Point and Shoot

[kballing]

OK, I see all of these amazing photos on this site. I have no money for a DSLR, and if I did, I don't know if I would ever use it. I sport a Canon A2200 (hopefully with CHDK soon). I've taken art classes and dabble in computer graphics a lot, so I understand light and camera basics, but what's the key to getting the best pictures I can from my camera?

Someone prove to me that you can get awesome backcountry pictures from a POS PAS camera.

I'll post some of what I think are my best pictures soon.

 

[Aldaron]

I'm with you. I have a Panasonic FZ100, which I thought was a high end point and shoot, but my pictures don't look anything like the pictures others post. It makes me sad

 

[gnwatts]

Taken with an 3mp Kodak P&S, probably in '05. Luckily Kodak made their first cameras with Schneider lenses. You don't have the dynamic range and resolution obviously of larger cameras, so try not to have real bright light and low light combos. Also, spend some time learning some processing software, Photoshop, lightroom , aperture etc. Not saying this is an awesome pic, but I like it still. It has a little noise in the shadows in the corners, as I exceeded the limits of the sensor. I purposely left the sky out of the shot so the light meter wouldn't freak out.

Upper Black Box

 

[Deadeye008]

IMO, your best bet at getting great looking pictures with a point and shoot(aside from what you have already mentioned about understanding light and whatnot) is learning how to use editing software. I prefer Adobe Lightroom. I have seen some pretty bland looking pictures turned into excellence through post processing.

 

[Yvonne]

I take a lot of pictures with my Canon Powershot S95 and I love this camera.
And yes, I also have a Nikon D7000, but for convenience I usually use my PAS
Here are some examples of what the little one is capable:

The only software used is Picasa and in my case I'm happy with the results.
I love my PAS camera because it's small, handy, not heavy and easier to carry while hiking, biking, climbing etc.
The only disadvantage is shooting in tricky light situations and long exposure is limited to 15 seconds. I love night shots and night photography, but unfortunately the little one has it's limits

 

[IntrepidXJ]

Here's a few taken with my Canon S90 over the past few months. I process the RAW files in ACR & Photoshop. I use my S90 when I'm hiking somewhere that I don't want to carry my Canon 5DII.


Potosi Peak by IntrepidXJ, on Flickr


Richardson's Geranium by IntrepidXJ, on Flickr


Sunrise Hike by IntrepidXJ, on Flickr


Unnamed Peak Below by IntrepidXJ, on Flickr

 

[jdgibney]

I use my Fuji X10 when I'm hiking in the white mountains. I don't drag my DSLR (Nikon D3) as it's too beastly, but this works pretty well for what I need (just documenting, not trying to sell anything!)

 

[Dan]

I'm with you. I have a Panasonic FZ100, which I thought was a high end point and shoot, but my pictures don't look anything like the pictures others post. It makes me sad

i think the fz100 had some minor IQ issues, i'm not sure. but it is definitely a "high end" point and shoot. do you shoot in raw? i've looked at the fz150, but not the 100.

 

[Dan]

Here's a few taken with my Canon S90 over the past few months. I process the RAW files in ACR & Photoshop. I use my S90 when I'm hiking somewhere that I don't want to carry my Canon 5DII.

same. the s90 is a sweet camera for the weight. definitely can take great backcountry photos. i use mine mostly in a housing, and it rocks in those really wet canyons.

all of these are on an s90 - http://www.canyoneeringusa.com/rave/best-canyon-ever-dan-ransom-in-heaps-may-2012/

 

[Dan]

i'm a big fan of the panasonic m43 cameras - it's easy to get an inexpensive gf series camera with interchangeable lenses for under $300 if you look around. they are the perfect compromise for me - light enough, and high enough quality...

these are all taken with a gf1 and 14-45 lens (or 7-14), but the basic kit is less than $400.

 

[Yvonne]

same. the s90 is a sweet camera for the weight. definitely can take great backcountry photos. i use mine mostly in a housing, and it rocks in those really wet canyons.

all of these are on an s90 - http://www.canyoneeringusa.com/rave/best-canyon-ever-dan-ransom-in-heaps-may-2012/

what kind of housing do you use?
I would love to have something for my S95 so I could use it for some wetter outdoor stuff here in Western NY

 

[Dan]

this one here - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003ZSHNH2/?tag=backcountrypo-20

 

[Aldaron]

i think the fz100 had some minor IQ issues, i'm not sure. but it is definitely a "high end" point and shoot. do you shoot in raw? i've looked at the fz150, but not the 100.

No, I shoot JPEG. I feel like many of the pictures just don't focus well. But, I also have to recognize that I have no idea what I'm doing when it comes to photography, and I need to do something to fix that.

 

[DAA]

I bought an S100 about six weeks ago. Have been using it more than my 60D DSLR since I got it. It's the only camera I took on my long Uintas backpacking trip last week and I just started going through those pictures this afternoon. Most, I took in JPEG, using auto or semi-auto settings on the S100. But some, I took in RAW and so am able to "develop" them to my tastes. Using either the free RAW converter that Canon proivides - DPP, or ACR. I use DPP the big majority of the time because I can fly through a lot of conversions quickly with it. But on the few that I feel are deserving of a few minutes special attention, I use ACR as some of the features I feel are more powerful and bring better results than DPP (the fill light and vibrance settings, plus the "adjustment brushes"for instance).

To my mind, there is no doubt about it, a night and day difference, the ones I shot in RAW are turning out waaaaay better than any of the ones shot in JPEG. That includes the RAW files I batch process in DPP, spending scarcely 15 seconds each on.

I think that in a nutshell, RAW is the entire advantage of a "high end" P&S. Because RAW gives so much greater flexibility and control in final output. And you don't need to know anything, or have any talent to get improved results over JPEG, I'm living proof of that.

Not that MY shots from the S100, or any other camera for that matter, are anything to get excited about. But, for my meager efforts, it is clear that RAW is the way to go for best results.

- DAA

 

[Dan]

But, for my meager efforts, it is clear that RAW is the way to go for best results.

Agreed. Love to get my hands on a s100, sounds like a great upgrade from the s90.

 

[Yvonne]

this one here - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003ZSHNH2/?tag=backcountrypo-20

thanks, the price is tempting right now.

 

[Nick]

I bought an S100 about six weeks ago. Have been using it more than my 60D DSLR since I got it. It's the only camera I took on my long Uintas backpacking trip last week and I just started going through those pictures this afternoon. Most, I took in JPEG, using auto or semi-auto settings on the S100. But some, I took in RAW and so am able to "develop" them to my tastes. Using either the free RAW converter that Canon proivides - DPP, or ACR. I use DPP the big majority of the time because I can fly through a lot of conversions quickly with it. But on the few that I feel are deserving of a few minutes special attention, I use ACR as some of the features I feel are more powerful and bring better results than DPP (the fill light and vibrance settings, plus the "adjustment brushes"for instance).

To my mind, there is no doubt about it, a night and day difference, the ones I shot in RAW are turning out waaaaay better than any of the ones shot in JPEG. That includes the RAW files I batch process in DPP, spending scarcely 15 seconds each on.

I think that in a nutshell, RAW is the entire advantage of a "high end" P&S. Because RAW gives so much greater flexibility and control in final output. And you don't need to know anything, or have any talent to get improved results over JPEG, I'm living proof of that.

Not that MY shots from the S100, or any other camera for that matter, are anything to get excited about. But, for my meager efforts, it is clear that RAW is the way to go for best results.

- DAA

Couldn't agree more. I have an S95, and while I don't always take it along, whenever I do I am very impressed and it is in large part due to the ability to process the photos like I do with my SLR. This is from my S95 over this past weekend in Stough Creek Basin:

 

[Bill]

i've always been impressed with the quality of shots nick gets with his s90.

 

[Yvonne]

i've always been impressed with the quality of shots nick gets with his s90.

same here

Do you all process your pictures in RAW? I know the S95 can do it, but I've never tried it, because I have no software to process any pictures.
So far I've always taken my pictures in JPEG

 

[Nick]

same here

Do you all process your pictures in RAW? I know the S95 can do it, but I've never tried it, because I have no software to process any pictures.
So far I've always taken my pictures in JPEG

Wouldn't you just use the same software you use to process raw out of your SLR? Or do you shoot JPEG there too? RAW is a huge advantage, you should invest in Lightroom or Aperture ASAP if you're not using it.