Interesting I'm thinking of buying a Cannon EOS 5D and this is a pretty good read here Brad. Thanks!

Will more likely get the camera no matter. I just like Cannon better than Nikon.

On an amateur all-thumbs basis of understanding, I agree with all he says....it's probably why I never rushed out to get a DSLR...

I agree 100% with this article. I have a Canon 40D with multiple lenses. I use them all. But then again, my job requires that I do. Most people aren't in my situation and don't need all the "bells and whistles." I would love to have a 40D or 50D for personal use, but my wife would never want to carry it around. A good quality point & shoot is just fine for daily personal photography.

I fully agree, but after I got my SONY DLSR A100-K I've gotten a better understanding of photography, and it's made me want to learn more about it.
Plus it takes awesomely good quality photos - and is going to cost me a fair extra buck, when I'm getting some extras for the camera (Lenses, tri-pod, carry bag etc etc)

Probably more like you are just a better photographer after some study.

The old Canon D60 is a pretty crappy camera by today's standards, yet I still get some pretty good shots off of that old relic.

I just got my fiancee a cheap $200 10 mpx camera . for casual photography the thing is fantastic..

A DSLR is like anything else - rubbish in rubbish out. The end result depends on the skill of the photographer, much the same as a skinner using Photoshop. If you can't make graphics, buying Photoshop isn't going to help...

What a DSLR does do for the skilled photographer is not get in the way of creativity. How many times have I in the past seen a great photo, only to miss it due to equipment limitations? With a film camera, many, many times. A 'point and shoot' would do the same.

With my Nikon D-300 I can tackle most things without worrying about equipment limitations. And referring back to the article, the D-300 has automatic sensor cleaning. I change lenses over and over, and never in 18 months of ownership have I had a single speck of dust. My old D-70 was prone to dust problems, but still churned out great looking pics. If you take a look in my gallery you will see many photographic wallpapers all taken with  the D-70.

I also wrote an article about lens resolution on DSLRs: http://fuzzylogic.wincustomize.com/Articles.aspx?AID=141240
Don't believe all you read about more pixels = more resolution. Ultimately any camera will be limited by the quality of the lens, and this is where your average 'point and shoot' will let you down. You might have massive megapixels but that 'do it all' lens is a series of compromises.

For the casual photographer, convenience is more important then anything else however. If your camera gives you great holiday photos without any fuss, what more do you need?

One feature the article didn't mention is a DSLR's ability to shoot continuously. When you're trying to capture a picture of something that's not posed it's a real plus to be able to shoot a rapid series and then pick the one that's "right". A big limitation of digital Point & Shoots is shutter lag and recovery time between shots. This has improved a lot over the years, but most can't come close to a DSLR. . The article did talk about low-light performance, which is still pretty limited in most digital P&S cameras. This can be a noticeable problem just shooting indoors during the day. The built-in flash helps but its' range is limited, and since it shoots straight ahead there is often a problem with harsh shadows, too bright foreground, under lit background, etc. Still, a digital P&S is very convenient. You have to think about what you're actually willing to carry around and use. Even a super-zoom is a lot of camera and too often I find myself not wanting to bring mine along. Recently I bought a pocket P&S that is easy to take everywhere and results in my taking more pictures. They're not as good as the super-zoom pics, but you get the idea.

I think the solution is to have multiple cameras.  Just like you shouldn't expect a Porsche to drive through a snow storm, you shouldn't expect to shoot weddings with a point and shoot.  I have several cameras and use whatever is best for the job.  I have a couple Nikon SLRs, a couple Nikon DSLRs, a Medium Format camera and a few point and shoot cameras.  I just pick the right tool for the type of pictures that I am wanting to take. 

The whole mega-pixel thing can not be the determining factor on picture quality, either.  I have a fairly high end point and shoot camera that has the same megapixels as one of my low end DSLRs.  There is nothing that I can do to make the point and shoot take pictures the same as the DSLR.  The color quality, the depth of field, the contrast, etc. is always better on the DSLR.  The point and shoot is awesome for portability, but if I want a really good picture, I turn to the DSLR every time.

 

Got my eye on this one when it gets here!