Bridge Camera

[Jim Steele]

Can anyone recommended a good bridge camera for a touch of wide field work and perhaps the moon?

[Ptarmigan]

Can anyone recommended a good bridge camera for a touch of wide field work and perhaps the moon?

My humble little bridge camera (good fun!) is 6+y old so I cant do any recommending but ,

I recently was looking at the superzooms now advertised and being impressed with the big numbers,

however, do not be decieved if you are thinking of telephotoing on the moon

because some of the impressively big zoom numbers are obtained by increasing the wideangle (decreasing the fl.) at the botom end.

Not by extending the telephoto fl. at the big end, iyswim.

Just a wee caveat for you, check out the actual (or equivalent) fl numbers at each end of the range.

[Langy]

So when you say of the moon, are you talking about through a scope?

If not then you will need quite some magnification / focal length to get a reasonable sized image. My EOS 300D with it's 300mm lens which on the digital is equivalent to 480mm is 10x magnification and the moon is still very small in the frame.To get a full frame shot I use my scope with a 2x Barlows which gives you then 1300mm focal length.

Now other than a bridge camera you may even find that some of the compact camera work just as well. For example my Canon PowerShot S45 which is now 10 years old does almost everything my EOS 300D does. Fully manual but I'm not sure of the maximum shutter speed, certainly not bold but in the seconds. The S45 was my first digital camera and the reason I bought it was because I have the EOS 300 film camera and all the controls available on the camera were the same.

I have also used the S45 for a bit of AFocal work which with it's narrow lens is ideal. Not easy work but if I were to buy a mount for about £20 would be far easier.

Just something to give you some extra thought diverting a bit from your original question.

With any camera just make sure you go by the actual focal lengths / magnification and not the digital magnification as that side is always a waste of time. You can soon digitally magnify any image on the computer, so why have the camera destroy a good image to start with leaving you often with a poor quality one.

[Jim Steele]

Thanks both, I was actually considering the Panasonic Dmc-fz200. Which has a 25-600mm lens and low f number. Want something I can carry about reasonably easily without the faff of an slr but with more options than a compact

[Ptarmigan]

Hi again,

I had hoped that someone with an up-to-date bridge would drop by because I am also in the market for a new one !!

The only thought that I have had so far is that the constant f2.8 across the zoom in the FZ200 is a nice feature not offered (it seems?) by other cameras.

This would be great for terrestrial use but I am not sure if it is of use astronomically and it has limited the max zoom available compared to other cameras.

My thinking ( available at modest fee and can be shot down at will ) :-

 At wide field the f2.8 is good for star fields, constellations, star trails etc.

But you pay a price when you start to zoom.

When you go to max zoom you are going to be thinking of the moon ?? Well there is no problem there, plenty of light that will be ok in poorer Fratios. By accepting a lens with a variable Fratio starting at F2.8 it can then go to a higher zoom ! There are bridges with twice the focal length of the FZ200 ie 1200mm instead of 600mm.

So you are going to be able to get much tighter in on the moon.

Just thinking out loud, off top of my head, there may be a fundamental flaw in the above !!

My bridge is the FZ18, at the time x18 was the max available, I think that is about 500mm max zoom, I would have to check, I could have a delve in my archives for some moon shots etc. if that would be of any use ( I doubt it !)

[Stevie P]

Most bridge cameras have a number of disadvantages over DSLR cameras, one in particular is the inability to take RAW format pictures, my advise would to look at the Canon Range of bridge cameras in conjunction with the CHDK development kit opening up a range of possibility's that are otherwise disabled...

Details of CHDK can be found here http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK

[russ]

The Fuji HS50 EXR could be the camera for you if you are dead set on a bridge camera. It has really good plus points that elevate above the norm:

Shoots in JPG and RAW

24-1000mm lens that is optically better than the Canon SX50, although the Canon boasts a 24-1200mm focal range.

Uses a 1/2" CMOS chip, much larger than competing Bridge cameras but still way short of APS-C DSLR. The Canon SX50 also offers a 1/2" backlit cmos sensor.

The Fuji handles like a DSLR with proper manual zoom and focus on the lens, not a silly rocker switch.

The Fuji has the best EVF viewfinder fitted to a bridge camera.

Its 3" articulated screen is equally good.

Looking at the reviews its a close call but the Fuji is the better camera compared to the Canon and Panasonic. But they are all really expensive and pretty gut wrenching when you factor in the sort of DSLR you could buy for the same money. If size and weight are a factor, have you considered one of the many CSC (compact system cameras)? They offer all the virtues of a DSLR but in a much smaller and lighter body. And the Fuji and Sony models feature APS-C sensors that rival anything the very best APS-C DSLRs can manage. The Fuji X series are arguably the most desirable range of cameras currently known to mankind.

[Ptarmigan]

>" proper manual zoom and focus on the lens, not a silly rocker switch."

How right you are ! One of my big hates about the FZ18 !

FZ18 does raw, so its followers ought to ? but yes good point, needs confirming in any choice.

Another of my hates is the poor performance of the panasonic lions, if you are out in the wild the ability to use common or garden batteries is a big plus with -  the Fuji(s) others ? - -

Thanks for all your thoughts, appreciated. 

[russ]

Pretty sure the FZ200 does raw too. But the big downside to the FZ is the sensor, just too noisy, even from just 400iso. Where as the Fuji and Canon are comfortable at 800 and could be used at 1600 at a push.

I sold my FZ28 and replaced it with a Panny GX1. Just love it to bits. With a 14mm f2.5 pancake lens its proper pocketable. But with the 45-200 it has some decent reach.

[Ptarmigan]

Another thought for the mix,

back in the day 18x was a bit of a novelty at a price that could be afforded.

Things change tho',

more options are available,

more times no one camera (or telescope !) suits all our ambitions desires 

[iam4208]

Going down that route will always be a compromise. Cheapest way to get started for planetary imaging is to get a webcam and a powerful Barlow, take video and stack the best individual frames using Registax. You'll find plenty of advice elsewhere on the specifics, but buying second hand will also keep the cost down. God luck whatever you decide to do!

[rowan46]

I am presently using a csc and I have to say its much better than the bridge camera I was using. If you can't stretch to the fuji x csc's the sony nex5 takes some decent pics and some of the versions can be picked up pretty cheaply

[Jim Steele]

The Fuji HS50 EXR could be the camera for you if you are dead set on a bridge camera. It has really good plus points that elevate above the norm:

Shoots in JPG and RAW

24-1000mm lens that is optically better than the Canon SX50, although the Canon boasts a 24-1200mm focal range.

Uses a 1/2" CMOS chip, much larger than competing Bridge cameras but still way short of APS-C DSLR. The Canon SX50 also offers a 1/2" backlit cmos sensor.

The Fuji handles like a DSLR with proper manual zoom and focus on the lens, not a silly rocker switch.

The Fuji has the best EVF viewfinder fitted to a bridge camera.

Its 3" articulated screen is equally good.

Looking at the reviews its a close call but the Fuji is the better camera compared to the Canon and Panasonic. But they are all really expensive and pretty gut wrenching when you factor in the sort of DSLR you could buy for the same money. If size and weight are a factor, have you considered one of the many CSC (compact system cameras)? They offer all the virtues of a DSLR but in a much smaller and lighter body. And the Fuji and Sony models feature APS-C sensors that rival anything the very best APS-C DSLRs can manage. The Fuji X series are arguably the most desirable range of cameras currently known to mankind.

Great advice, I like the look of the Fuji HS50 ESR.

I hadn't considered a CSC my budget won't stretch to a Fuji X-pro - Im not sure what the difference is between other models such as the M1, E1, E2 and T1.. All very confused