I keep a few bridge cameras on hand for workshop registrants who fail to bring a DSLR as instructed . The Canon SX30, SX40, and SX50 series has served extremely well.

My SX50 is now my go-to camera for quick photo-ops; it always rides "Shotgun" on any family road trip. The articulated screen, delivery of RAW, image quality, low-light multiple exposure noise reduction, fast AF for birds in flight, and long zoom reach are its strong points. Its somewhat limited aperture range is a shortcoming, anthough not a serious one.
I will certainly be checking out the new 60X Panasonic Lumix, but suspect its lack of articulated screen (a personally very important/necessary feature) may rule it out for me.
Dave Graham
East River, SD

One of the great advantages...perhaps the greatest advantage the beginning digital photographer has over the tyro film shooter is the immediacy of feed-back! A bit dark? composition a bit off? Need to zoom out a tad? Within 10 seconds of exposure you have a chance to modify ... at no cost...your exposure/technique/perspective as needed to attain significant improvement in the captured image. Ever since the days of wet, then dry glass plates, then film, to today's electronic photosensor the single practice guaranteed to improve the quality of any photographer's product has been... make more images...and then more images...and then...you get the idea. There was a cost to every glass plate, and sheet and frame of film and a great investment in time before each new image could be evaluated as a learning exprience. It is in the essentially unlimited possibility for sequential image tweaking AT NO COST that the great advantage of digital photography resides. Truly a wonder and a miracle!
Dave Graham
Estelline, SD

That's a lovely portrait of a male American kestrel, not an aplomado falcon.
Dave Graham
Estelline, SD

I've been involved with photography on very close to a daily basis since 1947 and have taught innumerable formal and informal classes and workshops on photography since The mid '60s. There is absolutely no need for an aspiring photographer to "cut one's teeth" shooting film before getting into digital photography. If one has been a film photographer the transition to digital should be a smooth delight! " But what about exposure?" Is the worry I hear expressed. If you shoot JPEG format the basic principle of exposure for color transparency film applies(expose for the highlights, process for the shadows) . It makes no difference if you learn the "Exposure Triangle" with film or with sensor pixels! The histogram is the single most useful and wonderful aspect of digital imaging you should embrace IF YOU ARE SHOOTING JPEGs.

Unfortunately, experience with film gives you no "leg up" in learning to expose RAW format images which is, contrary to what the camera manufacturers imply with their " JPEG+RAW" image collection option, a "different kettle of fish" from exposing JPEGs.. Each camera model is different in the additional dynamic range provided beyond the right side of the histogram. To collect the highest possible quality image data in a RAW file you need to determine how far BTR (Beyond The Right) you can safely expose without clipping highlights.
Dave Graham
Estelline, SD

That's a Cooper's hawk. ( rounded end of tail asopposed to squared-off tail as in sharp-shinned hawk, the species ith which it is most often confused.)
Dave Graham
Estelline, SD

To both TrainNut and gmcase:
Fact: I am atheist; i.e. I belive in no "God". The fact that I'm impressed to a state of awe by the life, words, and ethics of a man, Jesus, to be gleaned from the synoptic gospels and, to some extent, from John has, to my mind, nothing to do with a putative God. It's Jesus that impresses me, not "Christ" , the supposed "Anointed One". I completely disregard the supernatural fables and miracles and hackneyed myths of several religions that wound up embodied in the putative "Christ" and in the continulally growing multi-morphic cult/cults that comprise "Christianity". The man, Jesus, is an exceptional teacher and exemplar of a good life...a serving life...a loving life. It is of him and of his basic natural, human characteristics and behaviors that I am in awe.

Does this imply acceptance on my part of the New Testament as the unquestionable "word of God" ...or even written by humans inspired by God?
Not a bit of it! It's interesting literature, and when when the writings of several contributers appear to substantively agree on a number of points of rationally, observable, non-supernatural facts and occurances are found, some degree of credibility seems fair to accept. But mythic, miraculous, supernatural bushwah? No thank you.

So there y'go. That's who I am and it's my seriously considered opinion. Take it or leave it! Couldn't care less. I've long realized that it is futile to attempt to reason anyone out of an idea they weren't reasoned into in the first place.

Best regards,
Dave

You don't get it, NikonJohn. I am atheist...and am in awe of the life of the man Jesus. "Christianity", on the other hand, I judge, and judge fairly, I believe, by the actions of putative "Christians". Their cult, and their professions of "faith" come off poorly by any standard of comparison you might choose.

It is NOT impossible to be Christian if not also a Republican...it's simply infinitely easier because neither is beset with shame at wanton ignorance and irrationality. Indeed, both, frankly, enjoy being absolved of any responsibility to rationally and objectively explain their stand on any matter! Just " take it on faith" does it for them in any situation! Why fervently obstruct all efforts at rational govrnance? "Because we can...because it's God's will!" Can't argue that! Why? It would be un-Christian to do so!

Live life without having to think or reason! Gawd, it's easy!

In 1947 my dad, who had worked for Eastern Kodak in Rochester, taught me the: "full sun, sharp shadows,f/16, ASA " SYSTEM THAT Pablo8 mentioned. Depending on light conditions ( bright snow & sand, full sun, hazy sun, slight overcast & fuzzy shadows, and heavy overcast with no shadows the aperture ranged from f/22 down through f/16, f/11, f/8, to f/5.6. The main skill was learning to accurately classify those.light conditions. Took less time than you'd think. That got the concept of full stops established. Then metering and equivalent exposures (on a Weston.Master black Bakelite meter) brought it all together. And it still holds true for Film and jpeg exposures. to get the best image quality from RAW files requiresadditional exposure beyond the highlight clipping warning...how much depends on your camera.
Dave Graham

Using Photoshop's Adobr Camera RAW it is actually faster to do your initial "normalization" post-processing of either JPEG or RAW image files.
The great advantage of RAW is that you have far more latitude and options beyond the basic tonal normalization you do in ACR when you take the image file into PS. Anoher great advantage to RAW that the camera manufacturers don't tell you about is that you have available at least 1/3!stop to more than a full stop of exposure BEYOND THE HIGHLIGHT CLIPPING SIGNAL that you can use for exposure of a RAW file.. This extra dynamic range enables you to give more exposure to a RAW file than the histogram would suggest you give to a JPEG file. The result is that the LED display of your RAW file will look a bit or very "washed out" or "overexposed"...but you can still normalize its tonal values and recover supposedly blown highlights in ACR by sliding the "exposure" slider to the left. You'll need to experiment with each camera to see how much extra exposure for RAW each allows. I have some cameras that allow only 1/3 stop, but two that allow one-and-1/3 stop of extra exposure beyond the clipping warning. The result? Most of your image data will be of the highest possible quality ( highest Signal: Noise Ratio) and will deliver the lowest possible level of noise for whatever ISO you employ for the exposure.
Use Raw and the extra DR it allows. You'll never go back!
Dave Graham
Estelline, SD

Been using Dropbox for several years...flawless service, ties in my desktop PC, laptop, iPad, and smartphone (droid). The only addition I've recently employed is putting the app "GoToMyPC" on all my devices. Now I can access my desktop fron anywhere and use any application...including Photoshop CS6 and AdobeCameraRAW...remotely on any other device, as well as access everything on my hard drives. Life is GOOD!
Dave in SD

Had the Canon SX40 and was totally impressed. When the SX50 cameout the longer reach reached me. Gave my son the SX40 and the SX50 is my walk-around camera. Whenever I drive anywhere it rids shotgun. Delivers RAW, super zoom range, great I.Q. ,best dollar value in the bridge super-zoom class!

You are missing your best bet if you don't seriously consider the Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 All-In-One Zoom Lens. Absolutely super value for your dollar!

I might add that, alhough multiplier designations are not typically applied to lenses for SLR/DSLR cameras, such deignations are, indeed, useful and can be accurately applied in discussing "magnifying power" of a variety of lenses with people more familiar with telescopes, spotting scopes, and binoculars.
Again, when applied to zoom lenses and their ranges, the starting point of the zooming must first be established.
Dave G.

Indeed,that's right. But 5x, 8X, 10x etc are commonly used on a variety of P&S and so-called bridge and " Superzoom" cameras to indicate the RANGE of zoom...from its widest angle to "strongest" telephoto. To relate those "multiplier" designations to specific focal lengths requires knowledge of the sensor size ( and thereby knowledge of its "normal" lens' focal length by which to apply the appropriate " multiplier" to find the focal length. That will vary depending on the wide-angle starting point of the particular zoom under consideration. The original question is not insoluble; it simply requires a bit more info from which to start forming a cogent reply.