Bridge Cameras

[SteellFJ]

Talk to me?

What are these and are they any good? or am I better having a DSLR?

I'm no photographer by any means but enjoy the pleasures a good picture can bring to the eyes.

I'm looking for something quick, no fuss, good outdoors, good indoors, clear/bright colours, lots of detail and good at action shots for the kids when we have them out of their cages. But having NO experience of cameras (Currently only use my Xperia Z3) I am clueless.

I'm 30 this year and might ask the Mrs for a good camera...

[GetCarter]

As mentioned (a lot). Bridge cameras are fine. If that's what you want.

However, they have none of the advantages of a DSLR and none of the advantages of a compact, but the disadvantages of both.

IMO, either buy a good compact (Sony RX100 etc) or buy a DSLR and do it properly.

[Fubles]

Bridge cameras aren't well thought of in this sub forum so don't expect an abundance of enthusiasm. they are mostly gimicky with no real plus points.

it depends what type of photography you want to do and what your budget is. For basic kid snaps and holiday pics with little effort, a decent compact would do you fine. If you want to go to twitching or take arty long exposures with shallow depth of field, you'd need something different.

A bog standard DSLR like a Canon 1200d with a kit lens on auto mode would likely get you what you want and leave you room to improve in the future. or you could consider the compact system cameras(mirrorless cameras) which would probably suit your needs just fine. both of these have interchangeable lenses though.

[RobDickinson]

Bridge cameras, just dont do it.

[13m]

GetCarter said:

As mentioned (a lot). Bridge cameras are fine. If that's what you want.

However, they have none of the advantages of a DSLR and none of the advantages of a compact, but the disadvantages of both.

IMO, either buy a good compact (Sony RX100 etc) or buy a DSLR and do it properly.

I need to buy a compact for general use. Is the Sony better than the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70?

We've bought Panasonics for work as a default in the past because they are cheapish and do the job. We had some problems with a Sony a while back. But if the Sony you mention is good I may take a look.

[missingman]

A total and utter waste of time.

I cannot think of any single reason to buy one.

[mizx]

13m said:

I need to buy a compact for general use. Is the Sony better than the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70?

I should say so...

The RX100 is a high-end compact, current 4th gen will set you back £730, though the previous models are still available. In terms of Panasonic, the TZ100 is a competitor to that and out soon for £560.

There are just a couple of (very expensive) bridge cameras with 1"+ plus sensors that don't deserve being lumped with others, but they are still a bit bulky.

Best option and for the OP is probably just a decent compact, doesn't have to be a large sensor compact there are some good premium compacts. There are other options than an SLR... CSCs are worth looking at, lenses can be more expensive, but smaller and lighter.

[Zerotonine]

I use a Fujifilm F660EXR as my compact shooter (for if I am out and about and want to capture a quick shot) and I have a Panasonic GF5 Mirrorless ILC camera for the more arty shots. Both serve me fine, as I am currently amateur level and haven't got the money to spend on DSLRs etc. Unless you are going to be faffing with aperture settings, long exposure, etc I would go for a decent compact or a camera like the GF5, as it has the flexibility of a interchangeable lens without the huge price tag.

[sgrimshaw]

missingman said:

A total and utter waste of time.

I cannot think of any single reason to buy one.

Let me, or rather AP, educate you then.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/compa...

And you can now buy it for around half the price as when it was tested.

Edited by sgrimshaw on Tuesday 19th January 20:45

[Simpo Two]

sgrimshaw said:

Let me, or rather AP, educate you then.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/compa...

£879.99? fking hell, you could get a DSLR for that... or two

[sgrimshaw]

Simpo Two said:

£879.99? fking hell, you could get a DSLR for that... or two

If you read it properly, that's the Mk II.

Mk I is £539 at WEX, probably can get it cheaper.

[LordHaveMurci]

Simpo Two said:

sgrimshaw said:

Let me, or rather AP, educate you then.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/compa...

£879.99? fking hell, you could get a DSLR for that... or two

As pointed out, you can buy them for about half that now, I was looking at them recently.

[Simpo Two]

Well if you can't work a proper camera I suppose it's an option

[13m]

mizx said:

13m said:

I need to buy a compact for general use. Is the Sony better than the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ70?

I should say so...

The RX100 is a high-end compact, current 4th gen will set you back £730, though the previous models are still available. In terms of Panasonic, the TZ100 is a competitor to that and out soon for £560.

There are just a couple of (very expensive) bridge cameras with 1"+ plus sensors that don't deserve being lumped with others, but they are still a bit bulky.

Best option and for the OP is probably just a decent compact, doesn't have to be a large sensor compact there are some good premium compacts. There are other options than an SLR... CSCs are worth looking at, lenses can be more expensive, but smaller and lighter.

Ah I see. Any pointers for a good compact for £200-£250?

[LordHaveMurci]

13m said:

Ah I see. Any pointers for a good compact for £200-£250?

I am merely an amateur, not even a particularly enthusiastic amateur lately. I mainly use my Canon S95 over my D80 SLR, it fits easily in any pocket & takes some great pics, later versions should be under £250 I should think but others may have better suggestions.

[rich888]

SteellFJ said:

Talk to me?

What are these and are they any good? or am I better having a DSLR?

I'm no photographer by any means but enjoy the pleasures a good picture can bring to the eyes.

I'm looking for something quick, no fuss, good outdoors, good indoors, clear/bright colours, lots of detail and good at action shots for the kids when we have them out of their cages. But having NO experience of cameras (Currently only use my Xperia Z3) I am clueless.

I'm 30 this year and might ask the Mrs for a good camera...

Good to hear you're considering purchasing a decent quality camera and I think you have posted on the right forum because the PH Photography & Video forum has some very experienced and knowledgeable people posting who will try to assist you as best they can.

GetCarter regularly posts some pretty damn impressive landscape photographs taken using a RX100 MK1 camera, RobDickinson and Simpo Two have provided me with an enormous amount of very useful information, so it might be wise to pay attention to what they have to say.

From my newbie learner perspective, and having purchased a RX100 MK1 after upgrading from a Canon S100, I would recommend you take a look at the faster RX100 MK3 which has a more advanced processor, so may be more useful for photographing your fast moving kids, my MK1 seems a tad slow in focusing on them when they are running across the lounge so I sometime miss the shots.

Alternatively go down the route of the slightly larger bodied DSLR, I purchased a Canon 700D which is the larger version of the very capable 100D, both these allow you the flexibility to change lenses over to suit the occasion, so if your taking pics of your kids close up use a 50mm lens, or out and about use the 18-55 zoom lens or perhaps for further away use the 55-250mm lens. With a DSLR camera you have the ability to change the lens whilst the compact cameras such as the RX100 you are confined to using the installed zoom lens.

The Sony RX100 range has a much larger sensor than most compact cameras and this is what makes the difference in the actual quality of the photograph rather than the number of pixels - so don't be fooled by the marketing hype of a megapixel camera with a small sensor.

The DSLR cameras tend to be faster and have even bigger sensors so the quality goes up, but so does the size of the cameras, and this is the crunch question, which camera are you most likely to be carrying around? The RX100 in your pocket or the much bigger DSLR round your neck?

Both the RX100 and 100D/700D cameras can be used in full AUTO mode, or can be used in Aperture, Shutter, Program or Manual modes if you wish when you feel a little more confident - there are plenty of very experienced users on here who can guide you along the way with any questions you have - and I've asked plenty of questions over the past few months and they have helped me immensely so don't worry about asking.

I now use a RX100 and a 700D and have been very pleased with the results from both of them, though would like to upgrade to the faster Sony RX100 MK4 and the more advanced Canon 760D if funds permitted.

What you decide to purchase may of course be heavily influenced by your budget and that is where the Canon 100D scores top marks, though be warned, a newer version is expected to be released sometime soon, though that rumour has been circulating for several months now!

[SteellFJ]

missingman said:

A total and utter waste of time.

I cannot think of any single reason to buy one.

Think this is the best advice i needed and sums up what everyone is saying, think i'll look at entry level DSLR's if they are best to get started, i do like a good "arty" shot and thought these would do. Amateur thought i suppose.

I like taking long distance action shots of the kids and scenery and the phones these days do a good job but are lacking some areas.

i'll have a look at the Canon's mentioned above.

Thanks and sorry if mentioning Br***e Cameras offended anyone

[SteellFJ]

rich888 said:

"Lots of Advice"

Thanks Rich, great advice, I'll look all these up and see what I (she) can afford..

[Simpo Two]

SteellFJ said:

Thanks and sorry if mentioning Br***e Cameras offended anyone

To be fair I have a friend who's a travel writer and she's taken a Lumix bridge camera all round the world and got photos perfectly fit to publish. But she's not interested in photography. Point is - bridge cameras can achieve good results for little input/knowledge but they're not the best springboard from which to progress. If you want to progress and have flexibility, get a DSLR. If you just want decent photos quickly, get a good compact.

Thanks to Rich888 for including me in the list

[sgrimshaw]

SteellFJ said:

Thanks and sorry if mentioning Br***e Cameras offended anyone

I'm sure no one's offended

However, they are often summarily dismmised in here, with the most criticsm coming from Pro's, Ex Pro's or enthusiastic Amateurs who have, or are prepared to, invest serious amounts of money in their photography.

There's a reason why all the major camera manufacturers keep developing new Bridge Cameras - they sell.

If you just want a decent camera without spending the earth, but at the same time giving you the opportunity to explore photography then they certainly have their place.

This article gives a fairly balanced view on them:

http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2015/03/10/bridg...