Is a regular handheld digital camera just as good for photography?
I am wondering if a regular hand held camera is just as good for photography as compared to a “professional” camera (one that has removable lenses and many gadgets and gizmos). Or is it all the same until touched up in a photo editing program? I am wondering because I am interested in photographing things and getting warm glows and nice colors that look very natural. Help? I don’t want to have to spend hundreds of dollars on a brand new camera when my new camera could possibly do the same things.
dear friend
nice photography is not job of a camera…it is within you…
it is not about jazzy colors or effects… it is about composition…subject… what it conveys… practice with same camera… do read some book on digital photography to understand basics…like…exposure…shutter speed…aperture..etc.
gadgets are secondary… human is primary…
go and shoot….
You can take a good picture with a point and shoot, but you will not have the control you get with a DSLR. Things like exposure, your depth of field, contrast, focal length, etc can not be controlled unless you have a very advanced point and shoot, or a DSLR.
If you are interested in photography I would use the camera you have as beginner. Read some books on photography and focus on things like composition before spending THOUSANDS of dollars on advanced equipment. Once you have a feel for things and are starting to feel limited by your equipments ability move up to an advanced camera.
First of all, the small format SLR cameras that have interchangeable lenses are handheld. You may need a tripod in certain situations, or sometimes they are merely convenient. But much of photography is done handheld. Even a medium format camera can be shot handheld.
As to which one will do the job, it really depends on your purpose. If the photos you want to shoot are for your own personal enjoyment and to be viewed online or printed no larger than 8×10, then a compact camera will work fine.
If you want to make large prints then an SLR will probably be required. The compacts just don’t have the resolution.
The effects that you mention can be done with filters that you would attach to the lens and can be done in Photoshop so you don’t have to have an expensive camera to get those effects.
@kan-Contrary to popular belief the camera does matter. People are very fond of pointing out that Ansel Adams didn’t have the kind of cameras we have now and was still able to make great photographs. That is absolutely right. He used a large format camera that took large glass plates to create his images. Comparing the size of the plates to our DSLRs is insane. He could create wall sized prints. It wasn’t just his ability but also his equipment.
If equipment really didn’t matter no one would spend $20,000 on a Hassleblad when they could buy a Canon Rebel DSLR for $500.
For a beginner and to practice, till you get the hang of colors, composition, lighting, angles. But at a later stage if you wish to turn to professional photography – you will have to acquire a DSLR for better control and better control over your exposures and frames. A Base Nikon DSLR is not very expensive. At a later stage perhaps you can afford it – or try a used one, to begin with, till you have earned yourself enough to get yourself a new one
You can take some kinds of photos with any camera but some types of photos can only be taken with more expensive cameras and lenses. A key difference is the ability to blur the background – you need at least an SLR to do this to any great extent.
You could buy a £30,000 Hasselblad and still not take good pictures.
It all depends on what the end product is to be for your pictures.
If you are just taking pictures for yourself (family & holiday snaps for instance) then a “regular” (I assume you mean a point and shoot) camera will do.
A “professional” camera (there is actually no such thing really) will give you more control, however to use them properly then you have to learn about photography in general.
Before you go investing in equipment I would suggest you buy a book about basic photography and learn a little.
If you believe you would be better with a Dslr then look around for one.
What makes a camera a good movie camera also makes it poor for stills. The color is not that great and you have no control of f stop or shutter speed. What makes a good still camera also makes it poor movie camera. The color is better for the stills but when you take movies, the picture is not as clear.
I do not have experience with the Nikon D60 to know the quality of the video.
Wow, thats a question with alot of different answers. The short answer is, a good photographer can turn out great photos, photos that sell, with a point and shoot. So, yes a regular point and shoot camera is just as good as a more expensive DSLR, kinda…not really….well sort of. Keep reading.
There are so many elements that go into a good photo. The camera and lens are only two parts. Being able to compose a good photo and understanding how the light (available and flash) is best utilized are larger parts. A good photographer will take better pictures far more often with a DSLR than with a point and shoot. It’s all about control of settings and consistancy in recreating good shots. A point and shoot (or DSLR stuck in auto for that matter) makes all the decisions affecting exposure without any idea what your vision for the photo is. When you take control of a DLSR’s settings and make the decisions for the settings that will best capture your vision for the photo, you will start taking better quality photos more often. For a crash course in using a DSLR in manual, check this link:
http://www.ehow.com/how_5279081_shoot-manual-dslr.html
Hope that helps and happy shooting.
Digital cameras are divided into three classes:
1. Point-and-shoot (P&S)
2. Prosumer
3. DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex)
There is a range of prices within each group, but as you go from 1 to 3, cost increases but so does image quality. So the simple answer to your question is “No, a $100 P&S camera isn’t the same quality as a $1,000 DSLR camera.”
However, what some people here are trying to say is that many aspects of photography have nothing to do with the camera. They’re about choosing the subject and “managing” it (for instance, getting people to smile if that’s what you want). Composition is also an important aspect of photography no matter which camera you use.
So the bottom line is, buy what you can afford, have fun, and learn to use it. As you get more money, you can upgrade your camera.
By “handheld” I’m assuming you mean a “point and shoot” (p&s) camera. “professional cameras” are also handheld (except for maybe large format cameras with bellows). And by professional camera I’m assuming you mean an SLR camera.
A p&s can be just as good as an SLR for everyday pictures (in fact, in the hands of most people, an SLR is just a glorified p&s camera, since most people use it in automatic mode).
That said, in the right hands, an SLR *can* take better photos than a p&s, usually because of the bigger sensor (the part that captures the image from the lens). But more important is the person behind the camera.
As far as touching up and editing your photos, it’s better if you get it right the first time (rather than fixing your photo later). Just my 2 cents.