Bridge cameras v D5200 with a long lens

Hi all,

Some time ago, I managed to snap a reasonable pic of a pair of red kites with a mobile. This excited me and my interest has developed and I'd like to take more pics of more birds, especially birds of prey. I have a Nikon D5200.

My question is ; how does the D5200 with a big lens compare to a bridge camera, say the Nikon P950. I read there can be attachment problems with third party lenses.

....Neil

  • As a rule of thumb, the DSLR will give you much better results. Modern bridge cameras are very good, but you're comparing something with a 5.6x crop vs the D5200's 1.5x (ie the sensor on the DSLR is a lot bigger physically as well as having more pixels). There can occasionally be connection issues between camera bodies & 3rd party lenses, but that tends to only occur when a new body comes out with an altered AF algorithm for example. Assuming you're looking at Tamron or Sigma 600mm zooms, you're unlikely to have any problems. As you already have the DSLR, the only reason to go with the bridge (in my opinion) is if the weight of the big lens is excessive to carry around
  • Yes, Although my knowledge is limited, I was coming around to thinking pretty much the same. Your advice is appreciated.

    ....Neil
  • Hi Neil if you are considering a telephoto lens, I have the Sigma 150 to 600 contemporary lens if you do buy one you might want to consider the peak design slide shoulder strap. They are brilliant when you are out and about taking photos and well worth the money. Have a look as well on utube the Reviews on both items .i also have a Nikon camera.
  • You won't get much better than Whistling Joe's advice, and I'll endorse "I Love Robin's" mention of the Sigma 150-60 contemporary lens.

    I've been using the Sigma for around 3 years after seeking advice here, initially with the Canon 705D, and now with the Canon 5D4.

    If you want to have a look at the advice I received, have a read of: "Looking to zoom in!"

    https://community.rspb.org.uk/wildlife/f/photography/195948/looking-to-zoom-in

  • In defence of bridge cameras. I'm sure you will always get a better quality image with a good DSLR and good lens. However that assumes you have the camera with you and you've not left it behind because you can't be bothered to lug it round on your walk.
    I don't go out to take photos but to walk and don't want to lug round a weighty camera bag. My only camera is a Sony RX10 - admittedly an expensive bridge camera - but I almost always have it round my neck. It always has the right lens on (24-600mm equivalent), it has a fantastic autofocus and will shoot up to 24fps.

    I'm sure someone here will enlighten me but what is the point of SLR on a digital camera when you can see the actual image with a mirrorless camera? The mirror makes a racket, slows shooting speed and you aren't seeing the real image?! With a good digital viewfinder you can see what you will get including the depth of field - without loss of brightness...
  • I agree the best camera is the one you have with you - and the all-in-one relatively low weight of the bridge makes them ideal if you're wanting to take pictures whilst walking, rather than walking to somewhere to take pics (if that makes sense). I have some serious prime lens hardware, but it doesn't go out with me on a walk (way too inconvenient) - I use a more compact zoom lens instead. At a nature reserve, where you're sitting for a while at different locations watching birds etc, the big lens comes into its own and it's worth the hassle of lugging it around.
    The market is slowly moving from DSLR type bodies to mirrorless (specifically EVIL types), but the benefits of mirrorless are not quite as clear cut as you'd imagine. The start up speed of the DSLR is better, the battery life too. The viewfinder - even on the best mirrorless - is simply not as responsive when tracking fast moving subjects (eg in-flight birds) as any DSLR - sometimes nothing beats optics. DSLRs don't make a racket nowadays - quiet shutter modes are not particularly intrusive, though generally with lower frame rates. Mirrorless do have some benefits (though I don't find DoF viewing very useful personally (not for wildlife anyway)). AF can be more accurate with mirrorless (as you're focussing from the sensor) and the full-frame focussing is nice. In-body stabilisation is good and can even help if you have stabilised lenses - though it is limited for the long focal lengths we tend to use with wildlife, IBIS is more useful at the wider angles. Aids like zebras & focus peaking can be handy, especially if you're doing a bit of video with manual focus lenses & indeed, mirrorless is better for a lot of video work due to the ability to work via viewfinder and backscreen (DSLR video is back screen only). However, there are often ways around any DSLR limitations in this area by using a phone App or external monitor for remote viewing (which make video work with any camera easier in truth).