While we are on about advantages etc - battery life seems to be immense on slr's, I trust it's the same on the Canon's? At wedding last week I gave a mate my camera and found it had taken 400+ photos, and still showing fully charge. So if you takes loads of pictures or like to review them in camera then compact probably a dead duck

You are right there.....

3500 images at Dunsfold in the rain - only went down 1 bar :eek:

My point is I believe both you and Mr Rockwell are wrong.

That is my opinion, you may disagree, but surely we can't be wrong?

I get that a lot....

What tends to get up my nose is people trying to stop me taking pictures in a public place.......

It annoys me when I try to explain all my kit together would barely pay for a deposit on one of the big primes you see lying about.

Here’s a question, why do snappers take a lens off and not bother putting a cap over the bayonet fitting? I have seen lenses in wet conditions left like this for many minutes and lost count of the numbers of times I’ve seen it. This doesn’t include snappers who own their own equipment.

While we are on about advantages etc - battery life seems to be immense on slr's, I trust it's the same on the Canon's? At wedding last week I gave a mate my camera and found it had taken 400+ photos, and still showing fully charge. So if you takes loads of pictures or like to review them in camera then compact probably a dead duck

I have managed over 1100 on mine! with a 2 battery grip

It annoys me when I try to explain all my kit together would barely pay for a deposit on one of the big primes you see lying about.

Here’s a question, why do snappers take a lens off and not bother putting a cap over the bayonet fitting? I have seen lenses in wet conditions left like this for many minutes and lost count of the numbers of times I’ve seen it. This doesn’t include snappers who own their own equipment.

Thats 'cos that is supplied kit!!!

That will also often happen when they need to change lenses quickly. The lens cap gets in the way and an important shot may be missed. (and they have probably lost it).

My colleagues who own their own gear tend to look after it a little better.

Thats 'cos that is supplied kit!!!

That will also often happen when they need to change lenses quickly. The lens cap gets in the way and an important shot may be missed. (and they have probably lost it).

My colleagues who own their own gear tend to look after it a little better.

I have seen this after a match/race meet etc when they are covering their laptops with their coats and pretneding to hide (or what ever they do in there ) Do they clean their own stuff/sensors, or take it to the nice Canon/Nikon experts to do it for them?

I have seen this after a match/race meet etc when they are covering their laptops with their coats and pretneding to hide (or what ever they do in there ) Do they clean their own stuff/sensors, or take it to the nice Canon/Nikon experts to do it for them?

The sporty togs tend to shoot wide open most of the time, so dust isn't that obvious, unless a house fly is stuck on the sensor!!!

Some send them to the factory for cleaning, some do there own.

I do my own, as I am careful and do a 'proper job'

I think I mentioned once that the nice Canon people cleaned some muck of the back of my viewfinder at Wimbledon this year. For FREEEEEEE:thumbup:

So far I've gone down the route (almost to paraniod levels) that avoidance is better than fixing it, so I too would be gobsmacked by someone leaving a lens down like that.

I tend to pick my lens for the day and only change it when I'm at home or in hotel room, but then I've only got a 18-55 and a 50mm prime, the latter is by far the superior so tend to get fairly tight compositions of people. Have to say it was ideal at wedding, and takes away some of the choice which for me learning isn't a bad thing

The Canon guys gave me a tip. If you ever have your camera with the body cap on rather than a lens, try putting some Toupee tape (double sided sticky tape) inside the cap, obviously making sure it is very well stuck down. It apparently picks up a surprising amount of loose little bits of stuff that rattles around inside the bony eg fluff, teeny bits of mirror mechanism etc.

Maybe its 'cos I'm colour blind and have a pi$h monitor

Anyway for those interested in the on topic stuff you may find this website covers my argument quite well and is a useful resource.

Your Camera Doesn't Matter

A $150 versus a $5,000 Camera

A $25 vs. a $5,000 Camera

Here's a simple test I did when I compared my old D-SLR (30d) to my point and shoot (Canon A710 IS) last year some time.

The lighting was not so good but it does demonstrate the difference between a D-SLR and a small sensor p&s

Canon 30d

Canon A710

The sporty togs tend to shoot wide open most of the time, so dust isn't that obvious, unless a house fly is stuck on the sensor!!!

Some send them to the factory for cleaning, some do there own.

I do my own, as I am careful and do a 'proper job'

Speaking of dust, I was cleaning my lenses and attaching the UV filters, looks like theres some dust internally inside one of the lenses. Whats the best test to do to see if its affecting shots? Also I don't suppose theres an easy way of getting it out. It probably wasn't the right thing to do but I tried using the rocket blower to blow air in the bottom to try disloge it but not luck.

Also noticed something on the middle left when looking through these something that should be there, doesn't appear to be showing on pictures though. Would I be right in saying it must be domething on the mirror?

Speaking of dust, I was cleaning my lenses and attaching the UV filters, looks like theres some dust internally inside one of the lenses. Whats the best test to do to see if its affecting shots? Also I don't suppose theres an easy way of getting it out. It probably wasn't the right thing to do but I tried using the rocket blower to blow air in the bottom to try disloge it but not luck.

Also noticed something on the middle left when looking through these something that should be there, doesn't appear to be showing on pictures though. Would I be right in saying it must be domething on the mirror?

Hi Gaff

If you can see anything when looking through the viewfinder, it's on the mirror or focusing screen.

Small amounts of dust inside lenses is not uncommon, its shouldn't affect the images too much if at all, so don't worry about it.

Hi Gaff

If you can see anything when looking through the viewfinder, it's on the mirror or focusing screen.

Small amounts of dust inside lenses is not uncommon, its shouldn't affect the images too much if at all, so don't worry about it.

....with a sigh of relief

So what places will dust affect the photos?

Btw those lens pens are the business

Spots of grime / dust on the CCD or CMOS will affect photos. I think lens dust doesn't too much because it's not so much the focal point. You'd need a lot of dust concentrated on one spot for it to have an effect and even then, you'd probably just lose out a bit on light, but wouldn't see a black spot "over the top" of the pic.

Best way to see if you have dust on the sensor is to shoot a photo of uniform white / grey (cloudy day is good - and plenty of them around at the moment) but with a very closed aperture. Don't worry about a slow shutter speed, just get something so that your photo is reasonably bright grey. If there are any "noticeable" bits, that's how you expose them the most

You probably won't see much affect with dust unless it's severe or when the lens is stopped right down.

To see if you have dust on the sensor, just stop your lens down as far as it will go (usually f/8.0 on p&s and f/16-22 on a D-SLR lens) and shoot a white wall or the sky.

Examine the picture on your computer and you will be able to see every dust particle on the sensor. You might be shocked!:eek:

I usually only use a dust blower, which gets around 90% of all the dust and I don't worry about the last 10% as you can only see it in shots when really stopped down where you can easily clone it out in post processing.

Chowy - as far as i can see in those cloudy conditions it shows sharper focus, better depth of field, and contrast, the latter you might have been able to sort with different in camera settings, the former two probably stucj with. The sort of photos I had in my mind when I thought of similarities were landscape in sunny days with the sun just setting, eg bright days (see below, can you guess which camera it was taken with?). It actually took me a while to sort out the depth of field on landscape pictures with my SLR compared to my all in focus P&S ones. I found an aperture of about 7-11 was about right with the focal point about a third into the picture if I wanted it all sharp. By then I need to get the tripod out. The first two landscape ones are slr, the other two p&s

Looking back I guess I can see a discernable difference in all over sharpness, but still think the P&S ones are acceptable

It actually took me a while to sort out the depth of field on landscape pictures with my SLR compared to my all in focus P&S ones. I found an aperture of about 7-11 was about right with the focal point about a third into the picture if I wanted it all sharp. By then I need to get the tripod out. The first two landscape ones are slr, the other two p&s

I agree that in good lighting, any decent p&s will do very good pics :-) and sometimes indistinguishable in small prints or web sized images to a entry level D-SLR with a kit lens.

If I recall, the depth of field of a small sensor is around 3-4 stops greater than an APS-C camera so @f/4 the D-SLR will be @ f/11-f/16 and if you're not getting enough light for hand holding at f/11, you can always shoot at ISO 400 which should give similar shutter speeds and probably still give you better noise performance than p&s @ ISO 100

The lens does play a key role here how contrasty/sharp/colours are rendered without relying on spending a lot of time post processing. If you use a quality lens, you will notice the difference as you have probably seen yourself when you use your 50mm f/1.8 prime especially stopped down to greater than f/2.8.

It is possible also through good post processing to get excellent results from a p&s

See here

High End Retouching Techniques Video Sample 1

It's in more demanding situations where a good D-SLR will shine for example, low light shooting, DOF control, fast action........

Then again, you can't fit a D-SLR in your pocket. The ideal is to have both and then you have the best of both worlds.

Here's an example of a shot that is just not possible with a point and shoot which shows clearly the advantage of a good D-SLR with good glass.

100% crop to show detail and sharpness

The first image actually looks weird, as if the boy was put into it. Savage clear.

Do you happen to know what sort of lens and camera were used as well as the aperture settings / shutter speed was that football one - super sharp

I'm still experimenting to see what settings work best for the 50mm f1.8. For portrait type shots I tend to use f2.8 and landscapes f7-f11. Is that sensible?

Do you happen to know what sort of lens and camera were used as well as the aperture settings / shutter speed was that football one - super sharp

I'm still experimenting to see what settings work best for the 50mm f1.8. For portrait type shots I tend to use f2.8 and landscapes f7-f11. Is that sensible?

That one is Canon 5D with 85mm L prime lens wide open @ f/1.2

With your 50mm prime lens, it's not so sharp wide open but you may need to compromise depending on how much of the background you want blurring or in focus.

Try using the depth of field preview button to give you an idea of what effects you get with depth of field when you change the aperture. The viewfinder will go darker as you stop down but you will be able to see whats in focus and not. There is also the LCD display after the shot but it can be difficult to see on a small screen.