Something Palms said in another thread reminded of stories like the one I've linked to below -- stories about professional, award-winning photojournalists using cameras that are NOT professional SLRs or dSLRs.

I just love to see evidence that most cameras can be used to make fascinating images (especially when I'm reading the latest equipment reviews and starting to fall in camera-lust again ;) )

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6468-7844

Excerpt:
"In 2003, Magnum photographer Alex Majoli shot some big stories for Newsweek magazine.

He spent a month in China shooting documentary images of daily life. He was in Congo for two weeks and Iraq for almost two months. In those two places he was shooting war.

Majoli's images for all three stories drew rave notices, and they earned him some of photojournalism's most prestigious awards in 2004, including the U.S. National Press Photographers Association's Best of Photojournalism Magazine Photographer of the Year Award and the U.S. Overseas Press Club's Feature Photography Award.

It would seem reasonable to guess that all that award-winning work in remote and frequently dangerous places must have been shot with big, fast, bulletproof pro SLR cameras. But in fact, Majoli shot every frame with Olympus C-5050 digital point-and-shoots -- the same camera your snap happy Uncle Maury takes to Disney World...."

CJ, I think any of today's cameras can take quality photographs if set up properly. Set up, using a tripod when necessary, setting the camera for the highest resolution, and a keen eye when post processing can work wonders. I've taken many photos with my point and shoot that have served well when printed in brochures and books at high resolution. It's obviously not the camera for studio work, nor does it come with all the cool lenses to do telephoto work like good nature shots, but even an old Brownie when handled by a photog with an eye for light and composition could do wonders.

Its the operator, not the camera for most photos.

Kind of like getting up from a great meal and complementing the cook on all the great pots and pans they must have in the kitchen.....

Hi CJ,
Many of the Point & Shoot cameras have the same sensors and much of the electronics of the digital SLRs. They can capture images which are often not distinguishable from the pro cameras BUT a lot depends on the subject you are taking and what yopu are trying to convey. What the P&S cameras lack is the flexibility and Depth of Field range you get with the SLR lenses. For example, it is really difficult to get a P&S to produce the DOF effect below.

The only camera I use these days is a point and shoot.

Obviously I only take pics for personal use, I'm not a pro, and I'm not suggesting for a moment that a PAS is comparable to an SLR, but it's still possible to get some surprisingly good results from them.

As for "serious" work, there may be situations where you may not want to be noticed, or where physical limitations preclude you from accessing with an SLR, in which case a PAS may be your best (or only) option.

CJ, I found that a very interesting article as well as surprising, I have always assumed that "serious work" was done with the top end camera's.

I have always used point and shoots they suit my type of photograph taking (happy snapper) and i have taken some great photo's. I do when time permits try to take more "serious" shots but they dont always work, that is the operator not the camera

I also made the descision at last camera change that the slr's where not for me, to much to learn (not learnt all the tricks my P&S can do yet ) and a bit to much to pay for. although i would love to take better wildlife photo's




Palms

There have been many photo exhibits of images taken with "toy cameras," including one at the Museum of Modern Art shot with the infamous plastic Diana camera.

I like to shoot quickly when I see a good subject. And altho I use a Nikon D50 I still shoot a lot of my stuff in "point & shoot" mode. With digital you also have the advantage of re-shooting in a good many cases.

One of the most inportant elements in getting a good shot is lighting. Pros may wait for hours or days to get the light falling on a scene just right, while most snapshots are taken in full sun or with flash.

Steve C.

One of the most inportant elements in getting a good shot is lighting. Pros may wait for hours or days to get the light falling on a scene just right, while most snapshots are taken in full sun or with flash.

Steve C.

I agree with you there i dont have the patience ( utmost respect for those that do ) for it, and is also the reason i have photoshop :grin:

Palms

I just love to see evidence that most cameras can be used to make fascinating images (especially when I'm reading the latest equipment reviews and starting to fall in camera-lust again ;) )

I am into Sports Photography, and I have heard on several occasions about P&S cameras being used in very hush hush areas of sporting events where shutter noises are prohibited, i.e. close to a golfer taking swing, tennis match, etc. When I say "being used", I mean being sold for $$$$ to national/international magazines, websites, media, etc.

Just some more food for thought... use in no shutter noise situations.

Its the operator, not the camera for most photos.

Kind of like getting up from a great meal and complementing the cook on all the great pots and pans they must have in the kitchen.....

Ditto on what Mike said!!!

I also agree with Mike, but being a P&S grad, I think they have enough drawbacks to not be used as an "exclusive" camera.

There are times when you want to have a P&S - shutter noise, pocket-ability, water resistance/proof bodies. But when I take my wife's P&S out over my dSLR, I am doing so knowing that I will have to deal with a certain degree of noise, chromatic aberration, and other foibles that I don't worry about with my dSLR.

People often ask me what is the best camera that they should buy. I have certain opinions based on the person's experience level and the various reviews I have read, but I clearly state one important fact every time this comes up: The best camera is the one you have with you.

Sometimes.... you have no choice.

At my old job we did a photoshoot where we shot some snowboarders doing jumps and pretty cool stuff. The photographer brought along his newest camera a Hasselblad H3 (I think it was) and that was sadly too slow to capture the snowboarders.....

So the whole thing was shot with some random persons P&S Canon camera. And it ended up looking great.

http://www.thinkglobalactstupid.com/images/acg_06_tomas.jpg

:)

whatever camera that was( and i am happy it was a p&S) , what a cool shot

Palms

Nice pic, but it's a skier not a snowboarder.

The only serious limitation I'm aware of for P&S cameras nowadays is that almost none of the current models capture raw files.