Busting Your Myth - SLR v/s non-SLR

September 4th, 2008

With the advent of digital technology, photographers have mushroomed many folds, who are novices and have no idea what equipment they actually need to buy for their photography, especially as beginners. Most of them think that to do good shots, one should just buy an SLR and one starts getting promoted as a great photographer overnight. I keep getting mails and phone calls, almost three to four a day on an average, to consult me while making a vital decision about which SLR they should buy. After a few questions, I find that the person has no idea about what is the difference between SLR and non-SLR camera, especially in the times of digital technology. Most of them end up making blunders and buy SLRs. Why I say blunders, because you do not need an SLR to learn basics of photography and by the time you grind your skills to reach a level of basic photography, your camera gets outdated, especially at a crucial time when you need an SLR but its has become outdated.

The SLR and non-SLR cameras have almost the same quality of output for a common man. Yes, in the film-era, there was a vast difference between the quality of film non-SLR and  SLR. We must be careful in assessing our requirements considering what kind of subjects I am going to handle. Also, we can not afford to replace cameras and lenses often.

Indian Rat Snake

I have posted this image to encourage you to reconsider your decisions about SLRs if you are a beginner. I have captured the fast flickering tongue and the image is sharp enough, it was shot with Canon Powershot G5.