To Paint With Light

well, you asked me what kind of camera I had, and the simple answer is "Nikon D40x with kit lens and 55-200mm lens." But I think what you really want to know is whether it would be worth it to get a DSLR or not no? and what the difference is? so I'll try to explain the differences (only the major ones, 'cause there's about gazillion), to the best of my ability.

I'll probably separate this into two separate entries - one I'll talk about general stuff, two I'll talk about technical stuff.

1. Should you get a DSLR?

Well, ask yourself how passionate you are about photography. If you're really aspiring to become a good photographer, then yeah, you should definitely get a DSLR. NOT necessarily because DSLR always brings better results, but because you'll learn so much about photography when you learn about the mechanics of the DSLR - such as shutter speed, aperture, ISO, focus, white balance, metering, etc etc.

Many point and shoot users don't really think much when they take pictures - and why should they? All you have to do is... well, point and shoot! If you get a DSLR, I can almost guarantee you that your pictures will look much worse than your point and shoot, especially if you put everything in manual mode. But as you learn, one by one, what the functions & limitations are and how an advanced camera actually operates, you'll have much better understanding of photography in general because if forces you to think much more.

Therefore, most people who shoot well with DSLRs can shoot well with almost any camera - it does not matter whether it's a point and shoot or DSLR. Many people actually actually prefer to shoot with a point and shoot - even professionals. But if you want to learn because you're serious about photography, definitely get a DSLR to learn - if not, then point and shoot will do.

2. What you can do with DSLR that you cannot do with a point and shoot: Controlling Depth of Field

First of all, DSLRs generally has the ability to create a "shallow depth of field." Let me illustrate:

See how the bee and the flower are clear but the background is blown out? I'll give you another example:

See how the background and the foreground is "blown away" and out of focus while the rotten apple is clear? That means that this picture has a very shallow depth of field - only very little area in the picture is in focus. DSLRs have the ability to control the depth of field, while it's generally much more difficult with point and shoots.

Picture taken with a point and shoot. It looks nice, but whatever you do, pretty much everything seems to be in focus - meaning everything is super clear whatever you do! This can be either good or bad, but the fact that you can't really control it well with point and shoots puts them at a disadvantage.

3. Ability to control time:

Can you take pictures like this with a point and shoot? probably not. Why? because you need the ability to control the shutter speed for pictures like this, but most point and shoots lack that function. If you took this with a point and shoot, the roller coaster will probably come out very clear & frozen in time, not smudged in motion like this.

4. Low light performance

You know how P&S shake a lot indoors or when it's dark and stuff? Well, DSLRs do the same thing (haha), but as the camera & lens gets better, it won't shake as much. But DSLRs in generally will look much better in low light situations due to the larger image sensors and pixel size.

5. Sharper pictures, faster. Better Auto focus

DSLR pictures are sharper (it's more clear) and better looking in general, but really, not by too much margin if you have an entry level camera & lens. But they do have much more faster and accurate auto focus function, which does matter.

6. Why point and shoots are better:

They're not as bulky. They cost less. You won't look like an idiot carrying a big DSLR to your friend's birthday party. you don't really need a separate bag full of lenses and stuff. You don't look like a crazy stalker. Did I mention they're not bulky? Well, they don't weigh as much either. You can shoot them at a weirder angle due to their size. You'll end up using them more. They're easier to use. You don't have to spend hours learning about photography (if you don't want to). They're more portable. You can take pictures of your own face with it. You have an excuse if you shoot bad pictures.

And honestly, you can take such great pictures with point and shoots - some of my favorite pictures were taken with it. If you don't like the quality, you can just photoshop it a little and it'll give you amazing results - look:

This is the original - kind of bland huh?

edited:

I actually screwed up a little with the edited version (look at the sky). But if I actually spent time on this, it probably would've been very difficult to tell whether it was taken with a DSLR or a Point and Shoot.

This one is unedited:

It's really vibrant and nice despite it was taken with a point and shoot.

I mean, look at the next two pictures. I think very few people will say, "psh, this was definitely taken with a P&S and that's why they have such horrible quality."

(the above picture was not edited - the turtle one was heavily edited).

So my conclusion: I think it's a waste of money to buy a DSLR unless people are genuinely interested in photography and are willing to invest time learning about it. DO NOT expect better pictures just because you're getting a DSLR. Expect worse pictures in the beginning.

Oh, and Nikon D40x is an outdated and old camera, don't buy it.

I know we shouldn't joke around about things we can't change, but sometimes, I just can't help it.

When Kevin Han was little, his parents told him that Huburt's skin became dark because he drank too much coffee and coke. And when I saw this picture taken in Mongolia... it was just asking for it. hahahaha

Associated Press (AP) Cambodian Man Arrested in Mongolia.

Last June, the Mongolian Authorities arrested a Cambodian man identified as Huburt Kang for charges of drinking too much coke. The officials are also expected to add additional charges of drinking and smuggling coffee within jurisdiction of Bagnor district, Mongolia.

Though the suspect declined the request for interview, his attorney stated, "...there is undeniable proof that my client only drank pepsi instead of coke. We also have photographs of my client even drinking sprite and milk." ...

The FDA (Fred dining association) experts, however, argued against the claims. In an annonymous interview, one official stated, "it is scientifically impossible for a man to have such skin colors while drinking milk and sprite." An interview with the Han family confirmed the official's remarks.

Eye witnesses report that the suspect repeatedly said, "sain bai no. Ochilale," at the time of the arrest.

ah, memories.

And two more classic drawings, just for the heck of it: