[jlspeed29]

Been thinking about an entry level DSLR for a while and didnt want to cut any corners and I found that there are "Prosumer Cameras" that are basically in-between dslr's and point and shoots.
In that category, I've seen:Canon, Samsung, Panasoinic and Nikkon
I've always liked Canon- They have the G12
I see Nikkon has the Coolpix P7000

what other models do you guys like? are they worth it for the not-so-serious-but-kinda-serious-photographer ?

any tips are welcomed too


thanks!!!

[Weebl]

Panasonic DMC LX5. The lenses are made by Leica virgins.
The cameras you listed are not DSLRs, very high end PS and even though I am a Canon guy, I would be happy to have any one of those. ( more likely to pick up a Panasonic though for image quality)

[BMW F22]

The Panasonic LX5 is a great camera. As mentioned the cameras mentioned are not DSLR. The G12 is to bridge the gap between PS and DSLR. You could pick up a G12 but be sure to do research on others (like the LX5, maybe Canon S95, etc.).

[jlspeed29]

Thanks for the responses guys. By "prosumer" from what I've read, are cameras between DSLR's and Point and Shoots

Keep em coming! I know there are some pros in here

[BMW F22]

Yeah I guess when we read prosumer we thought about prosumer DSLR's. I don't really know that much about that segment of the P&S so I can't comment much.

[InCityPhoto]

My mother was looking at the G12, and she actually ended up going with the Power Shot SX 110 IS, For the reason of price/options.

and I have to admit, it takes REALLY nice pictures. If i put my old 40D in Auto mode and took side by side photo's its hard to tell the difference.

[chili555]

I don't believe 'prosumer' and 'Coolpix' belong in the same sentence. I don't believe any professional, even part-time, in any segment of photography would use a Coolpix even as a backup, primarily because of the sensor size and resultant resolution. Paying customers expect a lot more than a Coolpix can provide.

Having said that, a Coolpix produces very fine photographs for its intended use, emailing to friends and relatives, posting on Flickr and prints no larger than 5x7.

If i put my old 40D in Auto mode and took side by side photo's its hard to tell the difference.

Put the two in prints of say 11x14 and try to charge a wedding customer a few thousand dollars for the job and you sure can tell the difference.

[bosstones]

I think 'prosumer' is just a coined phrase that is applicable to more than one class of camera. One could say there are entry level dSLR's (fixed lens dSLRs, Xs, etc...), prosumer dSLRs (7D/5D), and professional dSLRs (1D). Obviously, I'm a Canon fanboy.

I'd say 'advanced PS', but that's just me. To me, these are the higher end PS digicams and usually have more manual mode flexibility/control.

Regarding recommendations, I'd say it'd be a toss up between Canon (re: fanboy) and Panasonic. I think that follows the recommendations that have already been made, though. The only gripe I have w/ Panasonic is that their ISO performance seemed to be a little sub-par but I haven't researched advanced PS digicams in a while so that may have changed. In general, though, I abhor the MP wars....I'd rather have better low light performance than boat loads of MPs.

[Chewy734]

This might help you out:

Canon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...igital_cameras
Nikon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...n_DSLR_cameras
* check the bottom tables on both pages.

For the Canons, I'd consider prosumer to be the "Midrange" row.
For the Nikons, it would be the Consumer->Midrange or Consumer->Advanced rows.

I wouldn't consider the 5D or 7D prosumer cameras.

[jlspeed29]

thanks for the link....

Im kinda leaning towards the Panasoinic LX5k because of the Leica lens

[InCityPhoto]

Originally Posted by chili555

I don't believe 'prosumer' and 'Coolpix' belong in the same sentence. I don't believe any professional, even part-time, in any segment of photography would use a Coolpix even as a backup, primarily because of the sensor size and resultant resolution. Paying customers expect a lot more than a Coolpix can provide.

Having said that, a Coolpix produces very fine photographs for its intended use, emailing to friends and relatives, posting on Flickr and prints no larger than 5x7. Put the two in prints of say 11x14 and try to charge a wedding customer a few thousand dollars for the job and you sure can tell the difference.

Never said anything about a coolpix

And please stick your head in the sand, if your making a few thousand dollars a shoot you better be shooting a 1D MarkII or a 5D Mark II

[ichiban]

If you want to be able to change lenses, then i'd say the LX5 or GF2s. But if your looking at fixed lenses like the canon G12, then i think the canon s95 or if you have the cash, fuji x100. both are great cameras. The fuji will produce better pictures and the overall finish is better, but it is not really pocketable. Where as the s95, has adequate low light capabilities, sharp enough pictures, and very pocketable (leading to you taking it with you more = more captured moments).

[chili555]

Originally Posted by InCityPhoto

Never said anything about a coolpix

And please stick your head in the sand, if your making a few thousand dollars a shoot you better be shooting a 1D MarkII or a 5D Mark II

However, the OP did.

I shoot a Nikon D700, FWIW.

[jlspeed29]

Bssically, I'm looking for something respectable that will introduce me intomore manual settings that I can get used to. I have a Canon S2 that's in its last limb and its done a good job of getting me into Manual settings

[The1]

i keep hearing about the s95 because it can shoot RAW which i know the G12 can as well, however, the S95 has a faster lens, so it will shoot better indoors and give you better depth of field outdoors. It is essentially a repackaged G12, but with a different lens and body. So when you buy G12, you're buying something a little more rugged, but less indoor performance/depth of field. If i were to buy another point and shoot today i would get the S95 (canon lover) The S95 would also fit in your pocket better then the G12 which will give you bumpy pants.

that being said, i'm not too familiar with the panasonic, but from what i hear, it's worth consideration.

I've seen the word prosumper tossed around a lot when it comes to cameras, i don't give the term much thought though as any person who is shopping for a camera is a potential prosumer.

I've seen a few websites list the 7D/5D as prosumer. "Prosumer-level cameras are the cameras that were designed with the serious amatuer"

I just say, low end, mid range/semi-pro, and full professional and then i add the type of camera after such as "mid range point and shoot"

that's just how i avoid that confusion of camera company made up words that confuse everyone

[Litos]

just get an entry level DSLR........

in before you make a "prosumer" purchase, fall in love with it, want more, and the beat yourself up for not getting a real DSLR.........

[infinitekidM2C]

Whats the difference between the Canon 7D and 60D...used comparison chart and doesnt seem to be much difference but the price difference is huge $999 for 60d and $1699 for 70D

[The1]

Originally Posted by infinitekid2002

Whats the difference between the Canon 7D and 60D...used comparison chart and doesnt seem to be much difference but the price difference is huge $999 for 60d and $1699 for 70D

7D shoots faster frames per second at 8 vs 60D at 5.3

I believe the 7D has 2 processors rather then just the 1 in the 60D (for faster shooting reasons maybe...)

7D can achieve higher ISO clarity

7D has micro adjustment

7D does both horizontal and vertical leveling where 60D only does horizontal

I believe the AF system is a little stronger, but my 60D experiences are limited, i'd have to play with my buddies 60D some more to see.

there's many more things, i just am having trouble finding a resource so you can compare, i'll keep looking.

[The1]

7D has 19point auto focus vs the 60D 9 point auto focus, makes a large difference.

I'd say if you're doing sports type photography, go for the 7D, if just a walk around camera, the 60D is probably the better choice.

[infinitekidM2C]

Thanks that's plenty of info for somone like me

[The1]

Originally Posted by infinitekid2002

Thanks that's plenty of info for somone like me

there is good reason for the price difference, but it really depends on what you're shooting.

image quality will be very similar and 5.3frames per second isn't slow by any means, it just isn't 8-10 frames which sports photographers like.

the 60D in the long run can save you some money because the battery life is slightly longer (same battery, but one less processor sucking power) and it takes SD cards which are so easily available that you can get them in variety stores even sometimes. the Compact Flash cards for the 7D are nearly twice the price, and there's less selection.

My buddy loves his flip out screen on his 60D, it allows him to take lots of shots from near the ground and high above his head with ease

Hope that's helpfull

[jlspeed29]

Originally Posted by Litos

just get an entry level DSLR........

in before you make a "prosumer" purchase, fall in love with it, want more, and the beat yourself up for not getting a real DSLR.........

Thanks. With that in mind, what features would be available for an entry level DSLR vs Say the S95? Aside from purchasing a $400 lens :O and various filters?

For arguments sake, let's say the S95 vs canons entry-level dslr ??