Bridge vs. SLR

Why I prefer bridge (prosumer)to single lens reflex (SLR) for digital cameras.

I'll go back to the the reason for the creation of conventional (film) SLRs, and how they work:

Single lens reflex cameras were designed to solve a specific problem. With conventional non-SLR (i.e. 35mm) camera, the lens and the sight are situated a distance apart. Whilst this makes little to a landscape shot, to a close up shot it can make a massive difference, you're taking a shot of something an inch to the top (or left, right, bottom, etc.) of the target. The SLR solves this by using a mirror that reflects the image from the lens up through the eye piece, hence an exact view of what you're taking.

This problem doesn't exist with digital cameras, LCD (liquid crystal display) on the back, or the EVF (electronic view finder) display what is seen by the CCD or CMOS sensor on the camera.

So why buy digital SLR? Digital SLR's allow lens interchange, so zoom and quality can be changed quickly. Manufacturers also tend to make the DSLR ranges with better sensors and lens than digital compact cameras.

Why not to buy dSLR? Digital SLR's are heavy, glass lens and mirror set ups weigh a great deal. Price is also prohibitive. To less experienced users dSLR can be unwieldy to control with a variety of options and settings to configure. With dSLR, the image you see in the view finder is down to your eyesight, which is hundreds of times better than the sensor.

How do bridge cameras come in to this? Well bridge have a high quality fixed lens, giving high zoom and good quality sensors, most have the same features as a dSLR. They also tend to have very good automatic settings. The electronic viewfinder/LCD display exactly the same image as you take. They also tend to cost less than the dSLR cameras. You don't have the flexibility of changing lens, or quite the range of products available with dSLR but for the majority of users a bridge is a much better option.

Written Sunday, 6th January 2008 by Ed Gough, who is