Does spending more mean getting less?

[Cindy-Clicks]

Unlike a lot of my colleagues in the field, I stayed with my T3i until I proved myself worthy of an upgrade.  But now that I decided to get a "better" camera, I am finding that spending more money means I am getting less performance.  Why is that?   I decided to buy a Pentax K-3, but eventually returned it because it did not give me the flexibilty I wanted.  I decided to put off buying another crop sensor camera for now, so I bought a 6D with a 100mm Macro L-glass lens.  My old T3i with a Tamron 28-300 zoom still produces much better images under the same conditions. What gives?

[TCampbell]

The G15 is considered an "advanced point & shoot".  It's high-end as point & shoots go.  It's popular as a 2nd camera among DSLR photographers who need a camera to bring to places where either a DSLR is impractical or if the DSLR is simply not-permitted (lots of venues will not allow, for example, any camera that has a "removeable lens").  I have a G1 X and that's primarly why I use that camera.

[Skirball]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

I think I am understanding where she is coming from.  If you won a Pulitzer Prize with a G15  (P&S) and than didn't win one with the insanely expensive ESO 1Dx you just bought, was it a good buy?  Her answer is obiviously, no.

I think she should sell the 6D and put that money towards some more glass.

---

What does a camera model have to do with winning a Pulitzer Prize?  Just because you won one with a G15 you'd expect to win another if you used it again?  What she's missing is the understanding of using a camera as a tool, not a means to winning contests.

[cale_kat]

I like the term "advanced compact camera" . The reason I don't like "point and shoot" is because it becomes a catch all phrase that stresses the ease of use, through auto exposure and shutter algorithms. But an advanced compact camera allows near total creative freedom but in a small form factor.

[Cindy-Clicks]

Ok,  this is why I am freaking out right now.  I took this shot with the new camera and EF100 macro L, at ISO 2000, F9, 1/160sec and it is a mess!!  I took another shot with the old camera at ISO 800, F10, 1/15sec at 300mm and it was a LOT better than this!

[ebiggs1]

I don't know.  

But I do know your exposure settings are vastly different and would not make the same image even if everything else was equal.

[ebiggs1]

"I like the term "advanced compact camera" 

It just so happens you may call it whatever you please.  But the rest of the world is going to call it a 'point and shoot'.

If you google 'point & shoot' you will eventually stumble upon the Canon Powershot G15.

[Cindy-Clicks]

Come on, thats all you can give me?  We are talking a supposedly superior lens vs a third party.   A 28-300 zoom at 300mm and 1/15 sec should not be producing an image that is better than a fixed 100mm with "L" glass.  And don't say to try MF because I did that and that didn't work either.

[ebiggs1]

Miss Cindy,

I can't explain why that particular shot was better or worse with the equipment you have.  I do know your expouser values are vastly different.  That alone would make a great difference in the two shots.

Your EF 100mm lens may need adjusting, who knows?  I would try a lens test chart with each and very strict comparisons.

Equal exposure, equal light quality, equal distance on a tripod, etc and find out for a fact what is going on.

You must compare apples to apples.  You can not say one is better unless you know exactly what and how everything it is working.

[cale_kat]

If I trusted everything I read to be true, I'd believe a lot of nonsense.

[cale_kat]

Ms Cindy,

Is it possible that you are ignoring the minimum focus distance to the subject? You don't appear to be having any success achieving focus.

Just an observation.