A DSLR is a digital single-lens reflex camera, which is the big, bulky brother of the compact point-and-shoots favored by the digital masses. DSLRs are capable of taking far better pictures than point-and-shoots because they have bigger and better sensors, and because they have a zillion little settings that must be mastered to make those better pictures happen.
I found this post at The Tech Lounge listing the 10 reasons to get a DSLR. One of the 10:
7: Higher Build Quality: Most digicams are plastic, plastic, and more plastic. They feel flimsy and they’re not all that hard to break. DSLRs are built to much higher standards, increasingly so as you get into the more expensive models of course. Some of the cheaper DSLRs are still going to have a lot of plastic in them, but overall they’re more durable than a similarly priced digicam. When you get into some of the more expensive models in the $1,000+ range, bodies are ruggedized with largely metal bodies and nice rubberized grips. The ultra-high-end professional bodies are the most rugged and are weather-sealed so you can use them in the harshest environments without a problem. I don’t think you’ll find many war photographers using a rinky-dink digicam.
That post triggered a bunch of feedback which inspired, you guessed it, 10 reasons not to get a DSLR. Among them:
2. Portability, meet Window: This is sort of an extension of my first point. With a DSLR, portability goes out the window. To illustrate, when I travel with my DSLR I take a giant Lowepro hiking backpack, which holds my camera with a lens attached, 3 additional lenses, lens hoods, a flash, filters, my tripod, remote shutter release
“Careful editing gives the illusion of competence.”
That happens to be my personal creed.
I’ve been a semi-professional photographer for a long time now and one of the most annoying questions ever (from non-techies) is, “what camera do you use?”
It’s like a non-guitar player asking Eric Clapton what guitar he uses. As if the camera framed the shot, picked the exposure, etc.
For web-work, i use the cheapest pocket digital i can find. If it breaks, i replace it without pain and it fits in my pocket. When i’m getting serious about my work, well, let’s just say there’s a lot more weight involved.
It’s all about your needs. There are way too many people out there who think that buying the most expensive camera will make them great photographers. It just ain’t true. Unfortunately, digital has made that attitude much, much worse.
Give Clapton a cheap-ass guitar and he’ll make it sing. Give me the best custom guitar in the world and i’ll make some horrible noises.
Actually, Clapton would be really pissed off if he had to perform on cheap, clunky guitars.
That aside, it really is true that the “best” camera is the one that best suits your own needs and expectations.
I’m pretty serious about my photography these days so I carry a bunch of stuff on the trail. But in comparison to what I would carry in other conditions I lighten up. My basic backpacking kit includes:
All in all, perhaps about 10 pounds. Ironically the rest of my gear is almost in the ultralight category.
For most people this setup would be total overkill. However, for me the photography is one of the main reasons I backpack thse days.
I’ve written about this topic on one of my web sites – at great length. (Follow the link and look for the photography section.) Basically, I agree that most backpackers would be well served by a small, decent point and shoot style camera.