NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?

Started Apr 28, 2011 | Discussions thread
jazzroy1972 Regular Member • Posts: 172
Re: NEX instead of a Bridge Camera?

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!)

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow