Peter,
With an SLR, you have much greater control over your depth of field,
due to your ability to change the aperture. I have 3 SLRs and 2 point
and shoots (1 with 24x zoom, 1 a pocket 3x zoom) The point and shoots
I use for "quick and dirty" work. If I want to take quality shots,
where I have control over depth of field, I use the SLRs.
Thanks for giving us a few laughs anyway.
Cheers,
Carl Clifford
On 06/12/2009, at 1:53 AM, Peter Shute wrote:
This is probably the main thing that causes more difficulty with an
SLR than a compact. Because the depth of field is so much smaller, if
the focus is a little bit out, it matters uch more.
Apart from that, the main problem as I see it is that lenses for SLRs
of equivalent length and speed to those available with the ultra zoom
compacts are big and expensive. Many people seem to opt for a 300mm
lens to start with, and I think these struggle a bit to beat the image
quality of a good compact in many cases (e.g. bird not close, and
reasonable light).
Peter Shute
________________________________________
From:
] On Behalf Of Chris Ross
Sent: Saturday, 5 December 2009 11:03 PM
To: ;
Subject: Digital Cameras for recording sightings
Depth of field will be less with a DSLR, it's how you get out of focus
backgrounds in bird portraits.==============================www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
==============================
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
