• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Camera advice needed please! (1 Viewer)

thomasclark1985

Well-known member
Hi,

I'm hoping someone can help me with the predicament I am in. For starters I'm not massively into photography so I'm not too savvy with photography acronyms and camera specs. I mainly use my camera for bird ID rather than for artistic purposes, especially when I'm abroad as it's easier to have a photo to ID than just a memory.

Now the issue...

A few years ago I managed to acquire an old Olympus e400 DSLR, with a Sigma 50-500mm lens, and have had some pretty decent results. The drawbacks being the setup is quite heavy and I'm not the most careful, and now the camera is giving up (blue line through photos & saying card cover open intermittently when its not!).

After a friends advice, (not into bird photography) today I went and bought a Panasonic FZ1000 bridge camera, took it out this evening and was not too happy with the results, the zoom wasn't sufficient, and had much better results with my old setup. Although it was better not having a massive lens hanging around my neck for hours. So it's going back tomorrow.

With £500 to spend what's best idea?

a) Compact/bridge camera with a massive zoom.

b) Try to find a decent old/second-hand Olympus 4/3 camera (I have read they are no longer manufactured). Also was the E400 a decent spec camera for a 4/3 lens?

c) Quit photography and stick to bino's and memory.

d) Buy a new micro 4/3 camera and an adapter thing to take the sigma lens, if that's possible, which I think it might be.

e) None of the above, but one of your suggestions.

Any help would be great,

Cheers,

Tom
 
. . .c) Quit photography and stick to bino's and memory.

No need to rely on memory (or camera)—carry a notebook. That’s how it used to be done by serious birders and how I still do it (though I normally have a camera with me as well). Or carry a smart phone/tablet and use a voice recorder to document your sightings on the principle that a decent set of field notes is (generally speaking) worth a thousand lousy photographs.
 
Last edited:
Just a late thought but because of the way m4/3 focusing works you would possibly have to get an Olympus EM1MK1 to work better with the 50-500.
 
2 possible solutions to better photographs which won't cost the earth (though likely over your budget, less so 2nd hand)
* Sony RX-10 IV
* Nikon D7200 + Tamron G2 150-600

Both have in-camera crop factors on top of the sensor crop that will get you beyond your previous reach and will handle BIF well.

I use the Nikon D7200 and using the 1.3x in-camera crop I can often id things in the field from a quick photo that 8x bins can't reveal.

Another possibility (though no longer a currently produced system is available 2nd hand) is the Nikon V3 and 100-300 or even 300mm f4 PF via adapter, though that lens is expensive.

I think these 3 systems are great value for money, and will be as good or better than any m43 setup and much cheaper. Hope that grist for the mill helps ..... :cat:



Chosun :gh:
 
will be as good or better than any m43 setup

Chosun,
with two of those sensors you will get a smaller sensor than m4/3. I do not believe that ALL m4/3 systems are so far behind on focusing that you can fairly say what you say.

Niels
 
Part of the reason you're having an issue with the superzoom camera matching your 4:3 camera is that you have less reach overall, even if you take cropping into consideration.

With your E400, you have a 10MP, 4:3 sized sensor, with a 500mm lens. Considering the 2x crop factor of the sensor, you are shooting with an optical-equivalent crop of 1,000mm.

With your FZ1000, you have a 20MP, 1" sensor - the lens goes to 400mm-equivalent, with the crop factor already considered in that figure. You have more megapixels so you have room to crop, but if you crop to 10MP, you would still only be cropping to an optical framing equivalent of 600mm...still quite a bit short of the 1000mm you've been used to.

Cropping isn't of course the solution for everything - you may be able to get a camera with an 'equivalent' of 1,000mm after cropping - but the lens' optical quality, the sensor's performance and noise, the focus system's accuracy, etc will all determine whether all that cropping gives you a result that's in any way usable.

However, if you're using this system almost exclusively for ID purposes, not for the purpose of printing large photos or displaying in galleries - the overall quality isn't as important as being able to get as optically close as possible to see details to identify a species. Focus is important as you need to be able to focus on the subject to see it, but it's not super-crucial that it be perfect. So I think the way you may want to go is to look at mega-zoom cameras that will give you maximum OPTICAL reach without using the internal cropping modes...and good stabilization system for holding it all steady when trying to focus on a small bird in the distance. You may get much noisier results from a small sensor, but the optical reach will still allow you to get closer identifiable markings.

Take a look at some of the mega-zoom cameras like the Nikon P900, which has an optical equivalent reach of 2,000mm - double what you had with your E400...and still with 16MP to work with. It's a smaller sensor, so it will get grainy and noisy in low light, and the results might not be great for making large prints to display - but if you need to use it to identify species, it's got some of the longest optical reach available in a single, sealed unit. And you can still crop further if and when needed - either in-camera or on the computer. Other megazoom cameras to consider: Nikon B700 (1,40mm), (Canon SX60 (1,365mm), Panasonic FZ80 (1,200mm), and Sony HX400 (1,200mm). All of these cameras range from 16mp to 20mp, so have room to crop additionally as well. I wouldn't recommend these to a photographer looking for maximum IQ potential, but for a birder looking for a device to help ID distant birds, these will all be about as long a reach as you can get and all in light, easy to carry devices.
 
Chosun,
with two of those sensors you will get a smaller sensor than m4/3. I do not believe that ALL m4/3 systems are so far behind on focusing that you can fairly say what you say.

Niels

Agreed; I know of no empirical support for Chosun's statement, and don't believe he (?) has ever used a m4/3 camera. Went on a recent trip with someone who had a Nikon D500, and we both had similar results with BIF vs my Oly EM-1 mk. ii. And that was before a recent firmware upgrade that has reportedly significantly improved the latter's BIF capabilities.
 
Chosun,
with two of those sensors you will get a smaller sensor than m4/3. I do not believe that ALL m4/3 systems are so far behind on focusing that you can fairly say what you say.

Niels

Agreed; I know of no empirical support for Chosun's statement, and don't believe (she) has ever used a m4/3 camera. Went on a recent trip with someone who had a Nikon D500, and we both had similar results with BIF vs my Oly EM-1 mk. ii. And that was before a recent firmware upgrade that has reportedly significantly improved the latter's BIF capabilities.
I said "I think these 3 systems are great value for money, and will be as good or better than any m43 setup and much cheaper"

Of course I was talking comparable performance - mostly the reach component and the ability to snap off sudden images. Of course the IQ of the APS-C sensor will be superior to m43 which in turn generally outdoes 1" sensors - the Sony RX-10 MkIV is rather special though.

You are spending a LOT of money on m43 (Olympus OM-D EM-1 MkII for instance) - you can virtually get a Nikon D7200 + Tamron G2 150-600 for the price of the m43 body alone, although I just checked Adorama and it seems there is a couple of hundred off the body at the moment. You still then have to fork out for a long lens though, which still won't get you the reach of the APS-C system I suggested.

A mega reach Nikon P900 as others have suggested would also work well for cooperative stationary subjects in good light. I made my suggestions as the best value available since that rarely happens! and I know how super frustrating it is to miss a fleeting record of something new. :cat:

I should add that a Black Rapid sling takes care of any weight drawbacks of the Niki + Tammy rig. If the size is an issue I'd be inclined to go straight to the Sony RX-10 MkIV. :cat:



Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
With £500 to spend what's best idea?

a) Compact/bridge camera with a massive zoom.

Others have already mentioned the compact cameras with 1,000mm equivalent and more. If you want to "improve", it's worth to consider cameras with more fps (than the 3fps of your Olympus) to improve the BIF capabilities. The Nikon V2 + CX70-300 might be available, used, within your budget. That's "only" 800mm equivalent, but a weight below 1kg is a plus if shooting swallow BIF.
 
Hi Justin,

With your FZ1000, you have a 20MP, 1" sensor - the lens goes to 400mm-equivalent, with the crop factor already considered in that figure. You have more megapixels so you have room to crop, but if you crop to 10MP, you would still only be cropping to an optical framing equivalent of 600mm...

That's quite an interesting consideration. How do you calculate these numbers? I have an FZ1000 and know it has a nominal 400 mm equivalent focal length, but how would I extrapolate the equivalent focal length when cropped to any particular Megapixel figure from that?

Regards,

Henning
 
I said "I think these 3 systems are great value for money, and will be as good or better than any m43 setup and much cheaper"

Of course I was talking comparable performance - mostly the reach component and the ability to snap off sudden images. Of course the IQ of the APS-C sensor will be superior to m43 which in turn generally outdoes 1" sensors - the Sony RX-10 MkIV is rather special though.

You are spending a LOT of money on m43 (Olympus OM-D EM-1 MkII for instance) - you can virtually get a Nikon D7200 + Tamron G2 150-600 for the price of the m43 body alone, although I just checked Adorama and it seems there is a couple of hundred off the body at the moment. You still then have to fork out for a long lens though, which still won't get you the reach of the APS-C system I suggested.

A mega reach Nikon P900 as others have suggested would also work well for cooperative stationary subjects in good light. I made my suggestions as the best value available since that rarely happens! and I know how super frustrating it is to miss a fleeting record of something new. :cat:

I should add that a Black Rapid sling takes care of any weight drawbacks of the Niki + Tammy rig. If the size is an issue I'd be inclined to go straight to the Sony RX-10 MkIV. :cat:

Though certainly worth considering, I think your recommendations have significant drawbacks for the OP. The Sony has much less reach than his 4/3 set up and a smaller sensor; the P900 has an even smaller sensor and lacks raw capability – not a problem for ID shots, but a limitation in case he wants to move beyond them. Your Nikon DSLR set up has less reach and is a bit heavier than his current 4/3 set up, which he already finds a burden, and will require him buying both a new body and lens. (And sorry, sling straps may ease the weight burden for some, but they certainly don't eliminate it).

I'd suggest he consider a used Oly EM-1 mk. 1, which was suggested above and should be well within his budget. He can then upgrade to better/lighter, as his funds permit. Though I would seek further input on the DP Review m4/3 or legacy lens forums, where there will be more people with experience with legacy lenses.

No disagreement that top-of-the-line m4/3s equipment is expensive, but that is because it offers a unique combination of light weight, serious reach, and high image quality. m4/3 also has quality lower cost options, however.
 
Last edited:
Though certainly worth considering, I think your recommendations have significant drawbacks for the OP. The Sony has much less reach than his 4/3 set up and a smaller sensor; the P900 has an even smaller sensor and lacks raw capability – not a problem for ID shots, but a limitation in case he wants to move beyond them. Your Nikon DSLR set up has less reach and is a bit heavier than his current 4/3 set up, which he already finds a burden, and will require him buying both a new body and lens. (And sorry, sling straps may ease the weight burden for some, but they certainly don't eliminate it).

I'd suggest he consider a used Oly EM-1 mk. 1, which was suggested above and should be well within his budget. He can then upgrade to better/lighter, as his funds permit. Though I would seek further input on the DP Review m4/3 or legacy lens forums, where there will be more people with experience with legacy lenses.

No disagreement that top-of-the-line m4/3s equipment is expensive, but that is because it offers a unique combination of light weight, serious reach, and high image quality. m4/3 also has quality lower cost options, however.
The Sony has a cutting edge 20MP BSI CMOS sensor and phase detect AF, and it's Zeiss glass is faster and better than anything mentioned. Despite it's smaller sensor size it likely has much better dynamic range anyway. It also has facility for in-camera crop at lower than full resolution which takes it to 900mm, and 1200mm. It costs less than the Olympus OM-D EM-1 MkII body alone, so I think if the OP wants something smaller then this is a great solution.

I agree about the Nikon P900, but it is capable in it's limited performance envelope and a cheaper option - I think there is a P1000 model on its way which will supercede it very shortly.

The APS-C Nikon D7200 + Tamron G2 150-600 is superior in every way to any comparably priced m43 system, and I think it is fair to say that you would have to spend twice the amount to get on a near equal footing. With the Nikon's DX sensor crop factor of 1.5x you are at 900mm equivalent. It also has a 1.3x in-camera crop factor at 15.4MP which puts you at 1200mm. Far superior in every way to the OP's current set up, and at ~6lb all up is well balanced and easily managed on a Black Rapid Sports sling (harness) - I can carry it all day. Set up properly the sling is ultra quick to snap opportune off hand shots, and the sling length can be set not only for comfortable carrying but also be used to brace and steady the rig for shooting - 70 odd bucks very well spent :t:


Chosun :gh:
 
The APS-C Nikon D7200 + Tamron G2 150-600 is superior in every way to any comparably priced m43 system

Every micro 4/3 system is superior to the Nikon in weight and portability. I also note that top-end micro 4/3 systems (which I acknowledge are not comparably priced) have superior image stabilization and frame rates, and also offer a fully functional and silent electronic shutter.

Top end M4/3 sensors outperform the Sony RX10 mk iii on all DXO mark scores. I believe the mk iv has the same sensor (which wasn't rated the last time I checked).
 
Last edited:
Every micro 4/3 system is superior to the Nikon in weight and portability. I also note that top-end micro 4/3 systems (which I acknowledge are not comparably priced) have superior image stabilization and frame rates, and also offer a fully functional and silent electronic shutter.

Top end M4/3 sensors outperform the Sony RX10 mk iii on all DXO mark scores. I believe the mk iv has the same sensor (which wasn't rated the last time I checked).
I think you're trying to argue around in circles.

The Sony RX-10 MkIV is superior to every comparable m43 system in weight and portability too. So what's the point.

Also no m43 system will get near the Nikon D7200 + Tamron G2 150-600 for reach and IQ either. So again what's the point.

As important as frame rates is the number of those that are in focus. My rig does 7fps and doesn't miss any if I do my part. Electronic shutter would be nice though. I think as more rolling shutter and EVF lag problems are solved then Mirrorless will become more attractive.

Of course an Olympus OM-D EM-1 MkII + 300mm f4 PRO with or without a 1.4xTC is a very nice rig - something like about 4&1/2 pounds - but also over $1000 for each and every one of those pounds ! :eek!:

I think the rigs I suggested offer excellent performance for the OP. They just need to decide what is more important to them - shooting Nikon DX at 1200mm is quite addictive, but so could be the light weight of the Sony ........ :cat:



Chosun :gh:
 
Chosun,
the thing I still object to (after these intermediate posts) is with the Nikon system. When you - to get similar reach - have activated the 1.3x in camera crop, then you are using a sensor of the same size as the m4/3 sensor. It will also give about the same mpix resolution. It is only if you do not activate that crop you can talk about the nikon system having a sensor advantage.

I agree that cost is an issue with the m4/3 rigs. However, if I were to be forced to leave that system, I would be more likely to go in the direction of the 1 inch superzooms than in the direction of the nikon, those long lenses are just to unwieldy.

Niels

Niels
 
Thank you very much everyone for the information. Yesterday after returning the FZ1000 I tried out the FZ82 bridge camera which has 1200mm zoom. I was impressed by what it could do in the shop car park especially considering it was half the price of the FZ1000 and it seemed to suit my needs perfectly. I’ve used it today on a few birds so distant I couldn’t ID them by eye, and ended up easily able to ID them, and even some decent photos (by my standards!). So it looks like my sigma lens will be packed away in th loft for the foreseeable future, and no longer will I have a stiff neck and back after lugging it around all day!

Many thanks,

Tom
 
Chosun,
the thing I still object to (after these intermediate posts) is with the Nikon system. When you - to get similar reach - have activated the 1.3x in camera crop, then you are using a sensor of the same size as the m4/3 sensor. It will also give about the same mpix resolution. It is only if you do not activate that crop you can talk about the nikon system having a sensor advantage.

I agree that cost is an issue with the m4/3 rigs. However, if I were to be forced to leave that system, I would be more likely to go in the direction of the 1 inch superzooms than in the direction of the nikon, those long lenses are just to unwieldy.

Niels

Niels
Niels,

It is true that by activating the 1.3x in-camera crop of the Nikon then you are at roughly 2x crop. However there are two important points to consider:
i) You still have greater individual sensor pixel pitch with the APS-C system than with the m43, giving better dynamic range and noise control. The 24MP sensor of the Nikon D7200 is a Sony one and is a gem and clearly has a sensor advantage taking that into account.
ii) You still have a reach advantage with the APS-C system and native fit 600mm lens. Even if you take the extra resolution of a ~20MP m43 sensor into account (over the 15.4MP of the 1.3x in-camera crop mode of the Nikon D7200) it still only gets you to ~900mm (using say the 100-400 Panny lens) when cropping the photo afterwards to equivalize resolutions ..... well short of the Nikon rig I suggested.

Even if you take the very best and longest native fit m43 system available - the Olympus OM-D EM-1 MkII + Olympus 300mm f4 PRO + 1.4xTC (giving 840mm equivalent reach), and crop the photo down to an equivalent 15.4MP of the Nikon (in 1.3x in camera crop mode) then you are still only at about ~950mm equivalent.
So you are only at about ~80% reach but with a lesser sensor quality, slightly under ~80% of the weight, and at least twice the co$t of the APS-C system I recommended ....... that's a costly pound and a half to shed ! :eek!:

I hope that helps clarify the situation. :t: Trust me, I crunched a lot of numbers before leaping from a blank sheet of paper, and 1200mm is quite addictive ! :-O

However it looks like the OP is headed downsize at least for now :t:
Cheers B :)


Chosun :gh:
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top