First DSLR & a few questions

Greetings.

I've been reading a lot about DSLR's, but still can't decide and understand everything.
Stumbled upon Panasonic Lumix FZ82, after reading specs and some reviews, i'm wondering why isn't everyone recommending it. I mean like the price is good, the zoom is crazy (which is interesting, unless the quality suffers a lot) etc. The lens should cost half or more of the camera?
Being a bridge camera does it have downside compared to non bridge?
Even though i can buy a lot more expensive camera, firstly i don't want to pay a lot and then discover it's not my thing and second, usually a camera has a standard lens like f 3.5-6 20-50mm, so for night i'll need a lower aperture lens, which is extra cost and for macro you need more zoom?? That's why i'm interested in this model.

I'm particulary interested in: macro > night & general photography.
Shooting both raw and jpeg.
#Winter is comming, looking forward to some winter photography in the woods, does it have to be weather proof or anything for winter conditions? And if it's not weather/dust/w.e proof i shouldn't take it to the beach and in any conditions except clear day?
Would be nice for quality to be great and sharp (does it depend on lens only?)
What about those AF (as i understood autofocus) points, the more the better? Maybe manual autofocus would be nice.
Probably would go for a nikon > instead of canon.
The dslr that i mentioned goes up to f 2.8, is that good for night, a big difference from 3.5?
What exactly i'm looking for, for night expect the aperture? Zoom? I know about sensor, but if it's gonna be a budget one, no FF then.

It's all about the sensor. It's a tiny sensor. That's why the lens has such a long "equivalent" length. This combination makes it a no go for night photography. It can't gather enough "total light" to not be extremely noisy. It will make decent images in good light. That's about it. It can probably make decent macro images but forget about the night stuff.

+1 on what he said, above. That amazing zoom is only because of a small sensor and short focal length.

I'm not trying to be mean, but your expectations and requirements exceed your skill and budget.

You don't get to do low light work without having good equipment (both body and glass). Which costs money. You don't get to do macro without different equipment (and you can do lens reversal, true, but that leads to other requirements in equipment) and software.

Plus, you need to understand light. Snow, for example, is going to be really problematic.

Either find out what it will take to get one of those in place, or start with a modest system and accept that you'll have additional expenses over time as you grow. There's a log to learn, so suggest finding a local meetup and locate someone that will help you learn by answering questions, showing you how things work, and essentially mentoring you.

G'day BB

The 2 comments above are good feedback from dSLR users. However I am going to upset things a bit - as a fellow Panasonic camera user, I congratulate you on looking at such a camera!!
There are several 'Howevers ...'

The lens is the most important part of any camera as it creates the image in the first place ... so a poor lens always means a poor result. The sensor inside the camera records the image from the lens and the larger the size of the sensor, the 'clearer' the image will become. This is why pro photographers use Full Frame cameras, seriously keen photographers use dSLRs with their "APS" sensors and 'hobby' photographers like you and me use "bridge" cameras with their postage-stamp sized sensors.

The FZ-80/82 is one of many from Panasonic [and Canon & Nikon etc. also have similar models] where the factory has found that they can include what appears to be a magical lens. However, it's a bit like a motor car which can do 200mph but mostly is meant to collect the kids from school while also getting bread & milk from the local shop. ie: the so-called 'best feature' may not be all that exciting

Back to your enquiry-
If you settle upon a superzoom / bridge camera, then I invite you to look at the FZ-300 rather than the FZ-82 - specifically for its lens. It is unique amongst cameras in that the lens is a "constant aperture" lens that retains its selected aperture as the zoom is in use -- meaning that the F2,8 at wide-zoom stays as F2,8 at long zoom. It is excellent for night-time work and I play with it a lot here. Panasonic have kept the megapixels down to 12mpx, meaning that noise in low-light situations is much reduced when compared with other small sensor cameras

The FZ-300 has all the camera settings / controls of a dSLR with regards to RAW, JPG, Auto & Manual operation, shutter and most apertures. Panny also offer various extra settings that do not exist on dSLR cameras.

May I ask your indulgence here and include 2 images from my Panny FZ-200 [the FZ-300 old model] to give you some ideas as to what you could do with one

1) Night time operation - heli-ambulance landing at hospital

note the 'noise' from the slightly speckled appearance ... taken at ISO-3200

2) birds high up in a tree

note - taken at maximum zoom ... 600mm [film camera equivalent]

That's probably enough for the moment - hope this helps
Phil from the great land Downunder
www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

Those birds are amazing though!
Are both the sensor and lens impact image quality/sharpness? So both should be at a decent level?
So i've decided not to spend too much and go for 300-500 euro cam (pref with a lens) to start out.
How much a bridge different from a normal dslr?
I would ofc prefer better image quality/sharpness over the zoom.
Thinking on buying a beginner cam to try out and learn with all the features and options. So maybe something like D3400?

G'day BB

To try to answer each part of your reply ...

** Are (Do) both the sensor and lens impact image quality/sharpness? So both should be at a decent level?
Yes the both work together to create the best image - and all sensors that I know about do create a good result.  The inescapable fact is that "the larger in size (ie: millimetres) the sensor, the better the final quality of the printed image"

** How much (is) a bridge different from a normal dslr?
In many respects, the camera controls for a dSLR and a 'bridge' camera are identical
The 1st big difference is that the 'bridge' camera has a fixed big-zoom lens, and the dSLR has a removable / interchangeable lens.  The 2nd big difference is the size (mm's) of the sensor, with the dSLR sensor being much larger than the bridge camera

** Thinking on buying a beginner cam to try out and learn with all the features and options.
As a beginner ANY good camera with the everyday controls of "P-A-S-M" and a good ISO-range and a good lens and a good sensor will work quite nicely for you.  ANY camera of this sort could be either a fixed-lens 'bridge' camera or a dSLR ... remembering that with and dSLR you will need to buy extra lenses later on > so choose the camera wisely to save money later on!

** So maybe something like D3400?
This is a Nikon dSLR and to my knowledge is as good as any ... I do not know how 'new' it is ... maybe one of the Nikon members here can help out

ps- a suggestion ... look at the photos on my Flickr account (below) ... nearly all the 2018 images are taken with the 'bridge' camera - the Panasonic FZ-200

Hope this helps
Phil from the great land Downunder
www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

The photos themselves are great, but maybe it's me or laptop, but they seem to lack some sharpness. And continuing our discussion, the D3400 for example has APS-C sensor, which should? take sharper photos than a bridge.

G'day BB

From the DP Review.com site ...
The Nikon D3400 is the company's entry-level DSLR camera. It's a modest update to the D3300, using the same 24MP APS-C CMOS sensor, EXPEED 4 image processor, Full HD video capture and an easy-to-use interface. The camera has an ISO range of 100-25600, an 11-point autofocus system and can shoot continuously at 5 fps. The camera's Guide Mode makes it easy to learn how to shoot in various situations. While it doesn't have Wi-Fi, the D3400 has Bluetooth connectivity for transferring images from the camera to a smartphone, albeit slowly.

Okay - Nikon cameras are excellent cameras - and like every camera maker, they have various models & price ranges for all tastes.  The 3400 is designated above as an entry-level camera - meaning that it is well designed, the technology has been proven for many years and the features are more than okay for 99% of everyday people.  Others who may have a decade or more of dSLR experience might start looking for extra features, but for starting out with serious, interchangeable-lens stuff, the 3400 is more than okay

It might come with a package of 2 "kit" lenses ... the 3x zoom 18-55mm and the 4x zoom 55-200mm - both are good quality lenses that deliver clean, sharp results

As time goes on you might want to get other lenses and maybe a more elaborate camera body ... and that's the way of the world!  

Buy a ticket and jump on board

Hope this helps
Phil from the great land Downunder
www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/

blackborg wrote: The photos themselves are great, but maybe it's me or laptop, but they seem to lack some sharpness. And continuing our discussion, the D3400 for example has APS-C sensor, which should? take sharper photos than a bridge.

Yes, they're a bit soft. High ISO will do that, as will weak glass. These are things you learn about over time, with practice and experience.

The D3400 is a fine entry-level DSLR, and kit lenses are fine to start. But you'll want to upgrade the glass after a time to get better images. That body has potential, but it needs better glass. It isn't just about one facet, and there's no single, final answer.

Any camera, in the hands of someone that knows what they're doing, can take great photographs. It's not the equipment. So make a decision and jump in.

An APS-C (larger sensor) with interchangeable lenses (better optical quality, more versatility) will certainly make better images regardless of the brand of camera involved.  If you can't get together the budget for a new one, then consider buying an older model in new condition or a newer one in great used condition.  If you like the Panasonic line, there are plenty of options there.  They have some nice mirrorless cameras as well.

My problem with the bridge cameras is not so much the smaller sensors but the extreme (range) zooms.  In my experience they don't really satisfy in terms of image quality.

+1 with Gary on the D3400.  I know a couple people with this camera.  Very reliable camera with plenty of features for the money.