/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

[Anonymous No.6555900]

So it seems everyone who shows up to cons with a DSLR camera wants to be the next Ackson. I can't operate one to get that quality shot, let alone have the money to invest in one. What's the best point-and-shoot camera out there /cgl/?

Pick related, it's the camera I have.

[Stitch !!4nfQU4D48/w No.6555914]

i have a canon s90 and it takes quality photos without all the bulk. it's probably the best camera I've ever owned. it also have great reviews on amazon. its abut 500 dollars though so i guess it depends on how much your willing to spend.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6555935]

All point and shoots are terrible and some danky old slr would do a better job. If you want digital find the cheapest one you can find and buy it.

>>6555914
>449$

Who would buy this monstrosity? Few months ago the Canon 550D was 499$ or cheaper if you got the refurbished unit from canon direct.


OP ask /p/ about this and they would say the same thing no point ins pending so much money on P&S when they are so terrible. You can find a 30D or a 40D for that price with the the kit/50mm lens.

[Volpe !YykH67CS/s No.6555978]

It's worth it to invest in a DSLR. ( I had to for school, but it's still the best 800$ I ever spent.)

You can buy them used, or you can grab either a Canon or Nikon Point and Shoot. I've had both brands of Point and Shoot, really tiny differences in quality but that was it.
Canon Powershot was the preferred that I used. Took fairly decent pics.

Here's a 3 part comparison of the two P+S vs the DSLR.

[Anonymous No.6556031]

The intermediary type is the EVIL (electronic viewfinder/interchangeable lens) cameras. Most of the increase in quality is the lens, so it wont equal an actual SLR, but you will be a step up.

[Anonymous No.6556035]

>>6556031

I would probably use this lens 90% of the time. To the detriment of the actual pictures, but damn I would be having fun.

[Anonymous No.6556141]

Not OP, but I would like to know what's the best camera that has the body of a point and shoot but with the quality of a DSLR? I don't want to carry a big camera around my neck in cosplay that's why.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6556149]

>>6556141
Sony nex series but those are terrible compared to a full body DSLR.

[Anonymous No.6556182]

>>6556141

None. The quality of an SLR come from the lens.
as I mentioned here...
>>6556031

The interchangeable lens compacts are the smallest you can get without sacrificing quality.

Canon EOS M
Nikon 1
Pentax Hybrid
Samsung NX
Sony... etc. etc.

Canon and Nikon are top tier. Have been forever. And are very likely to be for a very long time.

I would go with the Nikon 1 J3 or S1 with the 11-27.5mm and the 10mm lens.

[Anonymous No.6556192]

fuck that shit. cosplay video is a dead art. wait, stillborn. it never was alive. you can't do much about it because cosplayers and video are just so limited.

>>6555935
s90 is like $150 on ebay. it was long discontinued so any for new for that price is just some idiot store holding on to old stock.

>>6556141
nex-5/6/whatever. fuji x20 looks good once they launch it ($600).
canon s95/s100 also good compromises. not as good as the above two but cheaper.

[Anonymous No.6556199]

>>6556192
Who mentioned video?

[Anonymous No.6556205]

>>6556182
both canon and nikon's mirrorless (eos m and nikon 1) need to get their shit together so i'd wait on them to do that.

[Anonymous No.6556208]

>>6556199
just the very top post mentioning ackson. people shouldn't hope to be the next big cosplay/con video guy.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6556211]

>>6556182
>Nikon 1 J3

No just no you can find a second hand NEX for about the price since they are ahead of competitors. Even then I recommend that OP reconsiders his/her idea of owning a full body dslr since they last for years and have a great resale value.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6556213]

>>6556205
Just not worth the price compared to NEX even though I hate mirrorless cameras altogether.

[Anonymous No.6556224]

>>6556211
they only have good resale if you buy it at a price where it can't get any cheaper because the newer models have already surpassed it enough. like, sub $500. then again for the really old ones it can be hard to find a buyer because all the newer, now older than the current stuff, is not too much higher in price.

[Anonymous No.6556233]

>>6555900

To all of the DSLR enthusiasts out there, I've never been happier than the time I took my first point and shoot to a convention instead of my DSLR. I don't need crazy quality shots at a convention, I want photos for the memories, so I don't mind using a point and shoot. I'm in cosplay, I don't want a heavier or larger camera with me, and I want something I can whip out quickly and take a photo with. It was a good small investment.

I recently picked myself up a Canon PowerShot A3400 and it does what I need it to. It definitely could be better, but I'm not complaining.

[Anonymous No.6556239]

>>6556211

Personal experience with Sony SLRs is that they are abhorrently slow. I can only imagine their non SLR is worse.

But really, almost everything is opinion.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6556245]

>>6556224
People still buy them even a Canon EOS 5D runs you about 500USD. They are built to last for years without any sign of aging and able to perform exceptionally well. I would rather spend the money on something like instead of an NEX that seen prices drop like a rock for used units.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6556252]

>>6556239
Who cares? They are gimmicky toys for the crowd who wants something slick and slim without much substance to it.

[Anonymous No.6556271]

>>6556245
a 5d yes becauase it's a 5d. the same can't be said of a 20d or something else many models surpassed. plus in the case of a 5d you have a now ancient feature set and interface. i used one for quite a while

[Anonymous No.6556286]

I agree with the option of going mirrorless if you want something that's as simple as a point and shoot but has the flexibility of a dslr. I'd recomend looking into olympus epl series or panasonic gf series since they are the more established mirrorless camera's. I started off with an olympus epl1 and I still see some at conventions. Nikon and Canon are still newcomers in this area.

I hated the Nikon 1 when I tried it, not enough manual control, small sensor, and price is too much. You are better off getting a used 550d or 600d if you want great photos and video.

[Volpe !YykH67CS/s No.6556290]

I dunno man, all these cameras are pretty terrible.

[Badr !KuHbpirZVI No.6556300]

>>6556031
I own the Nikon 1 J1
No complaints about the camera, other than the constant paranoia about dropping it.....

[Badr !KuHbpirZVI No.6556303]

>>6556035
gonna sound like a moron here...but what does that one do as opposed to the default 10-30 lens?

[Anonymous No.6556307]

>>6556303

wider field of view. projects less in front of the camers (typically called a pancake lens). f/2.8 aperture.

[Anonymous No.6556310]

>>6556307

I was comparing it to the 11-27.5

the 10-30 is the same fov at its widest, but the prime has a wider aperture, and is smaller.

[Badr !KuHbpirZVI No.6556313]

>>6556307
Ah, ok. Thank you, kind anon.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6556319]

>>6556271
sensor technology barely changes even with newer models coming out . What do you mean interface? All you need is iso,aperture, shutterspeed, white balance and bit of other things but thats about it. You have the benefit of shooting with a full frame. Also the 40/50/60D are semi pro dslr crop bodies.

>>6556286
Exactly these mirrorless/Micro 4/3 are kind inconvenient when it comes to ergonomics. Shoot it doesnt have to be that expensive 350D does a swell job.

>>6556303
Just a wide angle pancake prime lens

[Anonymous No.6556384]

>>6556319
the ways the menus are laid out and the options available, the lcd (and let's be honest; the 5d's is ancient), things like af microadjust, live view, etc.

[Volpe !YykH67CS/s No.6556959]

>>6556290
wow how dare you impersonate me on the internet, guffaw!

[Stitch !!4nfQU4D48/w No.6558142]

>>6555935
didn't check up on the price, just looked up the description on amazon, got it as a gift actually. :/ sorry for the misinformation. it's still a great camera though!
pic related took it at katsu last year..

[Anonymous No.6558153]

>>6555900
If I wanted to be Ackson, I would of spent thousands on some crazy prime lens and a chest rig so that I can spin around cosplayers for ten seconds
Most people who just take photos want to be the next Eurobeat King or want their photos to be on Cosplay Photographers

[Anonymous No.6558259]

>Best P&S
Canon S100 ($279) or S110 ($379)

Since the aperture will vary across the zoom range on most P&S, you want to keep the lens at it's widest zoom setting when composing your pictures (i.e. walk away/towards your subject to keep them in frame, don't use the fucking zoom button on the camera). This is because at it's widest zoom setting, the aperture will also be at it's widest, therefore letting in more light which in turn will allow you to use a lower ISO setting for smoother and less detail of the cosplayer's skin (unless you like seeing the pores on their faces). At it's widest aperture and depending on conditions, there may be some bokeh present, making the cosplayer 'pop' and giving the illusion of more detail in the image.

If you want a small point and shoot and are only taking pictures for memories and are not looking to get into photography as a hobby/profession, don't listen to these retards telling you to get a NEX, Nikon 1, EOS M, whatever the fuck. They probably shoot indoor conventions at 1/10, f5.6, ISO 6400.

[Libra !4gUHjMVbjw!!qoviRoAxEZs No.6558272]

>>6558259
>S110
>379USD

Are ya 'avin a giggle mate? Why would you spend so much much on P&S when a 40D is always available for the same price.

[Anonymous No.6558441]

>>6558272
Probably because DSLRs aren't allowed in many places where P&S are. E.g: You can have the best P&S for concert pics, but if you have a DSLR you won't get in without a photo pass. It's silly, but I can see that as a pretty good reason.

Personally I'll stick with my DSLR.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558479]

>>6558441
They use a the phone for these occasions since some of them have a built in flash.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558483]

>>6558441
Then a smartphone is suitable for these occasions but no point in the extra dosh on a silly P&S.

[Anonymous No.6558509]

>>6558483
Cellphone cameras, excluding the iPhone maybe, are fucking awful and grainy as holy fuck. Even a mid-priced P&S is light years better.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a P&S. They can take quite good pictures, especially if you know what you're doing. The only time I've ever had an issue with one is in low-lighting, which is why I got a DSLR to begin with.

Not everyone wants to carry around a clunky DSLR all the time.

[Anonymous No.6558516]

>>6558272
because a dslr is not something you can fit in your pocket, or even a jacket pocket. point and shoots have a place and it's for when you don't want hooj gear.

concerts + cell phone = oh god why. cell phones always want to take your shot at some shit like 1/2 second because it thinks it's too dark and you can't force the shutter speed.

libra i'm trying to not be like other people who are just shitting on you left and right but you're really not helping.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558520]

>>6558509
>Even a mid-priced P&S is light years better.

No? They are both horrible but one comes with the phone and the other costs 200-400USD and not the worth price.

>good pictures

With no manual settings besides a select few of them? A limited fixed lens?

> clunky DSLR all the time.

Of course not but it doesnt mean its a good idea dropping that amount of money on such a useless device that smartphones already have. Not gearfagging or anything I just see no point in wasting money like that.

[Anonymous No.6558526]

What is the difference between a point and shoot, a SLR, and. DSLR? In stupid people terms. All I need is a camera that I can choose what the camera focuses on.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558529]

>>6558516
>fit in your pocket, or even a jacket pocket

This is why we smartphones to fill that niche of photography mobility. I have the images that these P&S and they are generally unflattering but they cost 200-600USD? Nokia Lumia 920 takes incredible images for what it is.

/p/ has the same opinion so its not like im alone with this

[Anonymous No.6558532]

>>6558529
>lumia 920
>windows phone
is this the part where we start laughing?

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558536]

>>6558526
The difference is night and day when its comes to final product living you in awe or meh.

>>6558526
single-lens reflex 35 mm film camera
dslr-digital single lens reflex

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558537]

>>6558532
What? Android? iOS? OS jerking? MeeGo?

[Anonymous No.6558543]

>>6558520
My P&S has full manual. It may be old, but I don't doubt there's plenty of newer ones that also have this.

Also tons of ~pro photographers~ also have high end P&S for when they don't feel like dragging around their DSLR. It's not a waste of money.

And the only smartphone I'd advocate for photography at the moment is the iPhone. All the rest pretty much look like grainy shit.

Obviously for serious photography, especially if you're planning on making prints, you'd use a DSLR.

[Anonymous No.6558551]

>>6558516
Eh, to be honest, anything short of specific DSLRs for concert photography is moot. Even some DSLRs are terrible cause they aren't really geared toward low-lighting environments. A P&S will do way better than a phone, but even then, you're going to have awful grainy or blurred photos. They just aren't fast enough, and the sensors not good enough for that. And fuck anyone that abuses flash during a concert. Blinding the band and your fellow concert mates isn't cool.

[Anonymous No.6558553]

>>6558537
wow, I never thought I'd agree with Libra, but.. I have to agree. After a lot of research on different phones, I chose the Nokia lumia 710. I can't afford anything more, and both my boyfriend and sister want to switch from their iPhones to this. My camera is only 5mp, but this phone captures color so much better than the iPhones 8mp. The more expensive lumias must be even better.

Also, not everyone has the same wants it needs from their phone... Whether it's the hardware or the os's capabilities.

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558571]

>>6558543
> high end P&S

Digital rangefinders like the Leica M9 for general wanking around.

> for photography
They are all about the same

>use a DSLR

You can casually use find a used dslr for the same price as a p&s with the kit lens.

>>6558551
>really geared toward low-lighting environments

Because you are using the wrong lens for that occasions? You also need an extra flash with the right settings to have a professional results? Also some externals come with a collapsible diffuser to soften the flash.
>>6558553
>not everyone has the same wants it needs from their phone

Gold star comment

[Anonymous No.6558591]

>>6558571
If you're at a concert with a DSLR (with a photopass), you generally aren't allowed to use flash. It's also mega douchey to use flash in most cases, anyway. Blinding the musician is pretty rude.

What I'm talking about is the quality of the sensors and the ISOs they support. And some DSLRs really lose quality in the upper ISO range. There's tons of image quality examples you can look at that show their high ISO picutres and how grainy/unsharp they get on those settings. I use a Pentax K-M with a f/2.8 zoom lens. Since mine only goes up to 1600 before looking like utter ass, I still am completely fucked if the lighting is too low, or too red, because my DSLR just isn't good enough anymore. Same thing with a f/1.4 50mm. It's nothing to do with the lens. Not every DSLR is equal.

Anyway, this is off on a tangent, as I'm sure OP isn't gonna be using their camera for super low-light environments.

[Anonymous No.6558599]

>>6555900
OP, what do you mean by "can't operate one to get that quality shot"? Do you mean you don't know how to use manual settings? Becuase if so, you still won't get quality shots on a P&S.

My advice: learn manual settings and good composition, get P&S that has full manual, take photos, have fun! You can get good pictures with a P&S just as you can get shitty pictures with a DSLR. The only big difference is: DSLR can shoot raw and the image quality is better cause of a better sensor. Just look up examples of ones within your budget, try them out in store, and go with what you feel comfortable with!

[Libra !!DJgjz+hvEg4 No.6558601]

>>6558591
>mega douchey to use flash in most cases

That's the point of having a diffuser on the external flash? Since concerts have a lot of natural lighting it makes ideal candidate for fast primes or the 17-55mm kit lens. Shoot at a lower f stop and increase the speed oh yeah shoot RAW. Everything else can be take care of in lightroom then photoshoop.

[Anonymous No.6558621]

>>6558601
I shoot RAW. Doesn't matter in some cases. I had a photo pass to shoot Belphegor, but all they used was dim red light. I'm not sure anything could've shot in that, actually. And I wasn't allowed to use flash. I was mega bummed. Maybe I should've bribed the lighting guy.
Someone was using one with a diffuser at a Watain show though, and kept blinding me and pissing off the vocalist. It's best not to do it, IMO. I find it more appropriate for portraits, myself. I think a flash pointed toward the ceiling + diffuser would be good for convention shots though, as long as you understand how to set the camera for it. Also never use straight on flash, OP, it almost always looks awful and harsh!

Also, I don't know if this is just Pentax, but the kit lens was utter rubbish, and when zoomed in had too small of an aperture for me (like f/5.6 I think). I got that Tamron f/2.8 zoom and pictures look a billion times clearer. Are the kit lenses better on other brands?

But yes, I agree. BIGGEST advice with a DSLR is to always shoot RAW. I was amazed at the quality difference. Not to mention how much easier they are to edit in Lightroom. Also OP, definitely get Lightroom if you want good pictures. You can still edit JPGs a good bit if you're careful and don't overdo it. It's seriously saved some of my pictures, and definitely improved the others. Being able to sharpen only what needs it vs the whole picture is great. You can do that in Photoshop too, but I find Lightroom more intuitive.

Anyway, sorry for rambling on about this.