Question about Bridge camera
Awais Yaqub
Registered Users Posts: 10,572 Major grins
No plans to buy camera. But everything here happens unexpectedly. Today we may not have plans to buy a new camera/tv but tomorrow we are on our way to Sony . ;-)
So I have question
How good is Sony R1 for a person who will not invest in DSLR’s lenses . Is it worthy to get a DSLR with kit lens like I can get oly e500 with 2 kit lens for little less then R1.
Is R1 good camera for me if I bought it to spend few years or whole life with her ? :lust
I don’t have problems with my sony H5 or late w1 I need little more coverage and external flash .
So what is best DSLR or R1 ? :thumb
So I have question
How good is Sony R1 for a person who will not invest in DSLR’s lenses . Is it worthy to get a DSLR with kit lens like I can get oly e500 with 2 kit lens for little less then R1.
Is R1 good camera for me if I bought it to spend few years or whole life with her ? :lust
I don’t have problems with my sony H5 or late w1 I need little more coverage and external flash .
So what is best DSLR or R1 ? :thumb
Thine is the beauty of light; mine is the song of fire. Thy beauty exalts the heart; my song inspires the soul. Allama Iqbal
My Gallery
My Gallery
0
Comments
As a point of interest, I don't know if a mirror lockup is important to you but the E500 is the only DSLR in it's class that has this feature. Also, DSLR's are prone to getting dust on the CCD and the Olympus dust reduction system is the best of the bunch. Four years with an E1 and an E500 has demonstrated that to me very effectively.
Good luck
Bob
Hello! The R-1 has been raved about ever since it came out; never any lens dust, DPreview said it was worth the price just for the lens alone, and check the sony talk forum at DPreview for detailed pros and cons. That being said, I like mine very much!
Alpha 99 & VG, 900x2 & VG; 50mm1.4, CZ135 1.8; CZ16-35 2.8, CZ24-70 2.8, G70-200 2.8, G70-400, Sony TC 1.4, F20, F58, F60.
No one can answer this question for you except you, my friend.:-)
There are pros and cons in both high-end P&S and dSLR.
R1 (or similar P&S) would give you a worry-free (and definitely dust free:-) package for under $1000.
With dSLR you can barely start at that price. As every one (who has already turned:-) would tell you, it's a money pit. I only switched (from Sony 828) to dSLR world less than two years ago, and yet I have probably spent at least $10K on it by now (well, there are also lights, accessories, I have two bodies, not one, more accessories, etc). And yes I'm saving for 1DIII:-).
Anyway...
If you ask me "was it worth it?", I say "yes, every penny".
I cannot properly express the freedom a good camera gives you. RAW mode alone worth the switch (IIRC, raw on R1 is still mediocre). I'm taking the shots I would never thought possible.
While it is still truth in the words "it's not the camera, it's the photogrpaher", there is also truth in the expression "you should choose your battles". From my experience, you can choose (and win!) a lot more battles with a proper gear.
HTH
I can't give you any advice on the R1 but I do have one thing to add to the stuff Nik said. I have seen many threads asking about moving from P&S to dSLR, but I don't recall ever seeing anyone write that they regretted making the move.
Cheers,
Nonetheless, a dSLR provides so much more capabilities and tailorabilities —with your skills I think you would be ultimately be happier with a better "tool". Oly is fine. Canon and Nikon will be here for a lifetime. Only you can decide on a purchasing plan that meets your needs.
For me, the limitations of the f828/R1 are that of an otherwise simply outstanding lens which cannot be widened or lengthened with impunity. With my Canon digital equipment, I can fit the camera body with almost any lens of choice to meet my needs, from a 2000mm f/10 Celestron telescope (purchased over 30 years ago and which produces outstanding terristerial as well as astronomical photos), to a 10mm fisheye, to microscopic use. As well as use remote control, etc.
You can tailor a dSLR set-up to meet your needs when you first purchase it, but you can re-tailor it anytime in the future as your desires and artistic eye seeks broader horizons. Obviously, you can't do that with an all-in-one such as the R1.
If your preferential photography remains that of relatively near shots and you have no intentions of shooting super close (macro) or super far away (telephoto), then I heartily recommend the R1.
Anyway, my opinion ... just keep up the good photography!
Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est.
Your clear and concise point is *way* more powerful than all my babbling!
Yes who can regret on buying DSLR . But we wont be spending on lenses etc . So DSLR will only serve as fixed lens camera for me . I read R1 has lens worth 1000$ ,On the other hand I heard kit lens are of very bad quality . But I also heard nikon’s kit lens is good .
I am confused between kit lens and R1’s built in lens they have little or big differences ?
BTw i need R1/slr for job 2 years ahead !
Yet I know wonders of DSLR after all this is my 2nd year at dgrin !
E500 pics were very good i was impressed with Nocola's marrige photos. 650$ for 2 kit lenses
My Gallery
R1's Carl Zeiss fixed lens optics beats most of the "kit" lenses. But that's about it.
I think Oly can be a very good starting point into the world of dSLR. You will be able to add more optics later, and if you ever come to the point that the body or the whole line feels inadequate, you can always sell it (most of the dslr value is in the glass, not the body, and the glass is a very good value keeper), and start with one of the major players...
HTH
1. High ISO. Typically DSLRs look better at high ISO settings than P&S cameras. That said, if this matters to you, you should compare specific systems rather than generalizing.
2. Better lenses. The best lenses for DSLRs are better than anything you can get on a P&S. The reason for this is because the DSLR sensors are typically larger so DSLR lenses have a longer real focal length to get the same field of view and longer focal length lenses in general have fewer abberations. Even if you only buy one lens for your DSLR, you have the opportunity to choose a good one (usually this means not the kit one).
3. Better control. Most P&S cameras bury much of the camera control in menus where it is hard to use. SLRs normally have more dedicated controls for the camera settings. For instance, shooting manual is much more difficult without a dedicated dial for aperture and shutter speed.
4. More control over depth of field. The depth of field gets shallower the larger the sensor is. DSLRs, having larger sensors than P&S cameras have more potential for using selective focus.
All of these points are generalizations. They are things to look at when you choose a camera, but you really need to compare specific cameras to determine which is better for you .
I'm sure you've seen Yuri's photos. All recently with R1.
Based on your style of shooting I think the R1 would be a great camera for you.
Sensor size is close to that of Canon and Nikon APS, so you can get shallow DOF if you want.
ISO is pretty good up to about 800- a BIG step up from your H5.
Caveats compared to a DSLR- it's been reported to be slow to focus in low light, if you want to shoot RAW- the writing of RAW files is very slow as well.
It has limited reach- about 120mm if I remember.
The lens at the long end is kind of slow- F4.8 or someting.
I know you don't plan on getting lenses if you get a DSLR but..... why not?
That's the great thing about them.
That said the E-500 2 lens kit is a great deal- especially the 40-150 lens. It's very nice, sharp wide open and gives you 300mm field of view.
The out of camera jpegs are great and the noise levels up to ISO 800 are pretty good as well. It's much faster in operation than the R1.
The 14-45 lens that's part of the kit is OK. Probably a little better than most of those type lenses, especially the build quality.
If it were me- I'd go for the E-500. Much more versatile with the 2 lens kit.
Gene
final verdict is in hands of elder bro lets see what he loves or if he allowes me to get a camera at 1st place
My Gallery
What is shutter life of E500 ?
My Gallery
At best they're just estimates. There's a guy on the Nikon D2 forums at dpreview with near 1,000,000 clicks or something like that on his D2hs. Maybe not a million but over 500,000. He sometimes takes 14,000 or more shots in one day
I don't see why it wouldn't go 100k or so.
Gene
I personally wouldn't count on 100K.
The newset 1DMarkIII (due later this year) is claiming 300K. Yet this is a $4K+ camera that inherits a $5K+ one. E500 is an entry level, so I really doubt it can withstand this kind of abuse.
Another thing of course is: does one really need 100K, let alone 300K?
Unless you shoot sports or fashion on a regular basis, averaging 1,000 clicks per day, you probably will be way under that limits. Let's say, 30K a year? Or even 10K? New bodies coming out often enough, and there is always a market for used ones. Yes, it's a path of contiuos upgrades, but ain't it always with technology? Take a look around: cellphones, TVs, computers, cameras... They all become obsolete before you can say "smugmug"..
My Gallery