Lower MP digital slr? Or modern compact high MP?

[reefdude135]

Hi folks... I have a friend considering a rig and he's not sure on direction. Would it be better for him, based upon his budget, to buy a more recent compact with a lot of MP but smaller sensor, like a Lumix or Nikon J1 or Sony rx-100, or an older slr, like a nikon d-80 or d-40 that would have a larger sensor but lower mp?

 

[IslandCrow]

In my opinion, you're usually going to be better off with an older DSLR than a more modern point and shoot. I'm not a Nikon guy, so I'm not sure how old the d-80 or d-40 is, but I bought my Canon 40D used at least 5-6 years ago, and I'd take it over any point and shoot digital camera on the market. Now, let me qualify that statement by saying the price of the lenses I use on said camera range from $400 to $2500, so the question really needs to include how much money your friend is willing to invest in a lens. With the cheaper lenses, I think an older DSLR is probably still going to win out, but it may be a really close call. These compact cameras have been cramming more and more megapixels onto their sensors, but I haven't seen one much beyond 10MP where I've seen any significant improvement in picture quality. Also, although picture quality is a bit part of it, functionality and versatility play significant roles as well, and in those areas, as long as you're OK with the larger size, a DSLR is going to win pretty much every time.

So, I apologize for not really answering your question, but the one piece of information that's missing is what type of lens will be used on the DSLR. Also, was he looking at any particular Lumix? I own the DMC-LX5, and although I'm really happy with it, I bought it because it's light and portable, not to replace either of my DSLRs, which it really doesn't hold a flame to.

 

[reefdude135]

The d-40 & 80 are about the same vintage as your canon. He's really a beginner, but wants to do some tank macro. I could see him with a tamron lens down the road....

 

[BlueCorn]

Pixel counts really don't matter. Anything above 6 or 8 mp will do fine unless you need to make a print the size of a bus. A newer P&S might have better ISO range but that's about the extent of it. Aquarium photography is challenging. The adjustability of a DSLR and being able to shoot in RAW mode on a DSLR makes it easier. That's not to say you can't get good photos from a P&S, because you can. It's just harder to do consistently.

 

[IslandCrow]

For macro, I'd definitely lean towards the DSLR. The Tamron macro is supposed to be pretty decent. . .not as good as the Sigma or Nikon, but not as expensive either. One other thing to keep in mind is that in order to fully exploit the potential of the camera, it's going to take a bit of study and practice, so if he's just going to click away in the fully automatic mode, the differences between the point and shoot and DSLR may not be all that apparent. If, however, he's willing to invest some time learning photography techniques, the difference should be pretty clear. If he's willing to go a step further and learn about digital photo editing, the DSLR is clearly going to be in a league of its own.

Well, that's my opinion anyway.