Pentax X-5

LamyTax · 08-22-2012, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

I love the hit-and-run nude pictures made on a beach from selebs

True, but isn't 400mm a bit short for that?

**Aristophanes** · 08-22-2012, 04:42 AM

Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves

Weird. Isn't bridge cameras a shrinking market?

I walk by a cruise ship terminal everyday, usually 2 in port throughout the Summer and Fall, and by far the most observed camera around the neck and in use is a bridge camera.

I am sure there are lots of compacts and camera phones, and I se quite a few DSLR's. But bridge cameras are a viable market with lots of players still releasing models, so there's money to be made and customers who prefer them.

Tanzer · 08-22-2012, 04:46 AM

Yeah, not everyone wants to buy a "boatload" of lenses. Like one of my friends who bought a MILC and never got past the kit lens. For him, a bridge camera would have been a better choice.

eddie1960 · 08-22-2012, 05:20 AM

Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves

Weird. Isn't bridge cameras a shrinking market?

even if it is a shrinking market i think at the unit sales level it still outsells most dslr models. it's a price and user friendliness thing. All the silly stuff we hate (auto feature picture modes etc it has will appeal to the bridge crowd. Bridge cameras i think are the strongest segment in the P&S market because phones are killing most of the market.

Tonto · 08-22-2012, 05:57 AM

Agree with Eddie, I started really enjoying photography with my old Olympus 18x zoom camera. How ever if given the choice again at the time with todays knowledge (it was a wedding present) I would have preferred something in the 24-135mm equiv range (5-6x zoom) with a higher aperture and slightly larger sensor. Also RAW would have been nice to have!

KHatfull · 08-22-2012, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by Tonto

Agree with Eddie, I started really enjoying photography with my old Olympus 18x zoom camera. How ever if given the choice again at the time with todays knowledge (it was a wedding present) I would have preferred something in the 24-135mm equiv range (5-6x zoom) with a higher aperture and slightly larger sensor. Also RAW would have been nice to have!

Same here. My first "serious" digicam was an Olympus C-2100UZ...at the time the lens was amazing: stabilized, 10X, 38-380 EFL. While the camera by today's standards wasn't even good for web display it was the single most "funnest" photographic tool I've ever used, then or since.

I've often thought of picking one up on eBay, they go for like $75 in REALLY nice shape....just for nostalgia's sake.

audiobomber · 08-22-2012, 07:04 AM

Bridge cams have been continuously improving. A backlit sensor should add a nice little performance boost to the X-5, and maybe there are some other surprises in the box. The Panasonic with f/2.8 lens discussed above is interesting, and the Fuji X-S1 has the same 2/3" sensor as the X-10. I don't see this segment ever dying out. If anything, I expect it will grow as small sensors, lenses and processor technology continue to evolve.

A good bridge cam with a small advanced amateur p&s makes a pretty versatile combo.

RonHendriks1966 · 08-22-2012, 07:27 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

A good bridge cam with a small advanced amateur p&s makes a pretty versatile combo.

well make that last one a good phone or tablet!

Medium FormatPro · 08-22-2012, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by LamyTax

True, but isn't 400mm a bit short for that

Someone will most likely off the filter/lens combos that attach onto the end of the lens to perhaps even double the focal length

audiobomber · 08-22-2012, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

well make that last one a good phone or tablet!

Not for me! I'll have a small camera please, with real photographic features like manual mode, metering choices, ISO button, raw capture, etc.

magkelly · 08-22-2012, 08:50 AM

I started out my serious shooting with a Fuji S7000 bridge camera. It was a very good camera. It did annoy me not being able to change lenses once I got a bit more experienced with it. But it did shoot RAW and this was like 8-9 years ago. Bridge cameras like these are good for people who are ready for more than a pocket P&S but who aren't quite ready for swapping out a bunch of lenses. They give you a lot more control than a smaller P&S does but they're not as confusing as using a DSLR with proper lenses can be to people who haven't really used anything but a pocket cam before. They're also usually darned good at macro. I miss having my Fuji sometimes still when it comes to that. I can get basically the same or even slightly better macro shots that I got with my Fuji but I usually have to work a fair bit harder for it on my DSLR than I did on my S7000. I don't want to step backwards but I don't knock cameras like these because I know they can actually be really decent cameras.

JinDesu · 08-22-2012, 09:00 AM

When I walk around Times Square, all I see are compact cameras, bridge cameras, M4/3s, and the occasional Sony NEX or entry DSLRs.

So bridge cameras are still quite common.

eddie1960 · 08-22-2012, 09:04 AM

Originally posted by magkelly

I started out my serious shooting with a Fuji S7000 bridge camera. It was a very good camera. It did annoy me not being able to change lenses once I got a bit more experienced with it. But it did shoot RAW and this was like 8-9 years ago. Bridge cameras like these are good for people who are ready for more than a pocket P&S but who aren't quite ready for swapping out a bunch of lenses. They give you a lot more control than a smaller P&S does but they're not as confusing as using a DSLR with proper lenses can be to people who haven't really used anything but a pocket cam before. They're also usually darned good at macro. I miss having my Fuji sometimes still when it comes to that. I can get basically the same or even slightly better macro shots that I got with my Fuji but I usually have to work a fair bit harder for it on my DSLR than I did on my S7000. I don't want to step backwards but I don't knock cameras like these because I know they can actually be really decent cameras.

S7000 was a really good bridge camera (i sold more than a few)
They do have there place for people at that point like you were, and in many cases that will satisfy there needs for the long term. Most people don't make anything remotely resembling art with their cameras, they just want to document their lives and capture memories. a bridge camera lets them do a better job of this. for the more basic level for most people the cell phone will cover what they need as they continue to evolve, and the bridge camera will be there go to for family events, vacations etc. with the phone being the day to day camera
the people who get enthusiastic from the bridge camera crowd will move up. If the bridge camera was a pentax and they enjoyed it they are far more likely to move up to pentax. That is why they are still competing in this category. letting the other PS category revert to ricoh makes sense because that is the dying category and supporting 2 product lines there makes no sense

DaveBlack · 08-22-2012, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

Not for me! I'll have a small camera please, with real photographic features like manual mode, metering choices, ISO button, raw capture, etc.

And is there a reason a camera base on a smartphone interface couldn't have such features. I guess most of the physical buttons would be replace by virtual touch-screen bottoms. Still a camera with a good sensor and good lens could be place in a small smartphone body and have manual mode, ISO control and shot raw.

Dave

eddie1960 · 08-22-2012, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by DaveBlack

And is there a reason a camera base on a smartphone interface couldn't have such features. I guess most of the physical buttons would be replace by virtual touch-screen bottoms. Still a camera with a good sensor and good lens could be place in a small smartphone body and have manual mode, ISO control and shot raw.

Dave

the nokia is a big step in that direction.

08-22-2012, 02:04 AM	#106
LamyTax Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 376	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 I love the hit-and-run nude pictures made on a beach from selebs True, but isn't 400mm a bit short for that?

08-22-2012, 04:42 AM	#107
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves Weird. Isn't bridge cameras a shrinking market? I walk by a cruise ship terminal everyday, usually 2 in port throughout the Summer and Fall, and by far the most observed camera around the neck and in use is a bridge camera. I am sure there are lots of compacts and camera phones, and I se quite a few DSLR's. But bridge cameras are a viable market with lots of players still releasing models, so there's money to be made and customers who prefer them.

08-22-2012, 04:46 AM	#108
Tanzer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Perrineville, NJ Posts: 1,375	Yeah, not everyone wants to buy a "boatload" of lenses. Like one of my friends who bought a MILC and never got past the kit lens. For him, a bridge camera would have been a better choice.

08-22-2012, 05:20 AM	#109
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves Weird. Isn't bridge cameras a shrinking market? even if it is a shrinking market i think at the unit sales level it still outsells most dslr models. it's a price and user friendliness thing. All the silly stuff we hate (auto feature picture modes etc it has will appeal to the bridge crowd. Bridge cameras i think are the strongest segment in the P&S market because phones are killing most of the market.

08-22-2012, 05:57 AM	#110
Tonto Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wellington Posts: 969	Agree with Eddie, I started really enjoying photography with my old Olympus 18x zoom camera. How ever if given the choice again at the time with todays knowledge (it was a wedding present) I would have preferred something in the 24-135mm equiv range (5-6x zoom) with a higher aperture and slightly larger sensor. Also RAW would have been nice to have!

08-22-2012, 06:49 AM	#111
KHatfull Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 98	Originally posted by Tonto Agree with Eddie, I started really enjoying photography with my old Olympus 18x zoom camera. How ever if given the choice again at the time with todays knowledge (it was a wedding present) I would have preferred something in the 24-135mm equiv range (5-6x zoom) with a higher aperture and slightly larger sensor. Also RAW would have been nice to have! Same here. My first "serious" digicam was an Olympus C-2100UZ...at the time the lens was amazing: stabilized, 10X, 38-380 EFL. While the camera by today's standards wasn't even good for web display it was the single most "funnest" photographic tool I've ever used, then or since. I've often thought of picking one up on eBay, they go for like $75 in REALLY nice shape....just for nostalgia's sake.

08-22-2012, 07:04 AM	#112
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Bridge cams have been continuously improving. A backlit sensor should add a nice little performance boost to the X-5, and maybe there are some other surprises in the box. The Panasonic with f/2.8 lens discussed above is interesting, and the Fuji X-S1 has the same 2/3" sensor as the X-10. I don't see this segment ever dying out. If anything, I expect it will grow as small sensors, lenses and processor technology continue to evolve. A good bridge cam with a small advanced amateur p&s makes a pretty versatile combo.

08-22-2012, 07:27 AM	#113
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by audiobomber A good bridge cam with a small advanced amateur p&s makes a pretty versatile combo. well make that last one a good phone or tablet!

08-22-2012, 07:36 AM	#114
Medium FormatPro Banned Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh Photos: Albums Posts: 1,668	Originally posted by LamyTax True, but isn't 400mm a bit short for that Someone will most likely off the filter/lens combos that attach onto the end of the lens to perhaps even double the focal length

08-22-2012, 08:39 AM	#115
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 well make that last one a good phone or tablet! Not for me! I'll have a small camera please, with real photographic features like manual mode, metering choices, ISO button, raw capture, etc.

08-22-2012, 08:50 AM	#116
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	I started out my serious shooting with a Fuji S7000 bridge camera. It was a very good camera. It did annoy me not being able to change lenses once I got a bit more experienced with it. But it did shoot RAW and this was like 8-9 years ago. Bridge cameras like these are good for people who are ready for more than a pocket P&S but who aren't quite ready for swapping out a bunch of lenses. They give you a lot more control than a smaller P&S does but they're not as confusing as using a DSLR with proper lenses can be to people who haven't really used anything but a pocket cam before. They're also usually darned good at macro. I miss having my Fuji sometimes still when it comes to that. I can get basically the same or even slightly better macro shots that I got with my Fuji but I usually have to work a fair bit harder for it on my DSLR than I did on my S7000. I don't want to step backwards but I don't knock cameras like these because I know they can actually be really decent cameras.

08-22-2012, 09:00 AM	#117
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	When I walk around Times Square, all I see are compact cameras, bridge cameras, M4/3s, and the occasional Sony NEX or entry DSLRs. So bridge cameras are still quite common.

08-22-2012, 09:04 AM	#118
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by magkelly I started out my serious shooting with a Fuji S7000 bridge camera. It was a very good camera. It did annoy me not being able to change lenses once I got a bit more experienced with it. But it did shoot RAW and this was like 8-9 years ago. Bridge cameras like these are good for people who are ready for more than a pocket P&S but who aren't quite ready for swapping out a bunch of lenses. They give you a lot more control than a smaller P&S does but they're not as confusing as using a DSLR with proper lenses can be to people who haven't really used anything but a pocket cam before. They're also usually darned good at macro. I miss having my Fuji sometimes still when it comes to that. I can get basically the same or even slightly better macro shots that I got with my Fuji but I usually have to work a fair bit harder for it on my DSLR than I did on my S7000. I don't want to step backwards but I don't knock cameras like these because I know they can actually be really decent cameras. S7000 was a really good bridge camera (i sold more than a few) They do have there place for people at that point like you were, and in many cases that will satisfy there needs for the long term. Most people don't make anything remotely resembling art with their cameras, they just want to document their lives and capture memories. a bridge camera lets them do a better job of this. for the more basic level for most people the cell phone will cover what they need as they continue to evolve, and the bridge camera will be there go to for family events, vacations etc. with the phone being the day to day camera the people who get enthusiastic from the bridge camera crowd will move up. If the bridge camera was a pentax and they enjoyed it they are far more likely to move up to pentax. That is why they are still competing in this category. letting the other PS category revert to ricoh makes sense because that is the dying category and supporting 2 product lines there makes no sense

08-22-2012, 09:08 AM	#119
DaveBlack Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 441	Originally posted by audiobomber Not for me! I'll have a small camera please, with real photographic features like manual mode, metering choices, ISO button, raw capture, etc. And is there a reason a camera base on a smartphone interface couldn't have such features. I guess most of the physical buttons would be replace by virtual touch-screen bottoms. Still a camera with a good sensor and good lens could be place in a small smartphone body and have manual mode, ISO control and shot raw. Dave

08-22-2012, 09:18 AM	#120
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by DaveBlack And is there a reason a camera base on a smartphone interface couldn't have such features. I guess most of the physical buttons would be replace by virtual touch-screen bottoms. Still a camera with a good sensor and good lens could be place in a small smartphone body and have manual mode, ISO control and shot raw. Dave the nokia is a big step in that direction.