Biggest difference b/w P&S and dSLR for landscapes (IMO).

This is not a question, but an attempt to help someone find the right type of

camera.

I owned a P&S camera (Nikon Coolpix 8400) for several years. It was a great

camera for landscapes (wide angle, RAW, auto bracketing,...), but I was limited

by it and bought into the Canon system (Canon XTi, Canon 10-22, and Canon 28-135).

The image quality of the XTi is better, its high ISO files are much better, and

it's much faster. I knew all this before buying the system. What I did not know

is the difference in DYNAMIC RANGE. The difference is so large, I would buy a

dSLR over a P&S for that advantage alone, even if everything else were the same.

With the P&S, I almost always had to bracket, then blend two exposures. It was

really annoying, but I thought that it was inherent to all digital cameras. With

the XTi, I only have to bracket in extreme conditions. With most shots, I just

use the shadow/highlight function in PS and the photos look just right.

So, if you are taking daytime shots with a P&S, and either the sky is blown out

or the foreground is too dark, I highly recommend you look into a dSLR (I think

any dSLR will do).

Here are 3 examples of a large dynamic range that the XTi provides. If you go to

this page:

http://www.wildwestgallery.com/blog/Locations/Bisti1.htm

and scroll about half way down, there are three photos taken in daylight with

harsh shadows (the captions are "Next day exploration" and "Cool hoodoos!). They

look very natural (the way I remember the scenes), and all come from single

exposures in RAW. I am quite amazed that I can now take these shots, whereas

with my P&S, I would either not have taken them, or I would have had to work a

lot on blending multiple exposures.

Sorry for the long post, but I hope this helps someone.

That is also a big advantage of using the Sigma DP-1 over other P&S cameras, in addition to

lower noise.

It's really good to note this as a compelling reason to change out of smaller/cheaper cameras

though, as the industry is way to focused on megapixels when things like better dynamic

range make for better pictures for most people.

Hi Diane.

I also shot RAW (NEF) with the Nikon P&S, so I am strictly comparing RAW images from both cameras. Good point though.

Momo

I put my 10D and my Coolpix 5000 (slightly older than you 8400) side by side and took identical images in snow. Yes the 10D has more dynamic range but it is NOT by double (meaning not even one stop). If you are interested try using DCRAW (free) to demosiac your raw file in LINEAR and then look at the results.

Push one of the cameras to just clipping of highlights and then set the other identically.

I also found that (comparing CP5000 and 10D) that there was differences in the shadow areas as well, indicating (to me) that they do apply different rules to their digitisation of sensor output.

I put a brief comparison here:

http://home.people.net.au/~cjeastwd/digital/CP20D10D/CPvsDSLR.html