-
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.
Nikon p900 images. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Neil G.
- Start date
Steven Astley
Well-known member
Nice photos Neil.
Last edited:
ChrisKten
It's true, I quite like Pigeons
Although the subject of this thread isn't of interest to me personally, it might help others if posters considered the following:
Include the EXIF data in the image (Save to Web strips it out), or include it in the post. Bear in mind the UK Weather and light, it would be of more use if images were of ISO 400 and above. Distance to subject would help too. Even a cheap Mobile phone will take good pics at 10ft in bright Summer light, but 30ft on a Winter morning is another matter entirely
Include the EXIF data in the image (Save to Web strips it out), or include it in the post. Bear in mind the UK Weather and light, it would be of more use if images were of ISO 400 and above. Distance to subject would help too. Even a cheap Mobile phone will take good pics at 10ft in bright Summer light, but 30ft on a Winter morning is another matter entirely
ChrisKten
It's true, I quite like Pigeons
I'm sure others will find that useful, Neil.
I used (in fact, still use sometimes) Panasonic Superzooms for over 6 years - in fact the majority of pics in my Gallery was taken using the Panasonic FZ150. I was satisfied with the results up to and including ISO 800, and the Focus was fast enough to get the pics that I was after.
The only reason I changed to a DSLT was I needed better performance at low light when using high ISOs, and I wanted better Dynamic Range than a small sensor can provide. As my trees grew they attracted more birds but also reduced the light in my small garden - the FZ150 was fine most of the time, but I'd have missed too many Sparrowhawk and Jay opportunities in the darker months.
So, for pics in the garden, the heavier DSLT is best for me... for walking (which I don't do much now) the smaller and lighter FZ150 is better. So I appreciate just how useful a Superzoom is, and that it pays dividends to actually learn how to use it properly
I used (in fact, still use sometimes) Panasonic Superzooms for over 6 years - in fact the majority of pics in my Gallery was taken using the Panasonic FZ150. I was satisfied with the results up to and including ISO 800, and the Focus was fast enough to get the pics that I was after.
The only reason I changed to a DSLT was I needed better performance at low light when using high ISOs, and I wanted better Dynamic Range than a small sensor can provide. As my trees grew they attracted more birds but also reduced the light in my small garden - the FZ150 was fine most of the time, but I'd have missed too many Sparrowhawk and Jay opportunities in the darker months.
So, for pics in the garden, the heavier DSLT is best for me... for walking (which I don't do much now) the smaller and lighter FZ150 is better. So I appreciate just how useful a Superzoom is, and that it pays dividends to actually learn how to use it properly
Neil G.
Well-known member
I used a nikon d7200 with nikon 200-500mm for a while and it produced great images,as you say for ultimate quality and useability in lower light conditions you can't beat a much bigger sensor.I'm happy with the p900 as a portable camera that is capable of some really good quality photos,in my opinion it can compete with the 1" sensor models very well due to the extra optical focal length it has......as long as it is learned properley.
wunderlong88
Active member
Are these pics taken using a tripod? I'm curious what kind of pics you can get handheld?
All mine are handheld
The vibration reduction on both the 900 and the 1000 is VERY effective. I had reason to check this yesterday and was staggered at just how good it was. A few days ago I got the chance to get some pics of a Harrier perched about 90 Mtrs away. I just could not keep the image still, it was drifting/shaking all over the EVF.
So I checked and found I had switched the VR off.
Next day I set up a kids toy at 22 Mtrs and zoomed in with vR turned off and the image in the EVF was shaking about quite a lot handheld.
Set VR to NORMAL and image was a lot more stable, but when I switched to ACTIVE the image was dead still.......very effective, and no movement seen when I pressed the shutter.
This is something which has bothered me quite a lot, zoomed well out on a tripod and using the remote, the image remains dead still as the shot is taken, but when I hand hold the camera there is often a definite shift of the image to the left. I usually have VR set to NORMAL. This is down to me I know, and whether it affects the pic I am not sure, but the VR set to ACTIVE has cured it, so in answer to your question, you can take excellent pics handheld.
Den
So I checked and found I had switched the VR off.
Next day I set up a kids toy at 22 Mtrs and zoomed in with vR turned off and the image in the EVF was shaking about quite a lot handheld.
Set VR to NORMAL and image was a lot more stable, but when I switched to ACTIVE the image was dead still.......very effective, and no movement seen when I pressed the shutter.
This is something which has bothered me quite a lot, zoomed well out on a tripod and using the remote, the image remains dead still as the shot is taken, but when I hand hold the camera there is often a definite shift of the image to the left. I usually have VR set to NORMAL. This is down to me I know, and whether it affects the pic I am not sure, but the VR set to ACTIVE has cured it, so in answer to your question, you can take excellent pics handheld.
Den
Last edited: