Nikon D5100 SLR or Nikon P500 Bridge

[cmsajith]

In my experience IS really helps only for zoom lens. Anyways, its your call sam.
Sorry for OT

 

[matbhuvi]

IS is also really important in low light situation. It helps you to go at least 2 or 3 f-stops lower when shooting without tripod.

Source

 

[theironhorse]

In my experience IS really helps only for zoom lens. Anyways, its your call sam.
Sorry for OT

for a moving subject like his kid in play.. along with tracking focus. IS will help a lot as its gonna be hand held and no tripod.. 1 scenario.

birds in flight...

low light scenario..

and yes at full telephoto say at 250mm or more.. IS is a must .. else a tripod with a remote release..

 

[sam9s]

Thanks you all for such valuable inputs, seriously there was alot to learn and I have learnt a lot from you all photography gurus .... .

Now with 550D in picture I am reading quite a bit about 550D, it really seems to be an amazing camera, in video mode as well. dppreview put 550D movie quality even better than Sony SLT A35, that is something.

Check out this you tube video, that the dude has shot from 550D, not only does it looks amazing but it looks absolute professional movie like video as well. I fell in love with 550D after this video, Though I still have'nt even held the camera to see how it feels. I only have held 1100D in my hand and as I mentioned it felt far better then D3100. I am hoping the same for 550D

Do watch in 1080p

Canon EOS 550D sample video - YouTube



If I am getting or can get 550D for the same price point as A35, or D3100, then its should be the one to go for..... right.

Just one day to go and research more. Sat its time for the purchase .....


PS :: @kittu, how do I change the thread title, I cant seem to find the option.

 

[Kittu]

Ask mods to change the title. Btw, do you know what lens was used while shooting that video?

 

[sam9s]

^^ Kittu, I read almost the entire comment thread, and it seems that this video is posted by Canon itself, but deliberately have omitted to mention lense, maybe to somehow miss guide that its the camera that is responsible for such an outstanding video, when its the lens that makes all that difference...,...... not that camera has nothing to do with it, but what type of lens we use is the main deciding factor of the end result.

Anyway Going by the video again, it must be some kind of wide angle lens, as if you notice, in the mountain footage, the image bends as you move out from the center of the image.

 

[asliarun]

Before getting the dslr, I wanted to buy a compact that I can carry around easily, in my pocket. Did not want superzoom.
I was STRONGLY advised by my "network" to go for a DSLR and I went for it. And I love it.
However, I STILL want to buy a camera which may not have superzoom, but fits my pocket easily and is easier to carry around. Maybe a mobile with exceptional camera will do the trick. But I want a large sensor size, good ISO capability, big aperture.
Fuji X100 is nice, but EXPENSIVE.

I was on the exact same hunt,. and ended up buying a DSLR myself. From my research, the largest non-APS-C sensor in a P&S is 1/1.7" (and 1/1.6"). The camera that started it all is the Fuji F31FD. It quickly acquired a cult following with the enthusiast crowd - in some low light cases, it actually rivals a DSLR! Things have gone downhill after that because in the megapixel race, everyone started cramming in more and more pixels which made each pixel sensor progressively less sensitive to light.

Probably the most promising 2 cameras on paper today are the Canon S100 which is actually a well nourished child of the S90. It has a 1/1.7" sensor and a bright lens (F2-F5.5) at least in the wideangle end of the zoom. Then there is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 which is probably the best of the lot which has an even slightly larger sensor and a vastly brighter lens (F2-F3.3).

Most serious photographers would probably go for a LX5 or its parent, the LX3. But then, both the LX and Canon S series are significantly more expensive than other P&S cameras and are almost priced the same as an entry level DSLR.

 

[theironhorse]

most of the serious dslr users.. use the lx5 as a backup portable camera for their use and street photography and yes its one good camera..

and yes the megapixel race made it all bad .. cramming more pixel in same sensor increasing the density. without any gain in IQ.. cant help.. they running a company... it had becomes a marketing strategy.. most of the basic P&S under 10k are sold coz of megapixel and fancy features. however good to see canon pulling itself out of the megapixel race and after g10 14mp sensor they came back to g11 with a 10 Mp sensor and it was welcomes worldwide by people who knew stuff and appreciated the honesty to getting better IQ.

even today 90 % of camera's are sold on the basis of how many megapixels it has.. and the rest 10 actually research but a portion out of that 10 % too get biased towards megapixels..

more megapixels certainly will help to print board size if incorporated on a bigger sensor..


to print good 8 x 10 . a 8 mp sensor is good enough..

a 2 MP camera is actually 1080p if converted.. 1920*1080 makes 2073600..

 

[asliarun]

If I am getting or can get 550D for the same price point as A35, or D3100, then its should be the one to go for..... right.

You can't go wrong with a well established camera like the 550D. My humble opinion - you can consider the following strategy:

Remember you are building a system and not just buying a camera. So consider it similar to assembling an audio system consisting of "separates". It sounds like you like the 550D and you cannot go wrong with this choice.

Buy the most robust and well built DSLR you can afford which also has the features you really like. Over a long term, build quality will also become as important as features. So it is also important to buy a camera that will withstand the test of time - our handling will invariably tend to become more casual and "slam-bam" over time. Start off with a 1.8 50mm prime lens and avoid buying the kit lens. In fact, I would say that carry only this lens with you in your trip. Firstly, this will be the most compact combo to carry. Secondly, you will quickly figure out the advantages and the limitations of the prime lens. Thirdly, worst case, if you find yourself seriously hobbled by the limitations of the prime lens (such as the lack of zoom), you can always buy a zoom lens while you are traveling.

The thought process that I took was slightly different - I deliberately bought the cheapest DSLR I could find because I thought that if I find myself not using the camera much, I haven't wasted too much money to begin with, and if I end up becoming a photography nut, I will want to upgrade my camera in a few years anyway so it really doesn't matter what body I initially buy. Plus, upgrading later on will be much cheaper as I will be able to continue using all the lenses I would have bought in the meantime. I guess it is the equivalent of buying a pair of good speakers with a cheaper amp and then upgrading the amp.

 

[theironhorse]

You can't go wrong with a well established camera like the 550D. My humble opinion - you can consider the following strategy:

Remember you are building a system and not just buying a camera. So consider it similar to assembling an audio system consisting of "separates". It sounds like you like the 550D and you cannot go wrong with this choice.

Buy the most robust and well built DSLR you can afford which also has the features you really like. Over a long term, build quality will also become as important as features. So it is also important to buy a camera that will withstand the test of time - our handling will invariably tend to become more casual and "slam-bam" over time. Start off with a 1.8 50mm prime lens and avoid buying the kit lens. In fact, I would say that carry only this lens with you in your trip. Firstly, this will be the most compact combo to carry. Secondly, you will quickly figure out the advantages and the limitations of the prime lens. Thirdly, worst case, if you find yourself seriously hobbled by the limitations of the prime lens (such as the lack of zoom), you can always buy a zoom lens while you are traveling.

The thought process that I took was slightly different - I deliberately bought the cheapest DSLR I could find because I thought that if I find myself not using the camera much, I haven't wasted too much money to begin with, and if I end up becoming a photography nut, I will want to upgrade my camera in a few years anyway so it really doesn't matter what body I initially buy. Plus, upgrading later on will be much cheaper as I will be able to continue using all the lenses I would have bought in the meantime. I guess it is the equivalent of buying a pair of good speakers with a cheaper amp and then upgrading the amp.

thats precise.. oh we always come to examples to speakers and amps.. our obsession to sound... we all are.. sam9s.. waiting for saturday.. you gotta unveil it...

 

[theironhorse]

Side by Side Comparison: Digital Photography Review


all three compared... rest waiting for saturday..

 

[sam9s]

^^ One thing I missed noticing (my bad) was that with 550D it says image ratio 3:2!!!! I dont want my images to be 3:2. I will always view my snaps on my 1080p 16:9 ratio LCD or monitor ...... and with 3:2, I will have those irritating black bars ...!! I hate those black bars ...... now this would a serious deal breaker .... damm when finally I stuck to one choice I have this ........ gurus kindly shed some light .....

 

[cmsajith]

^^ One thing I missed noticing (my bad) was that with 550D it says image ratio 3:2!!!! I dont want my images to be 3:2. I will always view my snaps on my 1080p 16:9 ratio LCD or monitor ...... and with 3:2, I will have those irritating black bars ...!! I hate those black bars ...... now this would a serious deal breaker .... damm when finally I stuck to one choice I have this ........ gurus kindly shed some light .....

Quote from CameraLabs review:
"The biggest physical change is the new 3in / 1040k dot / 720x480 pixel screen, which for the first time on a Canon DSLR employs a 3:2 aspect ratio which matches the native shape of its sensor. Previous Canon DSLRs and indeed most rival models used squarer 4:3 aspect ratio screens which meant images in Live View or playback had black bars above or below when the entire frame was viewed. Now on the EOS 550D / T2i, images in Live View or playback fill the screen."

Hope it helps..

 

[cmsajith]

^^ One thing I missed noticing (my bad) was that with 550D it says image ratio 3:2!!!! I dont want my images to be 3:2. I will always view my snaps on my 1080p 16:9 ratio LCD or monitor ...... and with 3:2, I will have those irritating black bars ...!! I hate those black bars ...... now this would a serious deal breaker .... damm when finally I stuck to one choice I have this ........ gurus kindly shed some light .....

Not the image ratio of the pics, but the screen..

Quote from CameraLabs review:
"The biggest physical change is the new 3in / 1040k dot / 720x480 pixel screen, which for the first time on a Canon DSLR employs a 3:2 aspect ratio which matches the native shape of its sensor. Previous Canon DSLRs and indeed most rival models used squarer 4:3 aspect ratio screens which meant images in Live View or playback had black bars above or below when the entire frame was viewed. Now on the EOS 550D / T2i, images in Live View or playback fill the screen."

Hope it helps..

 

[sam9s]

Ok I think by screen you mean the View finder screen of the camera, that now has a 3:2 ratio to match the native shape of the sensor.... right..... I am pretty sure that is some advantage over other models. But I am talking about the LCD screen where I am gonna view the images, which has a native resolution of 1080p 16:9 (all does), I will have those black bars on the right and left side of the image (though still narrow in width as with a 4:3 image) but they will be there right ..... that is something which would ruin the slide show on the LCD. I dont know why they have not included a 16:9 image resolution when it pretty evident and common that most of the displays (infact 99.9%) now have a native 16:9 ratio resolution (1080p) .....

 

[gobble]

Sam
All SLR sensors come in 3:2 native format. My P&S has a button for 4:3 3:2 and 16:9 format. If the DSLR has 720p or 1080p video recording, then it should be in 16:9

HTH
--G0bble

 

[cmsajith]

Ok I think by screen you mean the View finder screen of the camera, that now has a 3:2 ratio to match the native shape of the sensor.... right..... I am pretty sure that is some advantage over other models. But I am talking about the LCD screen where I am gonna view the images, which has a native resolution of 1080p 16:9 (all does), I will have those black bars on the right and left side of the image (though still narrow in width as with a 4:3 image) but they will be there right ..... that is something which would ruin the slide show on the LCD. I dont know why they have not included a 16:9 image resolution when it pretty evident and common that most of the displays (infact 99.9%) now have a native 16:9 ratio resolution (1080p) .....

No, its the camera LCD

 

[sam9s]

Sam
All SLR sensors come in 3:2 native format. My P&S has a button for 4:3 3:2 and 16:9 format. If the DSLR has 720p or 1080p video recording, then it should be in 16:9

HTH
--G0bble

Gobble dear friend, I am talking about images, pictures taken from the camera, not videos .... If the image taken from the DSLR isnt in 16:9 then its gonna lad up with those black bars when viewing on a 16:9 LCD (which is common these days)

 

[arin]

Slrs are intended primarily for professional photography and all the sensor are in 3:2 ratio ( APS 22.3x14.9mm , full-size is 36x24 mm). when you shoot at any other aspect ratios, it is cropped in the camera to get the desired image. These professional cameras are designed for very high printing quality at around 300 dpi, whereas the computer screen has around 72dpi.

I had this "full hd" 1980x1020 picture resolution in my old canon 1000d but never used it because i always shot at 10MP (3888 x 2592 pixels) because you can always crop an image later in Photoshop to get smaller size/aspect ratio but you cannot enlarge a 1980x1020 into larger one without quality loss. In fact entry level slr or a prosumer-camera will be better for you as in more sophisticated ones like my canon 550d, who smallest resolution is also (2592 x 1728) is definitely not made for casual photography of family get together and birthday parties.

As far as the debate for even compacts/prosumers are concerned, even they have a 3:2 sensor so even their image will not be at native (highest) resolution, when shooting in 16:9 and image will be cropped in camera to get a HDTV size.

 

[arin]

Slrs are intended primarily for professional photography and all the sensor are in 3:2 ratio ( APS 22.3x14.9mm , full-size is 36x24 mm). when you shoot at any other aspect ratios, it is cropped in the camera to get the desired image. These professional cameras are designed for very high printing quality at around 300 dpi, whereas the computer screen has around 72dpi.

I had this "full hd" 1980x1020 picture resolution in my old canon 1000d but never used it because i always shot at 10MP (3888 x 2592 pixels) because you can always crop an image later in Photoshop to get smaller size/aspect ratio but you cannot enlarge a 1980x1020 into larger one without quality loss. In fact entry level slr or a prosumer-camera will be better for you as in more sophisticated ones like my canon 550d, who smallest resolution is also (2592 x 1728) is definitely not made for casual photography of family get together and birthday parties.

As far as the debate for even compacts/prosumers are concerned, even they have a 3:2 sensor so even their image will not be at native (highest) resolution, when shooting in 16:9 and image will be cropped in camera to get a HDTV size.