The new SX30 IS (1 Viewer)

I would agree with you Imans
BTW, S3 has 6 MP.

Jim (Imans66) - I assume you are a honest guy. And I assume your opinion is well intended. You say image quality has higher value than convenience and cost. I'll assume a lot of things here because I don't know you and must guess at "where you're coming from."

Dan Brown posts in my local Sacramento Yahoo bird group. He's a man with a passion for birding and like you Jim he shoots with high end camera equipment (Nikon I think). His current project is to see how many different California birds he can ID and photograph in 1020. His total so far is 377. He has some wonderful captures that show the image quality high end gear can produce. His gallery is WELL WORTH a look:

http://naturestoc.smugmug.com/Birds/Calbirding-2010-big-bird-photo/10973419_nnFku#1119904279_NWAso

Heather Hogg is a British gal, a grandmother, I met in the DP Review Panasonic forum a few years ago just after I'd bought my first superzoom, a Panasonic FZ50. Heather is a fairly new photographer having taken it up only about 7 years ago. She's loved birds longer than that. Most of the shots in her bird gallery are from 2007 with one of her older Panasonic superzooms (FZ38 I believe). Her bird photos are well worth a look too. She's a Panasonic superzoom addict. I think she mostly shoots a FZ18 now because of it's small size and convenience for her travels. She does quite well showing off her travel photos too as she has a talented eye. Her birds are here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/heathervhogg/sets/72157594528542115/

Kenn Threed is a backyard bird shooter in St. Louis, Missouri. He's also a long time bird lover and Canon camera photog. His choice has been to shoot with lower cost cameras and he has recently bought a Canon SX30 and has posted some very fine bird images. Kenn not only posts excellent quality bird photos. He's a smart guy who also presents practical thoughts about digital photography and camera operation. His words are well worth reading. One of his posts in the DP Review "Canon Talk" forum can be found here:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1010&message=36968012

I've attached a shot from my new SX30. Is it just a ID quality photo? It's a dozing Annas humming bird shot hand held and enhanced in Photoshop. Not all my bird shots are "killers" in quality, but overall I'm quite pleased with many that are beyond what you call "just a good ID shot" My opinion is that there is HUGE value in todays low cost superzoom cameras ... and one of the things I value is IMAGE QUALITY ... along with ease of use. Some of my new SX30 and older Panny FZ50 images can be seen here: (Note the Canon EOS-1D image is not mine, but one I worked on for a Retouch Forum post)

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8668668050/photos

Jim here's a gear value estimate based on some quick Google research and assumptions about tripod and cases. Total is probably low.


Total - $5000

Jim - You've shown me the money. Now show me your NEW photographs. The image quality in your gallery didn't impress me, but those were shot with your old gear. What has this big buck investment resulted in? I'd LOVE to see high quality images taken with your 40D and Sigma lens. Or, should I assume your hobby NOW is collecting expensive camera gear and bragging about it rather than birding? That last comment is made to make you grit your teeth the way your post made me do mine. It really doesn't mean I want to be your enemy! o

By the way I LOVED looking at nearly all of the photos in your zenfolio gallery. I can and do enjoy good bird photos regardless of grain or tack sharpness. You have some wonderful behavior captures and some very beautiful images and I applaud your efforts in taking them and also your HUGE effort of organizing and presenting them for public enjoyment. WELL DONE! I THANK YOU!

I have to wonder tho, does a large investment lock a person into a mind set that says, "Big bucks means better?" I also wonder if you did "bite" and buy one of these superzooms if your opinion might change ... not so much about the gear aspect, but I wonder if a new attitude about birding and photography would take hold of you ... a FUN and easy ... more enjoyable observing and shooting and less gear lugging attitude? (SX30 now sells for $350 at Sam's Club)

Cristian's post just came in while I typed this offline. I assume Cristian you are using expensive gear. I looked at your links and see what I assume are very nice images, but in their small size it's impossible appreciate them. Cristian my question for you is, "Do you earn enough money from the sale of your photos to pay for your camera equipment?" For a professional photog good gear is justified, but for a poor retired pro photog like me, and an honest guy too, with birding as a hobby I'm very happy to promote "cheap" tools.

Mark

There are birders that take Photographs, and there Amateur Photographers that take bird images, you can wax lyrical all day about the SX30 IS but the images from SX30 IS v the 7d + 400mm f5.6 are not compatible, the SX30 IS £375 the 7d + 400mm f5.6 £2000 worth every penny. Sorry not to agree Viddyog

Mark...I hear you and I really do agree with you... I had a S3 for years and used it. But honestly, the images (see some on the gallery of the osprey) are just way too grainy, and that was taken in perfect weather.

I think it was about that time that I really started thinking that while 'birding' is my hobby, ...somehow, I want to have better images. This really came apparent when I was in Ecuador trying to capture bird shots just so I could ID them. In many cases the S3 couldn't even provide me with enough of an image to do just that...ID.

So I started on the quest that many take...equipment upgrade. The dollar investment is worth it to me for this is what I want to do...period. Now if I really was into the equipment upgrade I would love to have someone give me a Canon 600 L lens for Christmas! This is still a hobby for me....I admire some of the true photographers on this site such as Roy and JohnZ or RebelEcuador...they have perfected their craft and I doubt I will ever equal their abilty.

I struggle every time a new camera is introduced with the question, is the technology improvement worth the extra money. In most cases the reply is no. I keep looking for a better Point and Shoot for my digiscoping set up but so far, the S90 still is quality. I have played around with various lenses such as the 300 L and TC or what I have now, the Sigma 150-500mm. Neither of them are the best but I can't afford the best. I use a 40D and not the 7D for the differences in price will not measurably alter my images.

So I find myself in a process of always 'looking'....rarely purchasing anymore. For me, while a superzoom would offer convenience and I would really love that, I also want better images and so far I haven't been overly impressed with 'my S3' or some of the later ones introduced by many makers. Superzooms serve a niche and if they fit to your like, use em....the beauty of birding is that it is an individual hobby so we all use what is appropriate for our needs or wants.

It depends whether you are a birder who takes photographs or primarily a photographer. If you're the former you'll probably be best off with a superzoom, the later with a SLR.

I'm moving away from the SLR towards the superzoom, because lugging the gear around gets in the way of my birding, which is why I resisted bird photography for a long while.

The idea that you can't take good shots with a superzoom is frankly nonsense. In good light, at low ISO, they're are capable of very good shots. Try this test:
On a bright day photograph a book at some distance at ISO100. With both cameras on RAW (sadly not possibly on this Canon because for some bizarre reason you can't take RAW shots) and then look at them both. The print allows you to make an objective, rather than subjective, comparison of resolution. I've done this comparing a Panasonic FZ18 with an SLR (I have to admit I can't remember if it was with my 350D or my 500D and which lens I used) I could see no difference.

Now on a dull day, I'd be the first to admit things are very different. I think nothing of wacking up my SLR to ISO800 or more, I wouldn't do that with a superzoom, unless as a last resort. Also my main bird photography lens is a Tamron 200 -500 which costs £850 rather than a £5000 Canon lens.

As someone who is more into birding/natural history then photography, if I could only have one I'd probably go for the superzoom, even if I wasn't taking price into account, if I was concentrating on the photography, the SLR.

Luckily I can go for both.

PS as a general point, it's hard to judge photographs on line due to monitor resolution and the quality of the saved picture. I know on my, free, website I save pictures at a resolution lower than optimum for a monitor due to the limited amount space I have.

Steve Babbs said:

It depends whether you are a birder who takes photographs or primarily a photographer.

As someone who is more into birding/natural history then photography, if I could only have one I'd probably go for the superzoom, even if I wasn't taking price into account, if I was concentrating on the photography, the SLR.

Click to expand...

I really prefer digiscoping Steve over my camera and lens and for just the reason you mentioned. To me....I find when I shoot with a camera and lens, I just shoot until the birds flies off. But when I use a digiscoping set up I feel I am more into the bird and natural history.

But...digiscoping is admittedly cumbersome. So is a camera with Lens with Tripod too! I use my camera when I am birding such as in Ecuador and use the digiscope when I can just sit someplace for hours,....waiting. There is a difference.

The image quality of digiscoping (at 100% or near) never will compare to a DSLR and lens. But in the same breath, the image quality of my S3 will never compare to either my digiscoping nor DSLR set up either.

Steve Babbs said:

It depends whether you are a birder who takes photographs or primarily a photographer. If you're the former you'll probably be best off with a superzoom, the later with a SLR.

I'm moving away from the SLR towards the superzoom, because lugging the gear around gets in the way of my birding, which is why I resisted bird photography for a long while.

Click to expand...

Well, I certainly started our as a birder, and I still am (I'd still rather get a lifter than a photo of a bird I have already seen). But nature (not just bird) photography has taken a greater and greater role over the past 5-8 years

Steve Babbs said:

The idea that you can't take good shots with a superzoom is frankly nonsense. In good light, at low ISO, they're are capable of very good shots.

Click to expand...

I simply do not agree. Three years ago I got a Canon S3 IS because I wanted a small camera I could take everywhere and get photos I would otherwise miss. I stopped using it in that respect after a few months. I was simply not satisfied with the quality, even at ISO 80 in bright sunshine. Now my wife use it when we travle, and we use the video a bit or as an every-day camera.

But this is of course only my personal opinion/experience.

Thomas

I actually purchased this camera a couple of weeks ago,and I posted a Starling pic to the gallery .I then p/ex to a different dealer for a beautiful little "used " 550D.
The camera did what it said on the box,the starling was perched on my rooftop,and it took a reasonable good shot,quite good in fact.But I was waving this little cam around in the air for ages before I could hold it steady so as to be able to focus.With an SLR it would have been a couple of seconds.
My main problem,was that there were so many buttons dotted around the body,that when trying to use the zoom facility ,I would inadvertedly hit another button and the screen would change,could suit someone with small nimble fingers.
But could be a very useful little camera for someone who has to travel light,and needs the options of wide angle to telefocal length.

Just to add,if anyone want a used copy of this cam,complete with a full printed manual(cost me £12 from Canon!!!!)then go to Mifsuds.com This is where I did the p/ex.

tjsimonsen said:

Well, I certainly started our as a birder, and I still am (I'd still rather get a lifter than a photo of a bird I have already seen). But nature (not just bird) photography has taken a greater and greater role over the past 5-8 years



I simply do not agree. Three years ago I got a Canon S3 IS because I wanted a small camera I could take everywhere and get photos I would otherwise miss. I stopped using it in that respect after a few months. I was simply not satisfied with the quality, even at ISO 80 in bright sunshine. Now my wife use it when we travle, and we use the video a bit or as an every-day camera.

But this is of course only my personal opinion/experience.

Thomas

Click to expand...

You did not get reasonable pictures with a specific camera ergo it can't be possble for anyone to get a decent shot with any superzoom! Despite the fact that there are huge numbers of excellent photos taken with superzooms and the evidence is there for all to see.

No-one would dispute that an SLR with an appropriate lens is the best gear for taking bird photographs and it's certainly a lot easier with an SLR, not least because of the high number of frames per sec. I find myself 'machine gunning' with an SLR frequently.

What were your settings? Were you expecting the shots to come out perfect or did you 'Photoshop' them afterwards. RAW or JPEG?

These are not (yet) an SLR substitute but for people who don't want to lug the gear around/spend the money they are an excellent alternative/additional form of wildlife photography for a very small amount of money.

While writing this I'm looking at my study wall which has a photograph of a broad-bodied chaser which I took with one of the first superzooms a 3MP Olympus c-730. It stands up pretty well next to lots of the other pictures, such as a Duke of Burgundy taken with Canon SLR and a Tamron macro lens, the lens alone cost more than these superzooms.

Steve Babbs said:

You did not get reasonable pictures with a specific camera ergo it can't be possble for anyone to get a decent shot with any superzoom!

Click to expand...

Steve, Did I say that?? No, I said that it was just my experience/opinion!

I never rely on getting "the perfect picture" straight from the camera, but generally spend quite some time in Photoshop (and shoot RAW whenever possible). I have never said you cannot get decent images from a super zoom, but decent (sensu Canon S5IS) wasn't good enough IMO. Personally, I think the image quality of the S5 would benefit from a smaller sensor (say 4MP) with today's technology)
I do not find carrying a 40D and a 100-400L IS in the field a problem - and I do spend quite some time away from the "beaten track" both as a birder and insect collector. But I admit that I do not carry my scope that often any more (only for sea bird/shore bird/raptor watching).

Thomas

Yep, I believe I've finally decided to get this camera and try it out (can't afford a DSLR set-up yet). Then once I've extensively tested it, I'll probably write a review.
As a side note, does anybody have a SX30 they'd be willing to sell?

How does everyone think the Canon SX30 measures up to the Olympus PEN?

I have Canon SX20IS. It is impossible to shoot flying birds. It produces only a blurred image. Still images are also not so sharp. But its good for its price. I think SX30IS will also be like that only inspite of 14MP.
I chose SX20IS for its 20X zoom in affordable price. Sure it is not comparable to the SLR in image quality. It is an 'all-rounder' suitable for amateur photographers like me. But I too often think I had an ordinary DSLR instead.

Bird photography with the SX30

Hi all,

We have been using the SX30 to photograph our birds for about 3 months now, and have been very pleased with the images it's giving us. Like most small-sensor superzooms it has its pros and cons of course... but we are finding it a very capable camera for birding on a budget.

Have a look.

Kenn & Temple's SX30 BirdShow:
http://kenn3d.smugmug.com/photos/swfpopup.mg?AlbumID=15050225&AlbumKey=a88Zy

Kenn

kenn3d said:

Hi all,

We have been using the SX30 to photograph our birds for about 3 months now, and have been very pleased with the images it's giving us. Like most small-sensor superzooms it has its pros and cons of course... but we are finding it a very capable camera for birding on a budget.

Have a look.

Kenn & Temple's SX30 BirdShow:
http://kenn3d.smugmug.com/photos/swfpopup.mg?AlbumID=15050225&AlbumKey=a88Zy

Kenn

Click to expand...

Kenn, those shots look great, but I can't tell how much you've cropped them, if at all. Have you got any shots that were cropped a lot? I shoot mainly for id, so for me a camera has to give ok shots in normal situations too - little birds a fair way off.

I also can't tell what ISO you've used. Similarly, I need a camera that will still get a shot in poor conditions.

I liked my Canon S3, but had to get an SLR mainly for the higher usable ISO. I was happy with it when they were close and in good light. Mind you, it only got me about one stop more, maybe two, because SLR lenses as fast as those on cameras like the S3 are too big to carry around.

I was also struggling with manual focus. Have you got that all worked out on the SX30?

Apologies if this has been covered before, I haven't read the whole thread, gave up when the arguments started.

Hi,had a look at a sx30is today,i was not impressed with the screen/evf going black for about a second after pressing the shutter,it feels like it would be impossible to follow a moving bird.Is this really a problem in the field ?

J.D said:

Hi,had a look at a sx30is today,i was not impressed with the screen/evf going black for about a second after pressing the shutter,it feels like it would be impossible to follow a moving bird.Is this really a problem in the field ?

Click to expand...

I haven't seen that camera, but I have a Panasonic FZ30, and it's very hard to use for birds in flight because of a similar problem. I've heard of people adding sights to use instead of the viewfinder.

I also have a Canon S3IS, which isn't too bad - doesn't black out for very long. I'm surprised that more recent Canons are as bad as the FZ30. I assume it simply doesn't have a fast enough processor to save the image quicker. Or you had it set to raw mode, that's usually slower than jpg mode.

Can anyone confirm this problem?

Hi pshute,Thanks for the info, the Canon does not have RAW.It was just a demo in a shop so I don't know what SD card was in it, I had not thought about the card speed,does anybody know if putting in a faster card cures the problem.Do other makes suffer from this,i thought it was Canon only.

J.D said:

Hi pshute,Thanks for the info, the Canon does not have RAW.It was just a demo in a shop so I don't know what SD card was in it, I had not thought about the card speed,does anybody know if putting in a faster card cures the problem.Do other makes suffer from this,i thought it was Canon only.

Click to expand...

I can't find any specific references to this problem with this camera, but did find a Nikon review that implied that they all do it. From memory, my S3 froze the display between shots, but didn't blank it out. Out least one had a clue what was going on in the sky, whereas with the FZ30, one might as well have just shut one's eyes.

It's likely this is a problem they could easily fix, but are leaving as an incentive to upgrade to an SLR.