Bridge Camera input?

[peyjax]

I think I have eliminated the idea of a dslr. (i think) It seems to me that a bridge camera is what I am looking for. I like the versatility of a manual mode with more features than a point and shoot. I am a tad intimidated with a dslr.

What is the take on a Canon versus the Panasonic Lumix Dz-18? The reviews seem to point to the Lumix, however the Canon name does typically equall quality.

I am looking for :
excellent shutter lag time
high clarity and excellent color
good zoom
take multiple shots in a row (forgot what that is called)_

I know I should probably go to a camera store but would like opinions from here as well. Any bridge camera I am overlooking? Thanks!

 

[dr_zero]

I think I have eliminated the idea of a dslr. (i think) It seems to me that a bridge camera is what I am looking for. I like the versatility of a manual mode with more features than a point and shoot. I am a tad intimidated with a dslr.

What is the take on a Canon versus the Panasonic Lumix Dz-18? The reviews seem to point to the Lumix, however the Canon name does typically equall quality.

I am looking for :
excellent shutter lag time
high clarity and excellent color
good zoom
take multiple shots in a row (forgot what that is called)_

I know I should probably go to a camera store but would like opinions from here as well. Any bridge camera I am overlooking? Thanks!

What is your budget?

Do you have a SLR now? if so what kind?

And you might want to read this thread
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?p=25497929#post25497929

 

[peyjax]

around 300-400.
I used to own a minolta SLR. I loved the camera and I got some amazing shots but I truly never really learned how to work it. It became very outdated and I fell in love with my digital. I just have a point and shoot currently (Fuji E550) a good camera. I typically like to blow my shots up to 8X10 or more. I dream about a DSLR but somehow think I am not ready to spend that kind of money and lug around that much equipment.

 

[dr_zero]

around 300-400.
I used to own a minolta SLR. I loved the camera and I got some amazing shots but I truly never really learned how to work it. It became very outdated and I fell in love with my digital. I just have a point and shoot currently (Fuji E550) a good camera. I typically like to blow my shots up to 8X10 or more. I dream about a DSLR but somehow think I am not ready to spend that kind of money and lug around that much equipment.

You may want to look at a Nikon D40 combo the basic package would cover most of what you want to do.
http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm

There are other bodies out there that are not new but you might be interested in also like the D50 and the D70S.

From Link
Technically my D40 produces exactly the same image quality as the D70s and D50, allowing great prints up to at least 13 x 19,"and adds these benefits:

light weight

The second obvious WOW! is the big, bright, sharp, contrasty and almost three-dimensional LCD

If you look the controls kind of like on your point and shoot you pick from the built in programs depending on the situation.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/images/controls/top-right.jpg

 

[MinnieMouse73]

I have the Panasonic FZ-18 and really like it, but it's the first bridge camera I've had and so have nothing to compare it with. I was also intimidated by the idea of a dSLR and am enjoying learning with the FZ-18.

 

[Graeme]

I've had my Canon S3 for about two years and have enjoyed it, however I'm on the brink of swapping it for an FZ18, as it gets good reviews and the 28mm wide and the 18x zoom are better at both ends than the canon.
I've been looking at early reviews of the Nikon P80, and it's looking good. The FZ18 though has had consistently good reviews and there have been a lot of negative comments about the P80 on camera forums. Look at www.dpreview.com and read some of the P80 threads in the Nikon talk forum. They also have indepth reviews of the FZ18 and the canon S3 and S5.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I could have written your post 18 months ago (in fact, I think I did!)

I bought the Canon S3 IS. It is a very nice camera. There is a long running thread here on the PB for S2/S3/S5 users. Posters there are a friendly and helpful bunch if you have questions about the Canon. (I don't know anything about the Lumix.)

I did get a dSLR after all, but the S3 was a great camera to learn on and I still keep it in my purse.

Good luck!

 

[JimbobJimbo]

I can only speak for the Canon S5, I bought one about a month ago, and realy like it. I had looked at several different super zooms/ bridge cameras before deciding on the S5. You should check out the thread Pea-n-Me mentioned above as it has a lot of info on the Canon S series cameras, as well as examples of the type of photos the cameras are capable of. For me the S5 was a big improvement over my old PnS.

I too was intimidated with a DSLR and all of the manual controls. But with that being said though because of my purchase of a bridge camera, I am now seriously considering purchasing a DSLR in the future. My opinion is that the bridge camera is a great learning tool by being able to work the manual controls. I didn't know anything about aperture or shutter speed before, but now I'm no longer intimidated by the thought of a DSLR. Buying the S5 has really sparked an intrest in photograpy within me So I guess the bridge camera served its purpose as a camera that leads from the PnS world to that of the DSLR.

 

[Groucho]

I think I have eliminated the idea of a dslr. (i think) It seems to me that a bridge camera is what I am looking for. I like the versatility of a manual mode with more features than a point and shoot. I am a tad intimidated with a dslr.

What is the take on a Canon versus the Panasonic Lumix Dz-18? The reviews seem to point to the Lumix, however the Canon name does typically equall quality.

Oh, it does, does it? You just made a marketing guy somewhere very happy.

But seriously folks...

A "bridge" camera doesn't have to be easier or more complicated than a DSLR. The big difference is that a DSLR is going to have an optical viewfinder, so you'll compose with that. That isn't that different than a bridge camera because most of those have "EVF" or electronic view finders - so you still hold the camera to your eye like you do a DSLR. You can use the LCD but it's certainly not as natural-feeling or stable. (Both the PnSs that I used inbetween my film SLR and DSLR had EVFs and I used them exclusively.)

The other big difference is that most bridge cameras (with one or two exceptions) use buttons for zooming and manual focus, which are slower and less accurate than using the rotating rings on a DSLR.

The big kicker is that all the bridge cameras (except a couple Fujis and one or two high-end Sonys, not the H5) have the usual tiny 1/2.5" sensor in them, so image quality (especially in low light) is not necessarily any better than any other basic point-n-shoot, and probably worse than a small PnS with a larger sensor.

 

[Graeme]

The big difference is that a DSLR is going to have an optical viewfinder, so you'll compose with that.


The other big difference is that most bridge cameras (with one or two exceptions) use buttons for zooming and manual focus, which are slower and less accurate than using the rotating rings on a DSLR.

A few of the newer DSLRs have 'live view' LCD screens, such as the new Canon Eos 450d.
I also tried the FZ30, with a similar ring arrangement to a DSLR but it wasn't as good, and made the camera too bulky. With that you really would be better off with the DSLR.

The clincher for me as to whether to choose bridge or DSLR is that I can carry one smallish camera in a coat pocket instead of a body, a wide lens and a tele lens which has a long range of 300mm instead of the 504mm lens on the FZ18 or Olympus 570 for instance. I accept that image quality suffers for the sensor size, but bridge cams aren't aimed at professionals or serious amateurs, just ordinary holidaymakers like me. I might miss a shot because I lose it to image quality, but if I had to faff about swapping lenses I'd probably lose it anyway!

 

[Pea-n-Me]

A few of the newer DSLRs have 'live view' LCD screens, such as the new Canon Eos 450d.
I also tried the FZ30, with a similar ring arrangement to a DSLR but it wasn't as good, and made the camera too bulky. With that you really would be better off with the DSLR.

Groucho and I both have dSLRs that have Live View capability (his a Pentax, mine an Olympus - Sony offers it, too). But most experienced users will tell you that even with Live View, you really ought to use the Viewfinder in most instances for a couple of reasons. 1) leaning it against your forehead helps steady the camera and 2) Live View on a dSLR works differently than it does on a point and shoot - the mirror has to go up so there is a slight delay (one some, the field of view might be different, too). It's generally best used for stationary shots like macro and difficult angles.

The clincher for me as to whether to choose bridge or DSLR is that I can carry one smallish camera in a coat pocket instead of a body, a wide lens and a tele lens which has a long range of 300mm instead of the 504mm lens on the FZ18 or Olympus 570 for instance. I accept that image quality suffers for the sensor size, but bridge cams aren't aimed at professionals or serious amateurs, just ordinary holidaymakers like me. I might miss a shot because I lose it to image quality, but if I had to faff about swapping lenses I'd probably lose it anyway!

You mentioned you're looking to buy another camera and are interested in dSLRs but concerned about size, weight, bulk, etc. You really ought to check out the Olympus E-420, just out last month. It's "the world's smallest dSLR", similar in size to the Canon S5. Olympus even touts it as a dSLR you can carry in your pocket. (They also encourage using the LCD screen to compose shots, interesting as the one thing it doesn't have is sensor-based IS; to get that you must go up to the 510/520 models, still fairly light and compact).

I bought the E-510 myself for these reasons, and I have been known to stick it in my purse if I don't want to carry a camera bag. It's fine, even with the larger lenses. Are you going to get best image quality available? Probably not, though depending on the user, image quality can be really great. Other dSLRs will probably have an edge in absolute picture quality because the sensor is smaller (it uses the 4/3 system). But you will still be able to get very good pictures; ones that are better quality than those of a pns or bridge camera, whose sensors are tiny in comparison. To me, it was a good trade off for the convenience of having a very portable dSLR system.

Olympus E-420, Website

Photo Gallery

 

[Graeme]

Live View on a dSLR works differently than it does on a point and shoot - the mirror has to go up so there is a slight delay

I didn't know that, very interesting.

As for the Olympus, I did have a look at that, but it still needs lens changes and still doesn't do the 504mm shots without a BIG lens. I know it's a trade off between IQ and ease of use, but truth is I'm not that technically advanced to get the best out of a DSLR anyway.

 

[bob100]

I went through the same review process and came away with the Canon S5 (less than $300) It has all the controls and features of a DSLR plus a 12x zoom - good alternative for those not inclined to spend more $$$ !