Which £300 bridge camera?

[JulianHJ]

A colleague has asked for advice on the above, but I've no idea as I'm only interested in DSLRs.

Can anyone shed any light on what's good at the moment?

[DannyScene]

For £300 I'd rather get a used DSLR or a new D3100 or similar, why the focus on the bridge camera?

[sgrimshaw]

DannyScene said:

For £300 I'd rather get a used DSLR or a new D3100 or similar, why the focus on the bridge camera?

Some people don't want to invest in and carry round a selection of lenses.

I have several DSLR's and also a Sony HX100V.

With the bridge I can travel light and I am covering a focal length of 27 - 810 mm.

I think the images are extremely good!

Sample, taken at full zoom, the subject was around 30 metres away, hand-held - straight out of the camera:

[DannyScene]

sgrimshaw said:

DannyScene said:

For £300 I'd rather get a used DSLR or a new D3100 or similar, why the focus on the bridge camera?

Some people don't want to invest in and carry round a selection of lenses.

Fully appreciate that I just wondered why his friend wanted a bridge and not a DSLR and a kit lense for example

[PJ S]

Fuji X-S1 can be had around that money, but it's not like your typical plastic toy-sized variants from other brands - it's a carry over of traditional bridge zooms as made back a good few years.
If the size and weight aren't an issue, I think he'd be more than happy with it.

[Skodaku]

Look at the Fuji HS30EXR. Well within budget and experience tells me it's a good 'un.

[LongQ]

As this is a relatively recent thread and I have just read a relevant review I thought it might be of interest.

Current price seems to be in the right park if you select a vendor carefully and can take up the cashback offer.

Canon SX50 HS

Edited by LongQ on Wednesday 9th January 09:54

[MysteryLemon]

Lumix fz200. End thread.

[PJ S]

LongQ said:

As this is a relatively recent thread and I have just read a releant review I thought it might be of interest.

Current price seems to be in the right park if you select a vendor carefully and can take up the cashback offer.

Canon SX50 HS

As much as LL is considered to be THE review site worth reading, I can't help but be nervous of perpetuating that view - said reviewer claims these cameras don't do RAW, as an output.
Funny how my FZ50 did RAW (2006) and the Fujifilm X-S1 does RAW, as does the HS30 mentioned above, and the rest of Panasonic's FZs from 30 onwards, all did RAW.
That's not to say the rest of the review isn't worth reading, but it does cast a certain light over it.

[PJ S]

MysteryLemon said:

Lumix fz200. End thread.

Dear God no! That's the plasticky toy I referred to - is it down to £300 already?
Was nigh on £450 in Curry's a few weeks before Christmas.

[LongQ]

PJ S said:

LongQ said:

As this is a relatively recent thread and I have just read a releant review I thought it might be of interest.

Current price seems to be in the right park if you select a vendor carefully and can take up the cashback offer.

Canon SX50 HS

As much as LL is considered to be THE review site worth reading, I can't help but be nervous of perpetuating that view - said reviewer claims these cameras don't do RAW, as an output.
Funny how my FZ50 did RAW (2006) and the Fujifilm X-S1 does RAW, as does the HS30 mentioned above, and the rest of Panasonic's FZs from 30 onwards, all did RAW.
That's not to say the rest of the review isn't worth reading, but it does cast a certain light over it.

I don't think the intention of that part of the review was to suggest the SX50 is unique (although many recent Canons in that series have not supported RAW outputs). Reichmann is simply saying that Canon made a good call allowing the RAW files to escape because he is not keen on the default jpg results. Moreover has is suggesting that the potential offered in the RAW is not bad for a $400 camera with a 1200mm equivalent focal length available to it despite the small sensor.

Going a long way back I have a Canon Pro 1 (cica 2003) that offers RAW output and an 'L' spec lens. It has a lot of interesting features and the output is not at all bad providing one sticks with low ISO settings and a well lit environment. In its day it was an expensive device. When Canon replaced it they dropped the RAW, a lot of the more interesting features, the claims for the 'L' spec lens and the price. Now we are seeing them re-introduce RAW, possibly because others have done so.

The Canon G series cameras have a more chequered history with RAW being offered or removed almost model to model over the years it seems. It's more to do with marketing (perhaps) than technology, or so one would guess. There may in some instances, be technical reasons.

It would be interesting to know how many dSLR users never shoot and process RAW files. My guess would be "most of them". (Quickly followed by those who never shoot anything with their cameras. )

[MysteryLemon]

PJ S said:

Dear God no! That's the plasticky toy I referred to - is it down to £300 already?
Was nigh on £450 in Curry's a few weeks before Christmas.

Seemed to be able to pick them up online around £350 a few weeks back. Maybe get closer to £300 second hand.

Plasticy maybe but its probably the best bridge out there at the moment.