Point-and-Shoot vs. SLR Cameras: What Are the Real Differences?

July 01, 2010, By Steve McFarlane 14 comments

Trying to decide between a pricier single-lens reflex (SLR) camera and a basic point-and-shoot? While the gap between these two classes is starting to close, there are some definite distinctions.

Main Differences

Single-Lens Reflex (SLR) cameras allow the photographer to see the subject or scene through the optical lens. What you see is basically what you get in the photo.

Non-SLR cameras differ in that they use a viewfinder or display screen to help the photographer frame the subject that is being captured. However, there are some challenges related to using these technologies.

• Framing the subject with viewfinders – Viewfinders use a separate light path than the one that captures the image. This makes it challenging to frame the subject or scene properly, especially when the subject is taken up close or at a distance. Once the photographer tries to shoot outside that sweet spot, it will be difficult not to cut off a head or a leg by accident.
• Continuous shooting and LCD displays – While LCD displays are better at framing subjects and may be found on SLRs and point-and-shoots alike, you will be hard pressed to find a point-and-shoot camera that will allow you to continue seeing the subject/scene while you are shooting. To do so, you will need to put the camera in movie capture mode.

General Differences - Weight and Bulk

SLR cameras are the mainstay of professional photographers because of their flexibility and technical capabilities. To pack in all the features that professionals want, manufacturers have had to make SLRs bulkier than other entry-level cameras.

While consumers normally pay a premium for the miniaturization of feature-rich devices, the practice of charging more for a smaller package is almost always held true as far as cameras are concerned. The more bulky and less portable SLR cameras are invariably more expensive than point-and-shoot cameras, mostly because they have so many features. SLRs can cost several thousands even without a lens, whereas point-and-shoots cost well below the $500 mark.

SLRs are generally much heavier than point-and-shoots as well. The weight is even more substantial when the camera is fitted with a large lens and a hot shoe flash. On the other hand, point-and-shoot cameras are designed for portability to the extent that many can be comfortably carried around in a pants pocket.

SLRs Big Advantage

One of the biggest differences between point-and-shoot and SLR cameras is the flexibility of SLRs. Point-and-shoot cameras are designed for individuals who just want to pick up a camera and take a picture without worrying about ISO settings or aperture speeds.

However, professional photographers, sports photographers and photo enthusiasts need the option to manually set aperture priority, shutter priority, ISO range and shutter lag or use an array of lenses as the job demands. As a result, SLRs can take some visually stunning images that are nearly impossible to capture on lesser cameras. Invariably, SLRs will capture higher quality photos, at faster speeds, in more adverse lighting conditions than a point-and-shoot camera can.

While navigating the rich feature-set of SLRs may be easier to do on some models, the sheer number of options and settings can make using a fully equipped SLR challenging to use for all but professionals.

Which Camera is Right for You?

Whether you choose a SLR or a point-and-shoot camera will depend on the results you want to achieve, how serious you are about photography and how good you are at talking your wife into letting you spend big. If you have the head for advanced photography, a SLR is your best bet, but there are still some very good point-and-shoot cameras that can do all the thinking for you and still output some very good photographs.

When all is said and done, point-and-shoot cameras can’t match the speed and output quality of SLRs – but, neither can SLRs match the convenience and ease of use of some of the best point-and-shoots. In a perfect world, you'll want one of each.

Steve McFarlane is a freelance writer and editor. He is a contributor to Six Apart Media.

Comments (14):

Andrew S. What is needed is for you ppl to learn how to read. The viewfinder remark refers specifically in the non-SCR species. I cannot understand why so many ppl just write comments to bash others. Get a life! - 06/08/2011

Mike A. It's quite clear that Steve does not understand what "single-lens reflex" means when he talks about framing issues. Steve is thinking of some cameras that have one lens for focusing light on the sensor, and a separate lens for the viewfinder. Those cameras have framing issues due to parallax as the distance between the camera and the subject decreases. "Single-lens" means that a single lens is used for both the sensor and the viewfinder. A mirror reflects light up to the viewfinder for framing, and the "reflex" is the mirror flipping out of the way so that it can hit the sensor. Steve should not be writing about something he obviously doesn't understand. - 02/24/2011

Greg H. All these comments point out different reasons to purchase a SLR or a point-and-shoot. However, point-and-shoot was developed for just that, you point it and push the button. You do not have to think about anything else. They are great camera for what the do. And yes, you can also do that with a SLR set on Auto. It comes down to what you want to carry and what results you want to achieve. There are many many differences between SLR and point-and-shoot cameras. As a buyer, you need to educate yourself into all this information. And a lot of it is misleading, as John S pointed out with 'aperture speed' issue. But even here, Fred S says a 'big lens=big window=lots of light' which is entirely false. That is not how optics work in a camera lens. A 'small' lens with a large aperture will let in more light than a 'big' lens with a small aperture. Also, we have to know what he means by 'big lens'. You may hear 'fast lens' which relates to the widest or largest aperture on the lens (usually 2.0 or 1.8 or 1.4). The world of photography is huge and very technical. Everything impacts your image, the lens quality, sensor size, shooting format, ISO, compression, and so much more. If all you want to do is snap some shots to share on Facebook or for 4x6s for a scrapbook, a point-and-shoot is perfect. - 02/12/2011

Glenn C. Nothing can keep up with hyperkinetic kids like an SLR with a fast lens. Most point and shoots can't even autofocus fast enough to take good pictures of children, let alone actually capture a blur-free shot. If you have kids, do yourself a favor a spend a few hundred $$ on a basic SLR and a good basic lens! The great moments you are actually able to capture on an SLR will far outweigh the initial cost. And as has been pointed out, these days you can get an SLR (or similar with a big sensor) that isn't much bigger than a point and shoot. - 02/09/2011

Don W. One more significant difference- at least for the point-and-shoot cameras we have- Sunlight can wash out the viewer display so you can't see the image. Still, I don't mind keeping a very convenient medium-quality point-and-shoot camera in the car, but woundn't do the same with the more expensive SLR, which requires a camera bag to hold extra lenses, etc. - 12/14/2010

Fred S. It gets down to LIGHT with out the light you have no image. Big lens = big window = lots of light. Faster shutter speed at a smmaler aperature=sharper image. If you are trying to caperature motion in low light you need a big window and a sensitive aka higher ISO. I take a lot of pictures after dark under stadium lighting of horse competition events a Nikon D700 with a 70-200mm f2.8 lens does well . Have fun experiment. - 11/16/2010

Joe N. As a professional photographer, I use Canon DSLRs, but I also, as Steve suggests, have a Canon point and shoot to use for grab shots or those times when my wife is tired of going on vacation with a camera instead of her husband. The article hits some good points, but, again, the MAJOR differences--lens interchangeability and sensor size--are so compelling that I find it hard to believe that anyone would write an article about the "real" differences without mentioning them directly. One doesn't need to have a "head for advanced photography" to use a DSLR. Quite the contrary, in fact. Many hobbyists and rank amateurs are turning out stunning images with their Canon Rebels and that without so much as an introductory class into digital photography. What the article should have added is that digital SLRs are becoming more and more user friendly, giving amateurs the capability to produce images that the pros were turning out just a few years ago. And this much to the chagrin of paid professionals who are now having to crank up their game and skills if they want to turn out--and sell--images that Uncle Roger with a Rebel can't produce. This is a GREAT time to learn and be a photographer! - 10/24/2010

Terry K. Yes, this article REALLY misses the important to a buyer points. Sorry! Buyers: Please make sure you understand: Sensor Size, Interchangeable Lenses, and Image Stabilization for long Zoom lenses. The new "4 Thirds Size" Single Lens Reflex cameras like the LUMIX can get you a true SLR with a good Image Stabilized Zoom lens for about $1000 .. Regards, Terry King ...On the Red Sea in Saudi Arabia - 10/17/2010

John S. No such thing as aperture speed. Shutter speed, yes. Aperture size. - 10/02/2010

Marilyn B. After shooting with SLR film cameras with interchangeable lenses since 1981, when it was time to switch to digital, after lifting the digital SLR with my old lenses, I decided to try one of the better point-and-shoots, because it had a fairly long lens capability and weighed about one quarter of what my old equipment weighed. I was simply tired of being weighted down with gear when I travel! After a few bad shots, anyone can learn quickly where the printable image will be relative to the image seen through the viewfinder. Rule One: Leave plenty of margin. You can crop later if the photo needs it. I would love to have an SLR with a big case full of the best quality lenses, but this is not practical when one has to carry one's own equipment, plus the usual travel baggage. My photos have never been better, thanks to my Canon Power Shot SX20IS plus a little photoshopping now and then. I hand hold everything and usually shoot in natural light. - 10/01/2010

Andrew V. This article was kind of weak. Why did you pay to promote it? You can't talk about an SLR without mentioning lesnes, sensor sizes, and the myth of the megapixel. - 09/19/2010

Jirka K. The article does not mention the main reason why DSLRs have better image quality - they have much bigger sensors. In fact most compact camera users do not know how diminutive the sensor of their camera is since they are not meant to e opened by the user. The laws of physics can not be cheated - you can cram ten or more megapixels into miniature sensor but this does not really increase resolution. Compacts make attractive pictures for viewing on a monitor or postcard size prints. When you want big prints the limitations given by the fact that you are enlarging a very small picture become apparent and cannot be compensated by illusion of sharpness provided by software sharpening, which does not really add any detail, only makes edges more prominent. - 09/18/2010

Tim R. In my opinion this article does a major disservice in not clearly conveying the main difference between SLRs and point-and-shoots that most photographers would tell you: interchangeable lenses. Most SLR owners have multiple lenses for each camera body they have. Although in the short term this can make SLRs significantly more expensive, this cost is reduced in the long term as lenses often will outlive more than one camera body (I have some lenses that I've used for decades, spanning both film and digital eras). The quality and selection of them are far superior of what is available in point and shoots - and you can even buy quality versions of them used, unlike the majority of point-and-shoots. They can range from ultrawide to ultra-telephoto along with a variety of zooms. And yes, I know some point-and-shoots (the latest Sony models for example) are starting to come out with nterchangeable lenses, but I wouldn't consider them in this same category as they have a proprietary mount and have nowhere near the selection as the legacy Minolta mount lenses Sony uses in their SLR (alpha) line. - 09/04/2010

Jack M. This article is written rather poorly -- I get the distinct feeling the author was assinged this article and really does not understand the key differences. - 08/19/2010