Beginner Do I really need a DSLR

Phillip666

Phillip666

Messages
2
Name
Phillip
Edit My Images
Yes
I have a Canon G16 which I bought in America last year. It takes great pics but as I am a beginner I have to learn how to use all the manual settings etc. I am thinking of selling it and buying an slr because I want to have full manual focus and to be able to have full control over shutter so I can take long exposure night shots. Recently I see Panasonic have brought out a bridge camera (FZ1000) that seems to have some of these features and a reasonable zoom. I have read reviews of this camera but still don't know if it can do what I want. Would I be better to go for an APS-C camera because of the interchangeable lenses and large image chip. Any advice would be appreciated.
 
Most people (like yourself) upgrade because their camera is no longer keeping up with their demands. You may find a bridge camera that resolves the issues but I think it's important to look at where you will go with your photography. My point is that a bridge camera may solve today's issues but will it solve tomorrow's? Bodies do not hold value like good glass does so unless you don't mind giving away money it's important to buy a camera body that you can grow into and not out of It's my opinion that you should always buy as much camera as you can afford for this very reason.
 
shaylou is right.

You really need to think what your interests are and will they stay the same. The FZ1000 looks like a jack of all trades to me.
Put it this way if long exposure night shots are what you are after now, will the FZ1000 be wide enough at 25mm.
The second hand market seems to be low at the moment and a 10-20/24mm lens would only set you back say £200-250 and say £200-£300 for a decent crop body. The difference between equivalent 15/16mm and 25mm is huge for landscape and night sky. Add a £50 50mm f1.8 and you are on the way to having some serous photography fun. There is also a load of choice for longer lens too.

I would also go with buy the best you can afford especially glass.

If you are going down the slr route go and try a few out see how they feel in the hand, look at what the range of lens the manufacturer has and the cost.
They will feel big and heavy at first so bear that in mind.

As for just keeping the G16 forget about it if you really want to get serous about photography. I have a G15 and it takes nice pictures but I would not like it if it was my only camera as I know it's limitations. Most dslr's will wipe the floor with it combined to the right glass but they won't fit in a pocket so it wins there.
 
Last edited:
What's ironic is using an SLR can help you get to grips with full manual - which helps you get more out of other smaller cameras too.
Many compacts now are more than adequate for most uses.
Best solution might be look at a cheaper (used?) SLR.
 
You could even skip the whole dslr step and go straight to mirrorless. If control of shutter speed, focus etc. is what you're after then there are a lot of nice new mirrorless bodies offering all three in traditional control layouts and you'll find the focussing aids like focus peaking to be much more useful than what a dslr finder tells you, especially on a aps-c body (ie the cheaper end of the dslr market).
 
Phillip666 said:
I have a Canon G16 which I bought in America last year. It takes great pics but as I am a beginner I have to learn how to use all the manual settings etc. I am thinking of selling it and buying an slr because I want to have full manual focus and to be able to have full control over shutter so I can take long exposure night shots. Recently I see Panasonic have brought out a bridge camera (FZ1000) that seems to have some of these features and a reasonable zoom. I have read reviews of this camera but still don't know if it can do what I want. Would I be better to go for an APS-C camera because of the interchangeable lenses and large image chip. Any advice would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

A DSLR is a good choice if you want to develop all aspects of your photography. The larger sensor has two key advantages: it collects more light for better low light performance and shooting at high ISO, and secondly the lenses they use deliver much shallower depth of field so you can produce blurred backgrounds for creative effect. Basically you need a camera with an APS-C size sensor - either a DSLR or a mirrorless CSC.
 
OK, so as mentioned you first need to decide what you want from a camera and what you want to shoot, as well as whether you want to carry around the bulk of a larger camera and several lenses. After that you can narrow down the type of camera.

It is true that most cameras offer full manual control in terms of ISO, shutter and aperture, and many offer manual focus too. However, the ease in which you can access these controls differs greatly and so it is important that you try cameras out to see which suit you. Some cameras have menu based system to access ISO, aperture etc, some have dials on the body.

If you want to control depth of field in order to isolate the subject (such as in the classic portrait) then cameras with larger sensors will help achieve this, it is difficult (although not impossible) to do this with cameras such as your G16 as the sensor is very small, although not as small as your average compact camera. You can of course get compact cameras and bridge cameras with larger sensors such as the Sony RX100 and RX10 but these sensors are still smaller than the APS found in some DLSRs and CSCs, which are in turn smaller than the full frame sensors in other DSLRs and CSCs.

Finally, you do not need a DSLR to get full manual control with external dials, and large sensors. Mirrorless (aka Compact System Cameras) offer everything that a DLSR does, except tracking/continuous autofocus still can't match high end DSLRs. Cameras such as the Sony a6000 and Olympus OMD EM1 offer very good autofocus systems though that are not far off. Whilst the Olympus systems 'only' have a 4/3 sensor IQ is still superb, and it is possible to easily get very good subject isolation.
 
Thanks for all the great advice, I really appreciate it. I had a film SLR years ago and loved the full manual focus, ability to keep shutter open as long as necessary etc. I went away from photography for a long time (work, Kids etc) so have to learn all over again. I do kayaking and walk a lot along the sea and in woods etc, so don't like the idea of a full size SLR because I feel I will just not carry it with me. I am coming to the conclusion from the advice given and some research online that I should probably go for a compact system camera which will have the manual controls and large sensor for depth of field etc. I think I need to attend some classes and do some learning before I decide which camera to buy, and maybe get good deal in post Christmas sales. :). Thanks again for taking the time to give the advice.
 
By 'compact system camera', I'm assuming you mean mirrorless? That would be a good choice as in my opinion (FWIW) mirrorless will supplant the DSLR sooner or later.

It is true that FF sensors capture more light per pixel than smaller sensors, but the fall off in quality is not directly proportional to the reduction in size of the sensors - you only have to look at the pictures the iPhone 6 is capable of, and some of the superzooms (which have tiny sensors), to see that.

Most mirrorless systems use the m4/3 sensor which is a bit smaller than the APS-C and 1/4 the area of FF. However, don't forget that the mirror in a DSLR is itself a compromise going right back to the days of reflex photography just after WWII. Mirrorless system cameras have a reduced lens-to-sensor distance which means everything can be smaller. A good, fast piece of glass matched to a m4/3 sensor will be a lot smaller, lighter, and cheaper than its FF equivalent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top