Neil
What I want to try is scaling down to 720p as then the camera does video at 30fps. I wonder if that is better. Have you any experience of that Neil.
Nothing will ever beat digiscoping for reach, especially when using a camera in combination with the scope eyepiece rather than connecting a camera directly to the scope. This was taken from the same site, from a completely different year though (well it is a juvenile if you look!) but at a likewise massive distance (easily 100m or more) and is full frame with no sharpening but had to give it a quick tweak for exposure. Purple fringing is a problem because of the white sky and the fact I was scoping at 60x on my zoom but that just translates into an insane amount of magnification. Not easy to do though and requires patience and good technique as scoping at 20x is tricky enough in itself but even that will give more detail than most DSLR's with 500mm's when used correctly.
Obviously digiscoping has still got it's niche but there are many more limitations than the other options as to when it can be used effectively.
Bobcesme
I rarely do digiscoping now as there gets to a point where I am carrying too much gear around and as I am like Roy C getting on in years the weight can get a bit much.
Having never owned one of these super zooms I do not know much at all about them, am I correct in thinking that this shot would have been taken at 3360mm focal length equivalent (840 x 4)? If so then this must surely beat digiscoping hands down for ease of use and possibly IQ. In fact I would say it out resolves most DSLR tele's at this range (including some super teles costing many thousands of pounds).This morning took this shot of a shellduck on a small island about 100 mtrs away , i used full zoom on my SX40 hs , by full zoom i mean the full 840 mm optical x 4 digital , to my surprise it turned out quite good , i didnt expect too much at that range especially using the x 4 digital as well , strangly the exif 150.5mm, anyway now i dont need to carry extra lenses anymore , this canon sx40 is one cool machine :t:
I posted these query on the Nikon forum but have yet to recieve a response. I wonder if any SX40 users have had the oppurtunity of comparing the two cameras or perhaps can advance a case for choosing the SX40?
"I am in the market for a "mega zoom" bridge camera and am struggling to decide between the Nikon P510 and the Canon SX40.
Factors like size, gps, battery life, number of features etc are not deal clinchers for me (although I do like the look of the P510's easy panarama function)
I am interested to know whether the extra x6 zoom of the P510 makes a significant difference in the field. Does the additional zoom come at the cost of a drop in image quality or focusing capabilitiy at full zoom?
I have read the comparison reviews of the two cameras but they don't realy address these issues.
I have to make a decision before a trip to Norfolk in early May. If anybody has had hands on experience with both cameras I would be interested to hear their views."
You could always assign the correct name to the image name (e.g. mushroom.jpg) or write some text on the image itself.Does anybody know if it's possible to add a comment (voice or in written form) to a photo taken with the SX40? I'm asking because I try to learn the species at guided tours of plants and mushrooms and think it could be helpfull to assign the correct names to the images.
Steve