Are DSLR cameras really better than PnS cameras?

[Dr. Harout]

In many ways

[Dusty]

Yes, in many ways! Although the P&S models are getting better - some even having RAW ability - DSLRs give you more features, more options, more (interchangeable) lenses and bigger sensors. Size DOES matter!

Dusty

[Birma]

I think DSLRs provide the ultimate control and big sensors. However I think the boudaries of "better" are blurring. As Dusty says, P&S types often have RAW options now. The micro four-thirds (Panny and new Olly Pens) are one side of the gap and then there are some pretty impressive bridge cameras (Sony Hs, Canon Gs, Panasonic LX3) the other side of the gap (if there is any gap at all!). I wish I could afford a LX3 to just have sat in my pocket for those P&S moments.

[stevecim]

I went from 35mm Film to a Pana FZ10 PnS, back to the DSLR A350.

With in 1 month of getting the Pana, I hated the EVF, slow AF, not able to set a app. smaller than f8

[bfitzgerald]

I have lost all interest in small sensor cameras, Whilst I do still have one, and I can get some ok stuff out of it, fine for decent light. The limitations clearly show up in lower light levels.

It's this that seperates the tiny sensors jobs, from the larger APS ones, and it's pretty noticable.
I was at one time thinking of getting a more serious compact, something with raw etc. But I simply cannot justify the high cost of some of these models, esp when I paid peanuts for the A200. The sony is not perfect, but for the outlay it's very hard to consider spending £400 ish, on a nice build well featured compact, when you get the small sensor.

I hope makers start to work out that bigger sensors in compacts, esp for enthusiast models, are the way to go.

Saying all this, I guess the final image counts, and a good photo is that, whatever it is shot on

[Filmmaker]

The sensors are getting better. EXMOR-R means 2x the sensitivity of conventional CMOS. Sony's new digital processing, which creates one image out of a sequence of several again lowers noise level. People bitch about high pixel count. When you downsize 16 MP, you can get 4 MP picture with low light performance of a 4 MP sensor. The high pixel count is forcing the manufacturers to build better lenses, so your 12 MP compact will produce very sharp and quite low noise 3.5 MP pictures, which will be OK for 8x10 prints. The high zoom range allows quick precise framing even at the long end. With DSLR's you have to change lenses. The large DOF is a problem though. You can't get too artistic without being able to control DOF.

I can see FF becoming the pro format. APS-C and 4/3 will dominate among amateurs, while 1/2.3" format will continue to rule the compacts. I can't see it getting bigger. It must get much bigger to gain usable DOF control, and then you are in the DSLR or EVIL category.


FUTURE:

The MP's will double from what they are today. ClearVid pixel pattern will allow effective pixel count to be advertised as 2x the actual one - that is the second number in parenthesis)

EXMOR-R will allow smaller CMOS with a zoom lens that will fit in a cell phone. So in the future we'll have
- cell phones to replace today's compacts (25/50 MP)
- compact size cameras to house features of today's super zooms (25/50 MP)
- high end superzoom compacts with today's EVIL camera performance (25/50 MP)
- APSC and 4/3" size sensor amateur cameras will continue being produced because people will realize the importance of DOF control (30/60 MP)
- FF cameras will fully replace today's MF and LF. (50/100 MP)

[Bob Janes]

Better is a strange old concept...

The main advantages for me are the reduced noise from a larger sensor, ability to control depth of field (to a greater extent than on small sensor cameras) and ability to use specialised lenses.

In the old days, lack of shutter lag would also have been an issue, but I think things have improved in recent times.

There is still a place for a P&S for me - the main advantage being portability.

Bob

[David Kilpatrick]

Good to see you here Bob! I agree, compact P&S will always have a place, even if it happens to be in my mobile phone which inevitably runs out of charge just when I want to take a snap...

David

[alphaomega]

To me my DSLRs A350/A700 are the best if I can carry them along. If I am restricted in bulk and weight my LX2/3 are definitely superior to nothing or any other small camera. At ISO100 & RAW they deliver incredible quality for their sensor size. I mostly shoot for Alamy and the images taken by these small jewels sail through as long as I keep ISO low and use RAW. I need to watch CA, but then they are not worse than my CZ 16-80.