Thinking of buying a bridge camera (1 Viewer)

ClarkWGriswold · Mar 2, 2014

Hi Alex. I looked at the various threads and drew a conclusion based on results and my budget. I ended up with the SX50.

I've been really happy with it. TBH I didn't think I'd use it so much but given that it's so light, I take it most times I go birding. The 50x is great for identifying distant birds. My previous camera was a little point and shoot Sony (which suited me fine at the time) but I had thoughts of going back to BC this year. I wanted something which would give semi-decent shots of the bears without having to get too close- for obvious reasons

(check out my avatar)

My advice would be to do what I did and compare the results in the various threads. With the benefit of hindsight, I'm sure I'd have been happy with the Fuji or the Pannys. ( Sony not available at the time). Some have mentioned the "poor" battery life of the SX50 but I've never found this an issue. I always carry a spare which are available really cheaply from EBay.

Rich

MrBiffa · Mar 2, 2014

Thanks rich really helped thanks for taking up some time to help me I'm getting really close to deciding now!!!

ClarkWGriswold · Mar 2, 2014

MrBiffa said:
Thanks rich really helped thanks for taking up some time to help me I'm getting really close to deciding now!!!

Nulla Sollicitudo (no worries)

Good luck with your choice. I'm sure whatever you decide upon you'll have great fun with it.

Rich

MrBiffa · Mar 2, 2014

you too good luck with the bears if only they were in an English backyard...:t:

Rapala · Mar 3, 2014

MrBiffa said:
Rapala I want a high zoom camera with good mp. how much zoom would be enough for a birdwatching trip?

It really depends on what you are using the camera for. Of course, the higher the megapixel, the higher the quality of the pictures, but also at a higher price. I recommend buying a camera with the most megapixels you can afford. Zoom is a different matter. You have to be careful, because with some pictures, the picture quality decreases as the zoom increases, although this isn't the case with many cameras. If you have higher MP in your camera, you can crop it down more to bring yourself closer to your subject. I would say anywhere from 30-50 (or 60 if it comes out) would be suitable for your needs. Say you're taking pictures of raptors in flight and waterfowl in open water. For this you would want more zoom, but you might want less if you're taking photos in heavy brush, where you can't see a bird extremely far away. The less zoom would result in a smaller lens, and less weight to carry around.

It's really up to you. Take a look at Cnet reviews, and that will narrow down the pros and cons of you camera options. Like I said, anywhere from 30-50x zoom would probably work well. Good luck on your decision!

Jon Turner · Mar 4, 2014

I'm currently using a Nikon P520 and the results are great. I'm not trying to win photographic prizes, so mostly record shots some of which are quite good, and help later on with id's.

I don't think there is any such thing as a perfect camera......

Frogfish · Mar 8, 2014

Rapala said:
Of course, the higher the megapixel, the higher the quality of the pictures, but also at a higher price. I recommend buying a camera with the most megapixels you can afford.

It is a very common misconception that higher MP count = better camera. Manufacturers have been relying on this public misunderstanding for quite some time, in the MP Race, to sell cameras.

Without going into this in depth (Google is your friend here) cramming more and more MPs onto tiny sensors does bad things to the photosites as well as affecting other aspects of the camera's performance besides image IQ, e.g. FPS rate due to reduced buffer throughput.

Frogfish · Mar 8, 2014

OK a separate question for those using Bridges. Many years ago, before getting into DSLRs, I had one of the first Sony bridges to come out and was amazed at the reach, even though at maximum magnification (digital) I was never going to be able to print anything as the IQ was that poor ! But it brought near invisible objects into clear view (I've kept a sample from back then, about 7-8 years ago I guess - see below) and if a bridge from back then could do this ........

However, whilst using my DSLR as my main camera I was thinking of adding a very high magnification Bridge solely for the reach, in place of buying a scope.

I believe there is now a Lumix FZ72 that has x60 magnification but to which you can add an optical extender (in effect a TC) that will give you x102 magnification (importantly this is all optical magnification, not digital, so even though the use of a TC will degrade the image it should still be much better than digital, AKA in-camera cropping). I'm guessing this is well over 2,000mm. Of course this will be impossible to handhold but as my intended use is in place of a scope it will be on a tripod and solely for the purpose of IDing birds at distance and maybe getting a record shot to confirm the ID.

Here's a link with comparisons of the best Bridges : http://www.ephotozine.com/article/top-10-best-ultra-zoom-bridge-digital-cameras-2013-16928

Upsides to this is a) magnification (reach) b) ability to take a snapshot c) portability / size and finally d) cost.

Any opinions on this very welcome before I rush out to give it a try ! Especially from those people who also have scopes ?

etudiant · Mar 8, 2014

Frogfish said:
OK a separate question for those using Bridges.
Here's a link with comparisons of the best Bridges : http://www.ephotozine.com/article/top-10-best-ultra-zoom-bridge-digital-cameras-2013-16928

Upsides to this is a) magnification (reach) b) ability to take a snapshot c) portability / size and finally d) cost.

Any opinions on this very welcome before I rush out to give it a try ! Especially from those people who also have scopes ?

Just to confuse things a bit more, new models have just been introduced by Fuji, Olympus, Samsung, Nikon and Sony, with Canon expected in April. As bridge cameras are the growth sector in the market, expect new offerings to keep coming. You just have to decide when the value is good enough.

dalat · Mar 18, 2014

Good thread, just what I need!

I am pondering the 24x Lumix FZ 200 against one of the 50x, like the Canon SX50 or the new Fuji S1.

Anyone had a change to have real life usage of a 24x zoom and a 50x zoom? Does the extra reach really matter in practice, or is the advantage mostly lost to more shaking and difficulty to find objects? Or the other way round, is the 2.8 at 600 mm of the Lumix worth loosing some extra magnification?

What about speed? I recall reading that the autofocus of the lumix is really good and fast. Is that still so, or does the canon and Fuji compare well (ok Fuji is just out, so probably no experience yet).

Thanks for comments!
Cheers,

dalat · Mar 24, 2014

Ok, I took the plunge and bought the Lumix. Curious to see what I can do with it.

HantaYo · May 6, 2014

dalat said:
Ok, I took the plunge and bought the Lumix. Curious to see what I can do with it.

So how's the Lumix FZ20? Enough reach? I am on the fence with it or a higher zoom like the Canon so much talked about.

Jeff

Andy1979 · May 6, 2014

Can I join the discussion?

I am really considering getting a bridge as well and so have read as much as I can here on Birdforum. I am fed up with trying to digiscope. I think these decent bridge cameras will do what I need for the best part, but really wondered about flight shots? Can these cameras manage decent flight shots (eg seabird passage or a small flock of waders going up)?

Thanks.

Andy M.

mathare · May 6, 2014

The Sony DSC-HX300 got a brief mention in the early part of this thread and after reading a lot of reviews and various comparisons it's the model I opted for around a month ago. I have to say I have been delighted with it.

I will say I'm very much an amateur photographer and haven't played with many of the settings but it has enabled me to get some excellent shots. I don't know how well it would capture birds in flight as that hasn't really been something I have been trying to capture.

I will say though that I find the time between shots on the Sony can be a bit long, without using burst mode. Maybe it's the settings I am using (out the box mainly) but I sometimes find myself thinking "Come on, I want to grab another shot or two before the bird leaves."

The 50x zoom is very good (in my opinion) and the digital zoom above that (to 100x) also looks OK to my untrained eye but the experts may disagree

Foxy · May 6, 2014

I think what has been said about every owner thinking they have the best camera is a tad patronising. Unlike the 'experts' and camera magazines most of us only get to use one type at a time and would assume that at the time we bought it we did think it was the best! One can only honestly speak about the camera you are truly familiar with.

I have been using a Canon SX50 for more than a year now and it has given me tremendous service from freezing weather high on Mount Cotopaxi in Ecuador to oppressive heat of the Ecuadorian lowlands and the intensity of light on the Galapagos Islands. Most of my photographs have been taken in the varied climate of the UK where it seems to cope in all conditions. It has been thoroughly wet in the rain and handled gloomy conditions at dusk. I frequently use the full 1200mm zoom facility and get more than adequate pictures.

Is it the best? I don't know as I haven't enough experience with other cameras but I have been delighted with it and more than happy to send you examples of pictures I have taken with it. My major criticism which is true of most if not all bridge cameras is that the manual focus is not really manual at all but an electronic system that is worse than useless for anything that moves. Trying to focus on a bird in a hedge is nigh on impossible

In truth I suspect all the top name Bridge cameras will do a great job and be better at some things than others. None of them is really 'the best' at everything. If it was, there wouldn't be any others! I would suggest you weigh up what you know, pick one that fits your most important requirements: zoom, price, pixels I should think and just get on with enjoying it!

Foxy · May 6, 2014

Andy1979 said:
Can I join the discussion?

I am really considering getting a bridge as well and so have read as much as I can here on Birdforum. I am fed up with trying to digiscope. I think these decent bridge cameras will do what I need for the best part, but really wondered about flight shots? Can these cameras manage decent flight shots (eg seabird passage or a small flock of waders going up)?

Thanks.

Andy M.

Hi Andy,
Since getting the Canon SX50 I have given up Digiscoping as not necessary and far too hit and miss although I should add that I have seen some fantastic digiscope results that show how it could/should be done.

However, I have been disappointed with flight shots which is down to the difficulty of following moving birds with the tiny viewfinder images on Bridge cameras and the fact that they are not the 'actual view' you get through an SLR mirror. I still prefer my SLR for those. You will probably need to get onto your subject on a low zoom and zoom in as you pan across which is not that easy if you are going to a level of zoom that will give you a decent shot. It can be done and I have had some good results but a lot more failures. It still beats digiscoping though!

ClarkWGriswold · May 6, 2014

Andy1979 said:
Can I join the discussion?

I am really considering getting a bridge as well and so have read as much as I can here on Birdforum. I am fed up with trying to digiscope. I think these decent bridge cameras will do what I need for the best part, but really wondered about flight shots? Can these cameras manage decent flight shots (eg seabird passage or a small flock of waders going up)?

Thanks.

Andy M.

Hi Andy. I've attached a couple of bleeding awful flight shots taken today. (I couldn't get two others in the frame:eek!

I've attached them because I like the subject matter.

The circumstances were that I was hopelessly lost and had pulled over to check my sat nav. I could hear some Cettis down the lane so went for a quick gander. It was then that I saw 9 of these beauties. Legged it back to the car, grabbed the Superzoom and fired off a couple of frames. To me, that's the beauty of them - portability. It's a record shot of an amazing (to me) experience.

I think I'm right is saying that the general consensus is that to get decent flight shots then you need a DSLR.

Good luck with your choice,

Rich

ROMANICHEL · May 6, 2014

I have a holder model Nikon P80, with a 18x zoom, and I love it, takes a little more patience, but the result are good, Nikon now have the P600 that seems to be excellent, Light and low price with a very large zomm, I have joined photo taken from my P80

Andy1979 · May 6, 2014

Thanks everyone. I think for my budget a DSLR and lens is too much of a push, and I'm new to photography, so will go for a bridge and see how I get on. All birds land at some point anyway!

Mick R · May 6, 2014

Hi Andy...you'll be fine with a bridge camera. They're excellent tools (and will only get better - the Canon SX60 is coming very soon!) to have in your bag. Here's the SX50 on a tripod in Thailand, shooting a Golden-throated Barbet that was way up in the canopy & at quite a distance away....

Thinking of buying a bridge camera (1 Viewer)

Carpe Carpum

Well-known member

Carpe Carpum

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Registered User

...

...

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Carpe Carpum

Attachments

Active member

Attachments

Well-known member

Active member

Attachments

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread