26 replies to this topic

[Parula]

I am looking for an inexpensive camera under $800 that is good for nature photography. This will be my first camera so I need an easy to learn camera.

[canon eos]

There have been several threads here on this same subject, and you might want to review those.

That price line would basically separate DSLRs (digital Single-Lens-Reflex) cameras from what may generically be called P&S* (point-and-shoot).

DSLRs are basically the starting point as you buy a camera body (often as part of a kit, with a starter lens), but to do birds you would need to invest some serious money.*P&S will often get a bad rap as they can be misunderstood. Yes, you can get basic ones for under $200. but there are some very good cameras in the P&S genre, many of which are known as 'bridge' cameras, rather bridging the gap between P&S and DSLRs.

Canon (SX40), Lumix (FZ150), Sony and Fuji have good cameras under your price cap. Superb results can be achieved with any of those, in the right hands.

Note:

• you do want a camera with a proper viewfinder (that is included with the purchase price); holding a camera up to view through the back is just not good enough!
• just because a camera has fantastic range (telephoto/zoom effect) does not necessarily make it the best. There is a limit as to how much quality you can achieve with super zooms, and that applies to DSLRs as well as bridge cameras
• consider a camera that has RAW capability. You may not be familiar with the term, but you may grown into its editing potential, if you are interested in high-quality images.
• that said, most camera have very sophisticated JPG 'engines; that can yield excellent images, again, in the right hands

Hope this helps some; have fun:)

[dklucius]

i'm in my mid 70's and never had a camera except for a polaroid land camera 50 years ago. After i retired this last time i did get a HP point and shoot camera for about $100 that was a good learning camera for everyday shots up to 50 foot. not always great closeups or details but
good enough for a beginner. Last year i got a Canon 4000 IS. as a gift and although a point and shoot for about $200. It has twice the zoom as the old one had and do get clearer shots. and does take good pictures for a backyard bird watcher. If you are a birder or hiker you probably will want to upgrade to a telephoto lens or one with an assortment of lenses so you can get the distance shots or tree tops or across the fields. my sister has a canon xs110 IS which is a $600 top line point and shoot just about the bridge between point and shoot and dslr cameras. she swears by it and uses at her job and also
as a field camera she highly recomends it.

[canon eos]

Parula, here is a link to a comparison of the super-zoom bridge cameras...........

http://www.2cameragu...ameras-2012.htm

[JimBob]

Canon SX40!

http://www.whatbird....pics-with-sx40/

That's my gallery of pics taken with it. I've got a lot more. . . not in the gallery though.

(it has a Tennessee Warbler pic that I said I would pm you in it!)

[JimBob]

Some pictures I've taken. . . (ps the Black Swan was taken at the STL zoo)

[Parula]

thanks guys i looked at another thread and my number one choice right now is a SX40

[Joejr14]

I'm retyping this for the 3rd time now since my browser has backed out of this thread twice already...

So since there's been new posts since then I'll just preface this by saying I do not mean to prejudice anybody in their thinking....

I personally don't understand the point of bridge P&S. In my cases, you're paying a very similar price to a DSLR and you're not getting all of the functions. So, my question is...what do you mean by 'nature photography'.

The thing is, a high end P&S is NOT comparable to a DSLR. I'm not saying you can't get great images, but I'll guarantee you that when put side by side the difference in picture quality is obvious.

Now, if you're not willing to spend money for the body and secondary lenses, then perhaps the P&S is the better option. If you're looking to take pictures of say flowers or bugs, I think a DSLR with a macro lens is the way to go. You can get a good DSLR body used for half of your budget. You can also get a good used birding lens for half of your budget.

I'd suggest going to a camera store and messing around with the higher end P&S and an SLR. If you're serious about getting into photography, imo, it's a waste of money to get a P&S to decide a year down the road you want the options of extras lenses, raw format, etc etc. Do some serious research and hold the different cameras to get a feel for anything before you make a decision.

[Liam]

I agree with Joe. For under $800 you can get an entry-level DSLR set-up that will take good quality photos, or at least better quality than a superzoom P&S. You could get a body like the Nikon D5100 or the Canon T3 and purchase a cheap 300mm telephoto, such as the Sigma AF 70-300mm (yes, I wrote a review on that lens, labeling it "BAD", but it's still good enough for the beginner) or the Tamron 70-300mm. You will be much happier with your photos versus purchasing a superzoom. However, if you are less interested in getting a really super shot, and more interested in getting a decent record, go for the superzoom P&S. You'd obviously not be interested in learning the advanced stuff, and the superzooms are designed to be easy-to-use and simple. The Canon SX40 is probably the best superzoom on the market.

[lonestranger]

Joejr14 makes a very valid point, one that I can totally relate to because I made that mistake in the beginning. I bought a point and shoot camera and was hooked on photography so I bought a better point and shoot. It was a great camera and the pictures it took were great, or so I originally thought. I was disappointed in the shutter lag of the point and shoot though, too many shots of a bird's tail as it flew out of the frame. The only way to get away from the shutter lag was to buy a DSLR, so that was my next step. I bought a 70-300 lens to go with my new DSLR and I was amazed at the difference in image quality. Yes, there was a bit of a learning curve going from auto, to shutter priority, and then aperture priority, heck I am still learning how to use my camera to it's full potential, but that's to be expected when you want to keep taking better and better photos. I guess that's the trap I fell into, I wanted to take better and better photos, so I kept buying better and better gear. If I had of known then what I know now, I would have realized that P&S cameras are not great for nature photography, yeah they take great pictures, right up until you take pictures with a DSLR and then you start to wonder what was so great about that P&S and why you wasted your money on it. Myself, I spent more on my two advanced P&S cameras than I did on my first DSLR and 70-300 lens.

Having said all that, if you're looking to get into wildlife photography, and your interest grows once you actually get a camera, then it will inevitably grow into purchasing a DSLR and lens. Photography is highly addictive and the desire to take better and better pictures is part of the evolution of a photographer. Buying the gear now that you're going to end up buying later can save you a lot of money. Learning how to use a camera is just as easy with a DSLR as it is with a point and shoot camera, and it's cheaper to learn on a DSLR than it is to learn on a point and shoot and then buy a DSLR later.

[LauraC]

I have a Nikon D7000 (DSLR) and a Panasonic FZ150 (as well as a few other ultrazoom cameras). The Panasonic is currently my back-up camera but because I purchased the Panasonic only this past April, I have been taking a few photos with it just to get used to the camera before I take it with me on vacation along with the DSLR. I put together a gallery of outdoor photos taken just with the FZ150 for anyone who is considering the camera. They are all handheld shots. You are welcome to look at the slideshow. It includes birds, macro and scenic all taken in my area of Tennessee.

http://zzcapphotos.s...AlbumKey=pxMD6W


To be honest, I would just as soon reach for the FZ150 to take a handheld macro shot as I would to change the lens on the DSLR. It has RAW as well as jpg. I do not shoot on Auto. I do not do video so I can't speak to that for any of my cameras. The image quality is excellent.

The only minus is 12 megapixels. My DSLR has 16 and when I need to have large prints made for competition, the DSLR is the better choice.

[LauraC]

I forgot to mention the last photo of the two groundhogs was taken through the windshield hence the poor quality.

[Parula]

well i have very little knowledge on cameras but from what LauraC said i can attach a DSLR lens on a point and shoot. So can I put a DSLR lens on the SX40 and the FZ150?

[canon eos]

well i have very little knowledge on cameras but from what LauraC said i can attach a DSLR lens on a point and shoot. So can I put a DSLR lens on the SX40 and the FZ150?

Ummm, No!
That's part of the problem in all this.
P&S like the SX40, FZ150 etc are fantastic 'deals' when compared to DSLRs. (as with LauraC above, I have both). When you buy a DSLR you are essentially buying a camera body (and yes, a lens may or may not come with it, depending on how you may choose), but then you have to start buying lenses. To get the (zoom) range of say the SX40 in a DSLR you would have to buy at least three lenses, so add at least $2000. to get close to the range (coverage) of the SX40.
So it gets over your $800. cap pretty quickly!

As others have said, it depends on how serious you might want to get into photographing birds.
I have posted links here at this forum on superb images taken with under-$500. P&S cameras. And you can see terrible images all over the net taken with DSLRs costing $2000-300 and more!

I hope this helps, Parula. But take your time.

[Joejr14]

Parula, I'd suggest doing some reading on cameras before you think about making a decision. It's not a cheap one, and the last thing you want to do is make the wrong decision and in 6 months realize that you now want to spend another $1000 to get what you really wanted.

Just as an example (and because I'm a nikon guy)...

Nikon D5000 (12.3 mp) -$349
D5100 (16.2 mp) -$465

Those are used prices on some of the newer 'entry level' Nikon bodies.

You'd need to pair that up with a lens, and if you're looking for a 'birding' lens you really need at least 300mm. So...

Nikon 55-300mm (refurbished) VR- $285
Nikon 70-300mm - $85 (a cheapie but a decent lens)
Tamron 200-400 f/5.6 - $215
Tamron 200-500- $546

Everything here is quoted from Keh.com, and they offer a 6 month warranty with all of their used items. I've bought a ton of stuff from them, they're top notch so there's no need to worry about buying used, especially with that long of a warranty.

Even the two most expensive options there (D5100 and Tamron 200-500mm) just hits $1000. The cheapest option (D5000 and Nikon 70-300mm) hits a whopping $434. If you swapped that with the NIkon 55-300mm VR lens you'd be at $634.

There are a TON of options out there, and it depends entirely on what you want. Obviously the lens listed are all zooms, and would be decent to good for birding, but the Nikon 'kit lens' 18-55mm that comes with just about every DSLR body is a whopping $100, and is actually a great lens for everyday use.

Lots to think about!

[lonestranger]

Parula, if you're already overwhelmed with too many choices and not enough knowledge to decide between them, the following article may help you better understand what you're getting into. It may seem like a lot to absorb, but the info provided is well worth reading. Even if you only absorb some of the info, I think it'll be helpfull in your decision making. They also offer their suggestions for what cameras to consider in each class/category, but the information before that is designed to help you sort through all the stuff that you don't understand about cameras in order to help in the buying process. http://www.theverge....ra-buyers-guide

[Parula]

So you all would recommend a P&S for me.

[Joejr14]

So you all would recommend a P&S for me.

Depends.

What are you looking to take pictures of? What are you expecting from your photographs? Are you willing to invest some money into different lenses for specific tasks, and be willing to potentially carry a few lenses around?

[dklucius]

for me the point and shoot was what i needed. it was inexpensive and was a great learning tool and the more i used it and epermented with settings and learning what it could do and not do. it fit in my pocket and used 2 rechargable triple A batterys and i had extras if i was going to use it over the day away from home. After learning to be comfortable with a camera and binoculars i decided i wanted some thing for better closeup and clear detail and went with a mid grade point and shoot and am learning new tricks and experience with it. it has a battery pack and i bought a spare battery pack so i could use one or both if needed or charge one while useing the other. it does give me clear clean pictures but is limited to mostly short distances under 100 foot and best under 25 foot. I am not a hiker or birder at my age and the camera fills my needs for the backyard or the fishing hole. or an occasional trip to the farm. in the future i might consider a more advanced super zoom point and shoot but don't see myself useing a dslr and packing a bag of lenses for a trip. but a lot of that is i am not a techie nerd and am happy with the basic computer or camera and don't have an ipod or blackberry.i am an old dog not learning new tricks very fast.

[JimBob]

Just realized you had $800 dollars to spend!!!! GET A DSLR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would've gotten a DSLR, but I couldn't afford one. I plan on saving up for a while, and getting one! Or. . . getting a good lens for my moms DSLR. . .