-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
83x anyone? The new Nikon P900 (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Marcobf
- Start date
crazyfingers
Well-known member
Yes, the first thing I did was set it to FINE.
And the Canon is NOT set on fine, or Canon's word for it. The Canon could be even better than the Nikon if I put it on FINE.
Last edited:
crazyfingers
Well-known member
Pretty frustrated. I took just a few photos this morning. Need to get food and then I'll be going birding and I will NOT be taking the Nikon P900 with me.
Here are two sets of demos this morning.
The P900 is on Birdwatching mode and set to FINE.
The SX50 is on my normal settings and is NOT set to save as FINE. It's set to normal.
The P900 is at 2000mm.
The SX50 is at max optical zoom for it plus the 2X digital teleconverter is on.
The first two photos are the Nikon.
The second two photos are the Canon.
The Nikon photo are very noticeably inferior to the Canon but are also almost twice the file size.
These are roughly 30 to 40 feet away.
Here are two sets of demos this morning.
The P900 is on Birdwatching mode and set to FINE.
The SX50 is on my normal settings and is NOT set to save as FINE. It's set to normal.
The P900 is at 2000mm.
The SX50 is at max optical zoom for it plus the 2X digital teleconverter is on.
The first two photos are the Nikon.
The second two photos are the Canon.
The Nikon photo are very noticeably inferior to the Canon but are also almost twice the file size.
These are roughly 30 to 40 feet away.
Attachments
Last edited:
I used digital zoom a LOT on the SX50, (maybe as much as 75% of the time when birding) and agree it's pretty amazing. The SX50 Goldfinches are nice but a little soft...the P900 should be giving you a lot more clarity and feather detail in comparison, but it's not. Might be interesting to try manual focus to try to ferret out if the AF is to blame.
At least one DPRer received a defective copy, returned it and got a good second one. Don't know if it's worth your time and trouble to do that or not. I can certainly relate to the frustration you're feeling...I returned one SX60 only to get a second one with exactly the same issues.
I would definitely jot down the serial number of your camera before you return it. Perhaps quality control suffered when Nikon suddenly had to produce a lot more cameras to meet demand? If that's the case, others should be popping up soon. If not, your camera might just be a lemon.
crazyfingers
Well-known member
I'm suspecting it's either a lemon or poor QC when they had to ramp up production. Either way this one is going back for a replacement and I'll see what comes in it's place.
There is no way I'm keeping this one. $600 for a monster camera that doesn't produce pictures as good as my less expensive and easier to carry around SX50 isn't something I'll keep.
I will mess with the manual focus on a tripod today or tomorrow just for kicks. It might suggest if the problem is the entire lens or just the AF. But either way it's just out of curiosity.
This is why I use Amazon. Returns are so easy and they pay for it.
Last edited:
Paul Higson
Well-known member
Crazyfingers - where pics taken through a window ?? Took a few myself through window to compare to SX40 and they were dreadful. P 900 must have been trying to focus on the glass all the time.
More to follow in next post . .
More to follow in next post . .
crazyfingers
Well-known member
They were all taken outside, both cameras the same spot one after the other.
flossiepip
Well-known member
Following this thread with great interest, though not seen anything as yet to make me abandoned my beloved SX50. Would not expect the P900 to give me better image quality over the canon but would hope that it would equal it and give me those few extra and needed yards while maintaining the image quality, that would be good and if it comes with a better view finder than the SX50 then so much the better. Does look a bit of a beast though! In the respect to size and extra yards I wonder if the P610 might not be the better camera?k
crazyfingers
Well-known member
I'm wondering if anyone who has both a P900 and an SX50 would be willing to post comparison shots of static objects one with the P900 at 2000mm and the other with the SX50 at max optical plus 2x teleconverter. I am struggling if it is even worth asking for a replacement for this faulty P900.
I've done some more side by side tests and a new issue with the P900 has come up.
I'm still on Fine mode for the P900 and I've changed Focus Manual to SPOT. Metering is also spot.
1st photo is a house sparrow that it took me many tries on refocus to even get the camera to focus on the spot. I had this same issue with my old Nikon P100. It almost never happens with the SX50.
2nd photo after 5 or 6 attempts the P900 finally decided I wanted to photograph the sparrow. Poor photo from 25 feet away.
3rd photo the same issue with the P900. It would not focus on the rose bush.
4th it finally focused on the rose bush
5 is the rose bush with the SX50 and is clearly a better photo with better depth of field. Also the Canon is not on superfine but plain old normal.
All these are taken with the P900 at 2000mm and the SX50 at max optical and the 2x teleconverter. All photos of the same object are from exactly the same location.
All photos above are roughly 25 feet away.
I've done some more side by side tests and a new issue with the P900 has come up.
I'm still on Fine mode for the P900 and I've changed Focus Manual to SPOT. Metering is also spot.
1st photo is a house sparrow that it took me many tries on refocus to even get the camera to focus on the spot. I had this same issue with my old Nikon P100. It almost never happens with the SX50.
2nd photo after 5 or 6 attempts the P900 finally decided I wanted to photograph the sparrow. Poor photo from 25 feet away.
3rd photo the same issue with the P900. It would not focus on the rose bush.
4th it finally focused on the rose bush
5 is the rose bush with the SX50 and is clearly a better photo with better depth of field. Also the Canon is not on superfine but plain old normal.
All these are taken with the P900 at 2000mm and the SX50 at max optical and the 2x teleconverter. All photos of the same object are from exactly the same location.
All photos above are roughly 25 feet away.
Attachments
crazyfingers
Well-known member
crazyfingers
Well-known member
One final set including again the failure of the P900 to identify the object. first two are the Nikon and the third is the Canon.
I am going to go out more with the Nikon and see how often it fails to even pick the correct object to focus on. This just hardly ever comes up with the Canon but is happening a lot with the P900 and it's the same problem I had with the old P100 I had.
P.S. I have no idea why the first photo displays correctly in the thumb but has been rotated in the attachment.
I am going to go out more with the Nikon and see how often it fails to even pick the correct object to focus on. This just hardly ever comes up with the Canon but is happening a lot with the P900 and it's the same problem I had with the old P100 I had.
P.S. I have no idea why the first photo displays correctly in the thumb but has been rotated in the attachment.
Attachments
crazyfingers
Well-known member
Out of 300+ photos, admittedly most not of birds, this is my first potential keeper. I'm pretty sure that if the bird had not left the canon would have taken a better shot.
I continue to have problems with it focusing on the wrong thing but, I think, less often when the focus is set to Manual Normal instead of Manual spot.
I still don't understand the huge file size. This I resized to 1600x1200 to attach. It just barely made the size limit. The Canon would have made a file about half the size and would have been in finer detail.
Taken from about 20 feet at 2000mm
I continue to have problems with it focusing on the wrong thing but, I think, less often when the focus is set to Manual Normal instead of Manual spot.
I still don't understand the huge file size. This I resized to 1600x1200 to attach. It just barely made the size limit. The Canon would have made a file about half the size and would have been in finer detail.
Taken from about 20 feet at 2000mm
Attachments
Last edited:
crazyfingers
Well-known member
Sorry for all of my posts recently so negative on the P900. But at this point I am really struggling to decide if I should return it for a replacement or just return it for a refund and be done with it. The decision is complicated by the fact that I also got a bag for it and spare batteries/charger. If I return for a replacement and I am still disappointed and return it again it wound probably be too late to return the then unneeded accessories.
I wish I could see with my own eyes some clear examples that the image quality of the P900 at 2000mm is clearly superior than the image quality of the SX50 at max optical plus 2x teleconverter on. The P900 is so much bigger and without clear image quality superiority vs the SX50, I can't see keeping the P900. It's so much more a chore to hold up and take photos as well as just casually carry about. It really needs to be clearly better than the Canon.
I really would appreciate help deciding on this.
I wish I could see with my own eyes some clear examples that the image quality of the P900 at 2000mm is clearly superior than the image quality of the SX50 at max optical plus 2x teleconverter on. The P900 is so much bigger and without clear image quality superiority vs the SX50, I can't see keeping the P900. It's so much more a chore to hold up and take photos as well as just casually carry about. It really needs to be clearly better than the Canon.
I really would appreciate help deciding on this.
Last edited:
Hi Crazy, after your experience yesterday, I took some photos with both cameras today. I have to go somewhere right now, but will download and post some as soon as I can.
Bird_Huszar
Active member
Dude you should definitely return it ...I don't even know why you're hesitating. Those are not the pictures the P900 should be taking. I noticed immediately how superior the P900 is to my SX50.
In fact I'm starting to wonder if I had a faulty SX50 or maybe you had a really good one because I struggled with the SX50 quite a bit. Struggled to focus on the right object, struggled to take sharp pics.
Not saying the P900 is perfect...it takes some crappy pics too but I'm having more keepers than I ever did.
crazyfingers
Well-known member
There is no question that this one is going back. So you think I have a defective P900 and I should sent back for an exchange and not just a total refund?
crazyfingers
Well-known member
OK, here's an inanimate object. It's at the top of a telephone pole that's approx. 50 yards away from where I was sitting. I set both cameras to 1/1250 SS to try to minimize the effects of shake. The focal point was the upper label and I cropped both to make it easier to compare details. SX50 (1st pic) was set to 2x teleconverter.
I also shot some birds but it'll take a while to get some on here.
Attachments
crazyfingers
Well-known member
Well that one's clear. Did you do any with P900 at 2000mm vs SX50 at max optical + 2x teleconverter?
I ask because I'd guess that 90% of the photos I take with the SX50 are maxed out like that and so I'd want the P900 to be able to beat it way out there.
Last edited:
The ones I posted of the telephone pole thingie were taken like that; 2000mm on P900, SX50 at full optical w/ 2x teleconverter. These were also taken that way and I'll look for some more.
