Bridge cameras and macro-photography.
Dec 9, 2011 10:25:18 #
Nikonian72! Thanks for your kind comment - I've had my bridge camera for 2 or 3 years. I purchased it on eBay as a refurbished camera - and it was like buying a new camera - I really like it, but I don't care for the limited DOF. Is there a technical reason why manufacturers can't put lenses with smaller f stops on bridge cameras with long zooms? I'm not a technical person myself, but I would think that they could add a few more stops to these lenses. That's my main complaint about the bridge cameras in general. They aren't quite as sharp as the DSLR's, but I usually use my Picasa 3 for sharpening my images where they need it. My 2 Cents! :>)
Dec 9, 2011 13:13:49 #
Nikonian72 wrote:
You stated that your WD is 1-mm. Do you mean 1-cm (10-mm)? 1-mm is practically touching the lens, and you would be working in the shadow of the lens, yet I see stamen shadows on flower petal.
hey nikonian..have to appologize to you.
finally found the book.--simple macro is 4 to 20 inches..
super macro is 1Cm.---but in one of my pics[this one???],one of the stamens was actually touching the lens and yet in fairly good focus. so again-sorry for mistatement..all I can say is "I got a camera that I would love to be as good[physically]as I once was."--I would be doing some super work to go with the super lens...lol---joe
Dec 9, 2011 14:02:15 #
jokescache1! We'd all like to be the photographers we once were - I've got the same problem - it's called aging! lol
Dec 9, 2011 16:27:01 #
dryart,,its not the photography I lament--its being able go/get down/snake around/do the hokey,pokey[lol] like I use to..now I got a tether to a tank anchor and a hitch in the gettee up go...---enough to make a person P***ed off..---joe
Dec 9, 2011 18:02:04 #
Dryart38 wrote:
Is there a technical reason why manufacturers can't put lenses with smaller f stops on bridge cameras with long zooms?
The more mechanics in a lens, the higher the cost. Also, apertures for the physically small "bridge" lenses are already tiny openings, and the blade thickness dictates how small an aperture is possible, as the blades have to stack as the aperture gets smaller. They are probably near their limit now.
Dec 9, 2011 18:33:20 #
Nikonian72! It's a shame that they are so complicated because there are some pretty decent brand names on the glass on some of the bridge camera lenses - Nikon, Schneider-Kreutznach, Leica, Canon, etc., who make really good lenses for DSLR's. The smaller openings would help make them have better resolution, and they'd come closer in resolution to the DSLR lenses! Some of them certainly look big enough, front element-wise! I think the bridge camera concept is a good idea, especially for those who don't have the backs to lug around heavy equipment. I like mine!
Dec 9, 2011 18:38:09 #
jokescache1! I know the feeling - I was a dancing fool when I was younger, until my feet went south - now I can just about stand still in one spot without falling on my butt! And I carried many a heavy case for myself and others "in the line of duty" so to speak. "NUF SAID"
Dec 11, 2011 17:33:12 #
Dryart38 wrote:
I think the bridge camera concept is a good idea, especially for those who don't have the backs to lug around heavy equipment. I like mine!
Amen Dryart, my equipment lugging days are done! If I want to take pictures, the bridge offers me the best of both worlds.. :)
Sep 29, 2014 15:38:37 #
shangyrhee
Loc: Nashville TN to Sacramento CA
tinosa wrote:
I captured this critter with a Panasonic FZ30
Hi tinosa ; I am a novice in macro and interested in learning technics. I saw your pix of bugs with amazement. I have panasonic lumix fz 200. I would like to know what mode/setting/accessories etc . Thank you in advance. shang
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.