patcam Loc: chelmsford essex uk

I am in the habit of changing my cameras, between bridge and dslr's, I have a Canon 60d with 17-70 Sigma and Tamron 70-300, both excellent lenses, in my opinion better than equivalent Canon lenses, recently I thought I would buy a Fuji hs50, mainly because of reviews etc, I mistakenly thought it would replace my 60D, oh boy, big mistake, the Fuji is an excellent camera, but today I took photos of my 4 year old granddaughter, using both cameras in the same situations, the results when downloaded to my pc are a revelation, the Fuji doesn't come near the Canon for IQ, not only for sharpness but for noise, tonal range etc, so pleased I kept my Canon, I will get money back on Fuji, but the moral of my story is really aimed at all the Canon xs50 owners out there, don't kid yourselves about your cameras, even a starter dslr like Canon 1100d will outperform any bridge camera, so if you are serious about photography buy a DSLR !!!

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

Don't compare the results of the Fuji line to the Canon line either!

Maybe the 'bridge' cameras don't come up to 'your' standards, but for the majority of people that are buying bridge camera the difference in results isn't worth the extra cost and hassle of the extra lenses.

phcaan Loc: Willow Springs, MO

Thank you, that's great information. I have been toying with the idea of getting a DSLR in addition to my Canon bridge camera

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

Love my 60D

All the surf shots on my site are 60D Sigma 120-400

EstherP

1. When you took the photos of your granddaughter, you say the situations were the same for both cameras, but how did the settings on the cameras compare?
2. How long did you use the Fuji hs50? Long enough to get to know the camera?
3. Where does the Canon xs50 come in?

I think that what I'm getting it, is that I have actually seen a photographer with a bridge camera outperform a person using a "professional" camera, simply because of the acquaintance (or lack thereof) with the tool in hand.
EstherP

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

:thumbup: :thumbup:
So many people (I hesitate to call them all photographers) seldom give a "new" camera, lens, etc, a 'proper' test period before 'slamming' the results. When I moved from the SX40 to the SX50 I was not happy with my results..... UNTIL I settled down and refined my shooting techniques and settings. I might not get the same results that 'some' with a dSLR might get in the same situation, but they are better than many dSLR photos that I have seen.

tramsey Loc: Texas

These photos that Alaskan took there other day with a p/s are not all that bad. It depends on how well you know your camera. Take a look and your own expertise

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-139548-1.html

JPL

I agree, you are right. But for many people cameras like the Canon SX50 are enough. It has a good zoom range and if you are not making enlargements or looking for very good pic quality they do the job.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

If you are "serious" about photography, learn the techniques of Photography and your equipment. You can be a serious Photographer and use a quality point and shoot and get fabulous results.Some people are so infatuated about getting the next "best" high dollar camera's and yet know very little about how to take a good composed photo. If you are not going to sell your photo's then why do you NEED an expensive camera and lenses???

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

I've seen Cell phone photos better than 'some' with a dSLR. (http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-139270-1.html#2357041) for example. I also notice that those with p&s and bridge seldom post the full photo, particularly long distance. I've seen only a couple sx50 long distance full size that were not blurry once you go full size. I've seen a ton of dSLR photos that look fantastic full size. On the other hand, I have an older bridge camera and I love it, and while I often wish I had a super camera rather than a super zoom, I am not willing to spend the cash nor go to the effort of lugging around a bunch of heavy equipment. (just a hobby for me) I have seen plenty of super sharp photos that I just can't get very often with my camera, and I feel rather confident I could up my percentage a great deal with one of the $$$ camera's and lens. I know when I got my first super zoom (18x) I was amazed. Now they are up to 60x and that really sounds great but I'd be happy with 300mm on a larger, top quality sensor, rather than more zoom. The little voice in my head keeps saying sharper, not further, but the louder voice says not worth the cash nor the effort. It's a tug of war between cheap and you only go around once...

Morrisdh Loc: Pisgah Alabama

Racmanaz, I see what your trying to say and maybe I
have the Photography thing all wrong. For me I love
to take pictures of beautiful things and surroundings. I
started with a pretty good point and shoot and couldn't
at the time do better. I yearned to do pictures like I see
in the magazines and elsewhere. I moved up a little and
soon realized my kit lens would not do what the L lens
do. I wanted to do wildlife and BIF my camera wasn't
fast enough. (7D poblem solved). I don't sell pictures as of yet, but I get a lot of pleasure in taking one of my best Eagle pictures framing it and just walk into a restaurant, or an old friends business's and say I brought you something. I like their smile and sometimes I just want to do better just for me. I try to learn something new about photography and equipment every time I go out and shoot. One thing I have learned is they make better Cameras and Lens's for a reason and
these are some of mine. mdh

JPL

I agree with you again. But like you say photography is much about pleasure, and some people get plenty of pleasure from photographing with point and shoot or bridge cameras. Others, like you and me want the extra quality of good lenses and bigger sensors to get the pleasure we need to be proud of our pics. I have a few years old bridge camera that is pretty good, but still no match to any dslr, and due to popularity of the Canon SX50 I became interested in that one as a travel camera. But when I downloaded some pics from it I could see at once that I would never be happy with the IQ so I put the idea of buying one aside.

Now on the other hand I am waiting for the Nokia Lumia 1020 to be available in my neighborhood so I can buy it to have a good camera in my pocket at all times. It does not have the big zoom of the Canon SX50 but in almost every other way it is much better, it is much smaller, has bigger sensor, good low light capabilities, good image stabilization. It is the second phone in a new generation of high quality smartphone and smartphone cameras from Nokia. We can say it is a no weight/no volume camera as it is only a 1-2 millimeter bulge on a smartphone. And smartphones we carry around all day anyway. And this Lumia 1020 camera is in a class of its own in the smartphone world along with its predecessor the Nokia Pureview 808, which carries the same 41 mpx camera. With this one we finally have a gadget that makes it possible to be without separate camera to get decent pictures.

patcam Loc: chelmsford essex uk

Settings identical on both cameras
the point I am trying to make is this, it doesn't matter how good your bridge camera is, it has a small sensor,! if you take a photo at 300mm with a dslr, that is approx. 480mm, so you only have to crop that photo 100%, the result will be roughly the same size photo as the bridge camera, but the dslr will have better IQ, a bridge camera can never be as good as a dslr, it all comes down to the sensor, I have recently owned Canon 40d, Canon sx40, Fuji x-s1 and a Canon 1100d, even the 1100d was superior to both bridge cameras, before spending good money on a bridge camera, consider a s/h dslr and put an 18-250 lens on it, the price difference wont be much, but you will get far better photos

scatt Loc: Racine, WI.

new to forum and photography so could you tell me what a bridge camera is

JPL

A bridge camera is also often called a superzoom camera. Basically it is a camera that has the small sensor of a point and shoot camera with a big lens in front of it that is capable of zooming at things far away, like a big dslr lens. And then bridge camera usually has more control options than cheap point and shoot camera and usually a little less than a dslr camera, and also simple auto settings for those who want.

The only thing a bridge camera really lacks in comparison with dslr is image quality. Due to small sensor (which is necessary to keep the price below dslr prices) they can not deliver the same image quality as dslr cameras.