Think I’ve bought the wrong camera

[PopsandBangs]

Clueless about this.....

Despite much research (and probably rushing into it anyway!!!) I can’t work out whether I’ve made a bit of an error with the Camera I’ve bought as a birthday present for my girlfriend.

She’s a very capable and keen smartphone photographer, and has been saying recently she’d love a proper camera to use. It’ll be for general photography of travelling and holidays (in normal times,) for on our long walks, family occasions, parties and gatherings, general sights and views, and something I’d like to give her to throw herself into and enjoy using and fill up the personalised photo album I’ve bought with some lovely pictures.

I decided on a Canon EOS 4000d slr and it arrived last week. It was a toss up between this, and a lesser Bridge Camera (the Canon SX540 specifically.)

Looking at it, I can’t help by think the DSLR is overkill for what she’d use it for.... not to mention bloody massive!

Lovely thing but I can’t help think it’ll be left behind when travelling due to its size and it’s a bit conspicuous. The SX540 looks similar package but much smaller and with a strong zoom, but with a comparatively tiny sensor (despite more Megapixels).....so I know the picture quality would be compromised and much poorer than the dslr ..... or would it really, for the above mentioned use?

Don’t know whether to exchange it for the bridge cam but though I’d ask those who are a bit more clued up than me

[Hammer67]

I`m similarly clueless.

Mrs H67 is into photography in a similar way.

She uses a Nikon Coolpix P1000 which, apparently, has a ridiculous amount of zoom for what it is and she raves about it.

No idea how it compares to the Canon you mention though.

[steveatesh]

OP, just a thought but if you’re useless with cameras have you considered involving your gf in the choice?

[gangzoom]

PopsandBangs said:

Don’t know whether to exchange it for the bridge cam but though I’d ask those who are a bit more clued up than me

Quite a few of us are waiting for our Samsung S21 Ultras to be delivered......If you really want a traditional camera, I have this lot which am almost certainly going to put up for sale soon - Olympus EM5 mark II with a range of lens from very small pancake lens to 'pro' level fixed aperture zoom lens.

Much smaller than my old Canon DSLR, much better quality than any bridge camera.......But even I wouldn't buy my EM5 II off me over some thing like a S21 Ultra, as am going to be selling it because am getting the S21 Ultra .



I am half serious though, go have a look at reviews of the Olympus EM5 Ii, its a very good camera and this is how much more compact it is than a DSLR. PM me an offer if you are seriously looking for an alternative to a DSLR. The 12-40mm F2.8 lens alone seems to be still retailing for nearly £700 on Amazon, I can be persuade to sell the lot for not much more .

.

Edited by gangzoom on Monday 18th January 06:26

[_Hoppers]

One problem with bridge type cameras with small sensors is you won’t be able to get a shallow depth of field like you can with an slr/large sensor camera.

[eein]

_Hoppers said:

One problem with bridge type cameras with small sensors is you won’t be able to get a shallow depth of field like you can with an slr/large sensor camera.

Depth of field is determined by the optical characteristics of the lens, not the sensor.

Of course smaller cameras may have fewer lens options available.

[DavidY]

eein said:

_Hoppers said:

One problem with bridge type cameras with small sensors is you won’t be able to get a shallow depth of field like you can with an slr/large sensor camera.

Depth of field is determined by the optical characteristics of the lens, not the sensor.

Of course smaller cameras may have fewer lens options available.

No sorry that is wrong, the lens controls the amount of light the sensor receives. The size of the sensor does have an impact on the the Depth Of Field. For any given aperture setting the depth of field will increase as the sensor size decreases

As sensor size increases, the depth of field will decrease for a given aperture (when filling the frame with a subject of the same size and distance). This is because larger sensors require one to get closer to their subject, or to use a longer focal length in order to fill the frame with that subject.

Now obviously this can be counteracted by moving closer to the subject to reach an equivalence.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digita...

[_Hoppers]

DavidY said:

eein said:

_Hoppers said:

One problem with bridge type cameras with small sensors is you won’t be able to get a shallow depth of field like you can with an slr/large sensor camera.

Depth of field is determined by the optical characteristics of the lens, not the sensor.

Of course smaller cameras may have fewer lens options available.

No sorry that is wrong, the lens controls the amount of light the sensor receives. The size of the sensor does have an impact on the the Depth Of Field. For any given aperture setting the depth of field will increase as the sensor size decreases

As sensor size increases, the depth of field will decrease for a given aperture (when filling the frame with a subject of the same size and distance). This is because larger sensors require one to get closer to their subject, or to use a longer focal length in order to fill the frame with that subject.

Now obviously this can be counteracted by moving closer to the subject to reach an equivalence.

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digita...

This. If you look at the actual focal length of bridge/compact cameras it’s usually tiny compared to SLRs. A smaller focal length will give you greater dof. The camera may state an equivalent 35mm focal length but this is a little misleading.

I’d stick with the slr, it’ll give better creative options.

[Mr Pointy]

PopsandBangs said:

She’s a very capable and keen smartphone photographer, and has been saying recently she’d love a proper camera to use. It’ll be for general photography of travelling and holidays (in normal times,) for on our long walks, family occasions, parties and gatherings, general sights and views, and something I’d like to give her to throw herself into and enjoy using and fill up the personalised photo album I’ve bought with some lovely pictures.

Surely something the size of a Sony RX100 is going to be actually used for those purposes much more than an SLR? I can't see many people casually lugging an SLR along on a long walk or whipping one out at a party.

[boyse7en]

Mr Pointy said:

PopsandBangs said:

She’s a very capable and keen smartphone photographer, and has been saying recently she’d love a proper camera to use. It’ll be for general photography of travelling and holidays (in normal times,) for on our long walks, family occasions, parties and gatherings, general sights and views, and something I’d like to give her to throw herself into and enjoy using and fill up the personalised photo album I’ve bought with some lovely pictures.

Surely something the size of a Sony RX100 is going to be actually used for those purposes much more than an SLR? I can't see many people casually lugging an SLR along on a long walk or whipping one out at a party.

Since I bought an RX100 my SLR has hardly been out. The Sony fits in a pocket, has a full range of controls and takes some cracking pics. So better than my phone and more convenient than an SLR

[tr7v8]

I have two DSLRs & a range of lenses for them. They rarely see the light of day (sorry!) since I bought a Sony super compact.
The Compact does everything I require basically. If I was going to an airshow or race meeting then the DSLR would get dug out but otherwise never.

[steveatesh]

Mr Pointy said:

Surely something the size of a Sony RX100 is going to be actually used for those purposes much more than an SLR? I can't see many people casually lugging an SLR along on a long walk or whipping one out at a party.

This. As somebody who regularly lugs a bag of full frame Sony camera and lenses around I’ve got to say I won’t be taking it on my next holiday (whenever that is ) for what will essentially be snaps.

My iPhone 11 will fill the role more than adequately and it’s night mode is excellent.

I do think it won’t be too long before proper cameras will be a thing carried around by (some?) professionals and masochists!

[Simpo Two]

steveatesh said:

I do think it won’t be too long before proper cameras will be a thing carried around by (some?) professionals and masochists!

If I'd charged you £1200 to photograph your wedding and turned up with a mobile phone you might have been a bit aggrieved...!

[Derek Smith]

I illustrate articles, websites, and used to take piccies when I edited a magazine. I had a decent quality 35mm SLR with a range of lenses, five or six, but the job of editor came with a Nikon bridge. It converted me to digital. I upgraded to a better Nikon bridge, courtesy of the editorship. Both were great and the images supplied by the second bridge were good enough for a double A4 page spread if I took care when taking it. I’ve had a number of cover images which were of great quality.

When I handed back the Nikon I bought my own Panasonic bridge, which was much better to handle, and gave superior images. The images were of higher quality than I needed, which is what all photographers want from their camera.

About four years ago, I moved to a M4/3rds Panasonic. It provided a certain flexibility that the bridge was short on. I’ve bought an additional lens, so go from 14 to 300mm, that’s 28 – 600 in old money. Again, it provides more than I need.

I also have a compact. It has an excellent lens, 4x zoom and I take it everywhere. If I drive, it’s in the glove locker, if I go for a walk, it’s in my pocket. The image is of higher quality than my phone’s, can be exceptionally quick even in difficult circumstances, and if one has the time to flick through all the menu, is very flexible.

It’s an old adage, but one I agree with. Any halfway decent camera, be it compact, bridge, M4/3rds or full size DSLR can provide all you need by way of images unless you are into specific requirements – night time astronomy for instance.

[LuS1fer]

I had a DSLR Nikon but sold it fairly quickly as it was just too big to carry round and, on holiday, was just extra weight.
I use a compact with a 1 inch sensor which does all that I need it to.

[PopsandBangs]

Thank you kindly all for your advice.

As it’s supposed to be a surprise present, and Curry’s are allowing extended returns/exchanges at the moment until the stores open again, i’ll Stick with the DSLR for now and gift that, and can always change it if she feels it’ll be too big

Some of those mirrorless suggestions look pretty good, however I’m on a £350-ish budget and the EOS 4000d looked the best bet for something semi-decent at that price.

Thanks again

[Mr Pointy]

Have a look at the dpreview site - there is a ton of review information & buying guides there:

https://www.dpreview.com/buying-guides

[steveatesh]

Simpo Two said:

steveatesh said:

I do think it won’t be too long before proper cameras will be a thing carried around by (some?) professionals and masochists!

If I'd charged you £1200 to photograph your wedding and turned up with a mobile phone you might have been a bit aggrieved...!

Absolutely, and it would be the same for other shoots too. However, the more phones improve their cameras together with the improvements in easy to use software bring excellent photographs into more peoples reach. Saving a fortune on photographs is a much easier choice when the guests can take excellent photographs and pool them through WhatsApp.

Not necessarily yet, but the direction of travel?

[Simpo Two]

steveatesh said:

Not necessarily yet, but the direction of travel?

I think both. Most couples want some professional photos as well as snaps from guests. Equally whilst some are happy to get Uncle Phil to do it free because he's 'got a big camera', others want Uncle Phil to enjoy his day and let a professional take responsibility. I was happy to fit in with whatever they wanted; people like flexibility.