The DSLR Plunge...

Thanks for the suggestions! Although one suggested a superzoom and the other the DSLR, lol.

Either of the suggestions given can work for you. The DSLR has the largest room for evolving your photography, but the G9(which isn't quite a superzoom) is a camera that can be taken everywhere(pocketable). The image quality will not differ much with the kit lens on the DSLR. The DSLR can go into higher ISO settings with less noise and is faster.

Most people that have a DSLR also have a good point and shoot because you won't take the DSLR everywhere because of the size. Many DSLR owners also own the G9 or they go with an ultracompact.

Yes, but do ppl who own a G9 also own an ultracompact...

The G9 is small enough to fit in your jacket pocket, or cargo shorts. A DSLR does not fit in any pocket.

See, this is where ppl get confused with my situation. I know a DSLR won't fit in your pocket. What I want to know is, is a G9 going to be that much better than my current p&s? In other words, is it pointless to spend more money on a bridge camera...in order to see a big diff in pic quality, manual controls, etc or should that money be dedicated to an SLR to truly have a different cam than my current p&s?

In normal to bright light, the G9 will out perform the other Canon point and shoots with more DOF, sharpness, and overall image quality. In low light or indoors there will not be much of a difference unless you add on an external flash which is one of the best things you can ever buy.

You buy the DSLR for low light(that being coupled with fast lens) and increasing speed. If you shoot the DSLR in auto modes then the image quality is really only noticed when pixel peeping.

I have owned several 35mm SLRs over the last 35 years and if you are serious about your pictures, go with a DSLR over one of the super-zoom cameras. My last SLR was a Minolta Maxim, so when I went to a DSLR, I bought the Sony A200. It accepts all my old Minolta lenses (because Sony bought the Minolta camera business). The anti-shake is built into the camera rather than the lens so you can use any alpha-mount lens and the antishake will work. Keep in mind that when you use a 35mm lens on this digital camera that the focal length of the lens increases by a factor of 1.5 because the sensor is smaller than a 35mm frame. A 70-300 zoom effectively becomes a 105-450 zoom. This would also be true on other digital SLR, but the factor depends on the sensor size. Olympus uses a smaller one and the factor is 2x. I believe the Pentax is also in the 1.5x range. All three of these cameras have anti-shake built into the body. If you go with a Nikon or Canon, the anti-shake is built in the lens and the lenses cost a lot more if you plan to add on. If you just want a couple zoom lenses, Costco has a couple great deals on the Nikon D40 od D60 with 2 anti-shake lenses and a memory card.

Whatever brand you get, the DSLR wil be vastly superior to a point and shoot camera.

If he is only looking at $500 is him buying a DSLR a good idea? We can throw out the DSLR as the best choice, but you're looking at a major investment. He also wanted more than his current camera in focal range(which is 35-105mm). So he wants more than 70mm on a Canon lens. This would put him well past his budget.

I suggested the G6 because he could increase his abilities. In normal to bright light there is not much of a difference between the G9 and entry level image quality. The G9 gives almost as much control in photographing as a DSLR, which would help him improve.

If his budget was over a $1000 then I would recommend a DSLR, but he's saying $500. Oh, the other thing is he could buy an external flash along the way, with the G9, and have it for when he makes the jump later into DSLRs.

Nikin D40 with 18-55 and 55-200 anti-shake lens plus 2GB memory card at Costco for under $600. It is onmly a 6 megapixel camera but mire than good enough for 8x10s

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11243346&whse=BC&topnav=&browse=&lang=en-US&s=1

I bought my Pentax K100d for $430 with kit lens from TriState Camera in december, and then bought a legacy Sigma 80-200mm F3.5 manual focus lens for $30 on ebay, A 50mm f2 Manual Pentax lens for $10 on ebay, and a Ricoh K-mount 35-70mm F3.5 on ebay for $30. People just get rid of these older lenses even though the quality is wonderful simply because they think they're obsolete.

Good way to stretch your dollar. I have some 30+ year old Pentax screw mount lenses that are just as sharp now as when they were back then. Problem is, it has been a long time since you could buy a camera to mount them on. I have 2 bodies that accept them just fine, but they use Mercury batteries and you can no longer buy them.

You can use screw mount lenses on Pentax DSLRs, you just have to buy an adapter: http://cgi.ebay.com/PENTAX-M42-SCREW-MOUNT-TO-BAYONET-K-MOUNT-ADAPTER-RING_W0QQitemZ260251448986QQihZ016QQcategoryZ30059QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Help the environment. Buy used stuff.

Yea, I knew when Pentax switched to to K-mount that there were adaptors around but when I switched from match-needle to auto exposure and focus, I fell in love with the Minolta Maxxum and hence the choice of the Sony Alpha body to take advantage of my lenses.

If I ever run across a digital Pentax body really cheap, I will keep that in mind as a back-up camera. I bet there are a lot of those ols screw mount lenses out there for next to nothing if you do not mind using them manually.