How come landscape/far away photos look as good from a point and shoot as an SLR?

Question

I recently bought a Canon Rebel XT, a Tamron 17-50mm lens ($450), and a Canon L 70-200mm lens ($550). After all that money spent on photography, I'm sometimes surprised by how crisp and clear photos of wide open scenes and landscapes taken with a cheap $100 point and shoot camera (taken by a complete amateur). Sometimes these photos seem to come clearer on the Point and Shoots. Why is that? It's discouraging! Thanks!!!

PS: I don't want you to think that I'm dumping on SLR's. Close up and portrait photos provide much better bokeh then a P & S.

Answer 1

There are some good points in all the answers above me. I'd agree that the most likely reason is that the typical landscape image is made using a wide angle lens where the depth of field is greatest. in a typical P&S camera, the actual focal length is in the single digit range on the wide end and darn near everything is going to be in focus. People come here all the time asking how to "shoot things out of focus with part of the picture blurred." That's because it's darn hard not to keep everything in focus with a P&S.

I like Ara's thought, too, that the P&S image has more "massaging" applied in the camera.

Let's look at the other side of the coin, though. If you try to make a decent sized print from either camera, the SLR will usually win. I'd like to say that it will win every time, but if you take a full format image from a typical modern P&S camera, you can probably get a nice 8x10 print from it without any trouble. If you want to do any enlarging at all (cropping the image as you do), the SLR will win all the time.

I have a couple of samples that relate to sensor size that will demonstrate this to you. Go take a look at http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/476181751/ Read the text under it to get your bearings and then click on "All sizes" and then "Original." Look at the difference!

Now, go to the same scene taken with two different P&S cameras. This isn't quite so apples-to-apples, but you will see a difference. http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/944309888/ Go all the way to "Original" size. This is a little tricky, but hang with me. Copy the address of the original size and put that address into another copy of Internet Explorer. Come back here and pick up the first sample and go to the original size again. You should now have each image open in it's own window. Now, "A-B" those two images in full size. Compare the 1/2.5" sensor with the SLR sensor. There really is no comparison.

Answer 2

Point and shoot careras are basically designed for infinity focus scenery type photos. They are mostly light weight with lenses that are a fixed foca l length or with very limited zoom capabilities in the short focal length area. In other words they are very forgiving when used for what they were designed to do and do not require tripods and fussy focus for vacation type photos.
On the other hand, the eqyuipment you have is not at all so forgiving. The camera is realtively heavy and so are the lenses, particularly the 70 - 200 zoom. You probably are using mostly the 70 -200 and no tripod for your less than sharp shots. The Canon L 70 - 200 zoom is a fine lens when used properly but needs to be handled correctly. Camera movement causes far more soft focus pictures than camera quality. The Tamron lens is OK too but not nearly the quality of a Canon lens. When you buy a point and shoot camera, the lens on it is always made for the specific camera you buy.
The equipment you have is nice but built for maximum flexability at a relatively low price.

Answer 3

The reason why pictures come out better is always the way an individual points at the subject. Most cameras are the same. The only difference is in the way you hold the camera and shoot. If you're not sure of how the pictures come out buy different cameras and the ones that takes the best exposure that's the one you should keep. Just because a camera cost more doesn't mean it will take great pictures. I know, because I have been using very low cost cameras and I wouldn't buy any expensive ones. Good luck. You can look into my online portfolio if you like. My work is done with cheap equipment. When I mean cheap I mean low price equipment.

Answer 4

Another factor is point and shoots have more processing done to the image in the camera. SLR users are sort of expected to apply the degree of sharpening and saturation they desire, rather than have the camera decide for them. I don't use a Canon SLR, but there may be options in the menu for saturation and sharpness. Perhaps you could increase the amount and like your pictures better straight out of camera.

Answer 5

The tiny lens on a P&S camera has wonderful depth of field, which results in crisp, clear images at small sizes.

That's perfectly fine, for most people, most of the time.