Budget bridge cameras a change of plan

[hashcake]

I've been out of photography for quite some time.
I'm now looking at a bridge camera for use on holidays.
I know thingd have come a long way, especially the zoom ranges.
I've had a look and read about the Nikon Coolpix 950 and although it sounds impressive, it seems like it will be as bulky as a DSLR.
It has to have a viewfinder and doesn't need a long zoom range as I don't intend on doing wildlife photographer or anything fast moving.
I'm looking around £500 maximum.
I previously used various Canon DSLRs but I'm not brand fussy this time around.
The Panasonic Lumix DC-FZ82DE looks interesting.
Any one used one of these?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

The Panasonic Lumix DC-FZ82DE looks interesting.
Any one used one of these?

I use mine frequently.

I consider it very good value for money and it compares well with my dSLRs, within its limitations. Here are some example images from it...

The thing I really like about something like the FZ82 is how it can cover from extreme wide angle...

View attachment 398891

via extreme close up...

View attachment 398892

To cover things that are really far away...

View attachment 398893

 

[skullfunkerry]

I had an FZ82 for a little while; I really liked it except for the weird manual focusing using buttons rather than a focus ring. It's nice and compact, and although you said you don't need a lot of range, it has a great zoom too.

Here are some shots I took with mine:

 

[Nod]

That last Moon shot shows what the camera can achieve. The one in the quoted post shows how east it is to screw such a shot up. IMO, of course.

 

[swanseamale47]

Why a bridge camera? They have the bulk of a small DSLR, with a short zoom for the most part I'd go with a compact for holidays. I uave the TZ80 with a long range zoom and it goes in a trouser pocket. As your not agter the longer range I'd be looking at someting like the Sony ZV1 which is great quality or maybe a Canon G9 which I dont have but does have a good reputation.
If I was taking bridge camera size I'd take a Canon 750d with a sigma 17 50 2.8.Lovely quality.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Why a bridge camera?

Because Hashcake specifically mentioned the FZ82...

The Panasonic Lumix DC-FZ82DE looks interesting.
Any one used one of these?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

That last Moon shot shows what the camera can achieve. The one in the quoted post shows how east it is to screw such a shot up. IMO, of course.

I'm surprised that you didn't draw attention to the softness of the picture of the bird in Kerry's posting, if it's all about sharpness...

 

[huxleypiggles]

Why not try something like a Lumix FZ38 which you can pick up on e-bay for about £50. It has a 27 - 486 zoom and is incredibly lightweight. Very impressed with mine. If it doesn't suit sell it on and probably get your money back and try something else.

 

[skullfunkerry]

I'm surprised that you didn't draw attention to the softness of the picture of the bird in Kerry's posting, if it's all about sharpness...

I spotted that when I looked at the picture on my computer monitor today, as opposed to my phone yesterday.

It was a handheld shot at maximum zoom; I was pleased with it at the time but in hindsight I've definitely improved!

 

[Nod]

I'm surprised that you didn't draw attention to the softness of the picture of the bird in Kerry's posting, if it's all about sharpness...

There's no direct comparison to Kerry's bird shot whereas there is between the 2 Moon shots from the same camera.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

There's no direct comparison to Kerry's bird shot whereas there is between the 2 Moon shots from the same camera.

Why would you compare two pictures?

It was a handheld shot at maximum zoom; I was pleased with it at the time but in hindsight I've definitely improved!

I wasn't criticising it. I was using it to criticise the idea of criticising any picture.

 

[Clive K]

Why not try something like a Lumix FZ38 which you can pick up on e-bay for about £50. It has a 27 - 486 zoom and is incredibly lightweight. Very impressed with mine. If it doesn't suit sell it on and probably get your money back and try something else.

I second that with the proviso that the camera comes with the RAW convertor DVD or an updated version. I don't particularly like the viewfinder image, but for the price that they go for they are a very capable and versatile camera.

However, the FX1000 / V-LUX can be had for the op's budget and whilst it is much larger, it has 'proper' controls for aperture and exposure control, a better viewfinder and an articulated screen.

 

[hashcake]

So after doing a bit more research I think I've decided to go down the Canon mirrorless route.
I first looked at the Canon M50 and M50 MK2 but then found out about the R50 and R10.
It's annoying that there's no camera shops for quite a distance as I'd like to hold both the R50 and R10 so I can get a feeling of them.
It's one thing YouTube reviewers say they are light compared to DSLRs but it's not the same.
The reason I gave up with photography was down to the weight of my kit. as I'm getting older I found it more of a struggle.

Mirrorless tech has come a long way since I last looked at it.
I do miss doing wildlife photography and the RF 100-400 IS seems quite appealing and I know it's not going to be as sharp as something like the EF 100-400 MK1 or MK2 but I'm not interested in going back to a heavy lens and I'm not planning on buying and L lenses.
Has anyone have any experience with either the R50 or R10?
Also interested to know if anyone has experience with the RF 100-400 IS?

Tia