D80 & 50-500 or Olympus 570UZ!!

[CJB450]

Sounds mad but im fairly new to photography and have a Nikon D80 Nikon 18-70 and Sigma 50-500 and im finding myself leaving my kit behind because i dont want to lug a heavy rucksak around with a mono pod stuck on my back all day.When i could have a bridge camera like the Olympus 570UZ which has 10mp , IS,20x zoom all in one.I have seen images from the Panasonic 12x and 18x bridge cameras and both give great pictures.
Am i mad to think this?

[NickCantle]

I don't think you're mad at all. I think your reasons are logical and sensible! I can't influence your decision as such, but it does make sense from what you're saying. There's no denying that the 50-500 plus body AND tripod etc is a pretty weighty arrangement. I sometimes wonder why I endeavor to lug all of the gear around, but at the end of the day it does actually keep me relatively fit! It's your decision, and I say go for it- I don't know much about the camera you propose to get if you do go ahead, but the bridge cameras are getting better and better. All up to you chum- keep us posted.

Oh, and a big warm welcome to WAB too

Nick

[Hobjob]

No not mad at all - thinking the same thing myself.

Am also looking for a bridge for my f-in-l for an Africa Safari.
He used to be into SLR, but circumstances stopped this.

When scouting round the net I found some disparaging remarks
about the Olympus 570UZ and its image sensor size and noise
problems.

Welcome to WAB

[glsammy]

Not mad, but make sure you think through the restrictions the bridge camera will bring. Poorer ISO performance, limited aperture range, lower image magnification size, even with your 20X. All bridge cameras seem to suffer from some form of shutter delay, I know it drove me bonkers when I used them.
I hasten to add I know nothing of the particular camera your talking about so any/all of these comments may not apply!

[LoveT]

Originally Posted by glsammy

Not mad, but make sure you think through the restrictions the bridge camera will bring. Poorer ISO performance, limited aperture range, lower image magnification size, even with your 20X. All bridge cameras seem to suffer from some form of shutter delay, I know it drove me bonkers when I used them.
I hasten to add I know nothing of the particular camera your talking about so any/all of these comments may not apply!

I agree with you on this Graham - I've had bridge cameras myself before going down the DSLR route, and now I have I wouldn't go back personally. I was thinking of getting my daughter the Olympus 570UZ as she is getting interested in photography, but the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to spend a little extra on a basic DSLR twin lens kit (such as the E510), if I can afford it (and if this doesn't turn out to be 'one of those fads' that kids go through).

Know what you mean about lugging a load of kit around all day though - I'm usually on my knees by the time I get home !

Welcome to WAB by the way - hope you enjoy your stay!

Thea

[paulthomas]

I think it all depends on what you want out of your photography If you're only interested in taking snapshots and record shots then a super-zoom may be OK for you.

[John D]

When i could have a bridge camera like the Olympus 570UZ which has 10mp , IS,20x zoom all in one.I have seen images from the Panasonic 12x and 18x bridge cameras and both give great pictures.
Am i mad to think this?[/quote]

No you are not mad but in need of some clarification.
Depends on what you mean by great pictures. When it comes to quality your Nikon and 50-500mm lens will provide greater quality over a wider range of conditions than the Olympus 570UZ or any other bridge camera.
Like most I started with bridge cameras before I changed to DSLRs. For me there is no going back.
Granted the DSLR + lenses are heavier to carry but for the results they can provide, it is worth it.
However it all depends what you want to photograph and what quality and success you are after. It's your decision but give it very careful consideration and don't get rid of your DSLR etc until you have compared the alternatives.
Just MHO.
John D

[Oy]

It's a bit like saying you're going to sell your Porche 911 and buy A Ford Focus.

If all you want to do is nip down to TESCO for some shopping then yes, the focus will do the job.

[sleipnerofasgard]

I will try and illustrate the difference i have found ,the first pic was taken with a n old 5 MP 10 times zoom camera



the second with a 10.2 MP DSLR with 300 lens and was twice the distance from me as the first



now if the bird had been the same distance from me as the first was it would have been an excellent picture.so it depends on how good you want your pictures to be and how far away the subject is,of course if you are only 5 feet aeay then it doesn't matter quite as much.you pays your money (quite literally)and you takes your choice

[DuncanE]

Originally Posted by glsammy

All bridge cameras seem to suffer from some form of shutter delay, I know it drove me bonkers when I used them.

With reference to shutter lag you do tend to pre-empt the shot once you know the subject - Although this can give very mixed results and wasted frames. The thing that annoyed me wasn't the lag, but the whining of the lense motor moving out and in slightly as I took the shot. Then, this isn't on every bridge camera I'm sure.

[NicolaB]

The shutter lag was the main thing that drove me bonkers with my old bridge camera, a prehistoric Kodak DX6490, and made me start saving for my DSLR. I've just developed stronger neck and shoulder muscles for carrying everywhere instead!!

I'm still not about to throw my Kodak in the bin though, as it's ideal for taking out if I'm hillwalking for example, as it fits into the rucksack with all of my other gear, so is still ideal for taking reasonable shots, just not outstanding ones.

[DaveStott]

Hi,

I've just been through this, so I thought to share my conclusions. (Historically, I have taken slide film with Canon SLR's, then three years ago I got fed up with carrying glass around and switched to a PowerShot Pro1 Bridge camera).

The bridge camera can take excellent pictures, especially landscapes, but it is slooow. Slow both in terms of ISO (anything over 100 is very noisy), in terms of lens, and in terms of switch-on-to-shoot-time.

So I considered getting a modern bridge camera like the Fuji f1000sd, but then the size and weight are comparable to an SLR with a superzoom and you still have many compromises.

So I am now the owner of a Nikon D40x with the Nikon 18-200 stabilised zoom. It's a revelation after the bridge - I'd forgotten how much I'd missed everything. The lens overall is very good (any superzoom has to have compromises) and I'll never have to change it or miss a shot. For me, I'm sure it was the right decision, though of course it's not cheap. (Incidentally, I went for the Nikon after twenty years of Canon because of the Nikon superzoom with stabilisation, which Canon don't yet do).

I'm a bit of a safari nut, so can't wait till I get back out to Africa, especially on a walking safari.