The phone rang Saturday morning. My brother-in-law was wondering if my wife and I would like to join him and his wife for a stroll with cameras on Peebles Island. Sounds like a plan, I said. When we were unloading from the van, Kyle pulled his Nikon 3100 with kit zoom from the bag, and I unholstered my Panasonic FZ150. I was immediately struck that the two cameras were virtually the same size. I had always assumed that my bridge camera was significantly smaller than an SLR, but it simply wasn't so. The two cameras were so close in size, that it wouldn't be a stretch to say that I could mistake one for the other in low light. So I got to thinking about the differences. The Nikon has slightly better dynamic range (.4 ev), 2 bits more color depth, and more than 800 ISO better low light sensitivity. On the other hand, if my brother-in-law wants more reach than his 18-55 kit zoom, he needs another lens (which he left in the camera bag in the van). For my part, with my FZ150, I get lots more focal length flexibility (25-600mm equivalent), but I sacrifice in technical image quality, particularly if I want to make big prints or shoot in low light. Ultimately, it comes down to: how much are you willing to sacrifice for the convenience of not having to lug around extra lenses?