Bridge camera vs DSLR?

[clonmult]

flat-planedCrank said:

zetec said:

I've read bad things about the Nikon 18-200, allthough a great all purpose lens, it's not as good as it could be etc.

I'm not a big 'super-zoom' fan, but in their defence they allow a lot of flexibility in situations when you can only carry one lens. The Nikon 18-200 would seem to be regarded as one of the best of its type.

I think the maxim of the-more-a-lens-does-the-less-it-does-well stands true. However sometimes you can't carry £4k's worth of heavy gear in a bag

So super-zooms are probably a welcome addition for a lot of people, you just have to acknowledge the compromises that are being made for their unbridled flexibility.

+1

I took my A200 on hols, along with the kit 17-70 and a Sigma 70-300DG. To my utter disbelief, the Sony kit lens died. So was forced to pick up a replacement lens on the way back to the villa that day. Managed to pick up a Sigma 28-300DG.

Its not quite as sharp as the previous two lenses, but the convenience of not having to swap lenses whilst out and about made for many more photo opportunities that I would have otherwise missed if I had to swap lenses.

Its the lack of sharpness on all the lenses I've so far owned that is definitely pushing me towards a few more - 10-20, something between 35 and 50mm prime, etc.

[Juicetin1]

Clonmult, the A200 never had a 17-70 kit lens, it was 18-70, is this the one that broke on you? If you're using this camera I highly recommend the Sony 16-105mm, very sharp and versatile.
OP...go for DSLR...you wont regret it.

[9.3]

I would also factor in what you want the images to do when you have them? If you, like tens of thousands of other people, just leave them on your computer hard disk or make a hard copy up to say 10"x8", stick to a bridge camera.

My pro days are over, thousands of pounds worth of digital Nikons & a load of Hasselblads sitting in my office, and the only camera I take out with me these days is my Panasonic Lumix FZ28 bridge camera. Weighs nothing, terric zoom capability, and turns in a perfectly acceptable image.

Edited by 9.3 on Monday 27th September 13:03

[Elderly]

9.3 said:

My pro days are over, thousands of pounds worth of digital Nikons & a load of Hasselblads sitting in my office, and the only camera I take out with me these days is my Panasonic Lumix FZ28 bridge camera. Weighs nothing, terric zoom capability, and turns in a perfectly acceptable image.

I seem to remember a VERY striking image that I think you posted here of Hamilton's Mclaren, was that taken with your bridge camera
or a 'serious' camera?

[clonmult]

Juicetin1 said:

Clonmult, the A200 never had a 17-70 kit lens, it was 18-70, is this the one that broke on you? If you're using this camera I highly recommend the Sony 16-105mm, very sharp and versatile.
OP...go for DSLR...you wont regret it.

Last I saw of the lens was when I dropped it in a bin, my mistake for getting the 17mm wrong and yes, it was that lens that died on me. From what I'd read I expected the lens to break to be the Sigma 70-300 ..... next lens is (probably) going to be the Sony 50mm F1.8, cracking lens by all accounts.

[Hub]

In my experience of Bridge cameras (I have a Lumix FZ18 I used for a couple of years and replaced with a Canon 500D DSLR) they are fine outdoors in good light with ISO 100, but anything remotely low light and you get too much noise. You also can't control the aperture effectively to give narrow depth of field for example.

[forty-two]

All I have is the Nikon 18-200 and it does for me. It has taken around a year to appreciate the restrictions of the lens being f5.6 at 200mm end but generally it is great all rounder.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gash_booty_club_edit/

And all in I guess the whole kit isn't much bigger than a bridge camera?

[9.3]

Elderly said:

9.3 said:

My pro days are over, thousands of pounds worth of digital Nikons & a load of Hasselblads sitting in my office, and the only camera I take out with me these days is my Panasonic Lumix FZ28 bridge camera. Weighs nothing, terric zoom capability, and turns in a perfectly acceptable image.

I seem to remember a VERY striking image that I think you posted here of Hamilton's Mclaren, was that taken with your bridge camera
or a 'serious' camera?

Bridge.... !!