Comparing bridge and 3 DSLR cameras?

I LOVE photography. I have an Olympus SP-610uz bridge camera right now. I found 3 DSLR cameras on craigslist all under $400. I was just wondering how they compare to my current camera.

Nikon D3000 w/ Nikkor 18-55mm lens - $325
NIKON D60 DSLR - $300
Nikon D40 DSLR with a 18-55mm VR lens - $250
And then my Olympus SP-610uz camera.

Which one has the best quality, and which is the best deal?

Added (1). Jim A, I wouldn't buy any equipment before getting the full information on it and checking it out. If it needs anything replaced, if something isn't working correctly, if it's dirty, or broken, that kind of thing. But thanks for the advice.

A couple of things here.

First any dslr camera has a sensor way larger than any bridge camera. Result: Larger sensor, better results so that's a given.

However buying used isn't a good idea. How do you know how the gear has been treated? Has it been roughed up? Wet? How have the lenses been treated? Has the gear always been stored in a case when ever it's not in use? Has the battery always been pulled when the camera is stored?

Lots of questions you need to have answered before paying for any used gear.

Don't mean to hurt feelings, so here it is. First I can't stand the term bridge camera. It implies that it is somehow different from a cheap compact.added controls, maybe a bigger lens, it still uses a tiny, poor quality image sensor. I don't blame you, it's camera companies and their marketing. It's just like the thing with megapixels. They shove more and more onto tiny image sensors and quality is going down not up.

OK so enough of the rant. So I understand you are on a budget, and you are on the right track. Buying used is great, and getting a dSLR with a truly large image sensor will net you amazing image quality in good light at low ISO, and images that are actually usable at high ISO, where a small image sensor camera would deliver complete garbage over ISO 800.

The dSLRs you listed are pretty good, prices aren't bad, but I'll give you some really good advice for your first dSLR. Get the best image sensor you can within your budget. Anything else you can work around. This gives you more time to settle in with your camera, and you won't be looking for a better one right off the bat because your first choice wasn't the best.

If you can swing it, look a little more, within your budget, you could score a Nikon D3100. My advice is to go for that body because the image sensor performance jump is significant over all the bodies listed, and it's very similar in price to the 3000 now that the D3200 is here.

You'll most likely end up getting an entry level dSLR with the kit lens it came with, the 18-55.It's not a stunning lens, not great for low light. The one thing it has going for it is that 18mm on the wide end, you can get some wide shots that can look very dramatic of action like sports or a rock band if you get VERY close to the subject.

Your first lens, the one most photographers recommend, and I will too, the 50mm 1.8 for low light, for sharper images, and for the ability to defocus backgrounds, but you'll need to take control of if, you can't throw the camera in auto mode and expect results. If forced between only the dSLRs you listed, take the D3000.

for noise reduction in low light, use lightroom 4. If you can't afford it, check out NeatImage or Noise Ninja, be gentle with noise reduction, if you get crazy with it, detail can be smeared away.best of luck.

They are all dSLR's and have much larger digital sensors than your camera. They offer more range of controls too and the access to those controls are easier. The most important however is the presence of an optical viewfinder in those cameras which defines the true meaning of an SLR camera. Yours doesn't have it.

The best amont the three I would say is the D60 although you may be limited to the lenses that will autofocus with it. Don't get the D3000.It's the worse Nikon has brought out to date.