Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Why can't a dslr have the same amount of functions as a P&S or Bridge Camera
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
Aug 12, 2018 12:06:35   #
edrobinsonjr Loc: Boise, Idaho
 
jerryc41 wrote:
I see the "dating" question has already been covered, so I'll add my two-cents' worth. Manufacturers could add all sorts of features at almost no cost by modifying the firmware. They can even add features by means of updates to the firmware. So why don't they? Profit. Even though it would cost nothing to tweak the firmware of the cheapest camera in the line, they save features for more expensive cameras. The prices are higher, so you get more features, and the company makes more money. Generally, speaking, the higher the price, the greater the profit margin. "You pays your money, and you takes your choice."
I see the "dating" question has already ... (show quote)



Reply
Aug 12, 2018 12:22:06   #
Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA
 
Yes it was the first ever photograph of people. It was a long timed exposure so all the traffic on the street blurred into nothingness.Only the shoe shine man and customer stood still long enough to be registered.

Back on topic. Of course there has to be tradeoffs. A lightweight, superzoom with 4K video for a few hundred dollars, compared to thousands for a FF dslr and long lens that's too heavy to hand hold. A Kia versus a Cadillac. A Timex vs. a Rolex. But for those who want to get int the game on a budget, these are all viable tradeoffs.

HT wrote:
First ever photograph of people, wasn’t it? My recall for history comes and goes :)

On topic. Many people do not want all the bells a whistles. Adding all those extra features means compromises are being made elsewhere for features which are of no interest to me.

And I don’t accept for a second those features are “free” in $ or performance trade offs.

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 12:22:33   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
BebuLamar wrote:
I will have to add a way to focus the lens, manual only is fine. I can live without the meter.


I’m with you and Bob - simpler is better.

Reply
 
 
Aug 12, 2018 12:37:56   #
szoots
 
I can do somethings with my iPhone shots that I can’t do with my 7D2, but I can pp that raw image to do most if not all the things my iPhone or any p&s camera can do. Please note someone has programmed that p&s to make images the way s/he thinks it should be done. Not necessarily what you want. Also I find the satisfaction of the process of making a great image is part of the joy. Having the image interpreted by some firmware guy does not give me that joy.

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 12:39:54   #
dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl
 
kymarto wrote:
Different manufacturers have different philosophies as to extra processing features. Nikon is by nature quite conservative in what they include. Burst mode, though, is not something that can easily be done with a DSLR, since the mirror has to move out of the way for each exposure. The same holds true for sweep panoramas, since there would be viewfinder blackout for the whole length of the sweep. Anyway, size has nothing to do with it, since all the functions you mention are firmware, not hardware.
Different manufacturers have different philosophie... (show quote)


Actually, that isn't true.. many cameras, My Nikon D7100 for instance, have a mirror up (MUP) function that locks the mirror up once you've focused and have your shot ready.. It will then burst without the jarring effect of the mirror going up and down repeatedly. MUP is also useful for cleaning the sensor and other reasons.

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 13:20:21   #
AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire
 
rmalarz wrote:
Face it. All a DSLR needs in the way of functions is an ISO adjustment, an aperture adjustment, a shutter speed adjustment, and an accurate TTL meter. All the rest of those add-ons are a waste of money. My opinion and I'm sticking to it.
--Bob


I would add the autofocus mechanism and options. My eyesight isn't what it used to be, and the options for continuous focus, tracking, etc. are very useful to me these days.

Andy

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 13:39:33   #
IDguy Loc: Idaho
 
BebuLamar wrote:
So you know that one has to pay more to get less features.


Yes. Like with bicycles. You have to pay much more for one that weighs less.

Reply
 
 
Aug 12, 2018 13:40:04   #
ppage Loc: Pittsburg, (San Francisco area)
 
Classic DSLR's are kind of a dying breed. People will deny and fight this but they are on the way out, just a matter of time. The newer full frame mirrorless cameras have many more features built in as well as 4K and other advanced video features, that are possible once you get that mirror out of there. Canon and Nikon are racing to come up with their own uber mirrorless full frame bodies. If you want a feature packed full frame camera, have a good look at the new Sony A7III.
tenny52 wrote:
Recently I bought a Panasonic FZ80 for my pending trip. So I have been busy learning its functions and I found it can do a lot more in picture taking and movie capturing than my D610 except detail/clarity/dynamic.
The question is whence the DSLR is a bigger unit, why can't the manufacturer pack those functions such as 4K burst mode, post focus mode, panoramic stitching, multi-focus stacking, live cropping etc. which I think can be achieved by software(firmware). Or the reason is my D610 being too primitive.
Recently I bought a Panasonic FZ80 for my pending ... (show quote)

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 13:49:23   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
ppage wrote:
Classic DSLR's are kind of a dying breed. People will deny and fight this but they are on the way out, just a matter of time. The newer full frame mirrorless cameras have many more features built in as well as 4K and other advanced video features, that are possible once you get that mirror out of there. Canon and Nikon are racing to come up with their own uber mirrorless full frame bodies. If you want a feature packed full frame camera, have a good look at the new Sony A7III.


While the Sony is an excellent camera, I think the idea that DSLRs are a dying breed is a bit premature - just look at what the vast majority of the pros are shooting at major news and sporting events, weddings, etc. It’s not about features (very few of which, including 4K video, have anything to do with the presence or absence of a mirror) - it’s about performance, reliability, system breadth and factory support.

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 13:56:56   #
arweber Loc: Pacifica, CA
 
I was just wondering that myself. My Canon Eos 7i does automatic HDR merging. It is fantastic. I’ve never been able to match it. The most expensive Canon DSLRs don’t have it. It seems you can’t get everything you want in one camera.

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 14:03:51   #
Billynikon Loc: Atlanta
 
The reason that pinhole pictures and old 30's type B&W pics look so good is that the world looked different back then. I live in downtown Atlanta and many of the neighborhoods I go thru are so pristine and manicured, there are no good opportunities. But when I go 30 miles outside the city, I find old house, barns, trees, fields and things that turn me on to taking pictures again. I used to work near Lake Lanier and found many places there that just cried out for some experimentation.

Reply
 
 
Aug 12, 2018 14:06:18   #
juanbalv Loc: Los Angeles / Hawthorne
 
Gene51 wrote:
I own a D800 and D810, and I do not rely upon "canned" programs or adjustments that they provide - I think they call them "picture controls" - I prefer to tailor and adjust my images to my taste and if I decide to go in a different direction with an image, I can simply create a virtual copy of my raw file without any adjustments and make it the way I want. Once you use a picture control or other built-in image enhancement setting on a jpeg all that data that is not used to create the image is discarded forever - there is no going back.

So, for my photography, I have no use for those "features" you are writing about. Also, the D600/610 is 6 yr old tech. So no, it lacks the innovation the FZ80 has. And what's more, the FZ80 packs 18 mp onto a tiny 1/2.3-inch sensor, compared to the D610's 24 mp on a full size sensor. The individual pixels on the FZ are 1.59µm² compared to the D610's 35.4 µm² - there is no question which one is going to produce better images in low light with high ISO. Comparing the two is like comparing a Bugatti Chiron ($2.5M, 15 mpg to 35 mpg) to a Toyota Prius Prime ($30K, 133 mpg) and panning the Bugatti because it only seats 2 people, has no room for luggage, and doesn't include a JBL based entertainment system with integrated GPS, remote climate control, SafeSense collision avoidance with pedestrian detection, blind spot monitor, backup camera, satellite radio, dynamic radar-based cruise control, lane departure alert with steering assist, and fully automatic headlights, high beams and windshield wipers.

Each car fits a certain set of widely different expectations - same goes for cameras.
I own a D800 and D810, and I do not rely upon &quo... (show quote)



Reply
Aug 12, 2018 14:30:51   #
James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)
 
Jupiter Creek wrote:
I hope this isn't taken wrongly.
My 610 is an incredible camera and if and when I ever learn how to take a photograph it will serve me more than well.

Whenever I feel frustrated by a camera and its inability (or is it mine?), I look at the picture that really hits me as being a really good picture that shows wonder and movement and setting and life and ... it was taken on some sort of pinhole thingy. I wish I could take as good a picture as this.
I look at this and want to go there, talk to that boy who is cleaning shoes, chat to the man whose shoes are being cleaned, look at the trees and ....

So maybe get a camera that takes pictures and think about the picture and the memory and the event and stop worrying about all the fancy whoo haaa thingy stuff.

Sorry, I'll go away and be quiet again.

Don't waste money on fancy cameras!!!
I hope this isn't taken wrongly. br My 610 is an i... (show quote)

------------------------------------------------------

Good Point..... ;-)

=0=



Reply
Aug 12, 2018 14:39:53   #
SteveR Loc: Michigan
 
kymarto wrote:
Different manufacturers have different philosophies as to extra processing features. Nikon is by nature quite conservative in what they include. Burst mode, though, is not something that can easily be done with a DSLR, since the mirror has to move out of the way for each exposure. The same holds true for sweep panoramas, since there would be viewfinder blackout for the whole length of the sweep. Anyway, size has nothing to do with it, since all the functions you mention are firmware, not hardware.
Different manufacturers have different philosophie... (show quote)


The newer Nikon's are getting around the mirror problem by having the mirror remain up during the burst. It probably aids, too, in the number of fps that a camera can achieve.

As far as the number of functions on a DSLR, I remember posts questioning why cameras had to have the capability to film, when the photographers had no interest in doing so.

Reply
Aug 12, 2018 14:41:01   #
Rongnongno Loc: FL
 
James R wrote:
------------------------------------------------------

Good Point..... ;-)

=0=

Now I am thinking of going back to St Louis damn it.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.