What Camera? DSLR or Bridge (well D3200 or P510 really)
Discussion
We are thinking of getting a new camera in the new year, I cut my teeth on Praktica manual SLR's and a Nikon FE10, then moved to bridge cameras (fujifilm), the current one is on it's last lets and so we need to replace it.
for 90% of the time I will be the main user, 10% my wife (very point and shoot!).
I've been kind of frustrated by the lack of control given by the fujifilm FinePix S1000fd we currently have, I like low light photography, taking pictures of cars/planes etc (and of course obligatory family stuff) but feel it's limiting what I want to do.
So would a P510 be a suitable step up from the fujifilm? or do people think I should jump on the DSLR wagon, of course I'll need to go and actually be touchy feely with them, but looking for opinions from other amateurs as to what they would recommend.
If I got the DSLR i'd probably invest in a 35mm prime (or even an old manual one, I dont mind doing focusing) for more arty stuff and keep the kit lens for the pointy shooty stuff.
Also can a DSLR be used in very basic programme setting like a Bridge on full auto?
Here are a couple of samples of photo's I've taken that I like
DSCF2187 by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
DSCF2119 by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
DSCF2101 edit by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
DSCF2076 by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
for 90% of the time I will be the main user, 10% my wife (very point and shoot!).
I've been kind of frustrated by the lack of control given by the fujifilm FinePix S1000fd we currently have, I like low light photography, taking pictures of cars/planes etc (and of course obligatory family stuff) but feel it's limiting what I want to do.
So would a P510 be a suitable step up from the fujifilm? or do people think I should jump on the DSLR wagon, of course I'll need to go and actually be touchy feely with them, but looking for opinions from other amateurs as to what they would recommend.
If I got the DSLR i'd probably invest in a 35mm prime (or even an old manual one, I dont mind doing focusing) for more arty stuff and keep the kit lens for the pointy shooty stuff.
Also can a DSLR be used in very basic programme setting like a Bridge on full auto?
Here are a couple of samples of photo's I've taken that I like
DSCF2187 by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
DSCF2119 by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
DSCF2101 edit by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
DSCF2076 by Pherlopolus, on Flickr
Edited by pherlopolus on Monday 19th November 22:30
What Simpo said ^
If you're used to using a SLR then you know the advantages - for me bridge cameras aren't small enough to be super-portable (a camera to pop in your pocket) but don't gain the advantages and inherent flexibility of a SLR.
If you like Nikon then I'd say pop to a local store and check out the models you are considering
If you're used to using a SLR then you know the advantages - for me bridge cameras aren't small enough to be super-portable (a camera to pop in your pocket) but don't gain the advantages and inherent flexibility of a SLR.
If you like Nikon then I'd say pop to a local store and check out the models you are considering
What has already been said .... BUT ....
Your typical bridge camera these days is likely to have a zoom range that will cost a significant amount of readies to replicate with any quality for a DLSR.
Therefore the 'kit' becomes a different proposition. Very rewarding when pushing the boundaries and faster in use than most "bridge" or "compact interchangeable lens" systems. Your call.
Yes you can find some excellent older lenses to have some fun with. However keep the kit autoeverything for the otherhalf. Also bear in mind that you will be discarding over 50% of the capability of the camera when you use older non-af lenses (and maybe some older AF lenses as well), so there's probably not a lot of point in going too far up the model range for that approach.
Conversely your focusing challenge will be that the modern bodies are designed for AF and usually offer little traditional assistance (in fact usually none) for manual focusing. The exception may be "studio" work when using Live View but that sort of thing may not be on your list. Youn can, of course, buy alternative screens one of which may be a manual focus assist sort of design ... but the lower end body often don't cater for changing screens (Nikon might, I don't know but I doubt it. Never seems to be mentioned.) So if you are remembering the good old split prism focus from the old days .... forget it.
A lot has happened in the smaller products end of the market in the past 3 years and especially in the past 12 months or so. Yes you really should get a DSLR and you clearly want people here to justify that thought - which if course we will and always do! But you may just find that there are other options that, moving from what you have currently, prove to be quite satisfying. And smaller. And maybe a tad less costly by the time you built up the lens collection ... (especially if you get the adapter(s) and buy the old lenses!)
Your typical bridge camera these days is likely to have a zoom range that will cost a significant amount of readies to replicate with any quality for a DLSR.
Therefore the 'kit' becomes a different proposition. Very rewarding when pushing the boundaries and faster in use than most "bridge" or "compact interchangeable lens" systems. Your call.
Yes you can find some excellent older lenses to have some fun with. However keep the kit autoeverything for the otherhalf. Also bear in mind that you will be discarding over 50% of the capability of the camera when you use older non-af lenses (and maybe some older AF lenses as well), so there's probably not a lot of point in going too far up the model range for that approach.
Conversely your focusing challenge will be that the modern bodies are designed for AF and usually offer little traditional assistance (in fact usually none) for manual focusing. The exception may be "studio" work when using Live View but that sort of thing may not be on your list. Youn can, of course, buy alternative screens one of which may be a manual focus assist sort of design ... but the lower end body often don't cater for changing screens (Nikon might, I don't know but I doubt it. Never seems to be mentioned.) So if you are remembering the good old split prism focus from the old days .... forget it.
A lot has happened in the smaller products end of the market in the past 3 years and especially in the past 12 months or so. Yes you really should get a DSLR and you clearly want people here to justify that thought - which if course we will and always do! But you may just find that there are other options that, moving from what you have currently, prove to be quite satisfying. And smaller. And maybe a tad less costly by the time you built up the lens collection ... (especially if you get the adapter(s) and buy the old lenses!)
Thanks!
I'm quite literally on a knife edge,I manage with the bridge, and work round the inadequacies, just takes a little longer to get to the manual settings, and not having a bulb setting is a little limiting for night shots, but again - not carrying a big tripod is probably the biggest issue with quality (I tend to balance it on walls! or use a small bendy leg one)
Looking at samples of photo's from the 2 I can't tell an awful lot of difference, and I have to wonder about what difference the sensor size difference makes in real life (let alone the pixel count!)
Also the P510 has features I know I will use more than the more manual aspects of the DSLR.
As for the older lenses I hadnt even considered that the screen wouldnt have the focusing guides that my film ones did, and to be honest I'll probably not be able to afford to expand the lens collection for a few years - so perhaps we should have the P510 and then in a few years have a re-assesment again!
After all I call always push some 35mm film through my SLR and maybe lookout for cheap bits and bobs for that :s
I'm quite literally on a knife edge,I manage with the bridge, and work round the inadequacies, just takes a little longer to get to the manual settings, and not having a bulb setting is a little limiting for night shots, but again - not carrying a big tripod is probably the biggest issue with quality (I tend to balance it on walls! or use a small bendy leg one)
Looking at samples of photo's from the 2 I can't tell an awful lot of difference, and I have to wonder about what difference the sensor size difference makes in real life (let alone the pixel count!)
Also the P510 has features I know I will use more than the more manual aspects of the DSLR.
As for the older lenses I hadnt even considered that the screen wouldnt have the focusing guides that my film ones did, and to be honest I'll probably not be able to afford to expand the lens collection for a few years - so perhaps we should have the P510 and then in a few years have a re-assesment again!
After all I call always push some 35mm film through my SLR and maybe lookout for cheap bits and bobs for that :s
pherlopolus said:
I'm quite literally on a knife edge
I doubt it very much!pherlopolus said:
I manage with the bridge, and work round the inadequacies, just takes a little longer to get to the manual settings, and not having a bulb setting is a little limiting for night shots, but again - not carrying a big tripod is probably the biggest issue with quality...
A DSLR will help overcome this because it can have faster lenses, and much higher usable ISO - both of which keep the shutter speed higher so reducing the need for a tripod.pherlopolus said:
Also the P510 has features I know I will use more than the more manual aspects of the DSLR.
Can you elaborate on these features? Then we can see if they are essential or can be worked around. the big zoom, the panorama, and the slightly smaller size, built in GPS is another nice to have.
and believe or not the ability of not being able spend a seemingly unlimited amount of cash on 'stuff' I might need is a bonus
Domestically the Bridge is the 'path of least resistance' and a battle I could move to a later time when we have slightly more disposable income.
It's quite important that it will do video easily too which is why I had ruled out an older DSLR second hand.
I'm quite Obsessive / Complulsive about doing my research so January will be an early estimate of timescales...
EDIT!
I should add that I know my photography will improve and be more enjoyable with the DSLR but it's also a question of 'yet another expensive ish hobby' that would need 100% approval from SWMBO - and she is a primary school teacher and so has an answer for everything
and believe or not the ability of not being able spend a seemingly unlimited amount of cash on 'stuff' I might need is a bonus
Domestically the Bridge is the 'path of least resistance' and a battle I could move to a later time when we have slightly more disposable income.
It's quite important that it will do video easily too which is why I had ruled out an older DSLR second hand.
I'm quite Obsessive / Complulsive about doing my research so January will be an early estimate of timescales...
EDIT!
I should add that I know my photography will improve and be more enjoyable with the DSLR but it's also a question of 'yet another expensive ish hobby' that would need 100% approval from SWMBO - and she is a primary school teacher and so has an answer for everything
Edited by pherlopolus on Tuesday 20th November 10:57
I think dpreview is still a reasonably well respected camera review site and they do seem to do "comprehensive" assessments. (Probably ignore the forums though, as with so many similar sites.)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-coolpix-p510...
At somewhat less than £300 it's a lot of photographic capability for the money although there are probably 2 or 3 decent competitors in that price range.
If you are planning indoor shots of the family you may want to check your satisfaction with the flash performance. Probably OK but there is no hot shoe (not uncommon at this price point or even higher prices) so no obvious simple way to augment flash ability should you feel the need. There are probably other way to approach that need should it arise but nothing quite as obvious as slotting a flash unit into a hot shoe.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-coolpix-p510...
At somewhat less than £300 it's a lot of photographic capability for the money although there are probably 2 or 3 decent competitors in that price range.
If you are planning indoor shots of the family you may want to check your satisfaction with the flash performance. Probably OK but there is no hot shoe (not uncommon at this price point or even higher prices) so no obvious simple way to augment flash ability should you feel the need. There are probably other way to approach that need should it arise but nothing quite as obvious as slotting a flash unit into a hot shoe.
just happened to be passing a currys with the mrs an hour ago, they had the d3100 and the p510 in the touchy feely section, the p510 actually had a charge too!
the d3100 wasnt as user friendly or tactile, and the 42x zoom, and flippy out screen got a wow.
the lack of powerzoom I think is going to be the clincher for the P510 (and I was very impressed with how easy the manual controls were to get at and adjust!)
No matter how much I'd like the DSLR, I really think the P510 is the better choice for our needs at the moment, and if money allows at a later date I can see about a 2nd hand dslr without the video capability to do the 'arty' stuff with
the d3100 wasnt as user friendly or tactile, and the 42x zoom, and flippy out screen got a wow.
the lack of powerzoom I think is going to be the clincher for the P510 (and I was very impressed with how easy the manual controls were to get at and adjust!)
No matter how much I'd like the DSLR, I really think the P510 is the better choice for our needs at the moment, and if money allows at a later date I can see about a 2nd hand dslr without the video capability to do the 'arty' stuff with
pherlopolus said:
i'll take a look thanks
EDIT
Actually that ticks a lot of feature boxes (60s shutter, f2.8) so will keep my eye out...
It's quite a new camera so second hand bargains are not to be had, but the lens makes it the perfect all rounder. Plus, comparing the review shots on DPreview to DSLRs, it does very well indeed. Noisier at highter ISOs but to be expected from a smaller sensor, but the results at lower ISOs are spot on.EDIT
Actually that ticks a lot of feature boxes (60s shutter, f2.8) so will keep my eye out...
Edited by pherlopolus on Tuesday 20th November 14:12
pherlopolus said:
the big zoom, the panorama, and the slightly smaller size, built in GPS is another nice to have.
Well most importantly, a DSLR would fail on the monstrous zoom ratio you like. Panoramas can be assembled in software so that's OK, and you can have strap-on GPS widgets. But from what you say and with budget constraints, the P510 would suit your immediate needs better.pherlopolus said:
I'm quite Obsessive / Complulsive about doing my research so January will be an early estimate of timescales...
Oddly enough I read that as 'January will be an early estimate of testicles...' !that too, you must have met my wife?
Does anyone still use film? found a place that charges £7 to develop and scan c-41 at 18mb (Tiff) per frame, is that any good?
http://www.snapsphotoservices.com/filmprocessingan...
Does anyone still use film? found a place that charges £7 to develop and scan c-41 at 18mb (Tiff) per frame, is that any good?
http://www.snapsphotoservices.com/filmprocessingan...
pherlopolus said:
Does anyone still use film? found a place that charges £7 to develop and scan c-41 at 18mb (Tiff) per frame, is that any good?
http://www.snapsphotoservices.com/filmprocessingan...
I probably should - I have a few bodies to exercise and a number of boxes of various 35mm rolls.http://www.snapsphotoservices.com/filmprocessingan...
That price for TIFF sounds OK but I have no idea what the current marketable price is. I bought a scanner a few years ago. Not used recently.
Used to get Tesco to process the film and scan (only to jpg) and skip the prints. 95p per film at one point. Sometimes less. The scans were OK since I just wanted to see what there was - more or less. I should probably revisit a few of the images now I know ore about processing than I did back then. Hopefully.
LongQ said:
Ah, sounds like you have yet to discover the full joys of digital photo processing ...
I work in the IT industry, I try and pick hobbies that dont involve sitting for hours in front of a monitor. I have a feeling if i started down that road I'd be frustrated at never being as good as I want to be, the same reason I've never done car body repairs recently - stick to mechanics! I dont mind cropping, levelling horizons and the easy stuff, but detailed photo manipulation makes my teeth itch!Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff