Invest in DSLR?

[hawsumb]

I've been researching cameras and think that I've settled on purchasing a DSLR (likely the Canon T1i) instead of a superzoom (like the Canon SX20). I was explaining this to a colleague today and told her that I thought a DSLR would be a longer investment over the superzoom - i.e. I'd expect to have the DSLR for 5+ years vs the superzoom for ~2 years. With a DSLR I could invest in a better lens with the money I'd use to buy a new superzoom in 2 years. Then, I got thinking again, and wondered: IS a DSLR a longer investment? With technology changing all the time is it really reasonable to expect a DSLR to be "worth it" (for lack of a better word) for that long?

Thoughts?

~ Heather

[Kayleigh]

i don't know much about cameras but i have a T1i and i love it! (i got in january of this year.) Pair it with a tutorial from Katrina & you are on your way! Hopefully someone will come along wit more insight for your thoughts. Good luck with the decision!

[jeswel@msn.com]

I have a Canon EOS DSLR and I love it. That being said, I hate how expensive the lenses are. In addition, I don't use it very often. I save it for parties & portraits, but if I'm out & about nothing will replace my point & shoot. DSLRs while great quality, are not in my opinion, convenient. They are heavy, bulky, & take time to adjust which can be a pain if you want just a "quick" shot. Also, I confess, I have never taken the time to learn how to properly use my DSLR. They are so much more complicated & I haven't had the patience to sit down with the thing & practice.

So to sum up, I think they are great tools, especially if you love photography. However, if you just want a quick pic to scrap later, there are great point & shoots out there that are way more convenient & cheaper & will still give you great shots.

[dugarner]

It totally depends on your photography style, your level of interest in serious hobby photography, your budget . . . blah, blah, blah. I use my dSLR every day. That said, I would probably be content if I had my old Fuji ZLR back, it was a superzoom with 2.8-8 aperture, shutter from 30 sec. to 1/4000, quality ISO up to 800. So for the majority of hobby photographers, it would probably be plenty. It has all the modes on the dial that my Sony has, including full manual.

Lenses are pricey. And the problem is, you really need to commit to a system. I bought Sony and have not been pleased with the bottom-end lenses. Yeah, I get it, Carl Zeiss lenses are the bomb. They're also as much as a used car. Not happening! A guy I met yesterday said I should sell everything I have and re-invest in a different system. So that would set me back about $1000, even if I got what I paid for the four pieces (body and three lenses), whereas the Fuji I had is something like $300 brand-new.

And I will need to replace my camera body in the next year or two. That's another $800. I don't make any money off my photography, so I don't have a way to take money and put it back in to invest in the lenses I want.

I'd say if you had to replace the superzoom every 2-3 years (I had my first Fuji for 4 years and it was still doing fine, I just outgrew it) you'd still probably come out ahead in the long run. And you wouldn't have buyer's remorse like you would if you purchased a dSLR system and weren't happy with it, or got sick of lugging it around. Me, I don't mind carrying all my gear. But that doesn't fit with some people's lifestyles. AND if you decided to go dSLR somewhere down the road, you could keep the superzoom and use it when you needed to, so you wouldn't be losing any money at all.

Ha! I bet that didn't help at all, did it?

[Scrapbird]

I went around and around with this a few years ago, and decided on a superzoom.
My reasoning was:

1. I like to carry my camera on hikes and long walks. The superzoom is much lighter.
2. In order to take photos of the same telephoto length as the superzoom, I would have to spend thousands and carry many pounds of lenses.
3. I am a (very!) amateur photographer and I couldn't justify the expense just for a hobby.
4. The camera takes RAW photos and has most of the settings of a DSLR, so I can still have as much control as I want to learn about.
5. Here is the camera I use. Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18K 8.1 MP Digital Camera
6. I LOVE the quality of my photos. You can check them out at Flickr: scrapbird's Photostream

Hope this is helpful!

[jeswel@msn.com]

5. Here is the camera I use. Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18K 8.1 MP Digital Camera

That's the same camera I use!

[JulieSade]

This is coming from a person who currently owns a Canon SX20 (really...did they have to use "SX" in the name? to continue...). I also still own my Canon AE-1 Program, which I bought when I was student. It still works, and I've *loved* the quality of photographs I got with it, in 35mm film.

However! All the times I wished that it was lighter and more convenient when I was travelling! Or hauling it around after my kids-and when I had kids, I ended up investing in a nice Nikon 35mm point and shoot. It was half-price, back when digital was starting to become affordable for many more people. (about 8 years ago?)

Anyway, I like the size of the Canon superzoom. I like not hauling around a back-breaking camera bag with heavy glass lenses. I don't like having less control over my depth of field than I did with my SLR camera, but I'm trying to figure out a way around that. I love my depth of field control, when I have it. I'm happy overall with the quality of the photos I get with the SX20. I do qualify that, though. It does have some quirks, and it does some things while I'm shooting that I still can't quite figure out, but that's probably because I don't use it as much as my tiny Nikon Coolpix, which I can carry around in my purse without worrying about it breaking.

[dugarner]

Originally Posted by JulieSade

I don't like having less control over my depth of field than I did with my SLR camera, but I'm trying to figure out a way around that. I love my depth of field control, when I have it.

You can get around not having as large of an aperture with a superzoom by backing up as far as you can and zooming in tight. It will imitate the narrow DOF created by a wide-open aperture. This works as well with any telephoto technique. I frequently shoot portraits of my daughter all the way out at 300mm f5.6 so I can get that beautiful bokeh without worrying about fighting a tiny focal range with the f1.8. I'm more likely to have her whole face in focus, so if we're outside, that's what I use. It feels funny standing all the way across the lawn from her, but it also helps keep things more candid and real! I saw a photographer's website once who does portraits at 1000mm. Absolutely gorgeous, though the lens is a monster!

[Scrapbird]

Originally Posted by dugarner

You can get around not having as large of an aperture with a superzoom by backing up as far as you can and zooming in tight. It will imitate the narrow DOF created by a wide-open aperture. This works as well with any telephoto technique. I frequently shoot portraits of my daughter all the way out at 300mm f5.6 so I can get that beautiful bokeh without worrying about fighting a tiny focal range with the f1.8. I'm more likely to have her whole face in focus, so if we're outside, that's what I use. It feels funny standing all the way across the lawn from her, but it also helps keep things more candid and real! I saw a photographer's website once who does portraits at 1000mm. Absolutely gorgeous, though the lens is a monster!

Thank you for this wonderful tip!!

[JulieSade]

I've also found that you get a great shallow depth of field when you use the macro setting (there are two or three on the SX20). Your suggestion sounds good for longer distances. I'll have to experiment with that.

[fairoaks]

Here's my experience with the same issue. About 25 years ago I got a Minolta Maxxum 7000. I loved it, but it was a lot to carry around, even with just 2 lenses. I found I left it at home because of the size and weight. When I went digital about 10 years ago, I opted for the best point and shoot I could find. I went through 3-4 of them and was just never satisfied with any them. I recently gave in and went with a Nikon D90. I've been very happy again. I've managed to pare down to relatively small camera bag. My husband even said it was stylish.

My advice is to think it through. Everyone's priorities and lifestyles are different. Good luck!

[katrinak]

You've got lots of good advice here and perspective.

In all of the classes I teach and all of the tutorial emails I receive I'm asked this question over and over. You are following the advice I provide and many have been happy with. Spend that little extra to get a dSLR. It will give you so much more flexibility and many features to grow into. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

It sounds like you've done your homework

[SarahDanyelle]

Just to throw my two cents in: I have a Canon T1i and I love it! I carry it with me every day and use it at least once a day (thanks to the photo of the day project). I think if you are even considering a dSLR and you have the money for it, you should just go for it. It will be a learning curve for sure, but I think you'll love it!

[tylertooo]

I have a Canon 5D, and my daugher needed a DSLR for school, so I bought her the T1i. It is actually a smaller (and lighter) camera than my 5D, so I sometimes grab that when I want something lighter. Although megapixels have increased, my 5D is 5 years old, and still going strong. I bought a superzoom and carry it with me everywhere, but am now kind of sorry I did, as I find I use my 5D 98% of the time. Over time I have been able to put money into lenses, and see it as an investment. The lenses I have purchased will eventually be used on my next camera, which will have to be another Canon, so if your first dslr is a canon, chances are you will buy canon again, to take advantage of any lenses you may buy. Unfortunately, I have to fight for my favorite 50mm lens with my daughter, as we both like that one the best as it is great for low lighting conditions. Maybe I should have bought her a Nikon???

Also, the T1i is not full frame, therefore you may want to invest in a somewhat wide angle zoom, but I believe most kits come with the 18-55mm lens which is a perfect all around lens. The T1i has a crop factor of 1.6 which means the image is cropped somewhat from someone that has a full frame camera, like in the Canon 5D. All this means is that if you took the same photograph with the T1i as I did with my 5D, and we both had the same lens, your photo would be a somewhat "zoomed in" version of my photo. So all DSLR's are not the same concerning the image it takes with the same lens. I don't think it makes one better than another, just different.

Now if I totally confused you about crop factor, you can get a better understanding of it with visual examples at this link - Crop Factor

I am always looking for good photography help, and am slowing learning more, and look to all the wonderful people at DD for much needed help with my scrapbooking, where I also need lots of help. You will have to make the decision as to whether you think you will not mind carrying a larger camera. I have a camera bag, but often times, I stuff it in a big purse, so I only have one bag to carry, and am just extra careful not to bang it around. I haven't destroyed it yet. Sorry for being so long winded, but it is a big investment.

[hawsumb]

Thanks for the thoughts everyone! I knew this would be the right place to ask!