quality glass, they are also much better at higher ISO's.

If, however, you tend to shoot static subjects in good light and have no aspirations beyond the kit lens then there is a good argument to go for a bridge or even a compact camera.
 
Could always get a GF1, near DSLR quality but in a small camera that you can take and use more than a DSLR.
 
Is keeping the 450D and getting a compact an option for you? They complement each other. I always had a film compact in my SLR days, and I had an A640 until my daughter borrowed it and fell in love. She's a good photographer and I don't have the heart to ask for it back. OTOH, I suppose it does give me a reason to buy something else......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top