MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Why would you own a Point and Shoot camera?  (Read 13090 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 15, 2008, 17:42 »
0
This is not an attempt to put down people who use PAS cameras.

Basically the PAS camera makes every attempt to bring everything in the frame into focus.
The way this is accomplished is to set the aperture to it's highest settings (usually about f22)

This means the shutter speed is a bit slower. Moving subjects may be a problem.
You at a loss to be able to make use of DOF as much. So your creativity and appeal are limited.
The sensor is usually very, very tiny compared to a DSLR. So the quality of the image may, or may not suffer.

You are very limited in changing lenses and this feature is non existent in almost most PAS.
PAS do however serve a valid reason for owning one.
They are compact and easy to carry. The images are very good. Real estate agents love the PAS for shooting potential homes to sell.
They are like a tape recorder compared to a studio recording...the information is all there. It's just the quality that differs.

There are quite a few photographers I know that have been very successful in stock using a PAS.
On the other hand, I have never heard of a professional shooting a wedding, studio fashion, or sports with one.

I own one. its 4 yrs old...4 MP. I have had no use for it in the last 3 years....but I wont get rid of it

The MIZ


« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2008, 17:50 »
0
Do you consider a Canon Poweshot A620 a P&S?  I do, although it has so many features (even manual mode), as I guess 90% of users (maybe more) never go away from the basic "program" mode.

Regards,
Adelaide

digiology

« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2008, 18:08 »
0
It was handy for the Jurassic Park ride at Universal Studios. And for some skiing outings.

« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2008, 18:28 »
0
I make a few things with client photos like greeting cards and posters, etc.  I am totally appalled by some of the photos I am sent - but then those customers are usually the ones who turn out loving their products the most, so who cares about a bit of noise and bum pixels on their out-of-focus birth announcements!

And yes, I have a point and shoot as well, and I've even sold a few photos taken with it.  But - conditions have to be perfect for any kind of quality.  No Miz, I wouldn't get rid of it either, even though the batteries have been dead for a couple years. 

What I should do is charge it up and take my 6 year old on a photo walk.

« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2008, 22:09 »
0
I use lot of textured brushes in my work , so I use it for shooting textures. Fits in my pocket , and you don't need any special quality photos for that purpose. 

« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2008, 23:33 »
0
Because .... Mine is a Canon G3 which actually cost as much as my DSLR when I bought it nearly five years ago. it's actually got more controls than my 20D (focus bracketing for example). And a really good quality f2 lens. It can take an external Canon flash; at ISO 50  the image quality is less noisy and more robust to post processing as far as artifacts showing up than my DSLR (but no use at higher ISOs). It's only got 4MP so I don't have too many stock shots with it, but the quality is well good enough. While it's not exactly tiny, I can keep it in my handbag and use it to take reference shots for illustrations whenever something shows up. Because the small sensor has a depth of field from here to eternity when stopped down to f8 or so, it's a fine macro or landscape lens for non-moving subjects in good light. It has a swivel screen so that I can get down low without breaking my back, or take shots over the heads of a crowd. And people don't realise that I'm taking photos as it's so discrete.

And my daughters can hold it  -  they are very petite and finds the 20D too much of a handful.

I only wish that any of its successors were as good as I'd like to upgrade- while it's replacements have more megapixels they have slower lenses, and no flip out screen.

So why use an SLR if I love my P&S so much?...because the P&S focus is slower, the viewfinder is non existent and I can't see the screen clearly without wearing reading glasses. And I shoot a lot (not for stock) with moving subjects at low light (kids theater and concerts, mainly) and the focus speed and high ISO capability of a DSLR is essential. But having an alternative that can do maybe 75 per cent of what I need, that is always in my bag whatever I'm doing, is a real useful trick. And I still upload the odd istock photo with it (it gives me a medium)

« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2008, 00:02 »
0
I considered upgrading my Canon A95 to an A650i, but considering the fact that the Olympus E-420 is only around 50% more (price, size and weight), but delivers much better image quality and can take any lens I would care to mount, from a 8mm fish-eye to 300mm tele, I'll probably buy the Olympus instead.

« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2008, 03:06 »
0
I made my whole stock portfolio (between 75 and 400 photos online on the different major stockphoto-sites) with a point-and-shoot (Canon Powershot S2IS).
Will upgrade to a DSLR this year, because it gives me a bigger sensor and the opportunity to downsize photos when they are not totally sharp...
But I will keep my old Canon, because its easy work, and suitable for most things I want to photograph.

« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2008, 05:57 »
0
This is not an attempt to put down people who use PAS cameras.

Basically the PAS camera makes every attempt to bring everything in the frame into focus.
The way this is accomplished is to set the aperture to it's highest settings (usually about f22)

This means the shutter speed is a bit slower. Moving subjects may be a problem.
You at a loss to be able to make use of DOF as much. So your creativity and appeal are limited.
The sensor is usually very, very tiny compared to a DSLR. So the quality of the image may, or may not suffer.

You are very limited in changing lenses and this feature is non existent in almost most PAS.
PAS do however serve a valid reason for owning one.
They are compact and easy to carry. The images are very good. Real estate agents love the PAS for shooting potential homes to sell.
They are like a tape recorder compared to a studio recording...the information is all there. It's just the quality that differs.

There are quite a few photographers I know that have been very successful in stock using a PAS.
On the other hand, I have never heard of a professional shooting a wedding, studio fashion, or sports with one.


P&S cameras usually don't have f22 as an option. The diffraction would be horrible. From depth of field perspective f4 on most compacts would equal about f22 on 35mm - but the shutter speeds would remain the same. In some situations, this is actually an advantage - eg. Macro work. F2.8 will give you a lot of depth of field, and a fast shutter speed.

Real Estate agents love them because they're too tight to pay a decent photographer, or buy a camera that's up to task... and don't understand that in their hands the photos will more often than not look awful.

While there aren't a whole lot of fashion photographers out there, "never" is a big statement... if you're looking for inspiration:
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_FicKYeNJc" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_FicKYeNJc</a>

I'm sure Terry Richardson isn't everyone's favorite, but he's doing quite ok for himself... with a very small camera.

« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2008, 07:25 »
0
Because I don't want to take my 5D with f2.8 lens on nights out when I'm getting drunk with my friends...

Love my compact, spent alot of money on it, and it gets shots accepted at the stock libraries.  Wouldn't use it all the time though.

« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2008, 07:38 »
0
I  recently begun carrying with me Canon SD600, it is very small and light. shots from it are accepted at microstock sites.

graficallyminded

« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2008, 08:34 »
0
I love my Powershot a610 - most of the photos in my portfolio were shot with it.  It was a great starter camera to learn composition and the basics. 

Now that I have my 20D, there's no looking back.  I only will be using the point and shoot when going to small gatherings or events when I don't want to lug around the big guns.

« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2008, 09:32 »
0
Because I don't want to take my 5D with f2.8 lens on nights out when I'm getting drunk with my friends...

Love my compact, spent alot of money on it, and it gets shots accepted at the stock libraries.  Wouldn't use it all the time though.

i agree . there were times that i wished i had a PAS
in places where the crowd is rowdy and you feel apprehensive to take out of SLR or DSLR . probably won't get out of that place with it.LOL

even now i just seen PAS with 10 mp . i couldn't believe it,
the only thing for these little "non-pro" cameras are you mem card can only take like 20 shots.

but yes, they can be useful at times.

« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2008, 09:39 »
0

even now i just seen PAS with 10 mp . i couldn't believe it,
the only thing for these little "non-pro" cameras are you mem card can only take like 20 shots.

but yes, they can be useful at times.


I think my PAS is about 12 MP, it's not true you only fit 20 shots on a card, mine takes SD cards the same as some dSLR's.  I just bought a couple of 2GB cards for a fiver each.  Plus my PAS can shoot RAW, just the same as my 5D, so it opens up a whole new world of possibility.

Plus, totally disagree with Miz's comments about f22, mine shoots at a true f2.8 with it's Leica lens.

« Reply #14 on: April 16, 2008, 10:17 »
0
I do not even know what F stop my P&S uses. non of the literary classics had MS Word, Homer was blind, and some prehistoric images in caves better than most vectors at IS. Creativity is first, technology is second.


graficallyminded

« Reply #15 on: April 16, 2008, 10:19 »
0
You get what you pay for with a point and shoot.  You wanna spend $500-600 on a G9 or something, go ahead - but it's still going to be limited to what you can do with it.  Strap a flash on the hotshoe and try to shoot a wedding...you're going to look like an idiot :)  BUT, P&S cams are portable, and handy.  Cell phone cameras suck, but soon I'm sure they will begin to have 5-6 megapixels and start taking stock-worthy shots (with some post processing, of course).

I even hacked my Powershot a610 to shoot RAW.

« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2008, 10:43 »
0
Cell phone cameras suck, but soon I'm sure they will begin to have 5-6 megapixels and start taking stock-worthy shots (

My camera takes 5MP shots... no way they would ever get accepted at any of the libraries.

Perhaps one day, but then I'd rather spend 300 on a camera, and get a rubbish phone free on my contract, than spend up to 400 for my phone...

Phones make phone calls, MP3 players play music, GSP devices do location finding and Cameras take pictures.  I don't forsee a product in the near future that can do all those things and more well.  At the moment they just do all those things badly...


« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2008, 10:46 »
0
Seren, are you sure 5MP images are not accepted? My PS images 6MP; they are accepted; i have not cropped them though ....

« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2008, 19:12 »
0
5MP is no problem as long as the photos are good. Some of my best sellers are from a 5MP Canon A95.

Even the camera I use the most at the moment, the Olympus E-1, is 5MP, but that's not a p&s  :D

graficallyminded

« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2008, 19:17 »
0
We used the GPS on my wife's $40 LG chocolate cell phone (Verizon) and for the $2.99 demo/trial price for one day it gave us turn by turn directions on an 8 hour road trip.  It works just as well as a $200 tom-tom or magellan :)  The woman's voice was even quite pleasant.

« Reply #20 on: April 16, 2008, 19:21 »
0
I have uploaded images at 4MPix (3.9MPix in fact, from the Canon A520 I had before buying the A620; still re-upload some old stuff that had been rejected before ::) ).  I also submit images I took at 3MPix (to save storage) when travelling in Africa using the A620 (which is a 7.1MPix).  Some I have even upsized to fit the 4MPix minimum requirement of FT and 123RF...

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #21 on: April 16, 2008, 19:32 »
0
Sigma just released a PnS with a DSLR size Foveon chip and a prime lens in a single little package.  A little $$, but it looks like the convenience of a PnS with absolutely no quality compromises. 

« Reply #22 on: April 17, 2008, 01:58 »
0
Seren, are you sure 5MP images are not accepted? My PS images 6MP; they are accepted; i have not cropped them though ....

They're not accepted from my 5MP phone camera because the quality is awful.  It takes worse photos than my 5D at ISO3200.  That was my point - camera phones aren't good.

« Reply #23 on: April 17, 2008, 07:52 »
0
I got confused when you called it just camera ...

« Reply #24 on: April 17, 2008, 09:54 »
0
I got confused when you called it just camera ...

Look at the quote I referenced in my post about mobile phone cameras.  ;-)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
4871 Views
Last post September 08, 2007, 18:41
by pattie
14 Replies
8438 Views
Last post March 08, 2011, 15:14
by madelaide
2 Replies
3174 Views
Last post February 18, 2011, 02:48
by RacePhoto
10 Replies
5380 Views
Last post September 14, 2012, 05:46
by rene
32 Replies
18555 Views
Last post March 05, 2013, 11:37
by Fred49

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors