Any advice appreciated 🙏 (1 Viewer)

[legohead1977]

Hello all, I have just stumbled across the forum which has been a great help but need a bit of guidance please?

My wife and her family have always been into birds and wildlife. My wife recently announced that she would like to start some photography for fun and has been looking at cameras. This opened a world that I have zero knowledge on but after a week on YouTube I have gained 5% knowledge 🙈.

My wife is torn between a Nikon P950 due to zoom options however does have its disadvantages from what I can see being size and lack of versatility.

She also likes the Sony A6100 which seems like a neater solution and allows room to grow by adding additional lenses as required which is a whole other world I need to understand.

Has anyone got any experience with the above so we can get an understanding of real world use in our lovely UK weather and set expectations.

We are open to options and doesn’t have to be one of the above. We set ourselves £1000 as a budget.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

 

[njlarsen]

I believe, if you are expecting to be purchasing new, that you are better served with a camera with built in lens at the price range you are talking about. The sony would take up most of the price range just for the camera body and you would only be able to afford a lens that would disappoint with regards to reach.

I am not in a position to recommend one brand vs another within that group of cameras, but the P950 seems (based on other peoples comments) as a worthy contender. Walk into a camera store and play around with one to get an idea of what the weight would feel like.
Niels

 

[MiddleRiver]

The super zooms are an excellent way to get into bird photography. I've seen impressive results from the SX70, RX10, and such. As you step 'up' (some users of 1" and micro 4/3rds will quibble with whether it's a step up or not) to APS-C and Full-Frame, you typically enter mirrorless body and separate lens world. The a6100 fits that category. Even buying used, it's tough to stay in the under-$1k range but it could be possible with an older (used) alpha and a non-Sony lens. The a6100 is now a bit old-in-the-tooth... I'd shop for a used a6400 at min. Then try and get a good deal on a Tamron or sim lens.

I started with a 1" sensor point-and-shoot superzoom, and quickly got frustrated, lost money on that camera, and decided on an a6600 and Sony 70-350. That setup worked great until of course I wanted more reach and bought into a longer/better lens that accepts a 1.4 tele-extender. It's only money, right? <sigh>. You might be able to do better (less expensive) with a similar (used body, off-brand lens) kit in 4/3's and save a little. Dunno...

 

[dixonlau]

Do consider the weight. If not ready for 2kg+, like Sony FE 200-600mm lens+body, then it is better to get P950. For shorter focal length lens, you still can expect between 1-2kg with body.

Also do take note of the image quality. P950 is only 1/2.3" sensor size. The image won't look good when you view them on larger screen like laptop and it also will struggle in low light condition.

 

[dixonlau]

I started with a 1" sensor point-and-shoot superzoom, and quickly got frustrated, lost money on that camera,

Felt same with my first birding bridge camera Sony HX400V. After 1 year, straight upgrade to full frame A7Riii + FE 200-600mm. Fallen into "35mm equivalent" zoom marketing gimmick.

@legohead1977 do take this into consideration as well.

 

[njlarsen]

My input is that if you are unsure that photos will be you in the long run then it is better to think about a superzoom than anything larger - a lightly used one might be just what is needed in order to save money.

Regarding the quality of what can be done with a p 950, check out for yourself images on the web taken with that camera. Remember that some of what you see is less than what the camera can deliver.

If you one day want to go into a camera with exchangeable lenses, then the m4/3 format is where I would go -- especially given what you mentioned about weight of the P950. Of course if your are young and fit and can hold a several kg/many lbs camera steady no problem then by all means choose something larger such as the APC or full frame. A setup of a panasonic G85 with a 100-300 lens is actually lighter than the most heavy superzoom and cheaper. And it still has more reach than the a6600 and Sony 70-350 that middleriver used for a while.
Niels

 

[Richard D]

I own a full-frame Nikon DSLR set up, a few M4/3 cameras and a Nikon P900 (very similar to newer P950).

In terms of image quality the full-frame DSLR just pips the M4/3 set up, but it's incredibly heavy even with a moderate zoom that isn't anywhere long enough for bird photography, and a suitable lens for it would be significantly over your budget.

The M4/3 set up is probably the best compromise in terms of size, weight, cost and image quality with a 300mm (equivalent to 600m fullframe) just about long enough.

These days though I mainly use the Nikon for bird photography - the image quality isn't amazing, particularly in low light, but you can get reasonable results relatively easily and it's comparatively inexpensive and light.

A couple from the P900 in reasonable light:



Slight crops - As you can see the detail is slightly soft compared to cameras with a larger sensor, but for me the quality is just about good enough for the relatively low cost and moderate weight/bulk of the camera.

 

[legohead1977]

Thank you for all your replies, I will sit down during lunch today and re read so I can take in all of the detail. In terms of cost the A6100 can bought new for £750 including a lens and Amazon have the below but open into used options

Sony SEL55210 E Mount APS-C 55-210 mm F4.5-6.3 Telephoto Zoom Lens for £179.​

This is all new to me so unsure of the capabilities of these combined and don’t want to spend close to a £1000 and then be disappointed and needing to upgrade within weeks.

 

[legohead1977]

My input is that if you are unsure that photos will be you in the long run then it is better to think about a superzoom than anything larger - a lightly used one might be just what is needed in order to save money.

Regarding the quality of what can be done with a p 950, check out for yourself images on the web taken with that camera. Remember that some of what you see is less than what the camera can deliver.

If you one day want to go into a camera with exchangeable lenses, then the m4/3 format is where I would go -- especially given what you mentioned about weight of the P950. Of course if your are young and fit and can hold a several kg/many lbs camera steady no problem then by all means choose something larger such as the APC or full frame. A setup of a panasonic G85 with a 100-300 lens is actually lighter than the most heavy superzoom and cheaper. And it still has more reach than the a6600 and Sony 70-350 that middleriver used for a while.
Niels

Thank you for this and one concern is weight due to my having a bad back after an accident.

It would appear the G85 is the G80 in the UK after a quick look while making a coffee. Is this the one you referred to? Also due to only just starting to look at lenses would you mind linking the one mentioned?

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G80 Kit with 12-60mm lens | Wex Photo Video

www.wexphotovideo.com

Thanks again

 

[MiddleRiver]

Thank you for all your replies, I will sit down during lunch today and re read so I can take in all of the detail. In terms of cost the A6100 can bought new for £750 including a lens and Amazon have the below but open into used options

Sony SEL55210 E Mount APS-C 55-210 mm F4.5-6.3 Telephoto Zoom Lens for £179.​

This is all new to me so unsure of the capabilities of these combined and don’t want to spend close to a £1000 and then be disappointed and needing to upgrade within weeks.

IIRC @njlarsen is a 4/3's shooter. Sounds like @Richard D has both. I went with APS-C. They all work, they are all compromises, they all require different commitment and compromise.

Although there are exceptions, I will suggest that in ALL cases, there are some general requirements for bird photography. First you have to have REACH. Yes, a 200mm (or even less) can work at window birdfeeder. But if you are talking birds in wild settings, often small birds in canopy or distant shorebirds, etc., then you'll soon find that somewhere around 400mm it starts to get 'ok' and 600 is really a minimum (35mm equivalent). Folks will show you all kinds of exceptions, but if honest, I think they'll agree. The 55-210 is approx 300mm equivalent (APS-C is a 1.5 crop factor), so you are just barely there.

I went APS-C and mirrorless body route because I also do a fair bit of travel, architectural, landscape, etc. photography. Being able to swap lenses and get a little bit closer to full-frame IQ (for larger prints) was important to me. I'll admit in reality, some of my best shots have been taken with a 1" sensor RX100 pocket sized camera! But for birds, I 'upgraded' to a 100-400GM which gives me 600mm equiv and around 840mm with 1.4 tele-extender. But the price-to-play is 3-4x your budget, so be careful not to fall in the bird-photography rabbit hole!

If my budget REALLY was $1000, I'd find a used RX10IV or similar... Or get the 6100 and buy a used 70-350 or even less $ for a Tamron or Sigma zoom.

 

[Peregrine Took]

DON'T buy the Sony you linked to - the focal length of 210mm (although that converts to 315mm for an APSC camera body) is way too short for birding.

Like Middleriver says, 400mm is the minimum and preferably 600mm. Panasonic is an alternative to the Nikon P series, this one goes from wide angle (good for landscapes, city breaks, groups of people) to 1200mm zoom:

LUMIX FZ82 Digital Bridge Camera With Ultra-Wide Lens | DMC-FZ82 | Panasonic UK & Ireland

Explore the features of the LUMIX FZ82 digital camera, including an ultra wide 20-1200mm lens, allowing you to shoot stunning landscapes and panoramas.

www.panasonic.com

I might even get one myself (I used to work as a designer, and architectural and corporate photographer).

Start with something like this, or stretch to the Nikon P950 if your budget allows, enjoy it, and at the same time learn about cameras - don't get hung up on technicalities like sensor sizes at this stage - focal lengths and so on.

Good luck.

​

 

[njlarsen]

Thank you for this and one concern is weight due to my having a bad back after an accident.

It would appear the G85 is the G80 in the UK after a quick look while making a coffee. Is this the one you referred to? Also due to only just starting to look at lenses would you mind linking the one mentioned?

Panasonic Lumix DMC-G80 Kit with 12-60mm lens | Wex Photo Video

www.wexphotovideo.com

Thanks again

same camera with different name. The lens I mentioned is this one:

Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 II Power OIS: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

It has one quirk: it is sharper set at around 275mm zoom than at 300, at least my copy. If you go this way there are options for upgrade to the pana-leica 100-400 which is outside your current budget, and the camera body can also be upgraded to e.g., a pana G9 or the OM1 from what used to be olympus (they fit lenses).

I am currently using the G85 with the 100-400 after having used the 100-300 for several years.
Niels

 

[njlarsen]

Length of lenses: I am not sure how much you understand when we are talking length of lenses. The p950 is 24-2000mm equivalent with line under equivalent. In reality it is a much shorter lens but it has a field of view equivalent to what a full frame camera with such a lens. Some other examples
Pana with 100-300 has equivalent length of 200-600
A6100 with 55-210 has equivalent length of 82-315

So why did I double on the pana and only use 1.5 on the sony? because these have different size sensors. (and by the way, if you have a sony full frame camera you should not multiply with anything). The advantage of smaller sensor is the longer reach and the disadvantage is slightly poorer performance in poor light.

By the way, many years ago I moved from a superzoom to a pana with exchangeable lenses because my then superzoom could not properly handle the low light inside of the forest in Costa Rica. Even superzooms have progressed since then, I believe some of them today can.
Niels

 

[Richard D]

Don't overlook secondhand - if you buy from a reputable camera shop you can save a lot on new prices and get a decent warranty.

The differences between older and current models are often pretty minor too. The P950 is better than the P900, but under most circumstances will produce the same quality shots - you can pick up an excellent condition P900 for around £650.

I agree with @njlarsen on the Pana 100-300 - keep it to 275mm max (550mm 35mm equivalent) and it's a decent performer, but very soft at 300mm. It's as short a lens as I'd consider usable for bird photography though - I've used one for years, but find the extra reach of the P900 more useful. You could pick up a used 100-300 and something like a GX9 fairly cheaply and it will produce very decent photos.

 

[legohead1977]

DON'T buy the Sony you linked to - the focal length of 210mm (although that converts to 315mm for an APSC camera body) is way too short for birding.

Like Middleriver says, 400mm is the minimum and preferably 600mm. Panasonic is an alternative to the Nikon P series, this one goes from wide angle (good for landscapes, city breaks, groups of people) to 1200mm zoom:

LUMIX FZ82 Digital Bridge Camera With Ultra-Wide Lens | DMC-FZ82 | Panasonic UK & Ireland

Explore the features of the LUMIX FZ82 digital camera, including an ultra wide 20-1200mm lens, allowing you to shoot stunning landscapes and panoramas.

www.panasonic.com

I might even get one myself (I used to work as a designer, and architectural and corporate photographer).

Start with something like this, or stretch to the Nikon P950 if your budget allows, enjoy it, and at the same time learn about cameras - don't get hung up on technicalities like sensor sizes at this stage - focal lengths and so on.

Good luck.

​

Thank you for your reply and help. I just checked and this is only £300, am I missing something in terms of price?

We have seen a P950 used for £650 advertised privately but its a 2.5 hour drive away and didn't want to make the journey until we had more of an understanding and real life expectation of how they perform.

 

[legohead1977]

Length of lenses: I am not sure how much you understand when we are talking length of lenses. The p950 is 24-2000mm equivalent with line under equivalent. In reality it is a much shorter lens but it has a field of view equivalent to what a full frame camera with such a lens. Some other examples
Pana with 100-300 has equivalent length of 200-600
A6100 with 55-210 has equivalent length of 82-315

So why did I double on the pana and only use 1.5 on the sony? because these have different size sensors. (and by the way, if you have a sony full frame camera you should not multiply with anything). The advantage of smaller sensor is the longer reach and the disadvantage is slightly poorer performance in poor light.

By the way, many years ago I moved from a superzoom to a pana with exchangeable lenses because my then superzoom could not properly handle the low light inside of the forest in Costa Rica. Even superzooms have progressed since then, I believe some of them today can.
Niels

At this stage very little in terms of talking about a lens but slowly picking it up. So to sum it up the Pana with 100-300 has equivalent length of 200-600 would serve us better due to the range and by quite a bit versus the Sony option?

 

[legohead1977]

same camera with different name. The lens I mentioned is this one:

Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 II Power OIS: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

It has one quirk: it is sharper set at around 275mm zoom than at 300, at least my copy. If you go this way there are options for upgrade to the pana-leica 100-400 which is outside your current budget, and the camera body can also be upgraded to e.g., a pana G9 or the OM1 from what used to be olympus (they fit lenses).

I am currently using the G85 with the 100-400 after having used the 100-300 for several years.
Niels

Sorry, one other question......if your using the G80 and that lens which you recommended would you have a picture that you could share? That would be a great help to help understand what type of quality and zoom to expect? I know there is much more to it than that but I would really like to get something ordered this weekend so I can stop looking .

 

[njlarsen]

This is my gallery here at birdforum. If you look at page 13 and up for a long while and look at images uploaded during 2016 you should see images with that lens - mostly using an older pana camera body called GH2. Newer images are with the G85 and mostly with the newer and more expensive lens PL100-400. The G85 gives better and less noisy images than the GH2. Link:

Media added by njlarsen

www.birdforum.net

Niels

 

[njlarsen]

At this stage very little in terms of talking about a lens but slowly picking it up. So to sum it up the Pana with 100-300 has equivalent length of 200-600 would serve us better due to the range and by quite a bit versus the Sony option?

yes

 

[legohead1977]

yes

Thank you once again, you have been a great help and been looking through your photos which again has helped. I also downloaded Flickr and took a look at pictures for the G80, Z83 and P950.

I’m just digesting all the information, got the prices and hope to buy tomorrow 👍.