Moving from DSLR to bridge camera
Discussion
Hi folks
I currently own a Nikon D40x with std 18-55 lens and a Nikon 55-300. Had it for quite a few years. I'm no more than a "family happy snapper" and have slowly gotten used to using the DSLR. The long lense has been useful both for holidays but also things like airshows and motorsport events. I originally chose it as it was small in the hand and relatively easy to take out and about for a DSLR.
However, I have to say, I am now getting a bit miffed with carrying it around with both lenses available so recently thought about treating myself to something new and have started to look at modern bridge cameras. Given I've enjoyed the Nikon experience, I've looked at the Nikon Coolpix B700 (only online so far, haven't held it yet). The fact it also does video is a bonus for hols etc.
Given the age / type of DSLR I have, I'm assuming the modern bridge camera will outperform my D40x by a long way ? The digital zoom of *60 is massive compared to my current 300mm lens ?
What should I be wary of if I do decide to treat myself ? What other bridge cameras should I consider. Max £400.
Given I want something relatively compact without having to change lenses with at least equivalent to 300mm lens (preferably bigger)....other options ? Bear in mind I'm going from a D40x which I think is superb in terms of quality of image :-)
Thanks for any advice and any pitfalls.
Cheers
Steve
I currently own a Nikon D40x with std 18-55 lens and a Nikon 55-300. Had it for quite a few years. I'm no more than a "family happy snapper" and have slowly gotten used to using the DSLR. The long lense has been useful both for holidays but also things like airshows and motorsport events. I originally chose it as it was small in the hand and relatively easy to take out and about for a DSLR.
However, I have to say, I am now getting a bit miffed with carrying it around with both lenses available so recently thought about treating myself to something new and have started to look at modern bridge cameras. Given I've enjoyed the Nikon experience, I've looked at the Nikon Coolpix B700 (only online so far, haven't held it yet). The fact it also does video is a bonus for hols etc.
Given the age / type of DSLR I have, I'm assuming the modern bridge camera will outperform my D40x by a long way ? The digital zoom of *60 is massive compared to my current 300mm lens ?
What should I be wary of if I do decide to treat myself ? What other bridge cameras should I consider. Max £400.
Given I want something relatively compact without having to change lenses with at least equivalent to 300mm lens (preferably bigger)....other options ? Bear in mind I'm going from a D40x which I think is superb in terms of quality of image :-)
Thanks for any advice and any pitfalls.
Cheers
Steve
Edited by Steve Campbell on Monday 23 October 12:30
Well the pitfalls are that you can't use different lenses, the chip is small, and certain functions are buried in menus rather than in handy buttons on the outside.
'60x zoom' doesn't quantify focal length but the internet says: '24 mm wide angle to super-telephoto 1440 mm angles of view (equivalent in 35 mm format), aswell as supporting powerful macro photography as close as 1cm from the lens.'
1) How many times have you been out with your D40 and 300mm lens and thought 'Oh s
t if only I had a 1440mm lens I could get a better photo?' (viz Rhod Gilbert and his 1,000,000 candles!)
1a) What is the aperture at 1440mm and how is that going to affect shutter speed/ISO/noise? Funny how they never headline apertures.
2) You can't go wider that 24mm though there's probably a strap on-extra that would do it. You can often get closer to things but not far enough away - interiors being a good example. I'd want at least 18mm. At the wide end every mm makes a difference.
3) Macro - nothing to do with distance from lens but magnification. No doubt at only 1cm away the magnification will be high but how are you going to light the subject with a camera only 1cm above it blocking the light?
You see, under all the 'zap pow zowee' stuff is physics; make sure you have adequate physics.
It may be that a bridge camera will suit you fine - I'd head for Lumix but it's just a brand preference. Or would a good compact do everything you really need and take up even less space?
'60x zoom' doesn't quantify focal length but the internet says: '24 mm wide angle to super-telephoto 1440 mm angles of view (equivalent in 35 mm format), aswell as supporting powerful macro photography as close as 1cm from the lens.'
1) How many times have you been out with your D40 and 300mm lens and thought 'Oh s
t if only I had a 1440mm lens I could get a better photo?' (viz Rhod Gilbert and his 1,000,000 candles!)1a) What is the aperture at 1440mm and how is that going to affect shutter speed/ISO/noise? Funny how they never headline apertures.
2) You can't go wider that 24mm though there's probably a strap on-extra that would do it. You can often get closer to things but not far enough away - interiors being a good example. I'd want at least 18mm. At the wide end every mm makes a difference.
3) Macro - nothing to do with distance from lens but magnification. No doubt at only 1cm away the magnification will be high but how are you going to light the subject with a camera only 1cm above it blocking the light?
You see, under all the 'zap pow zowee' stuff is physics; make sure you have adequate physics.
It may be that a bridge camera will suit you fine - I'd head for Lumix but it's just a brand preference. Or would a good compact do everything you really need and take up even less space?
I've gone the 'other way', from a decent quality bridge to a G7.
My bridge was a Panasonic Lumix FZ 150 with a decent 24X zoom. I used it for illustrating articles and for web illustrations.
It's quality was good enough for two page, that's A3, illustrations in magazines, even with some cutting. For websites it was more than ample of course. It was the perfect single camera.
The negatives: it didn't have 4k video, and I want to move that way. Further, it was too big in some cases. I wanted a compact. So I bought a TZ. The quality was good enough for A3 and webs, but the zoom was limited.
For me, a G7 with a TZ compact is the best solution. For others, a bridge might be perfect and it certainly should not be dismissed as rubbish.
I've a friend with a Nikon with a massive zoom, to 900mm equivalent I think. He produces some lovely pictures of the Moon.
It's what suits your requirements, feels good to hand and you can afford. I would not turn my nose up at another bridge which does what I want.
Mind you, the G7 is fabulous and I highly recommend it
.
My bridge was a Panasonic Lumix FZ 150 with a decent 24X zoom. I used it for illustrating articles and for web illustrations.
It's quality was good enough for two page, that's A3, illustrations in magazines, even with some cutting. For websites it was more than ample of course. It was the perfect single camera.
The negatives: it didn't have 4k video, and I want to move that way. Further, it was too big in some cases. I wanted a compact. So I bought a TZ. The quality was good enough for A3 and webs, but the zoom was limited.
For me, a G7 with a TZ compact is the best solution. For others, a bridge might be perfect and it certainly should not be dismissed as rubbish.
I've a friend with a Nikon with a massive zoom, to 900mm equivalent I think. He produces some lovely pictures of the Moon.
It's what suits your requirements, feels good to hand and you can afford. I would not turn my nose up at another bridge which does what I want.
Mind you, the G7 is fabulous and I highly recommend it
.
Edited by Derek Smith on Tuesday 24th October 16:04
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff