# Time for a new bridge (or DSLR) camera



## Lugy (Nov 4, 2009)

After finally getting fed up with the poor quality photos (rubbish colours/contrast) and general slowness of my trusty old Finepix S1000fd I think it's time to replace it.
I'm looking to spend about £150-200 tops for a bridge camera but have been looking at spending a bit more and getting something like this; http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/camera...f-4-5-6-telephoto-zoom-lens-22001915-pdt.html.
I've hardly messed about with settings but it's certainly something I'd like to have a go at, I think a bridge camera would be limited in this aspect. Would that SLR above be a decent entry into 'pro' photos or will it be quite basic and would it be better sticking with a higher end bridge?

Any other recommendations?

Cheers!


----------



## packard (Jun 8, 2009)

Fuji used to have a great refurb site link.. http://shop.fujifilm.co.uk/refurbished-digital-cameras?limit=25

But of course so many other makes to choose from !


----------



## Laurie.J.M (Jun 23, 2011)

I'd spend the extra and go for a DSLR, it'll offer better results than a bridge camera and be better value in the long run. The lenses are the thing that makes the biggest difference and with the DSLR you can upgrade them if you want better results.

Lenses don't need to cost the earth either, I went to eBay and bought a couple of vintage Nikkor manual lenses along with an adaptor to so they'd work with my Sony NEX5-R and the results are brilliant.




_DSC2602 by Laurence, on Flickr


_DSC1439 by Laurence, on Flickr


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

There would be nothing wrong with the 1200D that you linked to, but I personally wouldn't buy that package.

The 75-300mm lens is ok, but it doesn't have any image stabilisation so it's not really ideal without a tripod. your S1000 does have in built stabilisation so you'll probably not have noticed this before. If you did decide you wanted it, you can buy it later for not a great deal difference in what you would've paid for the kit or it gives you the freedom to put a bit more cash towards getting something better from the outset.

What do you take photo's of generally? Do you need such a long reach lens?

Canon 1200D with 18-55mm £289 - Warehouse Express Free Next Day Delivery Code - WFD1015) and £20 Cashback from Canon.

There's also the Nikon options too. The D3200 is about the same price as the 1200D. Its' worth handling both in a shop and seeing which you prefer the feel of.

Nikon D3200 - £269 - Jessops + a free tripod.

As a side note, I personally think you'd get more benefit from a tripod (whether free or buying your own) than with the extra lens the Canon comes with.

Other options...

Have never used one, but I think some of the NEX range are pretty good value
NEX Alpha A5000 £249 - Amazon
Extra lenses are quite expensive, but you might find that you don't want or need any more. The manual lens option as mentioned above opens up a world of cheap second hand stuff, but the downside is you lose the autofocus/point and shoot functionality of your camera.

Personally I'm I Panasonic/Micro 4/3rds user. I changed from a Canon 500D about 5 years ago, when I wanted something a bit less cumbersome, and haven't looked back. Their current range of cameras would really push your budget though.

Panasonic GF-7 £341 - Amazon

Could also look at a premium compact, something like the Sony RX100. Again though, it's at the top end of your DSLR budget.
Sony RX100 £349

Sony RX100 Review
What you lose in flexibility of a long zoom and being able to add lenses, you gain in convenience of having a pocketable (small-baggable is probably more realistic) camera

EDIT: The only reason I haven't looked at any Bridge camera's is I really haven't kept up on what they're like quite a few years now so I couldn't give any genuine basis of recommending any of them currently. I do wonder whether with the influx of CSC cameras and entry level DSLR's that they've been overlooked now.

EDIT 2: Just having a quick look on Curry's there and can't work out whether either of their 1200D's (package you linked and the 18-55mm only) have a IS (Image Stabilisation lens) included. It don't think it specifically says in the description but the product photo's do show IS labelling on the lens. Definitely worth double checking and asking if you are thinking about getting from Curry's.


----------



## judasp (May 2, 2012)

I agree and go dslr I'm come so far since uping to my nikon d3200 great camera 
But everyone is different how much I love my camera you might want something different so best advice I can give you is to go you a camera shop and try different ones out see what you like.


----------



## Lugy (Nov 4, 2009)

Cheers for the replies, I'm leaning towards the DSLR more now, certainly a lot to take in! It's usually car related stuff, ie up close static events and motorsport events, what sort of range would an 18-55 give? Image stabilisation sounds like it'd be quite useful!

I quite like the look of the Nikon so might go and have a look, think there's a Jessops quite close by too.


----------



## GleemSpray (Jan 26, 2014)

I have the Sony RX100 mk1 and whilst it is a staggeringly good _small-as-a-***-packet-fi__t-in-your-pocket_ camera, it does have noticeable shortcomings when trying to do close up photography or coping with strong sunlight etc simply because it has a small lens.

Absolutely love the RX100 for holiday use and opportunistic landscapes, but still use my Canon DSLR for anything else as those bigger glass lenses make a huge difference.


----------



## GleemSpray (Jan 26, 2014)

18-55mm gives wideangle to normal viewing zoom range.


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

18-55mm is basically saying 3x zoom, which is going to be a big difference from the 12x zoom you get with your Fuji.

It's a very general focal length, one which you'll find on most cameras, that is good for most common eventualities.

As an idea, start your camera off in it's zoomed out setting and that will be roughly similar to the 18mm on the DSLR lens. In use it'll probably be a bit wider (you'll see more of what you're looking at on the screen/picture). If your camera display shows you anything when you're zooming in, take it to x3 or about a quarter of the way up the on screen zoom bar and you should be about the 55mm range.

EDIT:
18-55mm demo


----------



## m1pui (Jul 24, 2009)

Lugy said:


> Cheers for the replies, I'm leaning towards the DSLR more now, certainly a lot to take in! It's usually car related stuff, ie up close static events and motorsport events, what sort of range would an 18-55 give? Image stabilisation sounds like it'd be quite useful!
> 
> I quite like the look of the Nikon so might go and have a look, think there's a Jessops quite close by too.


18-55 would be fine for walk around/shows, but for motorsports you might feel like you need something longer. So whilst you would need something _like_ the 75-300mm, in the Curry's package, a lot of people say that particular lens is too slow (won't allow a fast enough shutter speed to freeze the car) if the lighting isn't perfect. Others say they get on fine with it though so like everything it can be a case of horses for courses.

There's an ocean of options though once you get a DSLR. You can buy something a bit better than the 75-300mm for a bit more money, or you can buy something totally OTT for a lot of money and anything in between.

Start off with the basic package of a body and kit lens then decide and expand in the right direction as you pick up experience. It's not dirt cheap, but there's places where you can rent lenses from which will a) let you try things and/or b) give you access to some pro-level lenses to play with.

http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/index.html

I'm sure this guy is/was on here https://www.flickr.com/photos/edbookless/
He's got some fantastic motorsports images in his library.


----------



## Lugy (Nov 4, 2009)

Cheers again, with a bit more consideration, opting for a package like the Nikon seems like a sensible purchase, as has been mentioned, I can always upgrade lens when funds/skill allow! Besides, I'll probably not be in a situation where I'd need a longer lens until into next year anyway.
Next stop is to head to Jessops for a look at that D3200 and also the 1200D (also comes with tripod).


----------



## Clancy (Jul 21, 2013)

If you do want a bridge/digital 

Get a lumix. Amazing pictures for a click and go but still has as many settings as an entry level Canon if you want to mess about


----------



## James_R (Jun 28, 2007)

Clancy said:


> If you do want a bridge/digital
> 
> Get a lumix. Amazing pictures for a click and go but still has as many settings as an entry level Canon if you want to mess about


Agreed :thumb:
I've got the Lumix FZ1000
It films 4k UHD video at 30fps, 1080p Full HD at 100fps/60fps/30fps

20 megapixel JPG/RAW photos
Not to mention having a 1" sensor (4x times bigger than most compacts/bridges)
and 25mm to 400mm zoom lens

Some nice inbuilt effects too if you want to use them.

Its a great way of taking one camera anywhere that does everything without lugging the DSLR bag round with 4 lenses in and always having the wrong one on when you have a great shooting opportunity.


----------



## Lugy (Nov 4, 2009)

How fast are these newer bridge cameras? I used my mum's Canon 650d last weekend and was much impressed with how quickly it took the photos, especially on rapid fire (sorting through 1800 photos afterwards was a bit of a downside though!). The bridge cameras I've had in the past have always had a delay between pressing the button and it actually taking the picture, then another delay before it takes the next one.
I certainly have to say I'm leaning more towards an SLR and continuing to use my phone for 'on the go' pictures.
Costco have the Nikon D3200 with 18-55VR lens and bag for just over £270 and IIRC Jessops have the next VR lens (55-300??) for a bit over £100, that's my current favourite I think.


----------



## James_R (Jun 28, 2007)

I think the delay between pressing and shooting on mine is 0.02s
It really is as fast as my Nikon.

It rapid fires 12fps constant with the fast card I have, and can be increased to 50fps using the electronic shutter alone at a full 20 megapixels. 

I was shooting last night at ISO3200 and grain/noise is very impressive.


----------

