[Robert L Jarvis]

Too true Roy.

[Paul Jarvis]

Now back to the subject, the SX40. You can carry on debating pros and cons LOL !!

[AndyM]

Image quality and a few niggles aside, I think you'd need to lug around a fair bit of kit with a DSLR to match the versatility of a Superzoom for a scoped-up birder. I think I'd sooner be pulling out 810mm of compact Superzoom and capture something reasonable than be restricted to a 'manageable' 400mm and probably not bother. Wide angle, Macro and Telephoto all in a single package. Nice....

The Superzooms of today are piffling compared to what is to come. I'll probably be brown bread but my grandchildren will look back at DSLR's and laugh...

Andy.

[peter.jones]

Originally Posted by Roy C

You obviously would not have any problem walking with the little 70-300 Greame, it only weighs 630g! -.

Wrong lens.. 70-300L is 1050g.

As you were.
Peter

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by peter.jones

Wrong lens.. 70-300L is 1050g.
As you were.
Peter

So it is. must have been looking at the wrong lens (now corrected )- still it is very light compared to one of the 'big whites' and also lighter than the likes of 100-400, 150-50, 50-500 etc, and I still say that 300mm is too short for most folk for birds unless you are shooting from a hide in the garden or at some sort of tame birds. I know the 70-300L is a nice lens but for birds I would actually prefer the SX40 myself - reach is everything for me.

[punta]

The AF impressed me today - lots of branchs and a dullish bird. Just snapped two quick shots at full zoom when out walking the dog. Liking it more and more at the mo. It fits into my barbour pocket as well when it starts raining

Did not do the CHDK as I am a bit of a dumbo and found it all to confusing. But I have found a way of leaving the camera on all the time. Lens retract set to nil seconds and mine stays live for ever, quick press of the shutter button and it comes back into action, not as quick as a DSLR but quick enough.

Do I sell my 400 5.6 now - and forget my DSLR camera upgrade. Just feel happier carrying the SX40 around when I am on my lonesome, alway feels like I may get mugged with the big stuff hanging from my shoulders in this day and age

I just dunno what to think now.

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by AndyM

Image quality and a few niggles aside, I think you'd need to lug around a fair bit of kit with a DSLR to match the versatility of a Superzoom for a scoped-up birder. I think I'd sooner be pulling out 810mm of compact Superzoom and capture something reasonable than be restricted to a 'manageable' 400mm and probably not bother. Wide angle, Macro and Telephoto all in a single package. Nice....

The Superzooms of today are piffling compared to what is to come. I'll probably be brown bread but my grandchildren will look back at DSLR's and laugh...

Andy.

To be fair Andy a 400mm lens on something like the 7D is equal to 640mm. And with the SX40 (as with any tele zoom) you only gets the full zoom at infinity (if ever!). I know from some shots I have taken with the SX40 at full zoom in the back yard that when measured against a 400mm prime on a 1.6 cropper there is very little in it when shooting from up to around 15 ft but the further you are away from the target the more marked the difference is.
I do know that the SX40 at 1260mm does beat the IQ of the 400/5.6 + 2x tc (1280mm on the 7D). Which is why I say that if you are reach limited then the SX40 should not be underestimated.

There is no doubting that a superzoom like the SX40 is a hand and versatile piece of kit though. I am still trying to convince myself that I do not need a 500/4 or 300/2.8 II LOL

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Roy C

To be fair Andy a 400mm lens on something like the 7D is equal to 640mm. And with the SX40 (as with any tele zoom) you only gets the full zoom at infinity (if ever!). I know from some shots I have taken with the SX40 at full zoom in the back yard that when measured against a 400mm prime on a 1.6 cropper there is very little in it when shooting from up to around 15 ft but the further you are away from the target the more marked the difference is.
I do know that the SX40 at 1260mm does beat the IQ of the 400/5.6 + 2x tc (1280mm on the 7D). Which is why I say that if you are reach limited then the SX40 should not be underestimated.

There is no doubting that a superzoom like the SX40 is a hand and versatile piece of kit though. I am still trying to convince myself that I do not need a 500/4 or 300/2.8 II LOL

Roy,
If you are a "walk-around" birder then light kit is better. But on my recent trip to the Pyrenees I was looking for Lammageiers so I took bins and my 300/4 with 1.4x. Most of my sightings were at long distance and the AF of my D800 had problems. I would never have got anything with the SX40HS.
The attached photo is a crop but most of my sightings of raptors were even further away than this.
I find the SX40HS is excellent for video which is what I use it for mostly. When I'm in the hide , either digiscoping or using a 500/4 , I have the sx40 sitting on the window ledge shooting video at around 800 mm. It's brilliant.
The sx40hs is useless for warbler photography in canopy too as the viewfinder is not up to it as has been mentioned by others.
Get the 500/4 as it's a wonderful piece of glass for birds.
Neil

[AndyM]

Originally Posted by punta

I just dunno what to think now.

I know what I think. I think that's a nice phota'!

Andy.

[Robert L Jarvis]

Originally Posted by Neil

Roy,

I find the SX40HS is excellent for video which is what I use it for mostly. It's brilliant.

The sx40hs is useless for warbler photography in canopy too as the viewfinder is not up to it as has been mentioned by others.

Neil

I have found that it is very good for video and that is what I use it for mainly as you do Neil.

As to your second point must agree with that as well IMO would be not good chasing birds in woods, forest etc, focussing not quick enough.

Robert

[GraemeS]

Reading around (since I'm always interested in something that will improve things for me :) ), I get the impression that the SX40 is brilliant for stationary birds, but pretty much any DSLR will trump it when the bird starts moving.
So for my walk around camera I'm sticking with my speedy 7D and light/ergonomic 70-300L, which is a weather-sealed combo. I also made myself a comfy shoulder strap.

Now, I also use my old 400L with a 2x on a tripod for stationary birds. I can't really justify what I already bought, so I'm not getting a longer lens. It gives great shots if I have time to manual focus. After reading this thread and looking around, I might be tempted to sell that and get an SX40 instead since it should give good results but be much faster, not require lens switching and give me or my wife a spare camera. I'm just concerned how the small sensor ('crop factor') will impinge results.

[peter.jones]

I think the two systems would complement each other very well Graeme. DSLR close-in, Superzoom for longer range stuff.
Haven't used any superzooms to date, but I suspect they may be rapidly moving into the "Digiscoping" space for birders, replacing the camera bolted onto a scope, more than replacing the DSLR?

Peter

[AndyM]

Originally Posted by GraemeS

Reading around (since I'm always interested in something that will improve things for me :) ), I get the impression that the SX40 is brilliant for stationary birds, but pretty much any DSLR will trump it when the bird starts moving.

I'm really sorry but I'm having real trouble swallowing this and it will certainly put a lot of people off when considering what many regard as a really good all-round bridge camera. Sure, a DSLR will probably trump an SX40 with moving birds but only up to a certain point and plenty depends on personal expectations. In much the same way the SX40 trumps a DSLR for the happy-snapper on versatility, portability and most of all, price. A lot of what the SX40 can or cannot do is very much down to the individual. Photographic skills aside, the hit rate is always going to be lower but at under £300, you don't expect miracles! Anyway, any DSLR user is always going to view the inexpensive Superzooms as a step down and bound to find fault. They are there to be found but this in no way detracts from their capabilities.

I admittedly know chuff-all but managed to squeeze some flight images of Golden Eagle from the Nikon P500 (which I consider inferior to the SX40) that would possibly equal Neils DSLR captures (had I known a little more about setting the correct exposure, they'd certainly be worthy of putting on show). With this in mind, I was rather bemused by Neil's comment that stated "I would never have got anything with the SX40HS" especially having marvelled at his superb flight shots of Pelicans!

If it has to be the consistency of 'professional' shots that you're after, and nothing else will do, a DSLR and a string of different lenses is the obvious answer. If, like me, you want to experience the joy of capturing images for any occasion on an all-in-one that are not too far removed from the 'real thing' and without the hefty price tag, an SX40 will certainly do. Additionally, if you have patience and enjoy a challenge, I firmly believe that anything is possible.

Thankfully, this tread contains the objective, no nonsense views of Roy C who has 'been there, done that' and is now 'doing it' well, on his push-bike with an SX40 flapping along behind him and producing excellent results

The SX40 - It is, what it is....

Andy.

[GraemeS]

I'd just like to point out that you didn't quote the part of my post that mentioned I might be buying an SX40 to complement my DSLR, so I really hope I won't have put people off it.
It looks like a fantastic camera that will never compete with my 7D for fast moving birds, but in other ways I think it appears superior (reach and portability) and doesn't compromise much anyway.

[AndyM]

Originally Posted by GraemeS

I'd just like to point out that you didn't quote the part of my post that mentioned I might be buying an SX40 to complement my DSLR, so I really hope I won't have put people off it.
It looks like a fantastic camera that will never compete with my 7D for fast moving birds, but in other ways I think it appears superior (reach and portability) and doesn't compromise much anyway.

My apologies Graham. It was intended as general point of order for anyone else on the look-out for one. There are many posts that claim that the SX40 is no good for moving birds and yours unfortunately just happened to be the post that last mentioned it. I only quoted that part as an example to get my points across. I should indeed have included the full quote.

I may be totally wrong, but I suspect that many people try the odd flight shot and simply give up when things don't turn out how they expect them to without a thought for what they could be doing to improve things. Leaving everything up to the camera to decide just isn't going to do it

Andy.

[RE Birder]

Originally Posted by AndyM

I'm really sorry but I'm having real trouble swallowing this and it will certainly put a lot of people off when considering what many regard as a really good all-round bridge camera. Sure, a DSLR will probably trump an SX40 with moving birds but only up to a certain point and plenty depends on personal expectations. In much the same way the SX40 trumps a DSLR for the happy-snapper on versatility, portability and most of all, price. A lot of what the SX40 can or cannot do is very much down to the individual. Photographic skills aside, the hit rate is always going to be lower but at under £300, you don't expect miracles! Anyway, any DSLR user is always going to view the inexpensive Superzooms as a step down and bound to find fault. They are there to be found but this in no way detracts from their capabilities.

I admittedly know chuff-all but managed to squeeze some flight images of Golden Eagle from the Nikon P500 (which I consider inferior to the SX40) that would possibly equal Neils DSLR captures (had I known a little more about setting the correct exposure, they'd certainly be worthy of putting on show). With this in mind, I was rather bemused by Neil's comment that stated "I would never have got anything with the SX40HS" especially having marvelled at his superb flight shots of Pelicans!

If it has to be the consistency of 'professional' shots that you're after, and nothing else will do, a DSLR and a string of different lenses is the obvious answer. If, like me, you want to experience the joy of capturing images for any occasion on an all-in-one that are not too far removed from the 'real thing' and without the hefty price tag, an SX40 will certainly do. Additionally, if you have patience and enjoy a challenge, I firmly believe that anything is possible.

Thankfully, this tread contains the objective, no nonsense views of Roy C who has 'been there, done that' and is now 'doing it' well, on his push-bike with an SX40 flapping along behind him and producing excellent results

The SX40 - It is, what it is....

Andy.

Here, here!

[GraemeS]

Originally Posted by AndyM

I may be totally wrong, but I suspect that many people try the odd flight shot and simply give up when things don't turn out how they expect them to without a thought for what they could be doing to improve things. Leaving everything up to the camera to decide just isn't going to do it

Andy.

Too true, and some then buy top of the range expecting the machine to fix their weaknesses somehow.
I love the idea that the best camera is the one you have with you and for that alone a superzoom these days appears perfect for a birder, but arguably less if your primary interest is the photography.
And I am about set on trading in my 400L for the SX40. My wife likes the idea, too, as she'll use it as a walk around camera. She is more of a birder and refuses to use my DSLR since it's too unwieldy, which is quite telling.

[AndyM]

Originally Posted by GraemeS

Too true, and some then buy top of the range expecting the machine to fix their weaknesses somehow.
I love the idea that the best camera is the one you have with you and for that alone a superzoom these days appears perfect for a birder, but arguably less if your primary interest is the photography.
And I am about set on trading in my 400L for the SX40. My wife likes the idea, too, as she'll use it as a walk around camera. She is more of a birder and refuses to use my DSLR since it's too unwieldy, which is quite telling.

Well, if your interest is the photography, and you realise that the best camera is the one you have with you, I can see a few domestic disputes breaking out when you try to snatch it back from the wife...

If you haven't already done so, check out Monkey Princes Photostream. As well as the Birds/Wildlife stuff there's some pretty impressive stuff that knocked me for six when I realised that they'd all been taken with the SX40!

Andy

[AndyM]

...and here's one I rustled up earlier for the close-up boys...

Andy.

[draycotebirding]

Graeme just out of interest what camera are you using for your shots on your website?

Regards

John

[GraemeS]

Most the photos are with the 7D and 70-300L.

I'd guess that I may have missed taking the Rufous winged fulvetta with a bridge camera simply because it was quite dark and they were flitting around constantly and I don't always go out of my way for best technique (see below). The Japanese white-eye, on the other hand, would probably have turned out just as nicely since they were less lively, it was brighter and I've had to crop for the close up.

To get a great photo in dark conditions of a fast moving little bird with a camera that is not quite so responsive as the 7D, all you need is patience and understanding. Simply set your camera towards a likely spot for the bird to land and wait. At this time I was enjoying the walk in the forest and the bird wave hit us. I was excited and following upwards of 40 noisy little things, and I'm very, very happy to have got to some pretty shots out of it (which don't stand up to close examination, due to my poor technique).

http://aportraitofnature.com/wp-cont...2012-16232.jpg
http://aportraitofnature.com/wp-cont...725-035230.jpg

[RE Birder]

Here some taken close up
http://img.tapatalk.com/59f16158-c104-a27b.jpg

http://img.tapatalk.com/59f16158-c130-a12f.jpg

[AndyM]

Originally Posted by RE Birder

Here some taken close up
http://img.tapatalk.com/59f16158-c104-a27b.jpg

http://img.tapatalk.com/59f16158-c130-a12f.jpg

Looks like the same Hoverfly as mine!

A few shots taken not far off sunset. The aggro' Whimbrel's I included on the basis of it being so late in the day, full zoom at 2.0x with a 500 shutter speed and an ISO of 1250 (un-cropped image)! I was pretty surprised that it still maintained a fair bit of detail.

Andy.

[RE Birder]

I thought so too, it's volucella zonaria

[Neil]

I headed over to Kowloon Park yesterday in the heat of the afternoon. I used the built-in tele-extenders. The first three photos were taken at 800 mm,1.5x and 2.x. The flamingo was also at 2x.
Neil

Kowloon Park,
Hong Kong,China
August 2012