Bridge Cameras

[OKW Lover]

I'm not the OP but was attracted to this thread because I'm considering a small camera to bring with me on days I don't want to lug the full-size. My current full size is a Nikon 5200 which I normally use with the 18-200 lens. I shoot RAW and do post processing in Aperture. I also like to have location data for my pictures so whenever I import new pictures I add location to their exif info.

Some days I just don't want to carry that camera with me but I still want something that can turn out a nice picture if the urge strikes me. I'm considering the Nikon Coolpix 330 right now. I like that it has built-in GPS for location tagging and it saves pictures RAW. It also looks like a pretty light/compact camera that will go in my pocket when I want my hands free.

Anybody have experience with this camera?

 

[havoc315]

Well I certainly opened up a debate.
i am hoping to find RAW, ISO 3200, 12 MP or higher, 20x zoom, a view finder, prefer mount for external flash. I am currently looking to spend a little over budget for the Fuji X-S1 and the Canon sx50(no RAW though).

Thanks for the debate. It will certainly be a struggle for me to go from my Pentax DSLR but budget concerns, ease of use, and size are why I am looking for a change.

Thanks again!

Let's start with easy: Practically every camera on the market today is 12mp or higher.
RAW... Not every bridge camera can shoot, but the Canon SX50 does indeed shoot raw. I believe the Fuji does as well, though I don't really know that camera.
Viewfinders are common in bridge cameras, less common in compact P&S.

Now let's get a bit harder.
20x zoom is common in lower quality cameras. Higher quality cameras tend to have less zoom. But something like the Panasoniz FZ200 does manage to combine a fast lens with 24x zoom. And there are plenty of lower quality bridge cameras with 30-50x zoom.

But now let's talk about ISO. This is really where you have to prioritize. Many bridge cameras are capable of shooting at ISO 3200 -- but ISO 3200 on the Canon SX50 is NOT going to be the same as ISO 3200 on your Pentax dSLR. Where on your Pentax dSLR ISO 3200 translates to a perfect decent image, on most bridge cameras, ISO 3200 will be a grainy smudgy low quality image.
Small sensor bridge cameras will start to see the image degrade once you go over ISO 400 or so. Typically, once you hit ISO 1600, small sensor images are basically un-usable except as downsized facebook posts.

So yes, you can get everything you mentioned -- Including in the Canon SX50. Though ISO 3200 will look absolutely horrible. It won't be what you're used to with your dSLR.

You can view the comparisons yourself here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-sx50-hs/9

Just plug in different cameras, and different ISO and RAW/JPEG values to compare.

 

[havoc315]

I'm not the OP but was attracted to this thread because I'm considering a small camera to bring with me on days I don't want to lug the full-size. My current full size is a Nikon 5200 which I normally use with the 18-200 lens. I shoot RAW and do post processing in Aperture. I also like to have location data for my pictures so whenever I import new pictures I add location to their exif info.

Some days I just don't want to carry that camera with me but I still want something that can turn out a nice picture if the urge strikes me. I'm considering the Nikon Coolpix 330 right now. I like that it has built-in GPS for location tagging and it saves pictures RAW. It also looks like a pretty light/compact camera that will go in my pocket when I want my hands free.

Anybody have experience with this camera?

The P330 is an "enthusiast" compact -- slightly bigger sensor than most compacts, faster lens than most budget compacts. As far as compact cameras go, it's very solid. Quality is probably around the same range as the Canon S110. It won't match the Nikon D5200, but it's a nice compromise between size and quality, without busting a wallet with the Sony RX100, etc.

 

[photo_chick]

OP indicated they were looking for dSLR flexibility and controls in a smaller package. So with those expectations, Danielle, I'd ask which under $300 models you've seen that combine basics requirements such as:
- maintain full image quality up to at least ISO 800
- usable prints up to at least ISO 3200
- full manual controls, including aperture, shutter, ISO, manual focus.
- RAW
- dSLR-like responsiveness -- AF shutter lag under .5 seconds, shot-to-shot cycle time under .5 seconds. (Once I've seen a shooter get used to the responsiveness of a dSLR, it's very hard to go back to the grueling pace of an average p&s).

Perhaps less critical, but I think someone accustomed to a dSLR would also like:
- very high quality viewfinder.
-fast lens, at least 2.8 aperture.
-between lens and sensor, ability to achieve narrow DoF.

As I said, it's about managing expectations. Cameras have advanced in general, so for basic fair weather photography, you can capture good images with almost any camera. And even fairly cheap cameras are loaded with features. But for a responsive camera with enthusiast level controls, capable of performing in challenging situations, most cheap p&s cameras won't cut it.

You're assuming a lot about the OP's requirements and expectations. My problem with this thread, and other similar threads on here lately, is that the posters are so adamant that nothing less than this camera or that camera will do. That attitude doesn't help anyone figure out what camera is right for them, it only makes people look like elitists that really don't understand that the camera is a very small part of the equation when it comes to making great images.

From what I've read of the OP's requirements in this thread the only thing they may have to give up for under $300 is RAW.

 

[havoc315]

You're assuming a lot about the OP's requirements and expectations. My problem with this thread, and other similar threads on here lately, is that the posters are so adamant that nothing less than this camera or that camera will do.

I never said or implied that. I said it was about the expectations of the buyer. If you read my posts, you'll see that I *asked* the OP about their requirements and expectations. OP clarified that they want a minimum ISO of 3200. Now, as you and I both know, there is a difference between a camera having the capability of shooting at ISO 3200, and actually getting decent images at that ISO. So I addressed this point to the OP, so they were aware of what they were giving up.

As to "only giving up RAW" -- If that's a priority for the OP, then that's a pretty big sacrifice.

There are 2 mentalities, both of which I disagree with when I see them on this board. I disagree with the "only XXX camera will do, it would be a waste to ever get anything less." -- Again, it comes down to the expectations of the buyer. If they are hoping to get fullframe low light performance in a $100 P&S, they are going to be sorely disappointed. All comes down to their expectations and priorities. There is no 1 "level" of camera that is right for all buyers.

And I equally disagree with the mentality of, "All cameras are about the same. I got nice pictures out of my ________________, so you should look at it. " Never mind that the ____________ camera lacks half the features and capabilities that the poster requested. The mentality that, "never mind what you say you want.... this should be good enough for you. you don't really need to shoot raw."

When I make recommendations, I do my best to listen to what the poster is requesting. Try to ask questions that seek clarification. I wouldn't recommend the Canon 6d to someone looking for a compact budget camera. And I wouldn't recommend a compact budget camera to someone who says they put the highest premium on low light performance and are willing to pay more for it. (as rough examples).

For example, in this case -- The Canon SX50 can come pretty close to the OP's clarified requirements. But it depends on whether they merely want the existence of ISO 3200, or good quality images at ISO 3200.

 

[photo_chick]

Putting the debate aside because we could go on forever with that...

OP, it probably doesn't fit what you want but Arlington Camera ( a local shop to me www.arlingtoncamera.com) has the Nikon 1 J1 on sale for $179 with the 10-30mm lens. They've got a kit adding the 30-110mm lens to that for $349. The J2 with the 10-30mm is $199. Not sure who else has this low of a price right now but thought I'd pass it along.

 

[havoc315]

Putting the debate aside because we could go on forever with that...

OP, it probably doesn't fit what you want but Arlington Camera ( a local shop to me www.arlingtoncamera.com) has the Nikon 1 J1 on sale for $179 with the 10-30mm lens. They've got a kit adding the 30-110mm lens to that for $349. The J2 with the 10-30mm is $199. Not sure who else has this low of a price right now but thought I'd pass it along.

Those are good deals. Excellent camera in that price range, though I often see similar specials. Amazon has the J1 with both lenses (refurb) recently for $289. I feel like Nikon really misunderstood the market with that camera, which is why you see good discounts now.
It is a good camera for the right buyer -- a very good camera, especially with both lenses for around $300.

But Nikon launched it as a $500 camera (with just the basic lens). It was a camera really built for total amateurs. While an enthusiast can use it, it lacked many of the manual controls that an enthusiast would want (such as no bracketing) while other basic controls were hidden and not easily accessible. (Have to dig through menus just to use manual shooting modes).

So enthusiasts couldn't get too "enthusiastic" about the camera. The market was point and shooters wanting to upgrade.... but $500 was a lot to ask of a pure point and shooter. And after telling amateur consumers for years, to value high zoom and high megapixels and a compact camera... he was a slightly bulky camera, with only 3x zoom, (and only the equivalent of 11x zoom through the whole range if you add another lens), and only 10mp. And lacking even basic scene modes that are common on point and shoots.

For someone who wanted ultra fast focus, ultra simplicity, with above-average results.... this remains a great alternative to a point and shoot or bridge camera.

 

[LittleMissMagic]

Those are good deals. Excellent camera in that price range, though I often see similar specials. Amazon has the J1 with both lenses (refurb) recently for $289. I feel like Nikon really misunderstood the market with that camera, which is why you see good discounts now.
It is a good camera for the right buyer -- a very good camera, especially with both lenses for around $300.

But Nikon launched it as a $500 camera (with just the basic lens). It was a camera really built for total amateurs. While an enthusiast can use it, it lacked many of the manual controls that an enthusiast would want (such as no bracketing) while other basic controls were hidden and not easily accessible. (Have to dig through menus just to use manual shooting modes).

So enthusiasts couldn't get too "enthusiastic" about the camera. The market was point and shooters wanting to upgrade.... but $500 was a lot to ask of a pure point and shooter. And after telling amateur consumers for years, to value high zoom and high megapixels and a compact camera... he was a slightly bulky camera, with only 3x zoom, (and only the equivalent of 11x zoom through the whole range if you add another lens), and only 10mp. And lacking even basic scene modes that are common on point and shoots.

For someone who wanted ultra fast focus, ultra simplicity, with above-average results.... this remains a great alternative to a point and shoot or bridge camera.

Yeah, the discounted prices make me pretty sick because I was one of the people who dropped $500 on the camera as soon as it came out.

I really enjoy it, though, so I don't regret buying the camera because I've gotten a lot of great use out of it over the past two years. And while it's not as small as a point and shoot, I do appreciate its small size (especially light weight!) because I almost never leave my camera behind just because I don't want to carry it.

Although the prices have dropped (I think the introduced the J2 and J3 too soon for their own good.... there's a reason Apple waits a year to come out with a new phone, and it's not because it takes that long to create the technology), I do see a lot of fellow Nikon 1 users. I also see a lot of the Sony camera with interchangeable lenses.... but maybe I just have an eye for them.

I think it also sold well to the people who purchase an entry-level DSLR to use as a point and shoot (I think that craze began about five or six years ago... my Dad purchased a Canon Rebel xi or something like that to replace his old point and shoot... Sam's Club had a discount on that Canon Rebel around Christmas time, and my uncle and several of our friends purchased the same one), though I think they may have missed the mark a little because these people purchase the DSLR because it looks official, not because they knew anything about it. (I think it's important to note that my dad and my uncle now mainly use their iPhones as their cameras...)

 

[havoc315]

I think it also sold well to the people who purchase an entry-level DSLR to use as a point and shoot (I think that craze began about five or six years ago... my Dad purchased a Canon Rebel xi or something like that to replace his old point and shoot... Sam's Club had a discount on that Canon Rebel around Christmas time, and my uncle and several of our friends purchased the same one), though I think they may have missed the mark a little because these people purchase the DSLR because it looks official,

Exactly! I think that was Nikon's intent --- For people who want dSLR "quality" but fully-automatic. No interest in ever touching a manual mode. But most of those buyers still went towards the dSLR, because it "looks" official.

Looking at the title of this thread -- bridge cameras -- So often, we see potential buyers who make the assumption that bridge cameras are better than compact cameras, solely because they "look like dSLRs."

The Nikon J1/J2 is, in most regards, a far better camera than a bridge camera -- Now priced cheaper than many bridge cameras. So for people who want an automated shooting experience, this should be a big seller.
But among many ordinary consumers who may be lacking in an advanced knowledge... you're up against conventional wisdom, "How can it be better than this bridge camera? The bridge camera looks like a dSLR, has 14mp, and has 50x zoom! This camera only has 10mp and only 3x zoom! And it doesn't even look like a dSLR!"

To some extent, the camera manufacturers shot themselves in the foot by promoting zoom and megapixels so heavily, that now its such an expectation among buyers.

Though who knows... maybe next, we'll see the "sensor size war." Already getting it to a limited extent at the enthusiast level.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I think some of these threads get far too technical. (Not that there's not a time and place for that.) I agree that most people asking questions here are "auto" shooters looking for simplicity. For years we've been telling them that a little knowledge goes a long way, and it still holds true today.

The real challenge would be to put some of the different cameras available in different shooters' hands, and see what we come up with.

Speaking of which, wdwmom2, what an absolutely gorgeous set of photos you posted from your bridge camera! You have a lot of "camera experience" (remember we had the S3's way back when?) and you use pp. You also have a great eye for composition. Someone else with that same camera MAY NOT get a similar set of images. Theirs, in fact, might be horrible.

So specs can only take you so far.

 

[wdwmom2]

Speaking of which, wdwmom2, what an absolutely gorgeous set of photos you posted from your bridge camera! You have a lot of "camera experience" (remember we had the S3's way back when?) and you use pp. You also have a great eye for composition. Someone else with that same camera MAY NOT get a similar set of images. Theirs, in fact, might be horrible.

So specs can only take you so far.

Wow, thanks for the compliment!!!! That was very kind Lots of practice, help from camera forums, and articles on the internet.

Yes, I remember discussing the S3 with you. It was a great camera. I still have mine, it still works, but it is retired. This is one of the last pics I took with it a little over 2 years ago. I had a metel print made out of it.


Copy (2) of IMG_4057 by sharod1031, on Flickr


This year I graduated to a T4i. Love that camera I still keep the SX40 nearby, but it's not getting the use it used to get. But there are still times it is my camera of choice!!

 

[PhotobearSam]

For ease of you in most conditions, I bought a Canon SX 50 and LOVE IT. Works pretty well for night shots (used mine in Vegas) and is pretty responsive. I used to have the S5IS and this is truly an UPGRADE.

Love this baby when I don't want to drag around my DSLR. Worth every penny.