NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?

Started Apr 28, 2011 | Discussions
Einmalumdiewelt
Regular MemberPosts: 332Gear list
Like?
NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
Apr 28, 2011

I was asked for a recommendation on a bridge camera.

I am not up to date with this. Maybe you have an idea what's a good one currently.

But actually I was thinking if it makes sense to recommend a NEX with the 18-55 instead?

I mean what are the differences here except maybe price?

A bridge camera is usually compactish, has wide-angel to tele, shoots full automatic and has good IQ.

Our NEX does all these things quite well, right? Without being complicated to handle?

 Einmalumdiewelt's gear list:Einmalumdiewelt's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 +3 more
draganflyer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,247
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to Einmalumdiewelt, Apr 28, 2011

absolutely....with the added bonuses of having much better overall image quality and the ability to change lenses as skills develop

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JaccoW
Regular MemberPosts: 344
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to Einmalumdiewelt, Apr 28, 2011

The Nex is capable of all that, however the tele bit needs the 18-200 zoom.
The IQ will be great, but it is also quite an expensive option.

Why not go for the new Sony HX100V?

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666297852

It has similar functions as the Nex, and the Sony compact forum seems like the first few users are happy with it. At $450,- it is also a much cheaper option.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kaktusss
Regular MemberPosts: 393
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to Einmalumdiewelt, Apr 28, 2011

It depends of the budget and the use.

The big advantage of a bridge like the Fujifilm HS10 or the Sony HX100V is the range : 30X zoom versus 3X for the 18-55mm... That can be an issue for some people.
For everything else, a NEX is better.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Masterbrew
Regular MemberPosts: 496
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to Einmalumdiewelt, Apr 28, 2011

If Bridge Camera means a small camera that will turn you on to photography, then you've come to the right place.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lng0004
Senior MemberPosts: 2,602
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to Einmalumdiewelt, Apr 29, 2011

Hm, my idea of a bridge camera is a Panasonic FZ or a Canon SX. They're not compact at all, but does offer a huge range (FZ100 gives you 600mm!).

Anyway, having used both, I can say that you should definitely get an EVIL instead, a NEX all the better ;P Part of the fun is buying and trying new lenses. You can't do that with a bridge camera.

If you want a really compact camera that delivers great IQ, then go for a more prosumer compact like the Panasonic LX5. Terrific IQ!

Einmalumdiewelt wrote:

I was asked for a recommendation on a bridge camera.

I am not up to date with this. Maybe you have an idea what's a good one currently.

But actually I was thinking if it makes sense to recommend a NEX with the 18-55 instead?

I mean what are the differences here except maybe price?

A bridge camera is usually compactish, has wide-angel to tele, shoots full automatic and has good IQ.

Our NEX does all these things quite well, right? Without being complicated to handle?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Henry Richardson
Forum ProPosts: 12,985
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to JaccoW, Apr 29, 2011

JaccoW wrote:

The Nex is capable of all that, however the tele bit needs the 18-200 zoom.

To get an idea what the NEX 5 + 18-200mm looks like you can see it here (it's the camera in the center):

-- hide signature --

Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JaccoW
Regular MemberPosts: 344
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to Henry Richardson, Apr 29, 2011

Henry Richardson wrote:

JaccoW wrote:

The Nex is capable of all that, however the tele bit needs the 18-200 zoom.

To get an idea what the NEX 5 + 18-200mm looks like you can see it here (it's the camera in the center):

To be fair, the camera is a lot smaller when the lens is not extended. Not much longer than most bridge cameras and similar to earlier models like the F717.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jazzroy1972
Regular MemberPosts: 172
Like?
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?
In reply to JaccoW, Apr 29, 2011

Actually, to be fair, the camera with the 18-200 is way bigger than a bridge one.

The lens makes the difference, body is actually a bit smaller than Panny or Canon superzoom bridges' bodies.

Overall dimensions comparison:

with 16mm: Nex wins over bridge
with 18-55: Nex loses of a couple of cm
with 18-200: Nex loses of around 6 cm, which is a lot.

if you want to keep size small you have to go with rangefinder lenses, for example russian Jupiter, great quality and low price (and a lot of nostalgic style addiction!).

Consider also the 18-200 kit makes it cost more than double a bridge camera.

A low-cost and small size set could be:

  • Nex-3 or Nex-5 with 16mm 400-500 euro

  • Jupiter 50mm F2 30 euro

  • Jupiter 85mm F2 130 euro

  • M39 adapter 20 euro

you end up in having a quality way superior to bridge, a lot more fun with manual controls and some limits in not having a zoom..

I think the problem is to understand if we want to step outside the point and shoot world or not (with advantages and disadvantages!)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads