DSLR + Big Lens vs a Bridge Camera (Canon, Nikon, Sony)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So why go the big lens / DSLR route when my Sony Bridge camera will give a 50x - 1200mm zoom? Would a professional photographer use a bridge camera just for it's zoom?
Even the best "super zooms" have sensors ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE smaller than a professional DSLR. That means far less low light sensitivity, far more noise, far worse ability to enlarge the image.
Beyond the limiting factors associated with small sensors DSLRs are equipped with autofocuse systems that are many times faster than anything in a "super zoom" bridge camera, processors that can perform the digital writes to the SD cards much faster than any bridge camera, and a level or durability that cannot be matched.
Of course the high cost of long zoom lenses for full frame DSLRs are also due to the fact that the larger sensor requires a much bigger chunk of glass. That glass is often of special design and arranged into complex elements so that the sharpest image is rendered with the least amount of lost light. This makes the lenses inherently "faster" / having a low f-ratio. The benefit beside superb low light performance is exceptional control over depth of field -- the selected focus point pops out of lovely background.
Typically the costly pro lenses of long focal lenght have sophisticated stabilization that works in a more refined way than the systems in bridge cameras.
Finally professional DSLRs are setup so that huge numbers of images are captured in a single shutter press -- one could theoretically fill even a multi-gigabyte SD card with just a few minutes of captured images. When you see a pro shooting sports or news or models / celebrities they want to give their editors the option of every subtle angle of the player / body / event...
Thanks for your response. I'm just an entry level photographer although I took an art photography class back in college. I forgot most of my stuff since that was back in 1990. I did develop B&W film though.
I guess I'm happy with just my bridge camera, as I don't want to use a $260 DSLR camera backpack plus an expensive DSLR + several expensive lenses.
When I travel I try to keep all of my 3 cameras in my big Targus 17" laptop backpack. So I travel light in terms of all camera gear vs a photographer with a complete DSLR kit.
There are lots of situations where a bridge camera is an excellent choice and for the money a recreational user really will get LOTS of enjoyment out of such a camera but the trade-offs that go with them are why professionals still depend on cameras that are far more costly.
So why go the big lens / DSLR route when my Sony Bridge camera will give a 50x - 1200mm zoom?
Because the quality in many regards is better. The optics will be sharper, the autofocus may be more accurate and faster and quieter. A DSLR probably has a bigger and better sensor and there will be other things as well (the continuous drive is probably faster, for example).
Quote:
Would a professional photographer use a bridge camera just for it's zoom?
Probably not. The more "zoom" you try to pack into a smaller space, the more the optics quality will suffer. It will be fine for your purposes, there is nothing wrong with your purchase, but a professional would probably quickly find it far too inhibiting.
I have both a bridge camera and a DSLR. Although I am trying to force myself to use the DSLR more, I always go back to the bridge camera for my "walking-around" camera as I hate changing lenses and missing a shot or carrying a lot of equipment due to my physical problems.
I don't own the Sony camera you bought, but I have played with at the store many times and would love to have it. Sadly, it's not in the cards. Plus, if I had the money, I would probably spend it on another lens for my DSLR just because at this point it makes more sense.
Enjoy your camera. I know you will have loads of fun with it, and it seems to be very user friendly.
I just got a Canons sx50hs and love it and will never go back to a dslr and lugging around a bunch of equipment. I'm an amatuer and feel the bridge/supper zooms meet all my needs and then some.
Yeah, it's a tough choice between my Sony HX300 camera and the Canon sx50hs. I was impressed by the image stabilization and 50X zoom while checking it out at Best Buy. Good images with 50X zoom and no blur in sunlight, all hand held. The Sony has 20MP but the Canon has RAW files. But the Sony can shoot Panoramas.
Thanks for your response. I'm just an entry level photographer although I took an art photography class back in college. I forgot most of my stuff since that was back in 1990. I did develop B&W film though.
I guess I'm happy with just my bridge camera, as I don't want to use a $260 DSLR camera backpack plus an expensive DSLR + several expensive lenses.
When I travel I try to keep all of my 3 cameras in my big Targus 17" laptop backpack. So I travel light in terms of all camera gear vs a photographer with a complete DSLR kit.
There's certainly nothing wrong with a "bridge" camera. Until I started really, really getting into DSLR's, I'd still carry my Nikon S4000 point-and-shoot with me when I would ride my bike around LA, and I got some pretty good shots out of it:
It was when I started really wanting to compose shots, and have total control over the focus, the exposure, the shutter speed, the aperture, the flash angle, speed, and intensity, and everything else that I started seeing where I needed a DSLR. Now that I've gotten used to one, I gave the point-and-shoot to a friend who's just getting into photography and use my D5100 exclusively. Especially considering that I prefer low-light settings, there's just so much more that I can do with it and the available lens choices:
I'd like to get one of the higher-end Sony RX point and shoots... or, my sister has a Nikon of some sort that's pretty good; one of the $600+ variety, with a surprising number of manual settings... however, I'll still likely pick up a Sony NEX or something like that, instead.
the bridge camera and lens will be fine as long as the level of shots you take are simple and in good lighting.
the big bucks gets you great telephoto speed , low light ability and sharpness and clarity.
there is no way around it unless conditions are good and within the rang of capability your bridge camera has.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
