DSLR/Bridge camera

Hello,
What advantage would a DSLR have over a high end bridge camera if the captured images were only going to be shown either on a PC or in a DVD slideshow for viewing on a TV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bottel

Hello,
What advantage would a DSLR have over a high end bridge camera if the captured images were only going to be shown either on a PC or in a DVD slideshow for viewing on a TV.

---

David,

Check a few of the threads on this subject, although they approach the same question differently than you posed it.
Quick response:
The DSLR works well with all subject matter, the bridge camera can take useable photos in low light conditions and sporting events. That being said, the bridge can give great photos in low lights by using the flash but this changes the atmosphere of the event. Finally, as our more senior members will tell you, DSLR shoots in the RAW format and don't get me started on interchangeable lenses.

I have both types and would recommend either one, it depends on what your current and future goals are in photography. See the thread "P90 any thoughts".

John,
Thank you for your reply. I have read the posts on the P90 and found them very interesting.
My current camera is a Panasonic FZ18 and my main interests are macro and wildlife photography. I shoot mainly in raw and process images in Adobe Photoshop Elements 6.
I very rarely print images but create DVD slideshows for viewing on TV or post them on Flickr.com.
I am trying to determine as to whether a DSLR would give me better results under the above circumstances and any further advice would appreciated.

Hi David,

Looks like I was too late with the link ;)

I am not familiar with the FZ18 itself, but I have migrated to a DSLR from a similar bridge camera, see my signature strip for details.

With a macro bias, the issues you will face if you 'move up' to a DSLR are:
a) For a given numerical aperture, say "f8", you will only get about 1/3 to 1/4 of the Depth of Field you are used to, this should not be under estimated for macro work.

b) In order to match your current capabilities, you may need quite an expensive and dedicated macro lens if the FZ18 is 'well featured' in the lens department with respect to close focus distance and zoom range.

c) If you're used to using the on camera flash, you may find that DSLR kit and wide range zoom lenses may have such a large front element that they cast a shadow over part of the subject at some focal lengths and subject distances.

d) Quality should be better, both sharpness and image noise, particularly useful if you're a "hand holder" rather than a tripod person and don't use flash.

I have run out of (lunch) time, so I'm off now, others will no doubt chip in.

Cheers,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bottel

John,
Thank you for your reply. I have read the posts on the P90 and found them very interesting.
My current camera is a Panasonic FZ18 and my main interests are macro and wildlife photography. I shoot mainly in raw and process images in Adobe Photoshop Elements 6.
I very rarely print images but create DVD slideshows for viewing on TV or post them on Flickr.com.
I am trying to determine as to whether a DSLR would give me better results under the above circumstances and any further advice would appreciated.

---

David,

What name do you post under on Flickr? I would love to see what the FZ18 can do at its longest focal range. Do you have the lens adapters for closeup and 30X zoom?

I'm not sure exactly what a "bridge camera" is but I will attest to the abilities of the Canon G10, now the G11 although both seem to be available. It has great zoom range, the Digic 4 processor, a live view screen, a viewfinder, and it shoots raw. It's a lot of camera in a small package. Don't be misled by the size or the relatively low price --$450 to $500. I've had cameras from an M3 to a Canon F-1, and a lot of others. I also have a 450D. I like the 450D but the G10 is just a great camera. I still have the M3. I think the M3 with the 90mm F/2 Summicron was the best camera I have ever had. Alas, I don't have the 90mm any more.

That oughta start some conversations. Take that you poor, uninformed Nikon fans. :)

BillTexas.

Hi Bill,

I would probably call the G10/11 bridge cameras, despite their lack of a larger lens ;)

Seriously, I would say anything that does what they do is a bridge camera, although most of the 'bridge camera' breed also tend to look like a DSLR - which gives a bigger lens barrel.

Obviously, the downside is size, a G series slips in the pocket, my old Fuji wouldn't!

Cheers, Dave (u N f) :)

John,
My Flickr name is brallida.
I have an Olympus TCON-17 and a Raynox 150 close up lens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BillTexas

I'm not sure exactly what a "bridge camera" is but I will attest to the abilities of the Canon G10, now the G11 although both seem to be available. It has great zoom range, the Digic 4 processor, a live view screen, a viewfinder, and it shoots raw.
BillTexas.

---

Definition of a bridge camera: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_camera. Nikon also has their version of bridge cameras; comparably to the Canon G10-11 would be the Coolpix P6000. Camera companies always aggressively comes out with "tween" cameras. Cameras are becoming more and more of "a way of life" (from cellphones, computers, to keychains), and consumers are demanding something a little more diverse than a P&S. I've always considered basic P&S's being the "instant disposable cameras" version of the film days;). Bridge or tween cameras are great options for people who are not just quite ready to make the financial leap or investment for a full size dslr.

David, the biggest advantage of moving up from your current camera to a dslr would be image quality (better noise control due to larger sensor size), greater creative exposure control (i.e. off camera flash), and speed (less shutter lag/recycle times). Better optics is another consideration, most "all in one zooms bridge cameras" do a decent to pretty good job for the enthusiast. The whole point of moving up to a dslr is the ability to upgrade the optics for greater DOF control and perspective. For your needs, I would say any of the entry level cameras would be perfectly fine for your needs.

Thank you all for your replies.
I guess I will have to start saving my pennies and in time move upto a DSLR.

David,

Nice collection of photos of wildlife, cityscapes, and attractions. I didn't see any nightscapes, is that why you are interested in a DSLR or did you just not include any nighttime photos?

John,
Thanks for your comments.
I have'nt done any night photography yet, but I intend to try soon.
My main reason for my original question was to get opinions as to whether a DSLR would give better image quality than my FZ18 bearing in mind that the images would be resized to Pal 720x576 pixels when a DVD was created in Adobe Premier Elements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bottel

John,
Thanks for your comments.
I have'nt done any night photography yet, but I intend to try soon.
My main reason for my original question was to get opinions as to whether a DSLR would give better image quality than my FZ18 bearing in mind that the images would be resized to Pal 720x576 pixels when a DVD was created in Adobe Premier Elements.

---

Dave,

That's an old habit of mine when someone is thinking of upgrading I always think it is best to consider what your photographic intentions are.