Whatbird.com

for years i used a Canon S3 IS ... it took great photos.. but like an idiot i went to a Canon XS...the IS was convient, took video, fast fast focus, very good  burst rate...then i got this stupid DSLR... it is combersome, doenst take movies... going down the road , and i see a great shot at a hawk on the fence... the IS let me swing it over at the bird, and shoot away... the DSLR I gotta get the camera outta the case, put the stupid lens on.. then, if he is still there--take the photo...the IS  resolution was only 6, but you can't tell the difference hardly. only if you crop alot will the difference even show up..... the 100mm lens i got give about the same lens length as the 10x zoom on the IS...What is the big deal about going DSLR????? I hate it...

---

http://whatbird.com/forums/photos/early_summers_birds/

I had a similar situation...  went to upgrade, got a cheaper dSLR (you get what you pay for, I suppose), took it back a week later and got the Canon S5 IS -- love it!  Wouldn't trade it for anything.

When taking the serious photographs, in a blind or cubby, I grab the DSLR.  The camera will already be mounted on a tripod(Benbo Mini-Trekker) and a super ball head (Manfrotto) with the proper lense attached.

When walking around the neighborhood, I grab the Canon SX10IS.  This camera does well for those not so great shots that are taken in not so great places.  No filters, no nothing!

 

Both cameras have there place.  But for serious photography.....the DSLR is the only way to go.

 

 

 

Scott (where's the bokeh) B

When using your DSLR you should have the lens already mounted on the camera. I carry my camera with me every where I go and I always have either the 70-300mm zoom lens or the 300mm fixed lens on it. If your shooting bird pictures your going to want more than a 100mm lens. More like a 300mm at the least and a 400mm to 600mm would be ideal. Point and shoots are great, but, so far they don't equal a DSLR. Just my opinion.

---

Southwestern New Mexico

i meant a 300mm lens...a Canon Zoom Lens EF 75-300mm ...and i do carry both cameras around with me.. but the bag of the DSL (which doesnt accomadate a mounted lens) takes one seat...there are 4 seats. me, my wife, and my grandson...and the camera...

---

http://whatbird.com/forums/photos/early_summers_birds/

I vote for dumping the grandson. My new camera bag weighs about 25 lbs with all the stuff in it.

---

Southwestern New Mexico

raptrlvr:

I vote for dumping the grandson. My new camera bag weighs about 25 lbs with all the stuff in it.

Now THAT'S funny  raptrivr!! i needed a laugh.

---

http://whatbird.com/forums/photos/early_summers_birds/

birdseye:

i meant a 300mm lens...a Canon Zoom Lens EF 75-300mm ...and i do carry both cameras around with me.. but the bag of the DSL (which doesnt accomadate a mounted lens) takes one seat...there are 4 seats. me, my wife, and my grandson...and the camera...

My first suggestion would be to get a bag that can handle your camera and lens.  When I upgraded from a 70-300mm AF-D to a 70-300 AF-S VR, the VR lens was quite a bit longer than the older one, and it didn't fit in my bag.  So, I got a new bag.  Raptrlvr and you are both right, you can't take the time to attach a lens when you need to take a quick shot.  If you're going to be shooting birds, your bird lens should be on your camera body already.  When I'm out looking for birds, I don't even put the lens cap on.

To answer your other question, I think the main thing that's great about DSLR's is that they're fast.  When you press the shutter release, your picture is starting to be captured in a matter of microseconds.  With a P&S there's always a delay (usually between 0.2 and 0.6 seconds, I've even seen some take 2 whole seconds, yuck!).  Now, when you're grabbing your camera out of the back seat to take a shot of the hawk you just spotted, you might not notice this.  However, when you're looking through the viewfinder (or on the live view screen) and waiting for the warbler's twitchy head to finally look in your direction, you can't afford the delay that a point&shoot introduces.  Also, can the point&shoots take six shots in a second?  The newer DSLR's can.  Just imagine trying to capture a shot of an Osprey hitting the water and grabbing a fish when your camera has a 1/3 second shutter delay and can only manage 1.3 frames per second.

You also get a lot more creative control with a DSLR in terms of focus, exposure, and depth of field.  If you're just taking snapshots of things, this won't matter to you, but if you're really putting effort into composing and capturing images, this makes all the difference.

Anyway, that's my take.

I just purchased a Lowepro Flipside 400 backpack. I had a lowepro camera backpack, but, it was not big enough to allow me to leave the lens attached to the camera. Lowepro has 3 models of the Flipside, the 200, 300 and the 400. A friend of mine has the 200 which will handle up to a 200mm 2.8 lens. I tried it with all my stuff and it would not handle the 300mm 2.8 lens I have. It would handle a 70-300mm zoom lens. The 300 was a little bigger, but, it would not handle the 300mm 2.8 and the lens hood for it. So I went with the 400. This backpack is a lot cheaper in price than the Nature Trekker or the Photo trekker and if I want I can leave the 300mm 2.8 attached to the camera for quick use.

---

Southwestern New Mexico

I've got the Flipside 300, and I'm really happy with it.

I have a DSLR and a point and shoot (P& S) camera.  The p&s is a canon G9 and it works great if we're on the motorcycles or if I just want to stick something in my pocket or purse.  If we have the car the DSLR is sitting in the bag on the floor of the back seat. All I have to do is reach around to grab it.  That way I can also grab the bag and lock everything up in the trunk or throw a jacket over it if we hit Starbucks.  The p&s works great for somethings but not for that  beautiful hawk posed on the fence post!  

---

New for 2010: horned lark, prairie falcon, red-necked grebe, bewick's wren, snow bunting

I started with an advanced point and shoot (Panasonic FZ4 with a built in 10 x equal to 400mm). The main difference for me was the purple fringing on the P&S when built in lense was fully extended. If someone decides to upgrade to a DSLR a big lense is a must for birding. If you cannot afford a big lense Min: 300mm F4 fixed prime or even something like mine 80-400vr 4.5 to 5.6 you may as well stay with the point and shoot. The only upgrade other that that is if you plan to do portrait shooting and landscape a DSLR is a great choice, but the lense is key to this. I bought a used Nikon D50 body and a new set of lenses about a year ago. The lenses resulted in being published and being able to sell photos online, with two sales this week. Bottom line a DSLR is an excellent option but will take a little getting use to, at first I also thought it was a mistake but when I got good quality lense it opened up a whole new world for me and I would never go back to an advanced point and shoot.   

---

Nikon D50
80-400mm vr

Paul O'Toole
Kingston, Ontario

I'm glad I got a P&S for my first camera. I can shoot near and far etc.. Right now, I'm having FUN learning. I would not be having so much fun if I was having to switch lenses and miss shots etc.. I don't go out with something in mind. I might be on macro with a frog or I might be zoomed to a Osprey in a skyscraper tree across a river and because I don't know what I'm doing, time is of the essence sometimes.

HOWEVER, once I'm more experienced and understand the technicalities of photography better, I certainly plan to go DSLR. There's a reason the pros use them. I do notice a quality difference in some people's photos. And as someone else mentioned, the delay is no joke with P&S. I have the SX10 and the fastest it will shoot is 1 every .7 seconds. I wouldn't know what to do with something that does 6 shots per second. Oh I know, I'd be at home going through the 1,000 shots of the same bird! ha

---

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." ~ Samuel Johnson

I too started out with an advanced point and shoot. The reason I went to a DSLR was because I was missing a lot of shots because of shutter lag. I got frustrated trying to catch birds taking flight from the feeders and only end up catching the tail of the bird as it flies out the frame. There was a big adjustment period but I no longer have to worry about missing the shot because of shutter lag. Now when I miss a good shot, it's because of my timing and not the camera's timing.

---

My unorganized pictures can be viewed at

http://picasaweb.google.com/lonestranger102

I have 5 ultrazoom point and shoot cameras.  I don't use the movie capability so can't attest to that aspect.  I use manual controls, not auto.  By far the best one is the Panasonic FZ28, followed by the Panasonic FZ18, both 18x zoom, for photography.  My other 3 (Nikon, Olympus, Kodak) have more zoom but have poorer photo clarity, especially on dark days, and other problems.  The Nikon has very poor image stabilization (they call it vibration reduction) and my hands shake a little.  The Kodak has too many steps, not easily made, when switching settings between shots.  The Olympus is easy to use but has soft images and too much noise.  I don't take feeder photos (live in an apartment complex).  I never use a tripod.  And I have no intention of lugging camera equipment around or lifting a camera with a really big/heavy lens.  My camera is mostly used at max zoom for small birds.  I take a lot of photos from the car driver's side window (car stopped, of course ) . Like you, I'll be photographing a waxwing in a treetop one second, a brown thrasher on the ground the next and a tiny Carolina chickadee mid-distance right after that.  It has to be easy and quick to go between shots.  There's no setting up a shot because there's no time.  Birds don't come to me (feeder scenario), I go to them and I have no idea, when I go out, what I will find because I'm new to birding, too.  I can't imagine switching lenses. I frequently use the camera burst feature hoping to keep one out of five shots taken because of bird movement (not moving spot to spot but head movement, preening, singing).  My best friend, composition speaking, is my computer.  Every bird photo is cropped and resized.  I think the DSLR photos are sharper but I would miss a heck of a lot of opportunities, I think, if I used one.  My thoughts are that if I do buy a DSLR, I'd probably only use it for bird photos from my balcony and other non-bird scenic/people photos.  I'm experimenting now with birds in flight photos to see what works best with the Panasonic ultrazooms.