Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

P&S

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
June 6, 2005 8:55:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take a
photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame, even
with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm f/1.4, ISO
1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 

More about : question

Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:55:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

leo wrote:
> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take a
> photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame, even
> with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm f/1.4, ISO
> 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 

Well, duh.
What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the size
of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum ISO? What
was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a silk purse of a
sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the 20D in a shirt pocket,
either.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:04:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

BFD

"leo" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:FGQoe.13593$uR4.7195@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my experience. I
> was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of egomaniacs) with poor
> lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take a photo of our star,
> waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame, even with flash on. I took a
> good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was
> impressed. :) 
Related resources
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 9:27:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

leo wrote:
> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take a
> photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame, even
> with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm f/1.4, ISO
> 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
Hi,
If one does not know what s/he has and how to use it, it ain't matter
whether it's P&S or dSLR. Everyone, everything has a limit including you
and your 20D.
Tony
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 12:49:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> You are entirely right. A point & shoot in a low light condition, with >built in flash, will never equal an slr type in the same situation.

The new Fuji F10 might change that.
June 6, 2005 3:44:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of setting
up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans flash and even
my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get nasty looks. Ditto
for sitting outdoors in crowded places. Yesterday I sat in Quincy Market
in Boston with my 5060 on my lap, tilted lcd all set. Got a lot of
beautiful shots without anyone knowing. I'll grant that a situation
requiring 1600 ISO may be one for a dslr (which might not be seen in
those conditions), but by and large if you learn to work with a P&S the
results can be well worth the effort.

Ron Hunter wrote:
> leo wrote:
>
>> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
>> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take
>> a photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame,
>> even with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm
>> f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>
>
> Well, duh.
> What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the size
> of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum ISO? What
> was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a silk purse of a
> sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the 20D in a shirt pocket,
> either.
>
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 4:34:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

You are entirely right. A point & shoot in a low light condition, with built
in flash, will never equal an slr type in the same situation. And, if
coupled with using Adobe Photoshop, you will always blow the point & shoot
results out of the water. I will say that there are some point & shoots with
a higher ISO maximum ... so the difference could be closer with some.

Craig Flory
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:18:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

leo <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in news:FGQoe.13593$uR4.7195
@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take a
> photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame, even
> with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm f/1.4, ISO
> 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>

Sounds like this has more to do with the photographer and less with the
camera. a disposable p&s in the hands of a skilled photographer will
produce better pictures than the most advanced DSLR in the hands of a poor
photographer. This is especialy true in a challenging situation, like
taking low light photos.
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:34:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> You are entirely right. A point & shoot in a low light condition, with
built
> in flash, will never equal an slr type in the same situation.

My P&S has long exposure capability. I take great low light photos with it.

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:36:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of setting
> up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans flash and even
> my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get nasty looks.

That's a great point. When I'm tooling around town with my SLR I get
noticed - not usually the response I want. If I have my tiny little Canon
s500, people just dismiss me as a tourist and go about their business.

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 8:40:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
> experience.
<snip>

We had a saying in the Army - use the right tool for the job. Sometimes
that's an SLR, sometimes that's a 5x7inch view camera, sometimes that's an
inconspicuous tiny point and shoot. Many of the P&S on the market today
have long exposure capability. Coupled with a little spot or center
weighted metering creativity, you can pretty much get the exposure you want
in any situation. One of my favorite things about digital is how they seem
to build more capability into the digital P&S than they did with the film
P&S.

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
June 6, 2005 8:40:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark:

Great point. Here's another thing I've noticed when doing indoor
no-flash shots with my P&S cameras: the shutter lag enables me to fire
and remove my hand from the camera, leaving it to sit on the tripod or
table surface and steadily and clicklessly go about its business without
need for a shutter releas cord. So, even their minor deficiencies can
add to quality. Having had some bad experiences in Muslim parts of the
world where people do not like cameras, particularly if pregnant women
get in the pictures (largely by mistake), I've come to appreciate the
smallest camera possible for many situations. As to your main last
point, my Oly 5060 has a noise reduction feature that leaves me with
pretty crystal clear photos, even at 400 ISO, which is about as far as I
ever went with my 35mm cameras.

Mr. Mark wrote:

>>If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>>experience.
>
> <snip>
>
> We had a saying in the Army - use the right tool for the job. Sometimes
> that's an SLR, sometimes that's a 5x7inch view camera, sometimes that's an
> inconspicuous tiny point and shoot. Many of the P&S on the market today
> have long exposure capability. Coupled with a little spot or center
> weighted metering creativity, you can pretty much get the exposure you want
> in any situation. One of my favorite things about digital is how they seem
> to build more capability into the digital P&S than they did with the film
> P&S.
>
Anonymous
June 6, 2005 11:38:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron wrote:
> I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of setting
> up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans flash and even
> my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get nasty looks. Ditto
> for sitting outdoors in crowded places. Yesterday I sat in Quincy Market
> in Boston with my 5060 on my lap, tilted lcd all set. Got a lot of
> beautiful shots without anyone knowing. I'll grant that a situation
> requiring 1600 ISO may be one for a dslr (which might not be seen in
> those conditions), but by and large if you learn to work with a P&S the
> results can be well worth the effort.
>
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>> leo wrote:
>>
>>> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>>> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
>>> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take
>>> a photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame,
>>> even with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm
>>> f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, duh.
>> What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the
>> size of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum ISO?
>> What was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a silk purse
>> of a sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the 20D in a shirt
>> pocket, either.
>>
>>
>
I agree. I prefer to capture casual shots of people who aren't aware of
the pictures being taken. People change their looks when they know they
are being photographed. One of my all time favorite shots with my old
Minox B was of a very pretty girl sitting across a table from me,
looking directly at me, and not noticing the camera.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
June 8, 2005 8:05:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron wrote:
> I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of setting
> up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans flash and even
> my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get nasty looks. Ditto
> for sitting outdoors in crowded places. Yesterday I sat in Quincy Market
> in Boston with my 5060 on my lap, tilted lcd all set. Got a lot of
> beautiful shots without anyone knowing. I'll grant that a situation
> requiring 1600 ISO may be one for a dslr (which might not be seen in
> those conditions), but by and large if you learn to work with a P&S the
> results can be well worth the effort.
>
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>> leo wrote:
>>
>>> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>>> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
>>> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to take
>>> a photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black frame,
>>> even with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with 50mm
>>> f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, duh.
>> What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the
>> size of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum ISO?
>> What was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a silk purse
>> of a sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the 20D in a shirt
>> pocket, either.


Handheld so long exposure won't do. However, anti-shake would do.
Perhaps the Panasonic would do the trick. But it still can't overcome
situation that needs fast shutter for fast motions. I had a Olympus 3000
before I traded it to a friend. My friend has a Sony V1 that I can use
anytime and I still have a Canon Elph S300 but I prefer to use the 20D.
The picture quality is indeed much higher than all those P&S. Even my
friend who has a V1 just bought the Pentax *ist DS.
June 8, 2005 8:16:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

leo wrote:
> Ron wrote:
>
>> I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of setting
>> up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans flash and even
>> my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get nasty looks.
>> Ditto for sitting outdoors in crowded places. Yesterday I sat in
>> Quincy Market in Boston with my 5060 on my lap, tilted lcd all set.
>> Got a lot of beautiful shots without anyone knowing. I'll grant that
>> a situation requiring 1600 ISO may be one for a dslr (which might not
>> be seen in those conditions), but by and large if you learn to work
>> with a P&S the results can be well worth the effort.
>>
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>
>>> leo wrote:
>>>
>>>> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>>>> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch of
>>>> egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to
>>>> take a photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black
>>>> frame, even with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D with
>>>> 50mm f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, duh.
>>> What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the
>>> size of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum
>>> ISO? What was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a
>>> silk purse of a sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the 20D
>>> in a shirt pocket, either.
>
>
>
> Handheld so long exposure won't do. However, anti-shake would do.
> Perhaps the Panasonic would do the trick. But it still can't overcome
> situation that needs fast shutter for fast motions. I had a Olympus 3000
> before I traded it to a friend. My friend has a Sony V1 that I can use
> anytime and I still have a Canon Elph S300 but I prefer to use the 20D.
> The picture quality is indeed much higher than all those P&S. Even my
> friend who has a V1 just bought the Pentax *ist DS.


And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions. The answer is soundly NO.
If there are situations that need a P&S, you can always get a cheap one
for $200 or so. My friend bought a Pentax *ist DS kit with case included
at Costco for $760. The Sony V1 was $450. He bought it for snapshots and
wanted something small; he thought that's what he ever needed till he's
jealous about my 300D and now 20D. he now has a DSLR too.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 8:51:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

leo wrote:
> leo wrote:
>
>> Ron wrote:
>>
>>> I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of
>>> setting up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans flash
>>> and even my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get nasty
>>> looks. Ditto for sitting outdoors in crowded places. Yesterday I sat
>>> in Quincy Market in Boston with my 5060 on my lap, tilted lcd all
>>> set. Got a lot of beautiful shots without anyone knowing. I'll grant
>>> that a situation requiring 1600 ISO may be one for a dslr (which
>>> might not be seen in those conditions), but by and large if you learn
>>> to work with a P&S the results can be well worth the effort.
>>>
>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>
>>>> leo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>>>>> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch
>>>>> of egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying to
>>>>> take a photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a black
>>>>> frame, even with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon 20D
>>>>> with 50mm f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, duh.
>>>> What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the
>>>> size of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum
>>>> ISO? What was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a
>>>> silk purse of a sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the 20D
>>>> in a shirt pocket, either.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Handheld so long exposure won't do. However, anti-shake would do.
>> Perhaps the Panasonic would do the trick. But it still can't overcome
>> situation that needs fast shutter for fast motions. I had a Olympus
>> 3000 before I traded it to a friend. My friend has a Sony V1 that I
>> can use anytime and I still have a Canon Elph S300 but I prefer to use
>> the 20D. The picture quality is indeed much higher than all those P&S.
>> Even my friend who has a V1 just bought the Pentax *ist DS.
>
>
>
> And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
> claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions. The answer is soundly NO.
> If there are situations that need a P&S, you can always get a cheap one
> for $200 or so. My friend bought a Pentax *ist DS kit with case included
> at Costco for $760. The Sony V1 was $450. He bought it for snapshots and
> wanted something small; he thought that's what he ever needed till he's
> jealous about my 300D and now 20D. he now has a DSLR too.
Because he really NEEDS the features, or because he is jealous? Sigh.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 4:32:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
> claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions.

Who ever said such a thing?

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 4:33:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote

> > wanted something small; he thought that's what he ever needed till he's
> > jealous about my 300D and now 20D. he now has a DSLR too.

> Because he really NEEDS the features, or because he is jealous? Sigh.

My thought as well, Ron. :) 

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
June 8, 2005 6:20:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mr. Mark wrote:
>>And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
>>claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions.
>
>
> Who ever said such a thing?
>


I won't name names, but there are a couple of them hanging around here.
June 8, 2005 6:20:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
> leo wrote:
>
>> leo wrote:
>>
>>> Ron wrote:
>>>
>>>> I do a lot of candid stuff in pubs, etc. and wouldn't dream of
>>>> setting up a dslr (which I do own). My Oly 5060 at 400 ISO sans
>>>> flash and even my 560 on auto, produce fine results, and I don't get
>>>> nasty looks. Ditto for sitting outdoors in crowded places. Yesterday
>>>> I sat in Quincy Market in Boston with my 5060 on my lap, tilted lcd
>>>> all set. Got a lot of beautiful shots without anyone knowing. I'll
>>>> grant that a situation requiring 1600 ISO may be one for a dslr
>>>> (which might not be seen in those conditions), but by and large if
>>>> you learn to work with a P&S the results can be well worth the effort.
>>>>
>>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> leo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If people are deciding between P&S and DSLR, I can tell you my
>>>>>> experience. I was in a Cabaret (quite awful, organized by a bunch
>>>>>> of egomaniacs) with poor lighting. I noticed an old woman trying
>>>>>> to take a photo of our star, waitress/queen, all she got was a
>>>>>> black frame, even with flash on. I took a good picture with Canon
>>>>>> 20D with 50mm f/1.4, ISO 1600, no flash and she was impressed. :) 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, duh.
>>>>> What was the distance from the camera to the subject? What was the
>>>>> size of the lens on the lady's P&S camera? What was the maximum
>>>>> ISO? What was the relative cost of her camera? You can't make a
>>>>> silk purse of a sow's ear. On the other hand, you can't put the
>>>>> 20D in a shirt pocket, either.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Handheld so long exposure won't do. However, anti-shake would do.
>>> Perhaps the Panasonic would do the trick. But it still can't overcome
>>> situation that needs fast shutter for fast motions. I had a Olympus
>>> 3000 before I traded it to a friend. My friend has a Sony V1 that I
>>> can use anytime and I still have a Canon Elph S300 but I prefer to
>>> use the 20D. The picture quality is indeed much higher than all those
>>> P&S. Even my friend who has a V1 just bought the Pentax *ist DS.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
>> claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions. The answer is soundly NO.
>> If there are situations that need a P&S, you can always get a cheap
>> one for $200 or so. My friend bought a Pentax *ist DS kit with case
>> included at Costco for $760. The Sony V1 was $450. He bought it for
>> snapshots and wanted something small; he thought that's what he ever
>> needed till he's jealous about my 300D and now 20D. he now has a DSLR
>> too.
>
> Because he really NEEDS the features, or because he is jealous? Sigh.


He used to have a Pentax K1000 so he knows what that Sony V1 can't do.
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 6:43:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"leo" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote
> Mr. Mark wrote:
> >>And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
> >>claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions.
> >
> > Who ever said such a thing?
>
> I won't name names, but there are a couple of them hanging around here.

Hmm. FWIW, I have a friend who takes much better photos with his P&S than I
do with my SLR. You can't dismiss the roll of ability of the photographer
in the equation. :) 

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 6:55:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mr. Mark wrote:

> "leo" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote
>
>>Mr. Mark wrote:
>>
>>>>And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
>>>>claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions.
>>>
>>>Who ever said such a thing?
>>
>>I won't name names, but there are a couple of them hanging around here.
>
>
> Hmm. FWIW, I have a friend who takes much better photos with his P&S than I
> do with my SLR. You can't dismiss the roll of ability of the photographer
> in the equation. :) 
>
Hi,
No tools in the world can compensate lack of skills or experience there
of. In music, in sports, in photogrsaphy, you name it.
I've been in photography as a hobby from the days of B&W films and now
just soaking myself in digital stuff. Different ball game but still
basic is same.
Tony
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 9:03:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mr. Mark wrote:
> "leo" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote
>
>>Mr. Mark wrote:
>>
>>>>And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
>>>>claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions.
>>>
>>>Who ever said such a thing?
>>
>>I won't name names, but there are a couple of them hanging around here.
>
>
> Hmm. FWIW, I have a friend who takes much better photos with his P&S than I
> do with my SLR. You can't dismiss the roll of ability of the photographer
> in the equation. :) 
>
Well, sure. Give a carpenter a hammer, and he will frame a house. Give
a 4 year old a hammer, and he will destroy said house. Same tool,
different user.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 9:05:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Tony Hwang wrote:
> Mr. Mark wrote:
>
>> "leo" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote
>>
>>> Mr. Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>>> And I am not saying DSLR is THE answer; just counter a few people who
>>>>> claim P&S can rival DSLRs in all conditions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Who ever said such a thing?
>>>
>>>
>>> I won't name names, but there are a couple of them hanging around here.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmm. FWIW, I have a friend who takes much better photos with his P&S
>> than I
>> do with my SLR. You can't dismiss the roll of ability of the
>> photographer
>> in the equation. :) 
>>
> Hi,
> No tools in the world can compensate lack of skills or experience there
> of. In music, in sports, in photogrsaphy, you name it.
> I've been in photography as a hobby from the days of B&W films and now
> just soaking myself in digital stuff. Different ball game but still
> basic is same.
> Tony

Many of the skills translate. Composition is still composition. Light
is still light, and form is still form. Only the recording medium is
changed, and the nature of the digital sensor, and it's size, makes a
lot of difference in the details.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 2:32:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> > Hmm. FWIW, I have a friend who takes much better photos with his P&S
than I
> > do with my SLR. You can't dismiss the roll of ability of the
photographer
> > in the equation. :) 
> >
> Well, sure. Give a carpenter a hammer, and he will frame a house. Give
> a 4 year old a hammer, and he will destroy said house. Same tool,
> different user.

LOL!

--
Mark

Photos, Ideas & Opinions
http://www.marklauter.com
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 3:20:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mr. Mark wrote:

>>>Hmm. FWIW, I have a friend who takes much better photos with his P&S
>
> than I
>
>>>do with my SLR. You can't dismiss the roll of ability of the
>
> photographer
>
>>>in the equation. :) 
>>>
>>
>>Well, sure. Give a carpenter a hammer, and he will frame a house. Give
>>a 4 year old a hammer, and he will destroy said house. Same tool,
>>different user.
>
>
> LOL!
>
Hi,
Today's society is kinda sick. Most wants more pixels, bells and
whistles, more this, more that and all they do is shoot ordinary
picture. Same with other stuffs like cars, TV, house, whatever....
Maybe they want to show off? Or too much money in the pocket or running
up the bill on plastic, LOL.
Tony
!