steveinspain
pfm Member
Any suggestions on a starter bridge camera for an 18 year old who wants more than a point and shoot but who is very clumsy/careless with stuff ?
Thanks,
Steve
Thanks,
Steve
Rugged bridge camera ??
- Thread starter steveinspain
- Start date
The gap between a low end DSLR and a bridge camera is shrinking all the time - what features of a cheap DSLR would be unnecessary, and what would you gain from the bridge camera?
I'd think a Sony Alpha DSLR with the kit lens ticks every box I can think of.
http://www.parkcameras.com/8572/Sony-Alpha-A200---18-70mm-Lens.html
£265 for camera + 18-70 (28 to 105 equiv) lens is pretty decent, and you can stick older Minolta AF SLR lenses on this body which can be picked up cheap...
You can probably get it for less if you shop around.
Cesare
I'd think a Sony Alpha DSLR with the kit lens ticks every box I can think of.
http://www.parkcameras.com/8572/Sony-Alpha-A200---18-70mm-Lens.html
£265 for camera + 18-70 (28 to 105 equiv) lens is pretty decent, and you can stick older Minolta AF SLR lenses on this body which can be picked up cheap...
You can probably get it for less if you shop around.
Cesare
steveinspain
pfm Member
Hi Cesare,
Thanks for the help !
OK, I think size is important to the lad, as it will be slung into a backpack along with school/uni books etc. He is also after something simple to use while he learns - knowing how short his attention span is, that is likely to be a factor. His key interest is art, so needs a camera to record stuff he likes more than make pictures at this stage, or so I am told.
Other than that, I don't know - his Mum has asked me to find out what I can, and I was the one to come up with a bridge camera. I'll pass on what you suggest.
Cheers
Steve
Thanks for the help !
OK, I think size is important to the lad, as it will be slung into a backpack along with school/uni books etc. He is also after something simple to use while he learns - knowing how short his attention span is, that is likely to be a factor. His key interest is art, so needs a camera to record stuff he likes more than make pictures at this stage, or so I am told.
Other than that, I don't know - his Mum has asked me to find out what I can, and I was the one to come up with a bridge camera. I'll pass on what you suggest.
Cheers
Steve
Alex S
carbon based lifeform
Steve, I'm not sure of its modern equivalent but the Olympus C7070 bridge that I have is a magnesium shelled tank (it'll take knocks far better than an entry level Sony), quite bulky for a bridge but still smaller than any SLR. It has a surprisingly good lens, a good range, can be used as point & shoot, yet be made as complicated as you like. All pictures I post here are with the Nikon D40 (another good choice and more comfortable, for me, and better built than the Sony) or the Olympus; they may all lack artistic merit but image quality differences are very difficult to spot.
An SLR has a lot more creative potential than a bridge camera - but the incredible depth of field of the bridge is not to be sneezed at either. SLRs are also operationally faster - both in the field and on a computer. Bridge cameras are rubbish at high ISOs.
The problem with this recommendation is that the C7070 is obsolete (although available s/h) and its modern equivalent may be plastic junk.
An SLR has a lot more creative potential than a bridge camera - but the incredible depth of field of the bridge is not to be sneezed at either. SLRs are also operationally faster - both in the field and on a computer. Bridge cameras are rubbish at high ISOs.
The problem with this recommendation is that the C7070 is obsolete (although available s/h) and its modern equivalent may be plastic junk.
Most of the 'bridge' cameras I've seen are pretty much the same size as the entry level SLRs with a 50mm lens on. They're also equally as 'complicated' as it makes sense for the manufacturer to make as many parts standard as possible e.g. Canon G9 seems to be more or less the same as a 350/400, although it has even more programmes so looks more complicated to me. AND you can't change the lenses later if you want to, so you have to sell up and buy again if you want that feature.
sideshowbob
Champagne fascia aficionado
I don't think most manufacturers do "rugged" until you get to the expensive semi-pro part of their range. Bridge cameras mostly seem pretty average, optically speaking, although the older Olympus models seem the exception.
Derek Wright
pfm Member
I also do not know what a bridge camera is however I do know that the Olympus E1 is pretty rugged and very weather tight. OK it is discontinued but used ones go for interesting prices. And they can also take pictures of bridges <g>
If you buy into the Olympus system you can grow with it and the range of lenses and cameras.
If you buy into the Olympus system you can grow with it and the range of lenses and cameras.
steveinspain
pfm Member
Seems to be that the general opinion is to go for a basic SLR - not sure this is what the lad wants to hear, but I'll try...
I had hoped that there was something above a point and shoot, but smaller and easier to use than an SLR, so an easy way into learning the pleasures of photography..
It would have to be new, as it is an 18th birthday present, and the family have had enough problems with buying used, and money isn't too tight (to mention, for them..)
Bridges are not likely to be the main subject, by the way. Dropping it from one may be the subjest of a later thread though...
I had hoped that there was something above a point and shoot, but smaller and easier to use than an SLR, so an easy way into learning the pleasures of photography..
It would have to be new, as it is an 18th birthday present, and the family have had enough problems with buying used, and money isn't too tight (to mention, for them..)
Bridges are not likely to be the main subject, by the way. Dropping it from one may be the subjest of a later thread though...
DevillEars
Dedicated ignorer of fashion
I'm not sure I agree with the consensus so far re an entry level DLSR...
Key points in your posts on this thread:
a) "a starter bridge camera for an 18 year old who wants more than a point and shoot "
b) "size is important to the lad, as it will be slung into a backpack along with school/uni books etc"
c) "something simple to use while he learns"
d) "a camera to record stuff he likes more than make pictures at this stage"
and the caveat:
e) "who is very clumsy/careless with stuff"
A superzoom (aka 'bridge camera') offers a range of capabilities in a single and simple package that is also fairly compact and quite light in weight.
The range of capabilities addresses the "more than a point-and-shoot", while the small size and light weight addresses the need for 'luggability'. The zoom ranges on the latest superzoom cameras typically from ~28mm to ~500mm in a single unit provides the vehicle for capturing opportunistic shots within a much greater range of distances than would an entry-level DSLR (with a maximum of ~120mm zoom).
Most of these superzoom cameras have some form of "Simple Mode" where the camera does most of the thinking, leaving the shooter to focus the subject and capturing it. Also available are "burst-mode" that allows multiple shots for a single depression of the shutter release.
All in all - and apart from the caveat of ruggedness - the superzoom option makes more sense from the perspective of the recipient, while the entry-level DSLR tends to satisfy the purist photographers out there.
The issue of ruggedness is probably going to be a challenge as most superzoom cameras are:
a) Built with weight reduction in mind - hence extensive use of plastics
b) Built for compactness rather than ruggedness
c) Built with a feature-count to boggle the mind
d) Built to also satisfy the unitiated via "Simple Mode" operation (DSLR?)
As a first tentative step into the more than point-and-shoot digiicam, the superzoom is an ideal candidate and, if the bug bites and the recipient wants to get into the complexities of more sophisticated cameras, who cares if the superzoom becomes a second-fiddle as the rate of technological progress in CCDs etc is making the DSLR option a moving target.
Some superzooms worth considering:
a) Canon PowerShot SX1 IS (~475quid) http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX1_IS/
b) Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 (~275quid) http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_FZ28/
I have the predecessor to the DMC-FZ28 - the DMC-FZ18 - and find it an ideal 'camera of opportunity' while travelling - mainly due to the zoom range and scene features plus its small, compact dimensions and relatively light weight.
If one has to choose between functional fit and ruggedness, I'd plump for functional fit every time.
PS: Optical Image Stabilisation is incorporated in virtually every superzoom (~500mm zoom demands it) and this comes in very handy for long range hand-held shots. Few entry-level DSLR cameras incorporate this capability.
My $0.02 worth...
Key points in your posts on this thread:
a) "a starter bridge camera for an 18 year old who wants more than a point and shoot "
b) "size is important to the lad, as it will be slung into a backpack along with school/uni books etc"
c) "something simple to use while he learns"
d) "a camera to record stuff he likes more than make pictures at this stage"
and the caveat:
e) "who is very clumsy/careless with stuff"
A superzoom (aka 'bridge camera') offers a range of capabilities in a single and simple package that is also fairly compact and quite light in weight.
The range of capabilities addresses the "more than a point-and-shoot", while the small size and light weight addresses the need for 'luggability'. The zoom ranges on the latest superzoom cameras typically from ~28mm to ~500mm in a single unit provides the vehicle for capturing opportunistic shots within a much greater range of distances than would an entry-level DSLR (with a maximum of ~120mm zoom).
Most of these superzoom cameras have some form of "Simple Mode" where the camera does most of the thinking, leaving the shooter to focus the subject and capturing it. Also available are "burst-mode" that allows multiple shots for a single depression of the shutter release.
All in all - and apart from the caveat of ruggedness - the superzoom option makes more sense from the perspective of the recipient, while the entry-level DSLR tends to satisfy the purist photographers out there.
The issue of ruggedness is probably going to be a challenge as most superzoom cameras are:
a) Built with weight reduction in mind - hence extensive use of plastics
b) Built for compactness rather than ruggedness
c) Built with a feature-count to boggle the mind
d) Built to also satisfy the unitiated via "Simple Mode" operation (DSLR?)
As a first tentative step into the more than point-and-shoot digiicam, the superzoom is an ideal candidate and, if the bug bites and the recipient wants to get into the complexities of more sophisticated cameras, who cares if the superzoom becomes a second-fiddle as the rate of technological progress in CCDs etc is making the DSLR option a moving target.
Some superzooms worth considering:
a) Canon PowerShot SX1 IS (~475quid) http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX1_IS/
b) Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 (~275quid) http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_FZ28/
I have the predecessor to the DMC-FZ28 - the DMC-FZ18 - and find it an ideal 'camera of opportunity' while travelling - mainly due to the zoom range and scene features plus its small, compact dimensions and relatively light weight.
If one has to choose between functional fit and ruggedness, I'd plump for functional fit every time.
PS: Optical Image Stabilisation is incorporated in virtually every superzoom (~500mm zoom demands it) and this comes in very handy for long range hand-held shots. Few entry-level DSLR cameras incorporate this capability.
My $0.02 worth...
canonman
pfm Member
A bridge camera is one that looks like it should be an SLR (loads of bells and whistles) but has a fixed lens. It is supposed to "bridge" the gap between a compact and a low end SLR.
sideshowbob
Champagne fascia aficionado
But most of the "superzooms" are: (a) slow (f5.6 or so max aperture); (b) optically quite poor outside a narrow sweet spot; (c) unnecessarily wide in focal lengths. A DSLR with a prime lens or a narrow 18-55-ish kit zoom will generally be a better camera, optically speaking, and has all the auto and burst modes of the average bridge camera. Most of them are pretty small and light nowadays too.
Alex S
carbon based lifeform
Yes, I would opt for the D40 with kit 18-55 lens - apart from anything else, its the cheapest available SLR (but the mere 6mp would have to be carefully explained): £250 or less (plus some money for a case, an SD(HC) memory card and maybe a UV filter (52mm) to protect the lens).
Katya, aged 12, has the option of a phone, a Fuji P&S, Olympus Bridge and the Nikon D40 - she takes the D40 every time.
I don't want to bash (sic) the Sony but if you dropped it it looked like it would explode into a million plastic fragments; the D40 might not (although the kit lens certainly would).
Katya, aged 12, has the option of a phone, a Fuji P&S, Olympus Bridge and the Nikon D40 - she takes the D40 every time.
I don't want to bash (sic) the Sony but if you dropped it it looked like it would explode into a million plastic fragments; the D40 might not (although the kit lens certainly would).