Long, but not that long, cheap-ish bridges

[apodo]

I want something general purpose that I can keep in a medium-to-small-ish motorcycle tankbag when I would not be taking a DSLR for size and risk, and more often than likely not use. Having looked at the options, and given my need for a viewfinder, it seemed to be a choice between three:

Canon Powershot SX60 HS — Wide angle, better low light performance.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 — Constant f/2.8, higher resolution EVF.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ72 — Cheap[est].

I like the FZ200 for the aperture and the 600mm equivalent is plenty at the long end for me whilst the Canon sounds like the better camera in general, as expected being much newer. But both are significantly more expensive than the FZ72 that I was going to go for that, it is just £199 on the high street whilst the other two are over £300 online.

Despite that seeming an easy decision I clearly must not be so certain as I still have not done anything about it. But having wished I had had something with me the other day I should come to a decision.

It seems though that DigitalRev have the FZ200 for £289 and just £269 for the Canon. Still more than I would want to pay but may be worth it if I would be too disappointed by the FZ72.

So, would I be happy enough with the FZ72 or is the difference that great that I should spend more even though it is only to have something with me as a just-in-case option?

When looking up the DigitalRev prices it occurred to me that maybe I should also consider a superzoom lens, such as the Sigma 18-250 or 18-300mm? A bit more expensive, but it would also find more use as a versatile walkabout lens option too. It should fit just about okay in my bag and I can pair it with my old Canon 30D that I would not worry about. Better or worse idea?

Or is there anything else that I should have considered? I would like some amount of reach though cannot imagine needing even half of the 1365mm equivalent the Canon offers. Unfortunately most of the recent models seem to either not have a viewfinder or make them relatively expensive options.

 

[crofter]

The superzoom on your 30D would give the best image quality if you're not bothered about extreme range,I use a Sigma 150-500 for my wildlife shots,this is of course no good for wide shots and close-ups so I've been carrying a small compact for those,this was OK but I do like a viewfinder and having seen some nice photographs using the Panasonic FZ72 I thought I'd give it a go,went to Jessops and had a look,I came away with the Canon SX60,the veiwfinder is much better than the FZ72 (and all the other similar cameras from other manufacturers I looked at) although I suspect the IQ is about the same,It's fine for general use but not a patch on a DSLR and half decent lens,good luck with your quest,it's a bloody minefield.

 

[apodo]

Sorry for the belated response, but thanks for the advice. It made me think the lens idea is probably the better option, so as a test I have taken my old budget Sigma 70-300 APO out with me a couple of time. It was a very snug fit in the bag, but also tad longer than the all-purpose lenses so if it coped one of those should manage fine. Finally this morning I tried it out.

Not the greatest shot, but it does not seem to have suffered physically from the vibrations, or rain, or me. So I guess it proved the idea works, and with a bridge camera not offering that much of a size advantage I guess it has made my mind up. Though I might need to use something better for padding and protection than an old Lidl SLR case slightly too small for the lens length wrapped inside a carrier bag!

So now just to seek reviews to see which of the two Sigmas (18-250, 18-300) or the Tamron (18-270) is best. The 150-500 sounds very interesting but would just be physically too long to carry. And though I know I would be more likely to use the long end, I would still prefer the versatility of a wider option.

Thanks again.

 

[pingu666]

theres a 1.4 kilo difference in weight, atleast.

dyxum.com will have a bunch of reviews

 

[apodo]

As it is just something to have with me on the bike the weight is irrelevant to that, just the overall size.

And my usual long lens is a 70-200 f/2.8 (and convertor), which I have often taken for walks without ever using, so anything would feel much lighter to have and use. Obviously the 70-200 will always be the first choice, but a superzoom would also offer a convenient option for occasions when I would otherwise not take a long lens, or be put off of constantly switching.

I have looked at a number of reviews, I am surprised there do not seem to be many comparative ones given there clearly is a market for them. And they seem to get refreshed so often that many are about already out of date versions. But in general it seems the Sigma 18-250 tends to be narrowly favoured over the Tamron 18-270.

Not seen much about the newer Sigma 18-300, which is a shame as it seems to be the replacement for the 18-250. My prejudice would expect it to be poorer with more comprise to increase the length, but being newer it should be able to equal the performance if not improve it. Reviews also have it being sharper than the interesting sounding Tamron 16-300, but that is more expensive than I would spend on it.

The Sigma 18-200 seems to be the best of the lot, unsurprisingly with less range to cover. With the 70-200 I do not mind shooting to crop, but with one of these lenses on a 8mp body I would rather have a bit more reach from the lens itself. So I am siding towards the Sigma 18-300. I would be happy with the 18-250 range, and certainly the price, but the improved OS of the newer model and it using Sigma's dock system makes it seem worth the difference.