Same dilemma for me, a dslr and a bag with all the bits and lenses, a bridge or a 'so called' super zoom. I chose the latter, a Samsung wb350f........... a brilliant camera and as it has wifi can send photos straight to my laptop/phone or to my account on picasa.
Same dilemma for me, a dslr and a bag with all the bits and lenses, a bridge or a 'so called' super zoom. I chose the latter, a Samsung wb350f........... a brilliant camera and as it has wifi can send photos straight to my laptop/phone or to my account on picasa.
I had a look at the same camera too. I liked how compact it was for something with such a large zoom. I did feel it was not going to exceed the camera I already had though so went for the Nikon.
Play nice...... Play Naked!
I know what you mean, I suppose ideally it would be great to have a selection of cameras for different use....... but this super zoom works well however it does need some support for distance use, I use a cheap plastic tripod which is not much bigger than the camera.
For a small (ish) camera the Panasonic Lumix range is worth considering. The TZ60 as well as having wifi, GPS facilities and a massive zoom shoots RAW as well as jpg files. You can also download a useful free program to work with the RAW files.
Davie 8)
I had one of the earlier Lumix cameras and it was very good, despite the budget price. I bought a Fuji X10 about 2 years ago as a refurb from their online store for about £230 which was a good deal considering the original ~£500 price. It's a fixed lens but also fast at f2 so very good in low light, and silent, so great for taking people photos without being a nuisance. It's much smaller than my SLR, but not as compact as some other models due to it's retro design, but I love the manual zoom like my SLR and fantastic image quality.
The Fuji X** range seems superb and they shoot RAW as well as jpg and have 12MP sensors. You can get a very decent A3 print out of them. We picked up an X20 (now discontinued but still available) a couple of months ago for £320 and whilst it's the same as the X10 there's been an lot of the niggles ironed out of it. The X30 is very much the same as the X20 with the exception of the viewfinder which is now electronic and said to be excellent.
Cherry loves the retro Leica styling and also the manual zoom.
Key thing is figuring out what you want to use your camera for and of course your budget. As has been mentioned, there is some excellent used gear to be had, but just buy from reputable sources. From what you say, you might want to go for an entry level DSLR. Others have suggested the Nikon D3200 which is excellent value. If you get the serous bug, you can always upgrade later and you'll find many of the controls on better Nikons will be similar if not the same. Do not forget the glass attached to the body is just as important too!
I have considered upgrading the X10 to an X30 or perhaps one of the higher models. Fuji UK often tweet photos from pros who have ditched cumbersome SLRs for Fuji and the pictures are amazing. I noticed Prince Harry was using the X100 while in Lesotho recently.
The only limitation I can see is the expensive and fairly limited lens choice.
Good optics are the key to quality images. You get what you pay for.
The choice in equipment comes down to what the end product us going to be. A4 prints look great as do A3, giving the viewer so much more than a computer monitor, or heaven forbid just the rear screen of the camera.
I have used Nikons for many years and my first digital SLR was a D70, a 6 megapixel camera. Coupled with good optics A4, prints looked crisp and I Aldo had some printed by a pro lab up to 20 x 16 inches. Now I have a 12 megapixel camera (D300) and people are telling me it's time to think about a full frame camera. Very tempting......
R.B.
I had the same two cameras. The D300 is still on sale and is semi professional. For my standard and usage it will do me a while longer. I've got a free utility that works out how many times the shutter has fired. The camera is designed for hundreds of thousands of shots. Mine is just about "run in"
Davie 8)
A full frame would be nice, but they start at about £1,300 for Canon equipment. I have paid up to £300 for a lens, I'm very happy with my f2.8 Tamron, and the budget 50mm nifty fifty. Also have a Sigma super zoom which covers 18-250 so great for walkabout, but a little soft at the top end. Not quite felt the need to upgrade to L series yet (the white ones used by most pro photographers), they start at £500 and go into the thousands.
Now I have a 12 megapixel camera (D300) and people are telling me it's time to think about a full frame camera. Very tempting......
In reality there's not a lot of big advantages, a few being.
1. Full frame will give you/perform better at much higher ISO settings. If this is essential for the work you want to do then it's a biggie.
2. You'll get a bigger/better(?) viewfinder if you're using it for long periods another biggie.
3. Your depth of field (or lack of) will get better.
But of course, if you have crop lenses then you have to take that into account.
As others have said, it all boils down to what you want/need to do with your photography.
HTH
Different cameras do different things,I have a variety,full frame crop frame ,compacts etc,all do different things,I carry the compacts round when I'm wandering around ,as they are easy light and give great results, I use the slr's when I want something special,and/or have time. But the best camera ever is the one you have with you.