Bridge Camera for fish (cichlid) pictures?

philipgonzales3 · Mar 13, 2014

Hi, I am new to the forum and I've never owned a digital camera, besides the one that comes built into a cell phone. The camera's main purpose is going to be to take pictures of my Mbuna Cichlids in my aquariums and as a learning tool to learn more about photography. I've read a few articles about aperture, shutter speed, and ISO and what not and look forward to understanding them better, but for now I have a very basic understanding of these aspects. I want to get a "Bridge" camera with full manual and RAW photo format so that I can continue to learn more instead of just pointing and shooting. As I never have owned even a P&S there will be a bit of a learning curve but I'm ready to learn. One of the cameras that really stood out in my research was the Cannon PhotoShot SX50 HS because it has 50X optical zoom, manual mode, external flash support (not quite sure how this works but I'm sure I may end up needing this feature), RAW format support, etc. I know this camera does not do so well when you use high ISO (Sorry if that is wrong use of the word lol) but I figure it must be better than a $100 P&S right? also it should be better than the camera on my Samsung S4 right? I hope so. I like the idea of using the camera when I go to the beach, and travel and what not. Any help is appreciated. Please tell me if I am way off by looking at this camera.

philipgonzales3 · Mar 13, 2014

Anybody? I see a lot of people are using the 18-55mm lens that is available with the Cannon Rebel T3i and getting decent shots with it. I don't want to be a professional photographer or anything, just want to take some decent shots and be able to pick a few things up and kind of try it out as a hobby. I kind of wanted to buy something today, but I guess I will wait until I hear something here. My max budget would probably be about $500 for now but don't really think I want to get an actual DSLR.

D-B-J · Mar 13, 2014

Lighting is more important than the camera. For my aquarium shots I typically had a strobe on the side and one on top. As long as you have a reasonably fast macro lens, or that capability, you'll be fine. You can always use shop lights instead of strobes. I don't have much input on cameras.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

robbins.photo · Mar 13, 2014

philipgonzales3 said:
Hi, I am new to the forum and I've never owned a digital camera, besides the one that comes built into a cell phone. The camera's main purpose is going to be to take pictures of my Mbuna Cichlids in my aquariums and as a learning tool to learn more about photography. I've read a few articles about aperture, shutter speed, and ISO and what not and look forward to understanding them better, but for now I have a very basic understanding of these aspects. I want to get a "Bridge" camera with full manual and RAW photo format so that I can continue to learn more instead of just pointing and shooting. As I never have owned even a P&S there will be a bit of a learning curve but I'm ready to learn. One of the cameras that really stood out in my research was the Cannon PhotoShot SX50 HS because it has 50X optical zoom, manual mode, external flash support (not quite sure how this works but I'm sure I may end up needing this feature), RAW format support, etc. I know this camera does not do so well when you use high ISO (Sorry if that is wrong use of the word lol) but I figure it must be better than a $100 P&S right? also it should be better than the camera on my Samsung S4 right? I hope so. I like the idea of using the camera when I go to the beach, and travel and what not. Any help is appreciated. Please tell me if I am way off by looking at this camera.

I owned an SX-50 and it's not a bad little camera really, I owned one for a while and in good lighting it took fairly decent pictures. The thing about all bridge cameras is that they really don't do well in low light, which for a camera would include indoors without a flash. The sensors in a bridge camera are pretty small and as a result they really don't perform well in less than ideal lighting conditions. So lighting here is really going to be a lot more important than the camera itself if your going bridge.

If you do go bridge I'd probably recommend you look at Panasonic FZ-200, I owned one of those for a while and even though the zoom isn't quite as impressive as the SX-50 overall I thought the image quality was better, and the having an F/2.8 aperture throughout it's entire 600 mm equivalent zoom was pretty nice actually.

bribrius · Mar 13, 2014

I have a Nikon p520. I think you can get them right now at walmart for a little over 300 dollars. They have marked them down since I bought mine. Buy your bag to carry it, couple memory cards, extra battery you still might have less than 400 in it. Aquarium shots were a challenge for it however. Bridge superzoom cameras don't normally come with lowlight or fast lenses they are telezooms. But for a do all walk around camera they are great. Looking at robins post above, the 520 will take photos indoors and in lowlight without a problems. Night time, or lowlight with movement it runs into noise issues. you will be able to take photos in door with it without worrying about a flash though long as your subjects aren't moving to fast..

philipgonzales3 · Mar 13, 2014

Dang, well after seeing all the cool features of the SX50 I don't know what I want to do lol. It doesn't appear to be the camera for the job but the 50X zoom seems wicked, and it seems like it would be good for outdoor use. Now I'm really confused about what to get lol.

philipgonzales3 · Mar 13, 2014

So let's say that it doesn't have to be a bridged camera, and lets say the budget was under $600 bucks and I want to be able to take decent aquarium pictures (lowlight, fast lenses) and "normal" outdoor pictures. I wish they made a camera that "does it all", as in macro shots, far away shots, point and shoot but also with the ability to switch it to manual mode and that wasn't super expensive. lol sorry if I am rambling, just didn't think it would be this hard to pick a camera lol.

bribrius · Mar 13, 2014

philipgonzales3 said:
Dang, well after seeing all the cool features of the SX50 I don't know what I want to do lol. It doesn't appear to be the camera for the job but the 50X zoom seems wicked, and it seems like it would be good for outdoor use. Now I'm really confused about what to get lol.

I passed on the sx50 for the p520. All personal preference really. not easy on aquarium pics though. View attachment 68521 View attachment 68522 View attachment 68523 View attachment 68524

If aquarium is your primary purpose I couldn't suggest it unless you find the images above acceptable.

bribrius · Mar 13, 2014

Olympus Stylus TG-2

f2 lense and you can submerge it into the aquarium for up to fifty feet.

Robin Usagani · Mar 13, 2014

I rather get this.

Olympus E-PM2 Mirrorless Micro Four Thirds Digital V206021BU070

philipgonzales3 · Mar 14, 2014

But isn't the aperture on the olympus EPM2 too small on the smaller lenses for "action shots" of the fish? And I don't want to submerge the camera, my aquariums are on the small side for now. I have a 4' by 1' 55 gallon, and a 3' x 1.5' 40 gallon and a small 36" x 12" 20 gallon. These are the footprints of the aquariums, as I don't have the heights memorized.

There are too many choices lol. What is the advantage of mirrrorless? I asked a few people and they said to get the SX50 or the Canon Rebel ti, but these are just my friends who enjoy learning about photography.

What if I just blow the budget, get a canon t5i with the stock 18-55mm lens and see how that goes and eventually get a macro lens when I'm done paying off that bad boy lol.

robbins.photo · Mar 14, 2014

philipgonzales3 said:
But isn't the aperture on the olympus EPM2 too small on the smaller lenses for "action shots" of the fish? And I don't want to submerge the camera, my aquariums are on the small side for now. I have a 4' by 1' 55 gallon, and a 3' x 1.5' 40 gallon and a small 36" x 12" 20 gallon. These are the footprints of the aquariums, as I don't have the heights memorized.

There are too many choices lol. What is the advantage of mirrrorless? I asked a few people and they said to get the SX50 or the Canon Rebel ti, but these are just my friends who enjoy learning about photography.

What if I just blow the budget, get a canon t5i with the stock 18-55mm lens and see how that goes and eventually get a macro lens when I'm done paying off that bad boy lol.

Well if your going to blow the budget you might as well forgo the stock lens and get a prime of some sort, much faster glass that will give you much better lowlight abilities. Also you wouldn't have to blow your budget as bad as you might think. Take a look at a used Nikon D5100 (body only) and maybe a 50 mm 1.8 1.8 AF-S G. I recommend the Nikon over the Canon because they have much better high ISO/low noise than Canon, and in this situation that's a big deal.

Here are a couple of aquarium shots taken with a DSLR - these are with my D5200 and an 85 mm 1.8 AF-S G:

20140308_876 by robbins.photo, on Flickr

20140308_971 by robbins.photo, on Flickr

20140308_965 by robbins.photo, on Flickr

You could probably put together a D5100 and 50 mm 1.8 for a little less than $500, maybe less if your careful and watch some ebay auctions.

Robin Usagani · Mar 14, 2014

You can buy a faster lens. I was just saying I rather get a small micro 4/3 camera instead of a bridge camera.

philipgonzales3 said:
But isn't the aperture on the olympus EPM2 too small on the smaller lenses for "action shots" of the fish? And I don't want to submerge the camera, my aquariums are on the small side for now. I have a 4' by 1' 55 gallon, and a 3' x 1.5' 40 gallon and a small 36" x 12" 20 gallon. These are the footprints of the aquariums, as I don't have the heights memorized.

There are too many choices lol. What is the advantage of mirrrorless? I asked a few people and they said to get the SX50 or the Canon Rebel ti, but these are just my friends who enjoy learning about photography.

What if I just blow the budget, get a canon t5i with the stock 18-55mm lens and see how that goes and eventually get a macro lens when I'm done paying off that bad boy lol.

JerryLove · Mar 14, 2014

Canon EOS-M with the 22mm prime might be worth considering. The guts are basically the SL1 DSLR, and you can add an adapter to move to EF and EF-S lenses later if you like (making it a useful backup camera if you do go DSLR later). The kit lenses on the EOS M are, according to reviews, excellent.

philipgonzales3 · Mar 14, 2014

robbins.photo said:
philipgonzales3 said:

But isn't the aperture on the olympus EPM2 too small on the smaller lenses for "action shots" of the fish? And I don't want to submerge the camera, my aquariums are on the small side for now. I have a 4' by 1' 55 gallon, and a 3' x 1.5' 40 gallon and a small 36" x 12" 20 gallon. These are the footprints of the aquariums, as I don't have the heights memorized.

There are too many choices lol. What is the advantage of mirrrorless? I asked a few people and they said to get the SX50 or the Canon Rebel ti, but these are just my friends who enjoy learning about photography.

What if I just blow the budget, get a canon t5i with the stock 18-55mm lens and see how that goes and eventually get a macro lens when I'm done paying off that bad boy lol.

Click to expand...

Well if your going to blow the budget you might as well forgo the stock lens and get a prime of some sort, much faster glass that will give you much better lowlight abilities. Also you wouldn't have to blow your budget as bad as you might think. Take a look at a used Nikon D5100 (body only) and maybe a 50 mm 1.8 1.8 AF-S G. I recommend the Nikon over the Canon because they have much better high ISO/low noise than Canon, and in this situation that's a big deal.

Here are a couple of aquarium shots taken with a DSLR - these are with my D5200 and an 85 mm 1.8 AF-S G:

20140308_876 by robbins.photo, on Flickr

20140308_971 by robbins.photo, on Flickr

20140308_965 by robbins.photo, on Flickr

You could probably put together a D5100 and 50 mm 1.8 for a little less than $500, maybe less if your careful and watch some ebay auctions.

Those are some awesome photos. And me careful? you must have the wrong guy!!!! haha I have a hard time not buying everything that is shiny and cool! lol But thank you very much for your advice. I will continue researching a bit before I pull the trigger. Thanks for recommending Nikon as every review I see now they talk about it's better low light performance. I will post back when I am ready to buy or shortly after I do buy. It's so hard to sit back and learn all this theory about photography and not have a snazzy DSLR to test it out on...OK well maybe not hard, guess I just have to work on my patience a bit

.

And for the rest of the comments, thanks for the advice but I really think I want to start out on an DSLR because I am a nerd, and I like anything techie.