Point and shoot Question

[disneygirl76]

Hi all,

I have a digital SLR camera. However, several people have mentioned that the smaller cameras, like a powershot, that you can just put in your pocket, take better night time pics. Maybe not better, but good quality for not needing a tripod.

Which one of these little point and shoot cameras would you recommend?

 

[flynnibus]

They won't take better night time pics. When taking night photos there are two things to consider.. how much light there is, and how fast the subject matter is moving.

The point and shoot's advantage is they will always take their best possible photo with what you have. No worry about which lens you have with you, or if your lens is any good for nighttime shooting, etc. Basically 'its as good as its going to get, all the time' is what the value of the point and shoot is.

The point and shoot will do absolutely squat without it's flash in low light.. you'll get all junk. It will be worthless for taking photos of anything but illuminated things.. or flash photos of people up close, etc.

So it's ok to take photos of the castle.. and even fireworks to a degree.. but you aren't going to get any on ride photos, or distant photos of things.

If you have a decently fast lens.. you should be able to get all those same portrait or castle shots with your DSLR without a tripod. Worst case, crank up the ISO and accept the more noise for faster shutter.

Here are some photos taken with a SD800is canon years ago

see the need for flash (and still grainy) in this one?

See.. still not sharp

(with flash)

Indoor at night with flash

Here are three photos in a row from the same area showing just how fickle they can be with lighting. One is under exposed with no flash, one has flash, and the other because of looking the other way had enough light to get a reasonable photo

This is a good example of just how noisey the photo can be when trying to take low light photos

 

[RonAnnArbor]

That is absolutely wrong -- that might have been the case in 2008, but not now...any one of the top of the line point and shoots will give you amazing night shots these days and all of them without flash....among them the Panasonic LX 3/5...the Canon s95/100...the Panasonic ZS3/7/19/20...The Sony RX100...the list goes on. In fact with the RX100 you will get less noise and better highlight preservation than most entry level dSLR's...

 

[flynnibus]

That is absolutely wrong -- that might have been the case in 2008, but not now...any one of the top of the line point and shoots will give you amazing night shots these days and all of them without flash....among them the Panasonic LX 3/5...the Canon s95/100...the Panasonic ZS3/7/19/20...The Sony RX100...the list goes on. In fact with the RX100 you will get less noise and better highlight preservation than most entry level dSLR's...

Well now you're comparing a camera that cost just as much as entry level dSLRs..

Certainly cameras have improved from the images from that SD800.. but those were also $150 or so cameras, not $350-$650 cameras.

 

[ddbowdoin]

No matter the price tag of your PS or DSLR (at least consumer models) you aren't taking a sharp, clean picture at night without a tripod or some form of stabilization. The images might pass a quick look on an Internet forum or Facebook, but if you value presentation anything at ISO 1000 or higher is a pretty dirty image when printed beyond 4 x 6

 

[NowInc]

Although the line is getting blurry between a P&S and a DSLR, the fact remains (as said above) that unless you have an unnatural steady hand, you won't get "good nightime" without a tripod. Regardless of what you use. My gf uses a sony P&S which has surprisingly excellent low light capabilities....for a point and shoot. It performs well at higher ISOs and has a few modes for specific situations (fireworks for example)..but even in the camera it says that a tripod is "highly recommended". That being said..if cost isn't a factor..for a point and shoot sized camera that has decent performance...try and go mirrorless. I know the lens is a bit bulky but its still smaller than a full sized DSLR and they have exceptional performance from what i've tested.

 

[disneygirl76]

Thanks. We have about a $200 to $300 hundred dollar budget. Of course, I would like it to be as low cost as possible.