2004 was the year of the bridge camera. DSLR kits cost more than many enthusiasts were willing to spend, and compact digicams didn't offer high enough image quality or flexibility to satisfy. Hence the bridge camera.

Some of the exciting cameras of that era, each of which featured Sony's 8 megapixel 2/3" sensor, which replaced their earlier 5MP 2/3" sensor:

- Nikon Coolpix 8700: 35-280mm (8x) f/2.8-4.2 zoom, 113 x 78 x 105 mm (4.4 x 3.1 x 4.1 in), 512 g (1.1 lb)
- Canon PowerShot Pro1: 28-200mm (7x) f/2.8-3.5 zoom, 118 x 72 x 90 mm (4.6 x 2.8 x 3.5 in), 640 g (1.4 lb)
- Minolta DiMAGE A2: 28-200mm (7x) f/2.8-3.5 mechanical zoom, 117 x 85 x 114 mm (4.6 x 3.4 x 4.5 in), 654 g (1.4 lb)
- Olympus C-8080 WZ: 28-140mm (5x) f/2.4-3.5 zoom, 124 x 85 x 99 mm (4.9 x 3.3 x 3.9 in) 724 g (1.6 lb)
- Sony DSC-F828: 28-200mm (7x) f/2-2.8 mechanical zoom, 134 x 91 x 156 mm (5.3 x 3.6 x 6.1 in), 906 g

These cameras replaced similar bridge cameras, and in some cases were replaced by other similar models. However for the most part, as enthusiasts have migrated to DSLRs, the bridge camera been a slowly dying category. No doubt camera companies are enjoying this migration, as a result of which profits from lens sales are increasing.

There are a few recent bridge cameras, most notably the Sony DSC-R1, which features a very large (DSLR-like) sensor and a stunning 24-120mm f/2.8-4.8 Zeiss zoom. By adopting one of the great advantages of the DSLR, a large sensor, it lost one of the typical advantages of the bridge camera, small size. That said, the R1 is an undoubtedly compelling all-in-one solution. However, even Sony lacks a current bridge camera in its lineup. Fujifilm continues to offer cameras in this category, though I have not been excited by their recent offerings. Sadly Canon, Olympus, and Minolta (now Konica-Minolta) have altogether abandoned the category. In addition to pulling out of this market, Canon and Nikon seem to be going even further, by "dumbing down" their compact cameras to make them even less "bridge-like." For example, RAW capability has been notably absent from recent "advanced" compact models from these dominant companies.

What makes the bridge camera special?

Advantages over typical compact cameras:
- With relatively large sensors and fast lenses for compact cameras, bridge cameras produce images with more depth than the average compact camera. With a given number of pixels, larger sensors (hence larger pixels) also generally translates to less noise, better per-pixel sharpness, better color, and improved dynamic range.
- The electronic viewfinder (EVF), while not as clear as a nice DSLR optical viewfinder, allows the user to compose accurately with the camera held to the eye, which is typically a more stable position than composing with an LCD.
- With the somewhat larger size, bridge cameras are generally more comfortable to hold than compact digicams and have room for better manual controls, in some cases including a mechanically-linked zoom.

Advantages over DSLRs:
- As a result of using sensors that are significantly smaller than DSLR sensors, bridge cameras can be far more compact and less expensive than a DSLR coupled to an interchangeable lens of a similar speed and zoom range.
- Lacking a mirror mechanism, bridge cameras can operate silently and typically feature a movie mode.
- Lack of interchangeable lenses prevents accumulation of dust on the sensor in most cases.

In case it isn't clear, I am a big fan of the bridge camera. I will always have a compact digicam for when I must travel light, and I will probably always have an interchangeable lens camera for when ultimate quality is sought. However, most days I like to carry an all-in-one solution that lacks the bulk and weight of my DSLR, has excellent ergonomics, and has advanced features. Right now, the camera that offers all this in my daily routine is the Leica Digilux 2 (D2). With a fast, sharp (f/2-2.4) 28-90mm mechanically-linked zoom lens, largish sensor (2/3"), manual controls for aperture and shutter speed, nice EVF, silent operation, RAW capability, and integrated bounce flash, this four-year-old (2003) 5MP digital camera is the best solution for my current needs. I know it could be done better with 2007 technology. For example, I would be the first one in line if Canon released a Pro1 Mk II with the following specs:
- Similar size/weight as Pro1
- 24-70mm mechanically-linked f2-2.8L image stabilized zoom lens
- DIGIC III (or better) and RAW capability
- New 2/3 inch sensor, designed by Canon
- Native 3:2 aspect ratio
- High quality EVF
- Manual controls for aperture, shutter speed, and ISO

Unfortunately, the chance of Canon releasing such a model are similar to the chance that my wife will surprise me with a Leica M8 and Summicron-M 28mm f/2 ASPH as an anniversary gift this year (zero possibility, in case you were wondering).

For now, I will continue to greatly enjoy my D2. If anyone has any further thoughts regarding the bridge camera, I'd love to hear them!