 |
Lumix FZ1000.2 |
In the early days of digital photography we had digital
single lens reflex (DSLR) cameras with interchangeable lenses which in due
course morphed into mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras [MILC] at the high end of the market and compact
cameras with fixed lenses at the low end.
This left a market opportunity for something between the two
types and so the bridge cam was born. These cameras look like and in many ways
operate like an interchangeable lens model but they have a fixed zoom lens
usually covering a wide range of focal lengths from wide angle to
super-telephoto. In short, they can do (almost) anything and everything. Well, that is the selling point and the better
ones actually deliver on this promise.
In recent years bridge and compact cameras have waned in
popularity and in support by camera makers.
The decline in small compact cameras seems easy enough to understand as
most of them are now outperformed in convenience and capability by many smart
phones.
But smartphones do not have superzoom lenses and they do not
have an eye level viewfinder so I think there is still a place in the market
for bridge types.
There are a few small sensor cameras with a super-zoom lens
but no viewfinder. Trying to use these things at the long end of the zoom is an
exercise in frustration as it is not possible to hold the camera really steady
when waving about in front of us like a smartphone. I have no interest in these things and
neither would any enthusiast photographer wanting to engage with the process of
photography.
I have no inside knowledge of the camera industry so I do
not know how sales of bridge cams have been trending in the last few years.
What I do know is that there have been no new model releases
of bridge cams in the last few years.
The most recent models appear to be Canon Powershot SX70 2018, Nikon
Coolpix P950 2020, Panasonic Lumix FZ1000.2 2019,
Panasonic Lumix FZ300 2015, Sony RX10.4 2017.
In each case the new model is a modest upgrade of a previous
and very similar one. The most significant update has been the inclusion in the
Sony RX10.4 of a stacked high speed sensor with phase detect AF and fast frame
rate with subject tracking. These features make the RX10.4 the most
technologically advanced bridge cam to date.
I suspect that camera makers are concentrating their R&D
efforts on mirrorless interchangeable lens models because there is more profit
to be made on each unit sold and more opportunities for upselling to a more
expensive model or a better lens or few.
 |
Three bridge cams |
Bridge came fall into two groups by sensor size.
One group uses the tiny 4.55 x 6.17mm (diagonal 7.67mm)
sensor with different pixel counts ranging from 12 Mpx to 21Mpx. Most of these feature an ultrazoom lens with
a huge zoom range.
Tiny sensor models which I have used over the years include
Canon Powershot SX20, SX70, Nikon Coolpix B700 and P900, Panasonic Lumix FZ200,
FZ300, FZ80.
The 7.67mm sensor allows designers to incorporate a
super-zoom lens in a compact package. The main disadvantages are very high levels
of digital noise, sluggish autofocus and difficulty obtaining consistently
sharp results at the long end of the zoom range. One reason for this is that
f2.8 on a mini sensor cam is equivalent to about f16 on a camera with a full
frame (24 x 36mm, 43mm diagonal) and that is about where diffraction limited
sharpness sets in. Thus every mini-sensor bridge cam except the FZ300 is
already diffraction limited at the widest available aperture. The Nikon P1000
lens is f8 at the (very) long end which is equivalent to f45 on full frame. (8
x the crop factor which is 5.55)
My use and testing reveals the Lumix FZ300 to be easily the
most appealing, versatile and capable of the tiny sensor group. In fact it is
the only one of the tiny sensor group that I can recommend.
Notably the fZ300 has the widest aperture lens at f2.8 and
that is constant over the entire zoom range. It has the smallest pixel count
(12 Mpx) and the smallest zoom range (24x), which by the way is still rather
impressive (25-600mm equivalent).
I recently tested the FZ300 side-by-side with the Canon SX70
and found that the FZ300 is able to render the same amount of subject detail at
600mm (equivalent) as the SX70 at 1350mm.
More pixels are not always better and a longer zoom range
does not always produce more actual subject detail on the sensor.
The other group uses the larger 8.8 x 13.2mm (diagonal
15.9mm) so-called “one inch” sensor with 20Mpx. These have better image quality
because the 15.9mm sensor has an area of 116 square millimeters which is four
times that of the mini sensor at 28.5 square millimeters.
In order to maintain compact dimensions the lenses have a
smaller but still very useful zoom range which varies from (full frame
equivalent) 25-400mm on the FZ1000.2 to 24-600mm on the Sony RX10.4.
Bridge cams with the 15.9mm sensor which I have used include
the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000, FZ1000.2, FZ2000, Sony RX10.4.
One I did not buy is the Canon Powershot G3X because it does
not have a built-in EVF although a clip-on one could be mounted. The lens is a
compact 24-600mm (equivalent) f2.8-5.6. This model is discontinued but if Canon
ever produce an upgraded version with built-in EVF and EOS style controls I
think it could be very appealing. The G3X is appreciably smaller than the Sony
RX10.4 but has the same zoom range albeit with a smaller aperture at the long
end.
Of this group the Sony RX10.4 has the most advanced
specification and performance courtesy of a 24-600mm (equivalent) lens, on-sensor
phase detect AF and a back side illuminated, stacked sensor design which allows
for high frame rates. However the RX10.4 has a complex and sometimes confusing user
interface at both the external controls and the menu system level. It is also
significantly larger, heavier and more
expensive than the FZ1000.2.
The FZ1000.2 has a shorter zoom range of 25-400mm but is
more compact and less expensive and has a much more user friendly interface at
both the external controls and the menus. In fact the layout and operation of
the controls on the FZ1000.2
substantially resembles that of a
twin dial Canon EOS MILC. It is in my hands easily the most user
friendly camera of the 15.9mm sensor group.
What is the appeal of
a bridge cam ?
Mainly, I think it is the all-in-one-do-everything
versatility.
A model like the Lumix FZ1000.2 can deliver very good
results with most subject types including landscape, close-ups, documentary,
street, sports and action including birds in flight.
The Sony RX10.4 can extend the range of capabilities up to
600mm (equivalent) and more capable tracking of subjects in fast motion
The Lumix FZ offers a more compact package with a bit lower
level of image quality but still very good overall performance.
With a bridge cam we never have to change lenses. We never
have to wonder whether we should have taken that other (xyz…whatever) lens out
today. We can zoom from wide to telephoto in three seconds or switch from
close-ups to birds in flight in five seconds. We never have to carry any kind
of backpack to hold all our gear.
We are able to enjoy an excellent operating experience with
a proper camera having a 16x or greater zoom lens, a full handle, thumb support,
an articulated screen, an eye level viewfinder and a full complement of controls for the
expert/enthusiast user.
Yes there is some compromise with absolute image quality
when compared to full frame gear. But most people looking at most photos do not
pixel peep, they look at the picture. And the best bridge cams can reliably deliver
very good picture quality.
So is there a future
for bridge cams ?
I have no idea about camera maker’s intentions on this
subject.
But the bridge cam is my favourite camera type and I sure
hope that Canon, Sony, PanaLumix or one of the others decide sometime soon that
they have some R&D funds which can be allocated to bridge cam evolution. All
the bridge cams on the market could benefit from upgrades to the latest
technology in sensors, autofocus systems, tracking capability, processors, design,
ergonomics and features.