15 replies to this topic

[canon eos]

I don't want to start a camera war, but I have just come across a site which reviewed the "Best Superzoom Cameras under $500" and as I know many at Whatbird are interested in these wonderful and flexible bridge cameras it may be of interest, and value to check it out.
This sector of cameras is very worthwhile because of their long zoom range with quite good value.

• There are many who seek out the model with the longest telephoto length, and that is understandable, but there may be trade-offs. This has always been the case, where really long zooms (very long zoom ranges) are not necessarily at their best especially at the longest end. It's a matter of physics, mechanics and costs all being factored in.

• Another point to consider is the fact that while a lens may go wayyyyy out, the chances of you actually being able to control (hold steady), even with image stabilization, are very slim. Using a tripod may help, but may not be too effective with near-1000mm focal lengths
• One also needs to determine what quality level they are after. If you 'just' want to get a picture, any of the superzooms will give you that, and of course the longer will let you get a picture from even further, or of a smaller bird.

• But if you want high quality, read the review below. It's no surprise to me that the models with the longest zoom are not necessarily the 'best' for image quality (when you have them racked out to maximum zoom).

http://www.2cameraguys.com/best-superzoom-cameras-2012.htm




Of course this all applies to the superzoom bridge cameras. DSLRs, at a price, can offer more options.

[canon eos]

Most photographers with really long lenses and top-line cameras (DSLRs) will tell you that you still need to get in closer to a bird, especially smaller species, to get a very good image quality.

We can look at what on the surface are two camera outfits that can zoom in very close...............

• The latest 'winner' in the superzoom race for long range is the Nikon P510. It has a zoom range to an amazing 1000mm. This camera costs under $500. and weighs 19.6 oz.

• To get that telephoto reach we could go to the Nikon D300S with the Nikon 600mm lens. With its sensor factor of 1.5 this gives a range (close to the P 510) of 900mm. This camera and lens outfit costs over $11,000.and weighs about 15 lbs.

The fact is that if you were to photograph a Robin which is 200ft away, neither camera is likely to give you a superb image quality. The DSLR will definitely do 'better', but that is a relative term. Both cameras should be supported by a tripod since at near-1000mm it is almost impossible to eliminate camera shake.

The Nikon D300S/600mm will do better because it has a bigger sensor, and that 600mm prime has very few compromises such as are inherent in the 'superzoom' lenses. And in this case the competing P 510 has no RAW capability.

But, and here is the biggie..................
If the DSLR is left shooting the Robin from 200ft and the person with the P 510 moves in to say 30ft, the gap between the quality of the images will narrow. And, that gap will narrow even more if the superzoom is backed off from 1000mm to perhaps about 500mm or less.

The Nikon 600mm just loves being at 600mm (it's all it has!) but superzooms drop off in quality the longer they go.

So, if you have a superzoom, and perhaps not the longest (unless you 'just' want an image) and are able to get close, you can get pretty good images................

• remember that photography is all about light, and the quality of light is what can make the difference between very good and superb images.
• whether using a DSLR or not, take care in holding and supporting your camera (and look into a tripod or monopod as an option for greater support)
• if you can, shoot RAW, but regardless, if you want better images you must invest time into image editing

I've seen superb bird images taken with superzooms, and on the other side I have seen very poor images from some very expensive gear. The common factor was the operator skills.
Don't assume that good (bird) photos will suddenly happen with the purchase of that 'better' superzoom or even with a high-end DSLR.

Paint artists don't produce masterpieces as a result of buying the latest-and-greatest brushes

[JimBob]

Before I got my Canon sx40 I tried several other options. . . I personally like it better. I never got to take pictures with the others so don't know how good of quality they were.

I'm very happy with my sx40. It does well in all departments. Ask me what you'd like to know and I'll answer.

[JimBob]

[cwj2323]

I have the same camera JimBob. One of the big reasons I got it, besides zoom and other features is that it actually had a viewfinder. I never got used to holding a camera out to look at the screen, besides the fact I think it looks silly. We have a tripod, but it's kept with the scope most of the time, so I don't use it. I guess I fall into the category of just wanting an image (Like that Snowy Owl ). There are times though when I can see using max zoom will not get the best picture and will back off a bit. I'm learning, but I know I don't have the patience to fiddle with a lot.

We went to the camera shop today and the owner went through some of the manual settings with me so I can get better pictures. His big line was "The camera doesn't care about your photos." Using the auto settings, the camera decides what's best for each shot.

JimBob, I bought the "hood" today. Do you have one and if so, do you think it helps with your photos on a sunny day?

[canon eos]

I bought the "hood" today. Do you have one and if so, do you think it helps with your photos on a sunny day?

A lens hood should be considered essential. You're not likely to see a pro work without one as they can greatly reduce unwanted light from hitting the lens, thus reducing image quality.

[snick]

Are you guys talking about lens hoods for superzooms, or DSLRs? I didn't realize you could use a hood on a bridge-type camera.

[JimBob]

I don't have one yet. . . I should get one though, I've noticed sometimes I get too much light.

[canon eos]

Are you guys talking about lens hoods for superzooms, or DSLRs? I didn't realize you could use a hood on a bridge-type camera.

The Lumix FZ150 for instance comes with a lens hood. I can't recall ever not using one on our four FZ cameras!

[alanmcdonley]

Do you think the constant f/2.8 of the new Panasonic FZ200 will be a useful advantage? ($600 camera though)

[canon eos]

Do you think the constant f/2.8 of the new Panasonic FZ200 will be a useful advantage? ($600 camera though)

In short, yes.
To get that on DSLR lenses whether primes (no-zoom) or not, it is always at a premium.
What it means (constant wide aperture) is that regardless of your zoom position, you will still have that considerably wide f2.8 aperture. It can seem subtle, but is quite a valuable 'feature'. Several of the past Lumix FZ cameras had this feature and I'm glad to see them bring it back in the upcoming FZ200.

[a.wren]

Sorry to awaken an old thread, but for those of you who are using the Canon sx40, what are your default settings--not talking exposure or ISO, which are situational, but the things that are always a given?

I've always been all about the battery-saving settings, but I'm beginning to think that continuous autofocus and IS are a must for bird photography. What do you think?

[JimBob]

I like Auto sometimes. . . it does well, but often doesn't do what you know the camera can acomplish. So Manual is also one I like to use. You get to set it ISO, Shutter Speed, and Aperture yourself, so you often get better pictures. . . or worse. I also like Shutter Priority, which helps get less blurry pictures. You set the shutter speed, it deals with the rest. Did this answer your question?

IS is something I would call a must, but I know that lots of people use Manual Focus. I'm still learning with it, and I still stink at it. I wouldn't call Auto Focus a must.

[Doug Herr]

... but I'm beginning to think that continuous autofocus and IS are a must for bird photography.

A convenience but not a 'must'. I don't use either.

[a.wren]

I see what you mean about the autofocus. I had a lot of problems with it yesterday when the light was fading. Got some great focus..on the ground rather than the bird...or on a leaf. It was jumping all over the place.

Fortunately, I was taking pictures to puzzle through an identification, rather than for picture's sake.

[canon eos]

Once again, to put it all in perspective (and pertinent to the original thread!) here's a recent posting on DPReview showing superb images taken with 'measly' P&S cameras, the Canons SX30 and SX40............

http://forums.dprevi...thread=42537632