I’ve been shooting with SLRs for quite a few years. Back when I ran a darkroom at a local community college, I carried around an old Yashica SLR. But I inadvertently left it in a cab in New York City. Over the years, I drifted away from serious photography, and went through a series of point-and-shoot cameras. After experimenting with digital, I finally returned to the SLR fold with the Nikon D70.
History occasionally repeats itself, so of course, I accidentally left the D70 on an airplane when I was on vacation. Unlike the first time, I stayed with SLRs, replacing the D70 with a D70s, then a D80 and finally the D300. I’ve also had my share of point-and-shoot compacts, and liked a few, but now I use the D300 almost exclusively.
But SLRs aren’t for everyone. If you’re thinking about getting a digital SLR, and are on the fence, here are five reasons to avoid jumping onto the digital SLR bandwagon.
I currently own two SLRs, a Nikon D300 and a Nikon D90, plus assorted lenses. By September, Elizabeth will head off to UCLA with the D90. However, the D90 will be replaced by a D300s, so I’ll still have two SLRs. So when I talk to other people, the often ask me which SLR they should get. Rather than diving into speeds and feeds, we discuss exactly what they want to accomplish. Usually, what they really need is a fairly high end point-and-shoot camera, not an SLR.
Here are just a few reasons I’ve heard to justify a digital SLR purchase, and why those reasons aren’t necessarily valid.
Megapixels
Oddly, many potential SLR buyers are under the impression that SLRs have more megapixels than point-and-shoot cameras. While this might be true for some prosumer and higher end SLRs, like the 24 megapixel Nikon D3X, most affordable DSLRs range from 10 – 15 megapixels. Even modest point and shoot cameras now offer 10 megapixels, and some go much higher.
So don’t rush out and get a DSLR for megapixel count. That’s simply not a valid way to compare any cameras. At some point, more pixels aren’t necessarily better. You can print very good looking 8 x 10 prints with 8 – 10 megapixel images and 13 x 19 prints with 12 megapixels.
So raw megapixel count is a poor reason to buy a DSLR. Pixel density, on the other hand, might be a better reason.
Interchangeable Lenses
This is one reason that, on first blush, seems like a great reason to buy an SLR. After all, SLRs are made for switching lenses, right? You can use just the right lens for the right type of photo.
Well, no.
I’ve known camera buyers who buy an SLR with two kit lenses. Typically, it would be a combo like an 18-55mm and 55-200mm. That sounds great in theory. In practice, the average user almost never switches a lens. My daughter uses a Nikon 18-200 superzoom almost exclusively with the D90. Except for the fact that she often shoots in pretty low light, she might as well have a superzoom point-and-shoot.
Another issue with interchangeable SLR lens is dust on the sensor. Whenever you swap a lens, you run the risk of dust getting on the sensor, and suddenly you have ugly dust spots on your photos. While many SLRs now can vibrate the sensor to shake off dust, sometimes you get dust that stubbornly adheres to the sensor. That usually means a $35 – $100 trip to your camera dealer, who can clean sensors professionally.
Often what’s better is to get a good quality superzoom point and shoot. So if you’re considering getting an SLR so you can swap out lenses, then consider a superzoom point and shoot camera instead.
Loading tweets...
9 comments
1 ping
Tomas says:
August 21, 2009 at 6:27 pm (UTC -7 )
Hi, sorry to bother Loyd, but what do you mean with “share of point-and-shoot SLRs”? Super-zooms PSs?
And great article! I`m planning on buying one, and the article helped, altought I still plan to buy one.
Thx
Loyd Case says:
August 21, 2009 at 6:55 pm (UTC -7 )
“point and shoot SLR” was a typo. I’ve fixed it, thanks.
As long as you thing through why you’d want a DSLR, then by all means, get one. I’ve certainly gotten a lot of use out of mine. Have fun with it!
Robert Jensen says:
August 22, 2009 at 10:57 am (UTC -7 )
Lloyd,
I’ve enjoyed your work for a long time.
I’ve spent almost 30 years in the photo retail business, 10 years as a working photographer, and the past 2 years with a job similar to your’s.
One thing I’d add to the plus column of DSLR’s is overall image quality, mostly from having a larger sensor and being able to shoot in RAW format. (Camera’s like the Canon G10/G11 are the exception to the rule) Most of the point and shoot cameras people buy are lacking in wide angle, packing something close to an equivalent of 35mm. (Which always surprises me considering that such a focal length makes it almost impossible to shoot the obligatory family around the dining table at Thanksgiving/Christmas/birthday photo).
The strong point to P&S camera’s isn’t so much their ease of use (now there’s an oxymoron for you) but their compact, easy to always carry with you size. I think that for that same reason there’s been such a raise in the popularity of shooting family photos using cell phone cameras. The newest Apple 3GS has a 3 megapixel camera, more than capable of producing a decent 4×6 print or uploading to an online photo album. I think the day is coming (soon) where people aren’t going to bother lugging around even a small P&S camera when they already have something ‘good enough’ built into their cell phones. Then we’ll see the market will shrink to those mega-zoom cameras, traditional DSLR’s, medium format digital cameras or other specialty cameras (i.e. underwater, b&w).
Loyd Case says:
August 22, 2009 at 11:22 am (UTC -7 )
All good points. My purpose here was to debunk some of the misguided reasons people give for buying a digital SLR. Image quality is one, because people who want to buy a DSLR seem to think they’ll automagically take better pictures. They don’t realize that they often end up using it more as a point-and-shoot, rather than taking advantae of the qualities that come with an SLR, not to mention the learning curve.
The larger sensor size is definitely a factor, but you do have to understand how to exploit it.
Robert Jensen says:
August 22, 2009 at 6:27 pm (UTC -7 )
When I sold cameras I’d always ask first what they wanted to do with the camera, then I’d ask if they thought they’d get more use out of the smallest pocketable camera or something more jacket pocket sized that had a zoom that would bring the subject closer.
Many times I had a customer come into the store with a list of recommended gear to buy given to them by a friend who was a professional photographer. Seldom was it what they actually needed.
I always felt it was a salesman’s job to educate the customer enough so that they could make an informed decision of what to purchase. (Not unlike the job you and I do with our writings) Not only did I have a customer who was happier with their purchase, but one who’d come back to see me again and again. I had customers who needed their hand held until they got through the learning curve, which I didn’t mind doing as long as the store wasn’t busy. I tried to emulate the best sales people I’d had experience with, the ones who were knowledgeable, enthusiastic – and patient.
Dawson Witter says:
August 25, 2009 at 12:49 pm (UTC -7 )
I really see this whole article as a waste of time, sorry to say. I have been a photographer for over 30 years. I currently use two DSLR’s, Nikon and a Canon. I use three film cameras a Nikon F55 and a Nikon F801 along with an F70/N70. I must say that every now and again I am taken by the romance that is film. For what I call real working photography DIGITAL is the only way to fly as long as you know the camera off of the usual AUTO settings and you shoot in RAW only. I need to see what I am capturing right away, and then I need the flexibility of editing in the studio. Film does not afford anywhere near the level of control that Digital does, and so people make sure that you are fully educated in digital and do yourself a huge favor, read your user’s manual as it will allow you to go beyond that AUTO setting. Film is for private work that we might do as photographers, experimenting in weird lighting, or my personal fav – nightime photography, where you control everything just by leaving the camera on the “BULB” setting. Some of my results would blow your mind. Lately though I have even brought digital into this setting and I must say it is really invigerating to see “INSTANT” results. Digital is only going to get stronger and stronger. It is imperative that consumers find out a little before heading into the local store. I find most don’t even know some of the most simple basic points. So people do some WORK and find out what you WANT, and NEED!!!
Ivan Miklos says:
August 26, 2009 at 3:30 am (UTC -7 )
Yeah, i have to agree with almost all the sentences. However customers are buying a DSLR instead of the simple and easy of use compact, subcompact cameras because they realized that the DSLR cameras have better picture quality. And this is not coming from the talent of the photographer, but the quality of the camera.
They have no idea what the heck is the depth of field. They’re just seeing that the pictures is simply better.
They never realized the colorspace and white balance settings, just seeing that those pictures are well balanced and colors are deeper.
The opportunity to shot a series of pictures can be a very strong stimulus as well.
In sum, a DSLR is simply better than a point-and-shot camera. Even sometimes they have equal number of megapixels, the sensor quality and the optics is far better. And -horrible dictu- some of us aren’t using them better than the compact, we will shot better pictures.
…and of course, i will use my Nikon still to shot a good set of DIA slides. Just compare
YS says:
August 29, 2009 at 11:27 am (UTC -7 )
Loyd, the thing is, they’ll automagically take better pictures. Sure the photos they take may still be bad photos, but they’d be less bad than on a compact P&S. Better tonality, dynamic range, and lower noise. I’ve had some friends who’re definitely not photography hobbyists buy the smaller entry level DSLRs and are amazed at how much better their photos are now. This is on JPG photos without any post-processing!
Mark Ditter says:
August 30, 2009 at 5:54 pm (UTC -7 )
Excellent article, Loyd. Whenever I’m in a camera store and see someone looking at dslr’s who probably should not be buying one, I cringe. It’s all I can do to stop myself from interrupting the salesperson to try to tell the customer to buy something else.
I bought my first film slr camera almost 30 years ago, and now own two dslr’s. There are times when a point and shoot camera simply cannot do what I need it to do and the only thing that can get me the pictures I want is a dslr. Still, you know what the funny thing is? I think I get more “keepers” when I am using a P & S camera. It’s much harder to screw something up or set something wrong on a camera that hardly has any settings to adjust.
Five Terrible Reasons to Buy a Digital SLR -Improbable Insights says:
August 21, 2009 at 6:38 pm (UTC -7 )
[...] Case 2009-08-21 18:13:13 See the rest here: Five Terrible Reasons to Buy a Digital SLR -Improbable Insights var addthis_pub = ''; var addthis_language = 'en';var addthis_options = 'email, favorites, digg, [...]