DSLR Options

Jackmydad

ukcarper wrote: »

Must admit I recently bought a Panasonic tz100 as I was finding carting DSLR around a pain, I had replaced the kit lens on DSLR with a better lens which was much heavier. Still prefer using DSLR but tend to use Panasonic most of the time because it is much smaller and lighter and the results are very good.

I like the DSLR as well. At least partly because it's easier to connect to the studio flash units I use for some work, and the ancient ring flash I use for some macro work.
The quality of the images is better as well, although you would have to be extremely picky to see any real difference.
No disrespect to the OP, but I've heard a number of people say they want a DSLR because "It will take better photos"
The "best" I heard was a chap who bought an EOS 5D II and a couple of L series lenses, because he was annoyed at the price a professional photographer was going to charge him for some family photographs.
He said he never used the camera after the first few times because it "wasn't any good", and didn't give the results he expected!

As an aside, remember the ads for the Olympus Trip with David Bailey?

Techno_Mystic

I have a Canon EOS 1200D and I am very pleased with it.

I actually chose the lens first. I chose an EF-S 24mm wide angle pancake lens (but because it is a cropped sensor camera that is equivalent to 45mm or something). This is because I wanted to take landscapes, indoor scenes without a flash, and just to be able to whip it out and take pictures of scenes quickly without any faffing about. Then I bought the cheapest body that went with the lens.

I also bought a wire trigger for self-portraits, you don't get that with compacts I think.

I mostly use the presets but it is nice to know I can alter the settings if I want to. I have experimented with black and white sometimes.

boliston

Jackmydad wrote: »

TBH, you'd be as well off getting something like the Sony RX100. It doesn't look as professional, but basically it is.
It's not (mainly) the camera that gets the results. It's the lighting, and the skill of the photographer.

my oh got one of these and it seemed quite fiddly to use as no proper viewfinder or manual focus ring - it seemed aimed mainly at the point and shoot users after a better quality camera - one of my pet hates is cameras with no viewfinder or just an electronic viewfinder instead of a true optical finder

EssexExile

For the use the OP describes I would go with a compact camera, I haven't used an SLR since I was converted to Panasonic TZ.... Total manual control up to fully automatic & a good zoom, plenty good enough for leisure photography.

Techno_Mystic

EssexExile wrote: »

For the use the OP describes I would go with a compact camera

You might as well use a £150 smartphone like a Motorola Moto G then. You get the telephone, internet and apps as well for that money.

A._Badger

The point of a DLSR is to give the user maximum control over the image, be that by changing lenses or adjusting the (many) variable settings. The more skilled the photographer, the better the result and, to an extent, vice versa - in unskilled hands a DSLR can produce consistently rotten results.

Either of the OP's options will produce excellent results in skilled hands. as long as s/he is willing to learn about photography. If not, a top-end bridge or compact camera will produce better photographs for less money, most of the time for most users.

Jackmydad

boliston wrote: »

my oh got one of these and it seemed quite fiddly to use as no proper viewfinder or manual focus ring - it seemed aimed mainly at the point and shoot users after a better quality camera - one of my pet hates is cameras with no viewfinder or just an electronic viewfinder instead of a true optical finder

Mine's the "mark I" and it hasn't got a viewfinder. Which is one of the things I don't like about it.
All these compacts have too many menus and "modes" but you can manually focus with the front ring. Can't remember how offhand, because the auto focus is good. Center focus though, not "let the camera decide"
If I need manual focus for creative stuff I go to the DSLR.
That's not often though really.
A lot of pros are moving over to mirrorless. I tried a friend's new Fuji back in the Summer. Much more compact than a DSLR, and really excellent electronic viewfinder.
Way over the OPs budget though.

EssexExile

Techno_Mystic wrote: »

You might as well use a £150 smartphone like a Motorola Moto G then. You get the telephone, internet and apps as well for that money.

Does that have a 24-720mm zoom?

ukcarper

EssexExile wrote: »

Does that have a 24-720mm zoom?

My TZ100 doesn’t have a 24-720mm zoom it does have a larger sensor and 25-250mm zoom and viewfinder

Techno_Mystic

It goes back to what OP needs:

harshitguptaiitr wrote: »

I would like to take photographs of my family - sometimes dedicated self photo-shoot in nearby picturesque places, some tourism photos, birthday celebrations for little ones.

Is a zoom necessary for that? Photos in picturesque places, tourism, indoor birthday celebrations, a wide angle would be better for that, like the 24mm I mentioned earlier. Unless they want to take close-ups of the kids faces blowing the candles out etc.

But whatever.