Any photographers?

[gettin2dizzy]

I'm looking at buying a decent digital camera. The DSLR cameras are a bit out of budget, so i'm looking at that 'bridge' section of cameras. Ie. fixed lens cameras but 35mm equivalent. I'm looking a fujifilm s6900 and a few panasonics. they seem to have good reviews, and may be better for me than having a full out slr. Has anyone got any advice on whats good or not?

[GregK2]

click (http://gadgetshow.five.tv/jsp/5gsmain.jsp?lnk=401&featureid=299&description=Digital%20bridge%20cameras&show=s6e2&section=Consumer)

Not a photographer myself, but the gadget show on five covered bridge cameras a couple weeks ago, see link above

HTH

[rpwoodman]

have a look at dpreview.com - really good indepth reviews.

[Beenz]

You can get a DSLR for less than you might think, prices have fallen whist the specs have got better. For the cost of a decent bridge camera (Canon, Nikon, Sony (AKA Minolta) and Panasonic (for the optics) would get my vote here).

Check the prices of the Nikon D40, Canon 400D and the Pentax K100 (or K10 if you can afford it). All are good and you can add another lens later. The Pentax will take older manual focus lenss that are quite cheap on eb*y. Also the standard lenses of a DSLR will tend to give you a much better wide angle view, 28mm compared to 35mm in film terms.

Hope this helps.

[rob13]

I think for someone who is looking to get into Photography but doesnt want the outlay of expensive lenses on top of an slr body, then i cant see why a "bridge" camera doesnt fit the bill. It allows the user to have the functionality of an SLR (nearly) but puts it into one handy design and is an affordable option

I have the Panasonic FZ7 and the quality of the pictures i have taken have been superb. The simple function allows it to be used as a point & shoot or you can choose to use manual functions of Shutter speed & aperture to adjust your shots. The downside with the camera is that noise increases sharply the higher the ISO. Also the lack of a flash shoe might be of concern to some.

[gettin2dizzy]

thats all brilliant thanks. I used to do a fair bit of b&w with a 70's canon slr! then developed them at school until they thre out the projectors :( But decided with the prices of slrs these days its probably worth getting one again now. It pains me on the bike taking pictures with my mobile. (2 Mpixels with a lens the size of a pen nib :confused:).
Nikon D40 looks like it fits the bill, seems to be the best value for money. Although needs expensive lenses should i ever want to replace it.

[Amanda M]

Hiya.

I've recently bought a Nikon D40 and can highly recommend it. The quality of pictures I've been getting with are absolutely superb and it's easy to use. I was a bit concerned about being out of my depth with it and spending all that money, but I was worried about nowt because I love it and have no regrets at all about buying it :D

Amanda

[gettin2dizzy]

my only concern with it is that is doesn't have a depth of field preview on it, which is really a basic feature! i'll go try it out today :o)

[TC3]

The D40 is cheap but it can not use the older lenses. I have the Pentax K100D and its brilliant. Can use any Pentax bayonet mounet lens ever made. It also has shake reduction.....i have taken night pics hand held at 1/6 second and they are clear thanks to the shake reduction.
As was mentioned....dpreview.com is great. Check out the Pentax slr forum....you wont be sorry and if you have any questions just ask me :D

[TC3]

my only concern with it is that is doesn't have a depth of field preview on it, which is really a basic feature! i'll go try it out today :o)

K100D has one

[TC3]

thats all brilliant thanks. I used to do a fair bit of b&w with a 70's canon slr! then developed them at school until they thre out the projectors :( But decided with the prices of slrs these days its probably worth getting one again now. It pains me on the bike taking pictures with my mobile. (2 Mpixels with a lens the size of a pen nib :confused:).
Nikon D40 looks like it fits the bill, seems to be the best value for money. Although needs expensive lenses should i ever want to replace it.

Eventually you will definatly want faster lenses or a different range as you get to know the camera and it is something u gotta think about when buying a DSLR as you are buying into a system

[gettin2dizzy]

yeah, as i don't own any other lenses i'm not too fussed about it needing special ones. I'll look at the pentax, but i wish it could take continous shots like the d40 (it can take them until the memory is full) which of course would be good for any shots with bikes in! pity i can't just afford the better model :P off out now shopping

[Jelster]

Jessops were selling the EOS350D for £399 !! I paid over £500 when it came out (and I got discount!). It's because the new EOS400 has taken it's "space".

I was in Guildford on Saturday and they had them in stock.

.

[TC3]

For your info this was taken from the D40 test at dpreview

Conclusion - Pros


Excellent image quality, great resolution and detail, who needs eight megapixels?
Surprisingly good build quality, tight shut lines
Very compact and lightweight (especially with kit lens) yet still comfortable to use
Kit lens is better quality than many others
Great in-use performance, very responsive, short black-out time, very fast media write
Good fast auto focus system (only 3 areas but that's not a big issue for this camera)
Auto-focus assist lamp rather than requiring flash to be raised
Reliable, sophisticated, if sometimes a little conservative matrix metering system
For a Pentamirror the viewfinder delivers a surprisingly bright image
Extremely useful, customizable automatic sensitivity (ISO)
Easy to use playback / delete combination
All playback functions available in record review
Very attractive and intuitive menu system
Unlimited continuous shooting in JPEG mode (with a reasonably fast card)
Good SD card throughput and USB 2.0 transfer speed
In-camera retouching features including D-Lighting and Red-eye reduction
Support for SD and SDHC cards
Good large LCD monitor with wide viewing angles
Dedicated help button provides both shooting and in-menu assistance
Programmable Fn hard button
Value for moneyConclusion - Cons


No lens motor in body means non-AF-S/AF-I lenses are manual focus only
Disappointingly RAW+JPEG setting only records Basic quality JPEG's
No status LCD panel on top of camera (we hate to see these go)
No exposure or white balance bracketing
No hard buttons (without customizing) for ISO or White Balance
No depth-of-field preview
Occasional visibility of moire artifacts (although seldom)
Fixed exposure steps (1/3 EV)
Disappointing automatic white balance performance in incandescent light
No RAW adjustment with supplied PictureProject, only simple conversion
Limited image parameter adjustment (especially for color saturation)

[Beenz]

All of the vews here are pretty good. I think you need to decide really what you want from the camera.

Bridge cameras are a good all in one solution if you do not need to change the lens. Most have good close up ability and tend to have faster lenses (better light capturing levels) than a DSLR standard lens, however the sensors are smaller and therefore have smaller pixels than a DSLR meaning that they are less sensitive to light and create more noise. In good light they can be very good indeed. You could argue that this negates the use of the faster lens.

DSLRs give you the chance to view the image with far better clarity using an optical viewfinder instead of a low resolution monitor image. They will tend to focus quicker also. The larger sensor will also be more sensitive than the bridge cousins reducing the 'need' for a faster lens.

Depth of field preview mentioned earlier in this thread is useful if you understand how to use it (most people do not) and results in trhe view finder going darker at a given aperture to show what will be in focus in front and behind the intended focus point but as I say the viewed image will be darker so might be hard to see anyway. Note this has no efect on the captured image.

Personal view follows:

I have a great admiration for pentax, the bayonet lens mount has not changed for a very long time alowing the use of new AF lenses and older manual focus lenses (cheap on the used market) to be used. They are also well built with larger than average view finder images (helping that manual focus and composition)

Canon produce some very good feature rich DSLRs, light and easy to use with good optics. However the consumer items may feel built down to a price. They are very good and arguabely have the fastest auto focus.

Nikon DSLRs in comparison may seem a little more expensive than the Canon counterparts for the same feature set, however tend to be better built and according to reviews better handling. AF is (a tad) slower. Note also that most (if not all) new user lenses have the built in motor so will work fine with the D40.

From personal experience I've been using a D70 Nikon semi pro for the last three years and it's been used in all weathers including heavy rain and snow and blizzard conditions. It only recently died (last week). A quick phone call to the customer service stating the problem and symptoms and they said to send it back as they know what the problem is and accept that it might be a manufacturiing issue and not a user issue so will fix it free of charge. I've bought a D80 now and will use the fixed D70 as a backup. This is two years out of warranty!

Hope this helps. What ever you choose it really is hard to get a crap camera from Pentax, Canon or Nikon. Don't rule out the Sony either as they are using Minolta designs.