If you are serious about photography and willing to spend the time and effort to learn how to use a DSLR, then buy the DSLR. If not, then don't..
FINE PRINT: I reserve the right to be wrong. Should you prove me wrong, I reserve the right to change my mind...
Bill Randall wrote:.
If you are serious about photography and willing to spend the timeand effort to learn how to use a DSLR, then buy the DSLR. If not,then don't..
FINE PRINT: I reserve the right to be wrong. Should you prove mewrong, I reserve the right to change my mind..
I agree with above. The Olympus dslr will give better pictures than the bridge. Olympus is supposed to have one of the best kit lenses on the market. Even if you go with the bridge you're photos would still benefit from you spending time learning about photography...
Panaonic FZ18 for bridge or dSLR if you feel thats right for you...
Bridge probably isn't the right way for you to go. (You can take a look at my "Back to the Bridge Camera" link below which might help)..
You would likely get the best "straight out of the box" images if you could find yourself an old Nikon D40. As they cram more photo sites into the sensors they become more noise prone, and this is one of the arguments against the Olympus route which - whilst being lovely cameras - start off with a much smaller sensor size. Way better than P&S or 2/3rds but not as sympathetic to image cropping as the larger APS-C jobs on Pentax, Canon, Nikon, Sony etc..
John.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor..
There are a number of good buys uin DSLR's under $1000 right now. The ones I would look at first would be the K100D, K200D and K10D. All have the built in stabilization..
Forget the bridge. They are too close in size and price to a DSLR and will sit on the shelf once you get a decent DSLR. If you want a lesser camera, there are some better P&S models such as the A650, G9 and NV15...
Forget the bridge. They are too close in size and price to a DSLR andwill sit on the shelf once you get a decent DSLR. If you want alesser camera, there are some better P&S models such as the A650, G9and NV15..
Yep. A bridge might have made sense 3 years ago, but not today..
Even a bottom-end beginner DSLR will outperform a bridge camera. Today's bridge cameras feature lenses with huge zoom ratios in an effort to attract buyers who want as many lenses crammed into one as possible. And even though lens design has improved, there's still limits to what optics can produce. Combining a truly useful wide angle (24mm) with a decent telephoto (300mm and up) is asking an awful lot of the optics. The fundamental lens designs are completely different, so trying to engineer a lens that does both makes it do neither very well..
That's what's so great about DLSRs. You can mount any lens you want and, presto, a whole new purpose for your camera. Fewer compromises. In fact, people heavily invested in DSLRs (pros especially) might have several times more $ invested in lenses than in camera bodies. A single long telephoto can easily cost more than the body it's mounted to..
Barring any revolutionary breakthrough in sensor design, the megapixel race that characterized most P&S releases over the last few years has, by necessity, pretty much ended. The tiny sensors in P&S cameras simply prohibit any more megapixels. So now P&S camera manufacturers are turning to other useless gimmicks to sell their toys, like stupidly high ISO ratings, face detection, and what-not..
DSLRs feature at minimum APS-C sensors. And FF sensors are becoming more affordable. Bigger sensors = less noise. And bigger, more expensive lenses..
So, when you combine the superior image quality that's possible with pretty much any DSLR over a lesser camera AND the ability to mount top quality glass, well, that's a mighty strong argument for a DSLR for any serious amateur on up..
Buy a mid-line P&S for unexpected happy snaps and a DSLR for anything serious. Forget the bridge camera..
Thanks for the many answers!.
I want to take pictures on holidays, so landscapes and portraits, also on birthdays and on other events..
The budget ist approx. 400-500Euro which is (multiplied by 1,6) approx. 700-800USD..
I really want to spend more time to learn how to use a camera to get the best out of it.Thats the reason I don't think of buying a P&S camera anymore!.
Best Regards!Markus ..
Thanks alot for the helpfull answers!I also think the DSRL will be the better choice!.
For me it's important to have the live-view feature, because I wear glasses and dont want to use the viewfinder.Also I'm more confident with using the LCD than a viewfinder..
The E-420 seems to be a good choice, because many owners say it's a very good camera and it's a bargain!.
But it dont has IS and I know that even with the IS in P&S Camera sometimes it's very hard to get steady pictures..
So is it possible for a beginner to take good steady (not blurred or wiggly) pictures with this cam even that it has no Image Stabilization?.
Or should I wait for the bigger E-520 which may will hav this feature but also cost much more. (also nobody knows when it will be relased this year).
Best regards!Markus ..
I'm pretty new to a DSLR myself, and like the other posters I strongly recommend you skip the "bridge" cameras. I went with Nikon myself, and picked up a great D50 used. For your first DSLR on a budget, used is a great way to go- you get all the benefits of a DSLR without breaking the bank, and you can learn what you really like for when you do purchase new..
BTW, the lenses that came with my D50 don't have image stabilization, and thus far I haven't needed it, even shooting with a long lens on windy day. Remember, photographers did just fine for decades without all these fancy features, so while they're nice to have, they're not essential. Just get what you can afford, and get out there and have fun taking pictures.
Best of luck in your camera choice, and I daresay that with the current technology, you will be happy with whatever you get...
For me it's important to have the live-view feature, because I wearglasses and dont want to use the viewfinder.Also I'm more confident with using the LCD than a viewfinder..
Some viewfinders are actually pretty good. Among less than brutally expensive models, Pentax's viewfinders seem to have a good rep..
Most live-view cameras also have higher shutter lag in live-view mode somewhat problematic for some uses. Latency is a nasty enemy if you're trying to catch somebody's momentary expression..
The E-420 seems to be a good choice, because many owners say it's avery good camera and it's a bargain!.
Not a bad choice, but be warned that small size is a double-edged sword less room to put dedicated controls, for instance. It's also possible that the higher inertia of a somewhat heavier camera would help one hold it steady..
Might want to look through it's VF before you buy, if you get a chance. Not everybody likes it..
But it dont has IS and I know that even with the IS in P&S Camerasometimes it's very hard to get steady pictures..
So is it possible for a beginner to take good steady (not blurred orwiggly) pictures with this cam even that it has no ImageStabilization?.
Photographers have managed for years before IS/VR..
You might want a tripod at some point anyway, for such things as panoramas, long exposures, or low-light telephotos. It's not really optimal to hand-hold moon shots, even with IS at least, not if the lens is long enough that you're showing craters..
IS is a convenience if you're taking somewhat long exposures, especially in areas where tripods and monopods are forbidden..
Or should I wait for the bigger E-520 which may will hav this featurebut also cost much more. (also nobody knows when it will be relasedthis year).
One can play the waiting game forever, but it's not particularly recommended unless you -need- something you're waiting for...
I think I will go for the E-420 as it comes with good lenses (said by other users)..
As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong) the D40 , Alpha 200, EOS 400D have no live view feature..
I think I dont want to miss this feature, so the only choice is the E-420 for a price under 500 Euro!But if anybody has other suggestions they are welcome!.
Thanks again for your help!.
This is the right place to start. If you are budget limited and expect to remain so, then one needs to look at the fact that many of the advantages to having a dslr system come at an ever increasing cost. Many of the bridge cameras (slr like) are very competent cameras. You can use them manually or choose the level of control you desire..
Because of the actual lens focal lengths, apertures and small sensor sizes, it's difficult or impossible to get the types of aperture based focus range selectivity that you'd get with a longer dslr lens with a fast aperture..
With a bridge camera, you really are locked to the focal range equivalents of the primary lens. there are some wide and tele auxiliary lenses but quality of results may be limited..
They don't compare to dslrs with large sensors when it comes to low light..
They aren't usually as "fast" to focus and viewing through electronic finders inserts delay. Following and predicting erratic or fast moving subjects is much easier with a dslr..
Advantages to a bridge? Keeping in mind that expenses like external flash, brackets, tripods, etc., would be accrued to either type of system, the long zoom bridge is pretty much complete, you won't be spending a ton of money to go wider or longer or faster..
Lighter - you don't need to have an unwieldy and hefty bag(s) to carry the system around. You need good but not outstanding tripods..
There are compromises and limits to using a non-dslr but nothing that would keep you from getting a good basic photographic education and developing good skills and a good eye...
Thanks for your help!.
So I still guess the Olympus "Beginners" Series of DSLR would be the right for me (approx. 460Euro with the 14-42mm kit lens in Austria)..
I can start with an good entry level Body and a good kit lens and if I'm more familiar with DSLR photography I can invest more money later to buy other lenses for the body..
I know that before the digital camera revolution, photographers magaed to work without an IS..
Bu I'm still a little bit unsure if I as a beginner am able to shoot good photos with the E-420 which is missing the IS..
Maybe I will start a new thred in the Oly section to cover right this topic..
Have a nice day!Markus ..
Last week I got my new E-420 and I'm really impressed.The camera makes wonderfull images, even though I'm a beginner..
The image qualitiy is amazing in my opinion, because I only know the quality of the P&S models..
Now I have to get more familiar with DSLR photography to get the most aut of my new E-420!.
Thanks for your help!Best regards!Markus Olympus E-420 with Zuiko digital ED 14-42mm 3.5-5.6..