# Help me choose my First Camera



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

Im looking at getting a new camera and want people with more knowledge than me to give me a few pointers  

Ill be using it for a few shots of the car here and there, but mainly for up close pictures of products for ebay etc, 

Will I be better with an entry DSLR @ 12MP or a Bridge camera @ 16MP?
I know MP aren't everything sensor etc

A few that i have looked at are: 

DSLR:
Canon EOS 1100D
Nikon D3100

Bridge: 
Samsung WB101
Nikon L810
Nikon P510

The budget isnt much as you can see but any recommendations would be welcome, 

Thanks, Shaun


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

The DSLR, with it's much bigger sensor, is always going to produce better quality images and, as you say megapixels aren't everything. Especially as those on the bridge camera are much (much) smaller than those of the DSLR










If you compare the sizes in the pic above the D3100/1100D are the blue and red boxes respectively and the 2/3" one is the sensor in the typical bridge camera.

Ultimately though you need to buy a camera that _you_ feel comfortable using, so the best advice is to pop along to Jessops or wherever and try handling each of them and see which one feels "right".


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

I have handled all the cameras above and i did really like the D3100, which is sort of what im leaning towards, i dont see the point in going down the bridge route as im never going to take advantage of their zoom features and from what you have provided i can see the difference!.. so entry dslr is probably what ill end up getting, 

Thanks for the info!


----------



## Bigbruno71 (Sep 28, 2010)

I've got a Sony alpha a580 really good the quality is mental, has a panoramic facility as well. Tamron do lenses for it so you don't have to stick with the Sony expense


Clive Ford


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

puckacostello said:


> I have handled all the cameras above and i did really like the D3100, which is sort of what im leaning towards, i dont see the point in going down the bridge route as im never going to take advantage of their zoom features and from what you have provided i can see the difference!.. so entry dslr is probably what ill end up getting,
> 
> Thanks for the info!


The zoom on most bridge cameras isn't really a zoom in the way it is on a dslr. On a bridge what the camera does is simply crop a section out of the centre of the image to produce a zoom effect, but all you end up with is a smaller, fuzzier picture.

The D3100 is an old model now that has been replaced by the D3200, it's still a decent wee camera though and should be available at a good discount if you shop around :thumb:


----------



## lobotomy (Jun 23, 2006)

Bigbruno71 said:


> I've got a Sony alpha a580 really good the quality is mental, has a panoramic facility as well. Tamron do lenses for it so you don't have to stick with the Sony expense
> 
> Clive Ford


The A580 was commended for pretty amazing IQ before going into A700/A900 territory. Discontinued now though! So would have to go second hand or New old stock...

For the OP, if you could dtretch your budget slightly, what about the Sony NEX5n compact system? I've seen the quality first hand and it's great. Probably ideal for what you're wanting as well.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Glaschu said:


> The zoom on most bridge cameras isn't really a zoom in the way it is on a dslr. On a bridge what the camera does is simply crop a section out of the centre of the image to produce a zoom effect, but all you end up with is a smaller, fuzzier picture.


Sorry, run that by me again?
What source do you base your info on?


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

PJS said:


> Sorry, run that by me again?
> What source do you base your info on?


It's called "digital zoom" -a lot of bridge cameras achieve the zoom by cropping rather than actually zooming, you can tell if a particular camera does this by the size of file it produces - those that do it usually produce a much smaller file at the full "zoom" than at the lower end, sometimes it can be a quarter of the size, which when you're working with a tiny sensor to start with isn't ideal.

It's explained in more detail here.

HTH


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Don't think you've really understood that article there.
I'm well aware as to what the difference between OZ and DZ is, but you've maligned practically every bridge camera out there in your previous post!
I can tell you now, neither of my Panasonic FZs ever had their DZ function enabled, never mind used, and both enjoy(ed) a healthy 12x OPTICAL zoom.

I can't think of any cameras, even from the compact zoom sector at £100-150, over the past 3-4 years that haven't had a 4-6x optical zoom.
And of the cameras mentioned by the OP, even the first two bridge ones at their lowly price point, have a very big optical zoom.
Zoom is one thing, quality of glass used is a completely different story - so God knows what the resultant images will look like, but I imagine the typical buyer will be cropping them down to a 800-1280 pixel wide size to make them look decent and save on file size/upload restrictions/etc.


----------



## Bigcheese1664 (Mar 25, 2012)

Jessops have a triple lens deal on the Canon 550d at the moment at £549, I was looking at the Nikon 5100 but the reviews on battery drainage put me off so I brought the 550d deal instead. Cannot fault it.


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

I'm sure almost all, if not all, of the advertised zoom specs for bridge cameras are based on the optical range and not the digital range.

I've still got my Canon S3is which I bought about 7 years ago and I can assure you that it's 12x zoom claim is optical and the resulting images are very good quality and not cropped in


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

The Bridge cameras I have mentioned all have optical zoom! 

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

PJS said:


> Don't think you've really understood that article there.
> I'm well aware as to what the difference between OZ and DZ is, but you've maligned practically every bridge camera out there in your previous post!
> I can tell you now, neither of my Panasonic FZs got used with their DZ function enabled, never mind used, and both enjoy(ed) a healthy 12x OPTICAL zoom.
> 
> ...


I'm not so sure you understand it, tbh. 

I had this same discussion a while back with a bridge camera-owning friend, who maintained the optical zoom on her Fuji bridge meant that it was superior to my Nikon pro gear because it had more megapixels and a (according to Fuji) longer zoom.

She came out on a couple of shoots with me and on the camera's lcd the shots looked fine, but once off the camera, even down to 640x480 they were just awful, especially those taken at full reach .

Without wishing to start an argument,the pics you posted on another thread, with the massively blown highlights etc,perfectly illustrate the limitations of such cameras....


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

Think I'm going to go for the D3200  

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> I'm not so sure you understand it, tbh.
> 
> I had this same discussion a while back with a bridge camera-owning friend, who maintained the optical zoom on her Fuji bridge meant that it was superior to my Nikon pro gear because it had more megapixels and a (according to Fuji) longer zoom.
> 
> ...


He never said that the bridge camera was superior to your "pro" gear.

You said that bridge cameras achieve their advertised zoom range by digital cropping.

He, and I, say that this isn't true.

To quote a few spec lists

The Nikon Coolpix P510... is equipped with a powerful 42x optical zoom lens. This 24-1000mm lens (in 35mm format)

Canon SX50 HS.. with an incredible 50x optical zoom reaching from 24mm to 1200mm *(up to 100x with ZoomPlus)* bold text will be digital zoom option that you can enable/disable in the menu system.

The TZ25 boasts... a 16x optical zoom

They are all optical, in that the zoom is achieved by the movement of the lens, and not digital.


----------



## james_death (Aug 9, 2010)

Bridge Camera for what you are after can be second hand or discontinued model.

Just go with optical zoom figures for true zoom, always impressed with the panasonic Z range with the Carl Zeiss lens if i remember correctly or was it Leica oh well great cameras.

All you could want and many features you can explore later.

You can get some incredible macro shots also from adding a lens converter magnifier.

I have owned bridge cameras and despite having an old nikon D50 and a not so old Nikon D300 and a few lenses... i do rather miss the Bridge Camera.


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

I don't need the zoom functionality of a bridge camera tho for what I want it for? Which is mainly what bridge cameras are based around now a days isn't it zoom? 

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

They're based on a niche that someone might want to upgrade from a point and shoot without going as full blown as a DSLR.

The zoom has only really comes into it because of the fact that, with sensor size and crop factor, you can obtain a very long range in a compact/light body design whilst still keeping a decent level of image quality and for a reasonable price. 

It's supposed to be a jack-of-all-trades camera, and there is no scope for upgrading the lens, so by blessing it with a umpteen-x zoom it allows it to fit that bill.


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

m1pui said:


> He never said that the bridge camera was superior to your "pro" gear.


I didn't say he did, if you read my post again you'll see that it was my bridge-owning friend who insisted that was the case. It is, however, a common misconception, much like the one regarding megapixels, that more, regardless of size, is better.


> You said that bridge cameras achieve their advertised zoom range by digital cropping.
> 
> He, and I, say that this isn't true.


Sorry, but if you check the output file sizes for many bridge cameras you'll find that they produce smaller files at longer focal lengths. I didn't say that was the case for any particular camera..



> To quote a few spec lists
> 
> The Nikon Coolpix P510... is equipped with a powerful 42x optical zoom lens. This 24-1000mm lens (in 35mm format)
> 
> ...


they're hardly "spec lists", dig a wee bit deeper. 

At the end of the day it's a moot point, you don't get a 1000mm zoom" on any of these cameras, what you're getting is a 1000mm equivalent, which is just a field of view manipulation.

All you're essentially getting is a tiny little bit of the image you would get by cropping one from a dslr.


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

puckacostello said:


> I don't need the zoom functionality of a bridge camera tho for what I want it for? Which is mainly what bridge cameras are based around now a days isn't it zoom?
> 
> Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2


The D3100 or 1100D will do the job nicely, if you do feel the need for a longer lens both Nikon and Canon do lenses in the 55-200/250 range that can be bought new for well under £200.

If you can find a D3100 with the 18-105 lens, rather than the 18-55 that's the one I'd go for, however if you do opt for the 18-55 try and get the VR version.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

james_death said:


> Bridge Camera for what you are after can be second hand or discontinued model.
> 
> Just go with optical zoom figures for true zoom, always impressed with the panasonic Z range with the Carl Zeiss lens if i remember correctly or was it *Leica* oh well great cameras.
> 
> All you could want and many features you can explore later.


It's Sony that is associated with Zeiss.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Glaschu said:


> I'm not so sure you understand it, tbh.
> 
> I had this same discussion a while back with a bridge camera-owning friend, who maintained the optical zoom on her Fuji bridge meant that it was superior to my Nikon pro gear because it had more megapixels and a (according to Fuji) longer zoom.
> 
> ...


Oh I understand just fine.......:thumb:
Never was a fan of Fuji, and without getting into an argument, you're trying to make quality of glass and sensor size/noise level/dynamic range/in-camera processing/etc, the equivalent of 1+1=40 when you compare her output to your gear's.
I think that's a fairly classic case of demonstrating the definition of the word compromise.

Not sure which picts of mine you're referring to, but they have all been tweaked with software, and I don't extoll them as paragons of competition-winning photography.
Better software than Pixelmator (for manipulation, tools, and/or RAW conversion), a better camera, and/or a better user/understanding of how to combine them all might make them less overblown.

I'm a complete rank amateur, and freely admit it - I've much to learn in this arena.


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> I didn't say he did, if you read my post again you'll see that it was my bridge-owning friend who insisted that was the case. It is, however, a common misconception, much like the one regarding megapixels, that more, regardless of size, is better.
> 
> Sorry, but if you check the output file sizes for many bridge cameras you'll find that they produce smaller files at longer focal lengths. I didn't say that was the case for any particular camera..
> 
> ...


I can tell you with absolute certainty that my bridge camera did not and does not produce a reduced size image because of photographing at longest or shortest optical length.

What you're describing, and what is being explained in your linked article, is results of taking a photograph using digital zoom, not optical zoom.

If your friend was getting blurred images and reduced sizes at the long end, then it's either due to use of digital zoom function and/or using it handheld and suffering camera shake.


UFC Rapid Fire 01 by puihungma, on Flickr

Min/No zoom: Original file size 3.1mb


UFC Rapid Fire 14 by puihungma, on Flickr

Max/Longest Optical zoom (12x): Original file size 3.3mb


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

m1pui said:


> What you're describing, and what is being explained in your linked article, is results of taking a photograph using digital zoom, not optical zoom.


You mean the page I linked to whilst talking about "digital zoom"? Yes, I freely admit it, that article is about "digital zoom" :lol:


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> You mean the page I linked to whilst talking about "digital zoom"? Yes, I freely admit it, that article is about "digital zoom" :lol:


Which prior to that you state...



Glaschu said:


> The zoom on most bridge cameras isn't really a zoom in the way it is on a dslr. On a bridge what the camera does is simply crop a section out of the centre of the image to produce a zoom effect, but all you end up with is a smaller, fuzzier picture.


And



Glaschu said:


> It's called "digital zoom" -a lot of bridge cameras achieve the zoom by cropping rather than actually zooming, you can tell if a particular camera does this by the size of file it produces - those that do it usually produce a much smaller file at the full "zoom" than at the lower end, sometimes it can be a quarter of the size, which when you're working with a tiny sensor to start with isn't ideal.
> 
> It's explained in more detail here.
> 
> HTH


By your words, a bridge camera does no incorporate any optical zoom functionality.

The fact is, unless you specifically choose to use/enable the digital zoom feature, the camera will not just "crop a section out of the centre of the image to produce a zoom effect."

If you use the optical zoom range, the glass moves back and forth to create magnification exactly the same way as it does on your DSLR


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

m1pui said:


> Which prior to that you state...
> 
> And
> 
> By your words, a bridge camera does no incorporate any optical zoom functionality.


Read it again, I didn't say ALL bridge cameras do that, if you're going to try and use my own words against me, at least have the courtesy to quote me correctly .....


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> Read it again, I didn't say ALL bridge cameras do that, if you're going to try and use my own words against me, at least have the courtesy to quote me correctly .....


Do me a favour then and point me to a bridge camera that doesn't have any optical zoom capability


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

m1pui said:


> Do me a favour then and point me to a bridge camera that doesn't have any optical zoom capability


Again, I didn't say that. All bridge cameras will have an optical zoom to some degree, SOME use a digital zoom, which is in effect just cropping the fov to give the appearance of a longer focal length.

Happy now?


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> Again, I didn't say that. All bridge cameras will have an optical zoom to some degree, SOME use a digital zoom, which is in effect just cropping the fov to give the appearance of a longer focal length.
> 
> Happy now?


I'm always happy thank you.

Although I'm now not sure how a camera can have an optical zoom to some degree. It either does produce optical magnification, or it doesn't.

To be quite honest, If i've misunderstood then please correct me, because your initial statement intimated that some bridge cameras don't zoom the way a DSLR does (ie. with optical magnification). Which I don't believe is correct.

So my discussion has been based on my interpretation that you mean that a camera advertising 12x, 24x, 50x, etc optical zoom are false claims.


----------



## Glaschu (Sep 16, 2012)

m1pui said:


> I'm always happy thank you.
> 
> Although I'm now not sure how a camera can have an optical zoom to some degree. It either does produce optical magnification, or it doesn't.
> 
> ...


Then you have misunderstood what I said....


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

Easyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! lol

Went for the nikon D5100 in the end


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

Very good - I'm sure you'll get great enjoyment out of it.
Went and had a play in Jessops with the Sony A65 - A77 is nicer sized body, but not a realistic option, and the 65 wasn't so cramped as to be a non-starter.
So, need to see if I can get them to untether it from the alarms and display stand, and take it outside to fire off a few sample shots on my own SD card.
Might try the A77 with the 16-50 lens - see how much "more" it gives for the money.

Now get some photos posted up once you've received it.


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

Unfortunately i dont have a jessops near me so couldnt go in and have a play  argos let me have a look at it tho  

Will be here on thursday and i sure will get some pics up once i get the hang of it  

Glued to youtube atm watching guides


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

Also Need to get myself a tripod now  just gonna cheap out first and then ill get a half decent one, what height would i need for up close product photos?


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Glaschu said:


> Then you have misunderstood what I said....


Like I said, correct me as I can't fathom what you meant in that case



puckacostello said:


> Also Need to get myself a tripod now  just gonna cheap out first and then ill get a half decent one, what height would i need for up close product photos?


What you need to ask/check yourself is what height the table/cabinet is which products are going to be positioned on.

Any should do that job really though. You'll be able to adjust the height from anything like 18" up to whatever height it goes. And just about every run of the mill tripod I've looked at extends up to around chest/chin height.


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

m1pui said:


> Like I said, correct me as I can't fathom what you meant in that case


I say we drop this line of enquiry, and concentrate on helping the OP discover the joys and foibles of his new acquisition.
I'm not a Nikon man, so wouldn't know where the D5100 lines up in the grand scheme of things, nor what some of the best settings are to get a good feel for the camera's capabilities.

We can revisit the merits of optical zoom lenses in another new thread, if the need should arise.


----------



## james_death (Aug 9, 2010)

Yes Camera has been chosen personal debates on merits of cameras and crop factors and interpolation and file sizes jpeg Tiff Raw.... yaddda yadda.

Camera chosen debate over.

As for tripods look at ...

http://www.redsnapperuk.com/index.html


----------

