| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/15/2006 05:23:45 PM · #1 |
I've scrimped, I've saved, and now I need to make a decision. Which bridge camera to buy?
All the reviews I̢۪ve read have led me to think that the Panasonic FZ30, Fujifilm Finepix s9000z, and Nikon Coolpix 8800 are the ones to choose from.
What do you guys think?
Forget the price for now.
I want a camera that I can used in nearly 100% of the challenges on here.
I love doing macro and still life, but want to try portrait/studio shots.
Start your reply with the camera you̢۪d choose or with your suggestion for a viable alternative.
Thanks is advance!!
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 05:35:10 PM · #2 |
I haven't used the Nikon Coolpix 8800, but have the 8700. It's a great camera. Lovely macro mode, performs well in most situations. It hates low-light (both in ISO noise and focusing issues). I'm pretty sure the 8800 will still have the noise issues, but I think they tried to deal with some of the focusing issues.
I'd just like to add that for the price of these cameras, you could go dSLR route. A Canon 350D Rebel XT isn't much more expensive. Nikon D50's are about the same.
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 05:36:32 PM · #3 |
| My opinion only - I tried the Nikon but the focus was very slow. I have a Panasonic FZ5 and love it. Great zoom, image stabilization, nice colors and does a good job at macros. If you check my portfolio for some examples. It is what I use almost exclusively here at DPChallenge, the FZ30 is a big step up from the 5 at least sizewise. It also has more control, things like that. The FZ30 has the zoom ring on the lens if that matters to you. The Fuji has caught my eye lately but I don't know anything about it. You might also want to consider the Sony H1, H2 or H5, they have the same approximate zoom and IS as the Panasonic. DPReview is a great place to start, you can read reviews and owners opinions. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 05:54:38 PM · #4 |
Sony A100 :P
Seriously, hear nothing but great things for the FZ30, also consider the Sony DSC-H2 in the list, most of these will have much slower focusing than an SLR. I think the Sony DSC-H1 and DSC-V3 are about the only ones that really keep up with about .6 second of lag. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 06:03:45 PM · #5 |
I forgot about the Sony V3 - I do think it's been discontinued, but I'm sure you could find one somewhere. Does't have the long zoom or image stabilization of the FZ30 or Sony H's, but is a nice solid camera, great color, large clear LCD and has a night focus feature that works great. This shot was taken with the V3 and is pretty much out of camera
 |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 08:19:50 PM · #6 |
What's your budget? There may be some good deals on dSLR's after summer. A couple are around $500-$600 already.
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 08:40:17 PM · #7 |
Might reconsider the coolpix 8800, looks like no-one reputable has it anymore.
Just get an SLR, you'll do it in about 6 months anyways.
|
|
|
|
06/15/2006 09:35:41 PM · #8 |
| My CP8800 cost more than my D50, but I love both cameras. The D50 is more versatile than the CP8800 and has much lower noise. But if the lighting is good the CP8800 can produce a stunning image and the 8megapixel sensor permits more flexibility in cropping. The video mode is also useful on the CP8800 producing one minute clips in QT format. Some people are put off buy the one minute video clip limitation, but I have found it to be no handicap whatsoever, most film scenes are shorter than one minute. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 09:40:57 PM · #9 |
The coolpix 8800 was discontinued and you can pretty much only get it on ebay. According to Nikon, they won't be supporting it. (I called because this is what I wanted to get). After all the reviews I read I went with the S9000. I've been pretty happy with it. I also love that it takes 2 cards at once.
edit to add... I bought it here 17th street photoand it comes with a $100 rebate. I ordered around 3pm and received it the next day with regular shipping too!
Message edited by author 2006-06-15 21:44:19. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 09:46:30 PM · #10 |
Finepix S9000Z would be my personal choice - it's the only one among the 3 cameras that starts at 28mm widest, and goes all the way to 300mm.
and click here for a side-by-side comparison of the 3 cameras you mentioned.
Message edited by author 2006-06-15 21:47:02. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:03:01 PM · #11 |
It does indeed look like it has a better lens, and possibly a better sensor (none of this 1/2.5" crap). It can also have the screen tilted out, and if you need to shoot over a crowd, you can turn it upside down... 180 degree rotates are a simple matter...
It's also pretty exciting because the ISO 400 appears decent (most others are stuck to ISO 200 and above)...
However, it looks like it loses a LOT with that Max aperture of 4.9!!! fully zoomed in... Considering that Diffraction will start eating the quality of your images away at f/4.0 on that camera because of the 9 megapixel sensor, that's pretty frightening...
Further, there is NO image stabilization... Can't imagine how much fun it would be to shoot fully zoomed in at f/4.9 in most cases without IS...
Too bad.
My recommendation is, and has been for a while, look for an FZ20 in the local second hand market. Beats the pants off of the S9000 at the long end... Something like 3.5 extra stops of freedom at the telephoto end (f/2.8 compared to f/4.9, and 2 stops of IS...) |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:21:32 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
My recommendation is, and has been for a while, look for an FZ20 in the local second hand market. |
she didn't mention FZ20, but you are right - it has a sweet F2.8 throughtout the entire zoom range :) One thing to note is the AF tho - been reading far too many user opinions that it hunts a lot, even in medium lighting conditions. I think a used one today would be quite a steal :) |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:29:50 PM · #13 |
This is fully zoomed, plus used the 2x digital zoom on top of that. Handheld. f/5.6, ISO 200, shutter speed 0.005s. I don't think it hurt it too much. This was also taken through glass. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:42:11 PM · #14 |
| I have the 8800. I love it, but compared to a DSLR, it's SLOOOOOW. It takes fantastic macro shots, has the VR, and great resolution. I actually find it less noisy in low light than the D70s. However, it cost more, and i've been told they're hard to find now. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:53:37 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by iainmorrison111:
I've scrimped, I've saved, and now I need to make a decision. Which bridge camera to buy? |
actually if you can afford it, the Sony DSC-R1 is one splendid camera. Those Zeiss lens are pretty remarkable, and the R1 also uses a huge CMOS sensor. I've played with it in the store, and I'm impressed (but the price tag scared me away)
Message edited by author 2006-06-15 22:54:28. |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 10:59:36 PM · #16 |
|
|
|
06/15/2006 11:02:32 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by kdsprog:
This is fully zoomed, plus used the 2x digital zoom on top of that. Handheld. f/5.6, ISO 200, shutter speed 0.005s. I don't think it hurt it too much. This was also taken through glass. |
:) Yes, any camera does well in bright sunlight, shooting 1/2000 of a second. Even hand-held...
My point was that the FZ20 has around 3.5 stops more lattitude with hand-holding at the full telephoto... That comes in MIGHTY handy as soon as you are no longer in bright daylight.
That's around 12 times light difference for leeway.
A shot taken at full zoom in less favorable light, lets say 1/80 at f/2.8 on an FZ20 at 300mm zoom should work out pretty well (2 stops back from 1/300).
In the same light situation, the S9000 would be at f/4.9. One and 2/3 stop up... It would be shooting at 1/20, f/4.9.
How would you like to handhold a camera at 300mm zoom at 1/20 of a second with no Image stabilization?
You could use ISO to bump that shutter speed down, but even with good noise characteristics, the S9000 really only has 1 stop of better ISO quality... So you would still be shooting 1/40 at 300mm.
That's why I recommend the FZ20.
Any camera is fine outdoors, but consider what things you currently like to shoot. |
|
|
|
06/18/2006 11:12:11 AM · #18 |
OK, hows this for a 180 degree, flip on my head, change of heart.
I was in Costco today, and they have the Nikon D50 with a 18-55mm lens for £381.46.
That's ths bad boy I'm buying in the next three to four weeks.
Thanks for all the advice.
D50, any good?
|
|
|
|
06/18/2006 11:14:42 AM · #19 |
Good choice, I think you will be very happy with the D50.
|
|
|
|
06/18/2006 11:35:04 AM · #20 |
| I'm doing just fine with my FZ30. I went to a cubs game not to long ago, and I was very pleased with the zoom. |
|
|
|
06/18/2006 11:43:06 AM · #21 |
I'm sure you'll be very happy with the D50, but for what it's worth, I will add to the reccommendation of the FZ20. Not only will it beat the Fuji in lower light situations, it will also go longer. Where the Fuji is at f/4.9 at 300mm, the FZ20 can do f/2.8 at 300mm (as said before), but the FZ20 can also do f/2.8 at 420mm. Add on the IS and it works quite well at the long end of the zoom in lower light conditions. The only disadvantage is the noise issue. Panasonics have very bad noise above ISO 100, but the IS and fast lenses help keep this under control. To add more to the fire, the FZ series all have very nice Leica DC Vario Elmarit lenses. They are very sharp, clear, and provide great color. Another thing is that people have been saying that the camera hunts to focus at the long end. I've never had a problem with that at all. It's not fast AF by any means, but it will lock on properly 9 out of 10 times on my camera.
|
|
|
|
06/18/2006 11:44:40 AM · #22 |
Two major differences between the cameras that you have been checking out and the D50 with the kit lens...
#1 Focal length. 18-50 is approx 27-75mm, but the Big Zoom P&S cams that you were looking at are mostly 36-430mm or thereabouts...
That's a pretty significant difference in focal length... What do you hope to shoot?
#2 Image stabilization. The cameras you were looking at (except the FZ9000) all have some form of image stabilizatin. As mentioned before, it can have a very significant impact on your shooting... It's even more useful than it says if you have a fairly steady hand and/or have some tricks for keeping the camera fairly still, even without a tripod (this is how I usually use my Canon S2 IS).
These things might not be an issue for your with the subjects you want to shoot...
If you want to go long, IS is a BIG help.
It's also a BIG expense...
I am currently recommending to most people that they look at the new Sony A100 which will be available in most places in mid-late June.
The street price around here is approx $800 USD body only, or 900 with the kit lens...
You don't seem too worried about the kit lens idea with the Nikon, so I will make this recommendation:
A100, plus kit lens, plus Sigma 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 APO DG Macro II...
Should be doable for around $1100-1150 USD.
It will get you decent quality glass with a range similar to the digicams you were checking out at a VERY affordable price... The Sigma lens can easily be sold for close to original value, but it provides very decent quality, so should do you fine for some time.
What difference?
If you go with the D50, expect to get a cheap, but decent DSLR. It will do everything that a DSLR should do. If you want to get lenses, you will find that Nikon branded lenses are excellent, but costly. If you want to get VR lenses (to be similar in ability to two of the cameras you were checking out), you will have to fork out large... probably close to the price of the A100 body only...
It will be a suitable alternative to a short zoom P&S camera. It will take very nice pictures in most cases.
If you go with the A100, you will get a sensor that has 10MP (compared to 6mp on the D50), that has better imaging ability. It has a special mode to reduce your reliance on fill flash. This is a significant plus and is not available on any other kind of sensor to date.
Additionally, you will get anti-shake in the camera... This will help you a LOT with many types of hand-held shots (see the example below... daytime shots, less benefit... most other shots DO get a benefit though).
This makes the initial purchase a bit more expensive, but makes subsequent lens purchases much cheaper...
The money saved on getting a 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 is probably $200-250 USD (if that lens is even available for the Nikon system, sorry, I pay more attention to Canon lenses). That's pretty close to the difference in price between the D50 and A100... Add the better and larger sensor in there, and you are paying very little for a rather significant jump.
So, it is worth considering the A100 if you #1 want to shoot with longer lenses than 75mm effective focal length (a little shorter than current pocket digicams) and #2 if you intend to expand your photography at all at a later date.
Indeed, because of the f/2.8 constant aperture lens and the 430mm max telephoto effective focal length in the FZ20, if you want to go long, you may even be better off cash-wise with that camera.
At this point in the game, it is worth it to go with the D50 pretty much only if that's where you will stop.
IMO.
Message edited by author 2006-06-18 11:46:12. |
|
|
|
06/18/2006 11:55:32 AM · #23 |
..
Message edited by author 2006-06-18 11:56:16. |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 08:10:51 AM · #24 |
eschelar - thanks for that indepth and informative opion.
I should probably explain my train of thought on choosing the D50.
1# My experience is only with pretty basic/slighty creative compacts
2# I have a very limited budget. It's looking to be £400 tops ($730ish), and that is 100% top-end, not a penny more.
3# The A100 - as great as I'm sure it is, isn't available in the UK yet.
4# My local Costco has the D50 + 18-55mm lens for £381 inc vat. Now once I master the lens and the body, I plan to invest in a good lens collection. Then on day, in a few years, invenst in a second body. Now is there anything to stop me doing this?
Really, thanks to you and everyone for your advice. I'd hate to spend £400 on a camera and end up with a £400 lemon!
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 10:37:32 AM · #25 |
Another thing to check out if you wanted that anti-shake might be an older 5D or 7D by Konica Minolta.
They were selling VERY affordably around here a couple of weeks ago... Some around 500 bucks US... And a KM 5D is essentially a D50 with anti-shake...
Same deal with the lenses... although, the KM came standard with an 18-70mm kit lens and the D50 has an 18-55mm...
I understand that the KM kit lens is one of the better kit lenses out there.
Regarding building a lens collection of fine quality lenses, that generally means getting name branded professional grade lenses...
Many people are picking up a short range (17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron is currently a leader as is the 28-75mm f/2.8, also by Tamron) lens by a third party manufacturer and going for a branded 50mm prime, along with a branded telephoto (usually 70-200 f/2.8 or something similar)...
Those that want wide angle also often choose between a 12-24mm (Nikon or Tokina) or 10-22mm (Canon).
My personal lens kit will include:
50mm f/1.8 (canon)
17-50 f/2.8 (tamron) OR 16-50 f/2.8 (tokina)
80-200 f/2.8L (canon)
later, when I'm rich and famous, I'll probably spring for a 10-22mm canon ultra wide... I've used one already and it's riotous good fun... For a lens that is... :)
That 80-200 was probably one of the single largest reasons that I chose to go Canon over Nikon.
Simple availability of quality 2nd hand lenses (that are current) made the difference for me... The money I saved on that one lens alone paid for me to get the 30D instead of the 350XT... If I had gotten the 350XT, it would have nearly paid for the camera.
I checked the details on my ultimate desired lens list (including 6 lenses) and found the price of the Nikon to be significantly higher... as in hundreds of dollars...
For me, it was a no-brainer...
Going Konica Minolta also would have saved hundreds of dollars for me... if I had bought everything new... Second hand prices brought the price of the Canon system within reach (and the fact that there were also certain things I preferred about CMOS)...
In my eyes (and I usually start by looking at the dollars and cents - bang for the buck), the Nikon is one of the more expensive lens setups to go for...
There is one final thing I should add... you DO get what you pay for... Top end Nikon glass is generally considered to be very slightly better than Canon... Not everyone agrees of course, and that refers to their glass, not their mechanicals (which many believe gives the edge back to Canon).
Having said that, if you want to turn your money into optical goodness in large quantities, it's a good bet that the Zeiss lineup for the Konica Minolta/Alpha/Sony mount will do that better than even the Canon or Nikon bunch.
that's all :)
Message edited by author 2006-06-19 10:50:11. |
|
