I have a similar model, the Panasonic ZS8. These cameras are considered travel zooms. Takes pretty good shots, though I have never taken it to sporting events. Bridge cameras, for the most part, look like slightly shrunken DSLRs with a kit lens. If you don't mind the lack of a viewfinder, give it a try. Even more discreet than a bridge camera.

If I were you, I might consider a bridge camera and leave the DSLR at home. Between the rowdy crowds attending MLB games, and some of the neighborhoods the stadiums are in, a smaller, more discreet camera might be a better choice

I think I was missunderstood I bought the radar detector after getting the ticket. I did not have it when I was pulled ovef

I did. That ticket cost me $250.00 $50.00 for the fine and $200.00 for a radar detector

It shows an example of free speech. Each of us expressing our opinions based on our own experiences

I don't call all cops pigs. Just the one who had the nerve to ask me to help her after giving me a ticket

First of all, she was hiding in a barn 100 feet ahead a sign posting a 20MPH reduction in the speed limit, barely giving motorists the time to react. Second of all, she had the NERVE to ask me to change her flat on a freezing winter night after giving me a ticket. Supposing you were a doctor, and you made an HONEST mistake, and the patient was suing you, would you feel like spending hours filling out disability applications for him/her?

Would you have felt the same way if you were the next motorist she pulled over after I changed her flat? Yes, traffic enforcement is part of a police officers' job, but there is a big difference between being on active patrol, looking out for all kinds of crime, as well as traffic infractions, and hiding behind a tree, abondoned barn, or billboard with a "kodak", waiting to catch speeders in order to help her town balance its budget

Had to make that silly, juvenile comment. Though I do get annoyed at abuse of power by law enforcement officers, they are a necessary evil. As far as showing actual disrespect to a cop, I was guilty of that on only one occasion. Thirty years ago, during my medical intership in Waukeegan, Illinois, I was pulled over by a lone female officer with a radar gun on a deserted road, for going 15mph over the speed limit at 2:00 AM. While writing the ticket, he tire went flat. She asked me to help her change the tire, but couldnt void the summons. My reply was "Sorry, piglet, not only am I not going to help, but I hope 20 drunks drive by at 100mph in the wrong direction while you are waiting for help. If you are "Man" enough to put on that uniform and gun, you are "Man" enough to fend for yourself. How many of my fellow hoggers would have helped that "Sow" on a freezing winter night after getting that summons?

Oink Oink Oink; I smell pork chops

Thanks for your feedback. Were it not for the two Sony Compatible lenses that I already have, getting a new, in the box T1i Rebel for $200.00 cheaper than the Sony would be a no brainer

Thanks for everyone's input. I did kind of expect that my fellow hoggers would be steering me towards the Sony. Seems like an extra two C notes is worth it for being able to use lenses I already have and to get a current model. IMHO, a 2009 entry DSLR isn't quite a dinosaur, but does qualify as a wooly mammoth or saber toothed cat. In the three years in the digital photography hobby, I have noticed a few trends; Buyers of bridge cameras are the most likely to upgrade frequently. Those using a cheapo point and shoot will keep it as long as they can post on facebook; those with thousands invested in pro equipment will keep it until it becomes totally obsolete or unrepairable. Knowing this, the major manufacturers make enough yearly improvements to entice buyers to upgrade regularly. I suspect they may be doing the same with entry DSLRs and compact system cameras

I need some good advice from my fellow hoggers about picking my first DSLR. I am thinking of the Sony Alpha 37 because I already have a Konica Minolta 28-100 short zoom and a Kodak Gear 80-210 (made by Tamron or Tiffen) which would be compatible. However, my local brick and mortar store has an unsold, new 2009 vintage Canon T1i for the bargain price of only $400.00. ($200.00 cheaper than the Sony). Should I get the Canon and save the dough, or is it too much of a dinosaur compared to the Sony, and is the extra $200.00 worth it for the option of using lenses I already have? Please let me know what you think

In photography, as well as other endeavors, there is a hierarchy among professionals, as well as the tools of their trades. For example, a pianist for the New York Philharmonic and the music teacher at Public School 193 are both professional musicians; One uses a custom Steinway, the other can make do with an old Kimball upright piano. The master chef at a 5 star French Restaurant and the short order cook flipping burgers at the Greasy Spoon Diner and Truck Stop are both professionals. What differs are their skill levels, demands of their customers, as well as the quality of their cooking implements. The same goes true for professional photography. At one extreme, are those working for magazines such as Smithsonian, National Geographic, or Architectural Digest. These Professionals are often faced with demanding situations and their work is looked at by equally demanding viewers. They need the best or close to it. At the other end are Tabloid photographers on assignment for National Enquirer. For them, a bridge camera would be adequate. I doubt the bored housewives reading them would see the difference in a shot of Britney Spears taken with a bridge camera or a large format DSLR, especially considering that they are printed on cheap recycled paper.

Is it that I am being unfair, or perhaps you are unfamiliar with micro 4/3 cameras. With the crop factor of the micro 4/3 system, the two Konica/minolta 28-100 becomes the equivalent of 58-200. The kodak 80-210 becomes 160-420, and is not all that fast to boot. Most of us into digital photography have at least some form of image stabilization; in the camera body and/or lens, and have become quite spoiled by it. To be honest, how many photographers have a steady enough hand to get a clear shot at 420 zoom on a relatively slow lens, unless they are in extremely bright light conditions, allowing a fast shutter speed without either some image stabilization or a tripod?