Another "bridge camera, help me out" thread! (1 Viewer)

So, I have a Sony DSC H300, in the box, in my possession. Have taken 10 shots with it, an Osprey sitting on the beach. With the zoom, should have been no problem. ALL of the shots sucked. Now in all honesty, I took it out of the box and started shooting. Haven't taken the time to get to know intimately, don't know all the tricks to make it perform at max capability. Not so sure I want to get to know it that well either.

A friend recommended it. She has a DSLR and had the Canon SX50. She hated the SX50. It came to an unfortunate end not long after purchase and she opted for the Sony. She really likes it. She also recommended the FZ200 by Panasonic. I have read every review out there that I can find, both professional & personal. I have looked at photos. I have went through the brand subforums here.

The SX50 has the biggest following it would appear, but I am aware that it isn't the ultimate bridge. The Sony got mixed reviews - many professional reviews suggested that it wasn't necessarily the camera to go for. The ones that said that, recommended the Panasonic. The Panasonic subforum here didn't exactly sell this camera. "I love it" interspersed here & there, but not an overwhelmingly positive response to the camera. Which makes it difficult for me because I had planned to take the Sony back & order the Panasonic.

Now I once again have now clue what to pick. Research helps to a point. Experiences from normal users helped - confuse me more! I do not want a DSLR. I don't want the multiple lens, the weight or the cost. I don't expect Nat Geo worthy photos, though if I get a random one I won't complain. I won't be printing anything above an 8x10, mostly 5x7 if I ever print at all.

So keep the Sony and just figure it out - will it give me good.consistent shots? Or go with the rest of the world and get the SX50? Or is the Panasonic worthy? Help! One factor that makes me lean Panasonic is the YouTube tutorials by Graham Naughton (I think that is his name). They are amazing and after watching them, I think I might stand a shot at actually being able to use this camera to its potential.

There are so many threads on this subject now. I think to summarise, a bridge camera like the SX50 is awesome if you are a birder who wants to get some half decent shots whilst out birding, but is not awesome if you are a photographer wanting really good shots.

I have the SX50 and love it. Great zoom, IS etc. I went to see a Red-necked Phalarope last week and of the 5 people there, 3 of us had SX50's, one had nothing and the other an enormous DSLR lens.

My love of the SX50 is that I use it for birding, moth-ing and family pictures without needing to change anything and all for a decent price. I hardly notice that I have it with me birding, so can keep my telescope. The differences between these bridge cameras is probably not much, so you just need to trade off which features you need or want the most.

Andy M.

L. You say you took osprey photos on the beach. The issue may be about distance (although I do know in USA you can get a lot closer to ospreys then we can) The thing people forget with these cameras is that like all cameras they behave best at closer range. If you use the zoom with the bird at a maximum distance you will photograph the bird but also photograph sea or heat haze, dust and goodness knows what else in between. Distance also adds to fringing in certain backgrounds. That is true of all lenses. I like the SX50 and get some very good photos but at a distance I do expect the result to be record shot only.

Hi LuLu. I'd speak to your friend and find what settings he/she is using. Should make some difference compared to "straight out of the box". The beauty of the others you mentioned is that there tips on settings in their various threads. Not sure if this is the case with the Sony.

Good luck,

Rich

Thanks for the replies! The Osprey was at a distance that I really thought was not too far out. I could have walked to its spot in less than 5 minutes. I know straight out of the box is never advisable, but I really thought they would be better. A guy with me had the Sony H200 and got some really good in flight shots of a Caspian Tern. It was a cool, cloudy day and with scopes over the water, the heat shimmer was pretty bad. His photos were really good considering, though I don't know what they look like on my computer monitor. He was surprised at how blurry the Osprey was.

I am not one to get a new camera often. My FZ8 is 7 years old and been dropped several times. It was never a great camera though reviews at the time suggested it was. I know asking for advice like this is frustrating to others, just like asking which binocular is the best - always someone asking AGAIN! I also know that new cameras are due out and it doesn't sound like they will blow their predecessors out of the water, not for the higher prices at any rate.

I have spent 7 years hating my camera. I don't want to hate my new one. Spending $400-500 and hating it, always wondering what I should have gotten instead isn't where I want to be.