Do you need a DSLR?

[nac]

I see many buying DSLR or wanted to buy one without knowing much about it or are is it status symbol? Most of the people using their mobile phone for making and receiving calls, yet they spend 30+ grand for a smart phone!!! Does DSLR becoming like that? There may be tons of justifcation, probably I will never get the depth of them.

Coming to the topic... DSLR (Read, interchangeable lens camera)

You looooveee to take photographs. You're shooting with your compact (or mobile) camera, thinking of picking it up as a hobby. And you see this friend of yours showing off his DSLR. You think that DSLR will help you take better photographs. You know... your camera is as good as you get. In fact, it may likely to produce worse photos than what you have been capturing with your compact camera if you don't know how to use a DSLR.

Like every product, DSLR has its own drawbacks. See if you can live with these...

DSLR has more buttons and knobs around the camera. Ofcourse, it's much useful for professional photographers. But is it a must-have for a beginner? I don't think so.

Maintaining a DSLR is like owning a ride. You keep it under regular check, it works best. If not, it's likely to cost more to fix the problem when that happens.

Owning and maintaining a system is expensive. If you want great results, you need quality glass. For different purpose, you need different lenses. You can very well slap an all-in-one 18-300 or even 18-500 (if it comes in future

), but that defeats the purpose of DSLR and the quality of consumer super-zoom optics is not great.

DSLR is bulky and heavy. It's not as portable as compact camera. You can't keep it in your shirt pocket or in your trouser pocket. Unless it's for professional work, taking it everywhere with you is not convenient.

DSLR is little complex to use. Though it's not a rocket science, it needs some effort from the user to make good use of DSLR. Yeah, you can put it in Auto mode, but again that defeats the purpose of DSLR.

Of course, if your skill or work demands a DSLR, go ahead and buy one and use it to its extreme limits. But if you're like most people, shooting when the spirit hits you, or for home use, you're better off with a compact camera.

 

[max_demon]

with the recent evolution of technology I find using my dslt very rarely. even when travelling I prefer to use the cell phone or compact camera (Sony NEX), most importantly the increase in people carrying dslr everywhere has actually helped me in taking a break from being asked to take every photograph whenever I'm around.

 

[ronnie_gogs]

To take good photographs you need PASM mode and understanding of framing and lighting... If a camera has these you can take good pictures...

 

[logistopath]

Of course, if your skill or work demands a DSLR, go ahead and buy one and use it to its extreme limits. But if you're like most people, shooting when the spirit hits you, or for home use, you're better off with a compact camera.

DSLR is not just about taking artistic photographs that will be framed and exhibited or posted online with "xxxxx photography" watermark. There are so many people who use it for routine portraits and group photographs, using the auto mode. I use my 550D for such photographs (home use, as you put it) almost 50% of the time. That doesn't mean a compact cam is better suited in this case. A picture taken using a DSLR in auto mode is still miles ahead of a similar picture taken using a compact P&S. Of course, there are decent compacts that produce excellent pictures, but they turn out to be as pricey as entry level DSLRs itself.
I would say that DSLRs are more in vogue nowadays because people are aware of the quality of pics they produce even in auto mode, and because they are now affordable by most. Yes, the entire capability if these devices are not being put into use by most, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve to use them.

 

[booo]

dslrs have bigger sensor than any of the phone cameras which results in good photos in low light situation and also makes the photos bokehlicious. for those who complain about heavy cameras should go for mirrorless with classic lenses like leica or voigtlander. especially the MFTs

 

[AMG]

Do I need a DSLR? YES
Whether anybody has authorized you to judge how to spend their own money? NO

 

[madhukannan]

Do you need a F1 car to go to office ?

 

[RD274]

I could write a long ass essay on this topic, but the gist of it is-

1. Mobile phones have eaten through the basic and majority of the point and shoot territory- And why not? I bought a W730 for 7k with a laughably bad sensor/processing engine which my dads Lumia 920 walks all over and has the same feature set as my 7 year old Coolpix S5. Anyone who can afford a Moto G or Lumia 630 (cheap phones with ok-ok cameras) will not spend 7k buying one of these shitty cams for only marginally better shooting capabilities.

2. The midrange point and shoot market (14k+) with decent sensors, good features (nfc+wifi for eg) are not being advertised well and is too close to entry level dslr territory. Some of these cameras are really good but no one knows what great companions these camera would make next to your phone thanks to wireless transfer and a great battery life because NO ONE is advertising all this. But again, these cams are 14k+. If they were at 8k-9k then there would be some chance, but if I'm being asked to spend 15k on a camera, I WILL put in 5k more and get a 1200D because ....

3. Entry level DSLRs have become more affordable (20k+) and more mainstream with capabilities like multi scene options, guides and tutorials, compatibility with wide range of lenses and video shooting. Everyone knows that SLRs are cool and more professional looking and they have the performance to match. So when your budget is close to 20k, buying an SLR is an obvious option. After all, anyone ready to spend 20k on a camera should already have a good and worthy phone and will obviously want his camera to be far better than what his phone can do, and SLRs can do that. Everyone knows SLRs are more bulky and require some skill to use (even in Automatic) but people are prepared to deal with all this if it means far better pics than what their phone can take.

4. Mirrorless and high end point and shoots that perform as good as entry level DSLRs are not advertised at all and are too expensive. Does anyone know anyone who is not a professional photographer and has heard of the RX100? People don't know that there are point and shoots that are portable and can compete with entry level DSLRs. People who know about them only see them as expensive companion cameras to professional photographers and not for basic consumers. Assuming all this, would any non-professional consumer consider them?

Everything else is beside the point when consumers will think like this.

EDIT : Added/Subtracted a bit.

 

[asingh]

This is like: a kick-2-the-nuts.

 

[singenaadam]

Most of the times, people buy dSLRs for the sake of buying/display. Most end up neither understanding nor, using most of the features. By the way, I have seen highly paid [sic]pros using auto-mode only.

Open any book on digital photography and you would understand that max 50% of the final pic happens in-camera, the other 50% 'created' using Lightroom/PS.

Personally, spent more than what an entry-level dSLR would cost & bought a RX100 (@RD274 : I am not a "pro", so you do know one now ).

 

[Striker10]

Don't invrest in a slr if you're not serious about it.

 

[tkin]

I own a fz150 and I dare say I'm doing fine without a dslr. Too much hassle for a quick pic.

 

[asingh]

Don't invrest in a slr if you're not serious about it.

Yea, I have seen many of my friends get it for fashion and FB. Most of the times when they become US-return. Their pictures are horrible, there are no frame aesthetics, and looks like a waste of a lot of money. Though I have met a rare view who have won competitions -another- DSLR...! LOL..!

 

[raksrules]

I have personally seen that as soon as someone travels onsite (esp US), one of the first things they buy is a DSLR camera.
Also I have met couple of folks in US (Indian only) who claim they have a DSLR but when i saw what they had in hand, it was a (mostly canon) bridge camera.

My wife once asked me whether we should buy a big camera (she doesn't know what is DSLR or bridge) and i told her that I will never hold it and carry everywhere with its separate bag and all. RIP Buying bigger camera

As of now satisfied with pics my iPhone 4S takes. But I do have a canon P&S which I got for some $130. Does the job. But it seems at least in our family, we have sort of totally abandoned all camera and only ones we have are our cellphones which give us very good pictures.

 

[mathrisk]

For many buying a DSLR is works out similar as learning/buying a Guitar or starting gym-ing.


I had bought a Canon mega zoom (SX30 with 35x zoom) for some 20k-ish 4 years back. My idea was to own a big camera and also see if I find any interest in photography, I might upgrade to a dslr. But over the time, I have realized 'photography' is not cup of tea (well, I don't have any time left from gaming and movies/series and readings ) and I am using my mobile for day to day stuffs, I dont remember last time I take out the camera. Another reason is the bulkiness.

 

[ssslayer]

DSLR fetish is nothing but yet another display of consumerism.

 

[drkrack]

Smartphones have become ubiquitous
They've replaced P&S cameras, pdas, dedicated mp3 player, GPS devices for average user.
It doesn't make sense buying 12k P&S, instead add the budget in getting better Smartphone.

So for a camera buyers DSLR is the only option, (I consider mirror less in DSLR group)
Many High end P&S cost way more than entry level DSLRs, Today's entry level DSLRs are more equipped than yesterday's high end cameras especially on HD video recording capabilities.

The auto mode on DSLR is anyday better than the best of P&S cameras. If a person doesn't mind that size I feel it's perfectly fine to go with DSLRs. Even though you don't use all of it's features. Many people buy Smartphones without using it's 30pc functionality.

I think this is where the mirror less cameras come in picture, they combine the best of both worlds.
Everyone considering a traditional DSLRs for the first time should buy a decent mirror less camera, preferably of the same ecosystem and see how much they can improve their photography techniques. If they do improve their skills & take it to next level then omit the entry level DSLRs altogether and buy a midrange or professional DSLRs .

If they can't improve it beyond a point they can always use their mirror less cameras as a high end P&S due to their simplified menu structure.

My advice for new traditional DSLRs buyers is
Buy Mirror less cameras, you'll love them.
The future advances in digital camera technology will be more inclined towards mirror less cameras. So go for them...

 

[booo]

Everyone considering a traditional DSLRs for the first time should buy a decent mirror less camera, preferably of the same ecosystem and see how much they can improve their photography techniques. If they do improve their skills & take it to next level then omit the entry level DSLRs altogether and buy a midrange or professional DSLRs .

or just buy a sony a7 II and get everything. rest of the investment on buying good glass.

PS: sony a7 II is a professional full frame mirrorless. with in body image stabilization.

 

[blr_p]

You looooveee to take photographs. You're shooting with your compact (or mobile) camera, thinking of picking it up as a hobby. And you see this friend of yours showing off his DSLR. You think that DSLR will help you take better photographs.

Way i look at it is can i justify a DSLR or not. Right now i have a compact phone ie camera with a phone. The zoom on it can't be matched by flagships past, present or future because of the form factor. Lots of framing possibilites that are inconceivable on a fixed focal length phone camera.

I'm less interested in image quality which is what everybody seems to obsess about then choice of subject and how it is presented. So composition, angles, lighting. This is actually quite involved and is something i'd prefer to master before improving on the final bit ie image quality. Do i have the aptiude or not and will i stick at it for as long as it takes has to be answered.

You know... your camera is as good as you get. In fact, it may likely to produce worse photos than what you have been capturing with your compact camera if you don't know how to use a DSLR.

yep, WHO took the shot matter more than WHAT took it.

People always want to hide behind the camer and say THIS camera took the shot rather than I did it. Parrot out specs and how much it cost.

DSLR has more buttons and knobs around the camera. Ofcourse, it's much useful for professional photographers. But is it a must-have for a beginner? I don't think so.

Beauty of those buttons & knobs is fast access. Feel your way and set things without taking your eye of the subject. Easier to get those 'moment' shots in skilled hands. Once a beginner gets used to them there is no going back. In fact it would push people to take into account the ergonomics of the device they buy.

Going through menus is more involved in comparison.

Screw how good the device looks, how easy is it to use should be the primary consideration.

Maintaining a DSLR is like owning a ride. You keep it under regular check, it works best. If not, it's likely to cost more to fix the problem when that happens.

Owning and maintaining a system is expensive. If you want great results, you need quality glass. For different purpose, you need different lenses. You can very well slap an all-in-one 18-300 or even 18-500 (if it comes in future

), but that defeats the purpose of DSLR and the quality of consumer super-zoom optics is not great.

DSLR is bulky and heavy. It's not as portable as compact camera. You can't keep it in your shirt pocket or in your trouser pocket. Unless it's for professional work, taking it everywhere with you is not convenient.

DSLR is little complex to use. Though it's not a rocket science, it needs some effort from the user to make good use of DSLR. Yeah, you can put it in Auto mode, but again that defeats the purpose of DSLR.

Of course, if your skill or work demands a DSLR, go ahead and buy one and use it to its extreme limits. But if you're like most people, shooting when the spirit hits you, or for home use, you're better off with a compact camera.

The idea of DSLR is price to performance i suppose vs a micro 4/3 which is smaller and more portable but more proprietary and hence has less life.

Thing is which system to go with, how long will that system be good for. Say you invest in DSLR glass from a certain vendor, if they change things five years later then your whole investment is gone.

I've heard people go with Canon over Nikon for the same reason. Canon offers a better investment than Nikon which does better in image sensor quality.

 

[logistopath]

Most of the times, people buy dSLRs for the sake of buying/display.

DSLR fetish is nothing but yet another display of consumerism.

Aren't we being judgmental? I mean, you never know the reason why someone is buying a DSLR, or anything else for that matter. Each one has his/her own reason.

Don't invrest in a slr if you're not serious about it.

Can't really see the point. DSLRs are no longer professional equipments that need complete full involvement and dedication to take routine pics. They are advertised, and made, to be noob friendly with all their different scene settings and intelligent auto modes. Probably the better way to put it would be "Don't think that you will become a pro photographer just by investing in a DSLR."

I own a fz150 and I dare say I'm doing fine without a dslr. Too much hassle for a quick pic.

Yeah, too much hassle in terms of carrying the bulky gadget, especially for occasional random clicks. A good mobile with a decent cam module will do the job in such cases.

Most end up neither understanding nor, using most of the features. By the way, I have seen highly paid [sic]pros using auto-mode only.

This is what I believe the OP meant to say in his first post in this thread (and only post BTW @nac). That people using only auto mode in a DSLR really didn't need to invest in one. I don't agree. What is wrong in using just auto mode? Just because it has all manual controls doesn't mean that the buyer should make use of them. Especially so, when the auto mode will produce images that are better in quality than a basic compact cam.

IMO, if you know you will be using just the auto mode, and have the budget, choose a ultra high end compact cam that produces excellent quality pics, rather than a DSLR and avoid the bulky baggage.
If you know you will be using the auto mode, but are inclined to experiment with different lenses maybe at a later date, choose a DSLR.
If you don't mind about image quality, and/or don't have the budget, settle with a good smartphone with excellent cam or with a compact cam.