looking for a bridge or dslr?

355858

355858

Suspended / Banned
Messages
679
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
hi there i was wondering if you could point me in the right direction of my first decent camera, firstly which is best for me? DSLR or Bridge? i have around 350-400 max to spend? is the fuji s100fs or s9600 any good? or should i be looking at getting an olympus e520 or a canon 40d? or am i completely wrong in all above choices? lol if anyone can point me in the right direction i would appreciate it

many thanks ben
 
In that price range I'd get an entry level DSLR with a kit lens and I'd probably advise going second hand as you could pick up a bargin 400D and have plenty of money left over for extras.
 
whats someones opinion on the fuji s100fs?
 
nice photos, would you say the s100fs would take better photos or around about the same?
 
Both cameras produce some great pictures without the hassle of lugging loads of equipment.

The main difference is that the S100fs writes raw files and focusses faster/easier in low light, although produces more chromatic aberation than the 9600.

One thing i have noticed is that you have trouble lifting the rear flip screen while on a tripod

Dave
 
s100fs has a bigger zoom and also mechanical image stabiliser. However it is not cheap.

Buy the time you add in a case, some batteries, a tripod, software etc. that £100 of your budget.

Having just bought an s9600 alittle while ago, I can't help feeling a used dslr would have been better. But then the technical side of things is not quick for me to grasp, so happy to use what I got, and try and learn, but I know if I keep taking pictures then an expensive upgrade will have to come.

And I think the s9600 prices are going up a little as it is discontinued. Amazon was £220 the other day, I paid £180. £220 gets you the entry level sony, and also a nikon (?)
 
I would go for an entry level DSLR, something along the lines of a Canon EOS 400D. The S9600 isn't actually a DSLR, so I would go with the Canon. You can get alot mor eversatility with how you want to shoot your shots, if you use a DSLR.
 
Trev Rich said:
Id go for a DSLR, a bridge will soon leave you wanting to upgrade.
I had the 9600 and cant believe the difference a DSLR makes.
Click to expand...

That's very true, but it all depends on 355858's budget, the S100FS like all bridge cameras is a compromise but 11MP image stabilisation 400mm F/4.9 lens for under £300, once you've bought the DSLR you'll want to upgrade lenses then bodies and before you know where you are you're up to a couple of grand
 
The good thing about a bridge camera is that everything is in one package,there isn't any extra lenses to lug around.Choose the right model and your covered from wide angle to telephoto at the touch of a button.The new bridge from Canon is very good although quite expensive but it has the same sensor as a dslr,it really depends on how serious you will take to photography.Like the others said you can get some really good dslr's for the same money,another good entry level dslr is the Sony Alpha 200,which has had some excellent reviews,check the links below hope this helps.

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Pro...l_Camera/PowerShot/PowerShot_SX1_IS/index.asp

http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2008/02/15/Sony-Alpha-A200-Digital-SLR/p1
 
dcash29 said:
Both cameras produce some great pictures without the hassle of lugging loads of equipment.

The main difference is that the S100fs writes raw files and focusses faster/easier in low light, although produces more chromatic aberation than the 9600.

One thing i have noticed is that you have trouble lifting the rear flip screen while on a tripod

Dave
Click to expand...

I didn't have a problem with my tripod.

and the s9600 can also shoot in RAW, albeit very slowly.
 
355858 said:
nice photos, would you say the s100fs would take better photos or around about the same?
Click to expand...

well like its been said the lens on the s100fs will have more issues *** its longer and stuff.

but it does have more MP, now I know *** will say that doesn't really matter, imo it does make a difference, just when the s9600 already has 9mp its not worth spendin the extra £100.


In your situation I think it depends if you want to be buying more kit in a years time or not.

If not then I'd get a bridge, simply because it gives you so much diversity without having to buy lots of different lenses.
 
dcash can you explain chromatic aberation? as i'm totally new to photography.. thanks for everyone help but if i buy a dslr, am i going to find myself extremely limmited at the budget i have? as i will probably only get the body and a free lens?
 
If you want to make photography a main hobby, I think sooner rather than later you will want a DSLR, so if moneys no object ,get a bridge now and learn a lot, then later on get one. If moneys tight I would get an entry DSLR now as you WILL want one.
 
355858 said:
dcash can you explain chromatic aberation? as i'm totally new to photography.. thanks for everyone help but if i buy a dslr, am i going to find myself extremely limmited at the budget i have? as i will probably only get the body and a free lens?
Click to expand...

depends, I mean in your budget your only really gonna get the kit lens, which is ok, but rather limited compared to a bridge lens and your gonna want more lenses.

however if your really serious you may want a DSLR eventually anyway.

having said that, like me, it is perfectly possible to have a great hobby with a bridge, hence all the photos on my site. Some camera snobs on here will not agree with me though.
 
Chromatic aberation......In optics, chromatic aberration is caused by a lens having a different refractive index for different wavelengths of light (the dispersion of the lens).

Longitudinal and lateral chromatic aberration of a lens is seen as "fringes" of color around the image, because each color in the optical spectrum cannot be focused at a single common point on the optical axis.

Since the focal length f of a lens is dependent on the refractive index n, different wavelengths of light will be focused on different positions. Chromatic aberration can be both longitudinal, in that different wavelengths are focused at a different distance from the lens; and transverse or lateral, in that different wavelengths are focused at different positions in the focal plane (because the magnification of the lens also varies with wavelength).
 
For your budget you could get anything from a Nikon D40 (under £220 with lens) up to the D80 (with a lens) or any number of different Canon or Olympus or Sony models...
 
I agree Yantorsen, i think that i will have not lost anything if i buy a bridge and later decide i want a DSLR, i think a bridge camera will do me fine until i feel the urge to buy a DSLR which i'm sure i will..

but it is the credit crunch right now, and also just before Christmas! lol

Can you show me some bridge photos you have taken?
 
I use the bridge when walking rather than carrying my Dslr kit
 
Really does depend on your budget. I too have the S9600, (all shots on my flickr are taken with it), and you can learn your craft just as well with this camera as with a DSLR.

Naturally any bridge camera is a compromise but this does not stop you taking good shots and on manual mode you can learn all you need to.

I’ve managed to get 150 shots on Alamy, (stock agency site), with the S9600 so it can’t be that bad.
 
how do the bridge camera's deal with close up work? from what ive seen of both yantorsen and Baz777's photos very well i gues?
 
355858 said:
I agree Yantorsen, i think that i will have not lost anything if i buy a bridge and later decide i want a DSLR,
Click to expand...

I was watching a S100FS on ebay, it made £285 + £12 post as it's a current camera if you bought the refurb one chances are you'd get 90% of your money back should you decide it's not for you
 
355858 said:
how do the bridge camera's deal with close up work? from what ive seen of both yantorsen and Baz777's photos very well i gues?
Click to expand...

Well the very close ups on my site are taken with a Raynox DCR-250 on the front (they cost about £40), and with that you can get some very good results.

Without it it's only 28mm, which is fine for a lot of close ups, if you look at the picture of the Red Admiral on my site it is taken without the raynox, just the camera.
 
very impressed indeed, infact i'm going to order a bridge camera tonight, now the 9600 or the 100fs?

lol
 
you sure? don't make rash desicsions :)

I'd say the S9600 depending on price, remember other companies make bridge cameras aswell... you might want to consider some others first, its up to you.
 
what other companies make bridge cameras for around the same price? as the canon ones are quite expensive?
 
not sure for around the same price, but Sony, Nikon, Panosonic (lumix), Samsung, Sigma, all make bridges.

The S9600 is the kind of typical bridge camera, and probably one of the more popular.
 
ok cheers will check it out
 
you are still getting a bridge??
trust me.. dont!.. I've gone down that route like I said..

get a 350D or 400D and a sigma apo 70 - 300mm..
Trust me.

ok try them both out before you buy..
Just looking through a bridge (digital viewfinder) and a DSLR.. is a massive difference.
 
yeah but how much will that set me back?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top