[shuttertalk]

Some pretty interesting insights from Photography blog about the death of the bridge camera (or what I would like to call a prosumer camera)///
http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php...ge_camera/

Basically he predicts that in a year or two, manufacturers will phase out the bridge camera, offering consumers either a choice of a compact or digital DLR, with no in between. He observes that bridge cameras are only supported by companies that have virtually no presence in the DLSR market.

There is simply more money to be made by selling digital SLRs, with the many expensive add-ons in the form of lenses and flashguns, whilst compacts can accommodate the majority of people who don’t want the bulk of a DSLR. For the likes of Canon, Nikon and Olympus, bridge cameras actually compete with their most profitable products (DSLRs), rather than complement them, hence their gradual removal.

Quite profound eh? I for one think bridge or prosumer cameras are very useful and definitely have a place in a photographer's arsenal. Not everyone wants or needs a digital SLR system. Some would be better served with a fixed but good quality lens, with features such as macro, swivelling/tilt screen, live preview and more compact size.

It's sad that the trends are heading that way though...

What are your thoughts, people?

[matthew]

Basically he predicts that in a year or two, manufacturers will phase out the bridge camera, offering consumers either a choice of a compact or digital DLR, with no in between. He observes that bridge cameras are only supported by companies that have virtually no presence in the DLSR market.

I think that the pro digicams are already basically gone, and we're just waiting for them to be discontinued. Sony has its R1, which could revolutionize the category, but they're going to be launching 'their' DSLR soon, too. SLRs have marketing momentum behind them, but offer little additional benefit over a good digicam for most people.

What I've noticed is how aggressively digital SLRs are being marketed to the casual photographer.
Was this ever the case with film SLRs?

My Sony F828 isn't the equal of my Olympus, but neither is the Sony's DSLR competitors. I tried the original Rebel; it was the camera that got me looking for a replacement for my P&S in the first place. There's an economy and elegance to a camera that's designed as a unit; even smaller sensors make sense over an APS-Classic chip. (Anyone have a 28-200 f2-2.8 lens for their DSLR? I don't.) Build quality and lens quality can be better, without much sacrifice in image quality.

[Toad]

I dunno. I think there is still a place for the prosumer. Lots of times when I go out or I travel on the road, I don't want the hassle or bulk of taking an SLR but my Minolta A2 always is small enough to make the trip and it gives good results. Plus - there are many photographers that believe that it is the photographer and not the hardware that makes the shot. For photographers like this, the prosumer is perfect.

This is a small but very real market segment. We shouldn't confuse profitablility for the manufacturers with lack of consumer demand.