www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

OK - Here is a little test: Both of these are the same individual taken today....oh and one was with Warm setting and the other Standard; both were shot in RAW & both have been sharpened and processed to confuse.... (To be fair I've taken better and could have tried to get some better-matched shots.....)
One of these is with a DSLR+Macro, the other is a bridge camera with supplementary close-up lens.
But which one....
(and no cheating and looking at the Exif data, Eccles )

Nick
The first is the bridge shot.
This from the perspective that shows the camera was close to the subject, and from the depth of field associated wth a small sensor.
In the 800 pixel format forced upon us by the constraints of the internet, there is little to choose between them.
However - put a couple of 10x8, or larger prints side by side and the difference in clarity would be remarkable.
Where a DSLR really scores in having all those "spare" pixels to allow some pretty svre cropping.
Nice comparison Nick!

Any more brave enough to speculate - or do you all agree with Roger...

I agree with Roger.
And may I say, my bridge camera was S***! I wonder who suggested it, eh Roger

Denise

Yes - Bridge first!
(I should have made it harder and just given you the left wing of each )

(Got the bits of my 10.1mp Panasonic FZ50, which I broke when I dropped it - yes, after a long night at a friends wedding reception...
and put them back together so that focus and zoom ring functioned OK then super-glued the front-piece on - I think I have about 2mm extra between my close-up lens and the outer lens - but it still seems to work )
And at 800 pixel definition, it is true that there is not a huge difference - especially if you shoot in RAW and process for noise....but it takes the Panasonic an AGE to write the RAW file to the card....fast cards needed! Had also forgotten the delay in shooting (1/3rd sec or so) compared to the instant DSLR response. Nice though that the IS allows low shutter speeds by hand and it only weighs 650 grams or so. It does as a flexible, all-day, light camera with one small lens to screw in the front for macro if needed. I won't be putting aside the Nikon but at least having my Panasonic back removes the temptation (so far) to get another DSLR body
N

I think you could have increased the contrast and sharpening in the first shot and got it quite a bit closer, but Roger is right, the background gives it away straight away.
I have a workshop to take this weekend and I've been browsing some prints to take as examples. Looking at my old prints from the Canon S3 with close up attachment that I previously used I'm still impressed with what it could do, and it was a damn sight easier to do it too. But once I had the DSLR it only got used once, and then I wished I'd taken the DSLR.

Eccles
You'd love to go back the old Canon S3, but who in thier right mind is going to buy your second hand Sony DSLR gear

You'd love to go back the old Canon S3

Roger, It's funny you should say that. Just as you wrote that I was amending my previous comment to say that I wouldn't.
As for resale value of DSLRs, well, you've obviously been there and done that, but I'm still keeping mine.

eccles wrote:

You'd love to go back the old Canon S3

Roger,....., but I'm still keeping mine.

...And I was going to put in a bid ....