-
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.
Comparing Superzooms (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Hobbes2
- Start date
Roy,
Any camera can take reasonable photos in good light.
However, for your question
I think the answer is that you have that type and cost of camera in the m4/3 section. For example:
Pana G3 336 g
Pana 100-300 520 g
total 856 g (for about $1250 in the US, don't know the UK price)
Which is about the same weight as the heaviest superzooms (for example Fuji HS20 at 730 g). Yes, you loose the convenience of having wide angle in the same housing, but if your objective is to have something for the bird photos, this could be it (and a 14-42 mm is included in the above price but not weight). Edit: remember the 2x crop factor in m4/3 cameras.
Niels
Any camera can take reasonable photos in good light.
However, for your question
I think the answer is that you have that type and cost of camera in the m4/3 section. For example:
Pana G3 336 g
Pana 100-300 520 g
total 856 g (for about $1250 in the US, don't know the UK price)
Which is about the same weight as the heaviest superzooms (for example Fuji HS20 at 730 g). Yes, you loose the convenience of having wide angle in the same housing, but if your objective is to have something for the bird photos, this could be it (and a 14-42 mm is included in the above price but not weight). Edit: remember the 2x crop factor in m4/3 cameras.
Niels
Last edited:
Hobbes2
Well-known member
Yes, good point, Ivan. My camera is an older model but I don't even bother trying to use it above ISO100, lol. I can get away with ISO200 but anything more and it's just a record shot. When I see DSLR users talking about ISO3200, my jaw drops
! Roy, for me, I have found that I've learnt when there's no point in taking my camera out. Unless the sun is shining, my superzoom shots aren't much good. This obviously limits its use significantly.
Hobbes
Hobbes2
Well-known member
Hi Niels
What's the 35mm equivalent lens length of that set up, please?
Hobbes
Don't worry, Niels, just found the answer: 200-600mm.
Last edited:
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
Yes, I am starting to realise this. With the DSLR I routinely shoot at ISO 800 and even go to ISO 3200 if needed. If one had to shoot at ISO 200 all the time in the UK then I guess you would have to use a tripod which is defeating the object of getting these lightweight Cameras in the first place I guess.
IvanCavallazzi
Well-known member
Tripods won´t help you. Actually the IS systems of the superzooms are very good. The stabilization problem is not you, the problem is the bird.
There is certainly one user on DPRewiew (Sony Talk Forum) who is producing some pretty stunning shots with the HX100V. They are not too far off a DSLR type of finish. However, he seems to be the only one capable of achieving these results (or at least he's the only one posting these kind of results).
Hi Hobbes2
But most of his shots are of captive birds at close range,mainly of slow moving wildfowl.
Any compact camera would get good results under these conditions.
Hi Hobbes2
But most of his shots are of captive birds at close range,mainly of slow moving wildfowl.
Any compact camera would get good results under these conditions.
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
Thanks for all the feedback folks :t: I think I will stick to the DSLR route for now and maybe pick up a relativity lightweight lens like the 400/5.6 if I feel I need to continue with bird photography. I will keep my eye on the superzoom market to see if things improve with new models.
BTW and without knocking any body else's pics on this thread I think the examples show in post #26 by 'Kenn3d' are well up to the best DSLR standards IMO. I guess they were all taken in good light from close range.
BTW and without knocking any body else's pics on this thread I think the examples show in post #26 by 'Kenn3d' are well up to the best DSLR standards IMO. I guess they were all taken in good light from close range.
Last edited:
If they're the photos I'm thinking of then I agree. I think this is the confusing thing about comparing people's shots, it's hard to know how far away they were and how much they've been cropped. Unless you intend spending the time to get that close to every bird you photograph then you can't expect to get the same quality results.
I'd be interested to see what sort of results are obtained with ISO 3200. I suspect you might need to be fairly close to the subject to use this setting and get decent results (i.e. you can't afford the enlargement of the grain necessary after cropping). Can anyone confirm?Yes, good point, Ivan. My camera is an older model but I don't even bother trying to use it above ISO100, lol. I can get away with ISO200 but anything more and it's just a record shot. When I see DSLR users talking about ISO3200, my jaw drops
And don't forget that it wouldn't be like having a usable ISO 3200 on a compact camera. An SX30's aperture is f5.8 at 840mm equivalent. To have the equivalent on a DSLR would be a pretty big and expensive lens.
I went to a DSLR mainly because of the lack of controls on compacts, especially manual focus. I think if I could have a compact with the same level of controls as a DSLR then I'd put up with the noise in order to have the lightness and smaller size back.
scodgerott
Well-known member
Hi All, I'm attaching three pics taken with my FZ100 at different iso's ranging from 400 to 1600. The 1600 image definitely shows some noise, but I think it's still not too bad. The others, I think are quite reasonable considering that its only a small sensor.
With regards to the lack of controls on compact cameras, I think the modern crop give a wide variety of control, with multiple settings and shooting modes.
I also think that the images taken by Kenn3d are excellent. I don't think it would be possible to get any better with the superzoom cameras. I wish they all turned out as good as those.
With regards to the lack of controls on compact cameras, I think the modern crop give a wide variety of control, with multiple settings and shooting modes.
I also think that the images taken by Kenn3d are excellent. I don't think it would be possible to get any better with the superzoom cameras. I wish they all turned out as good as those.
Attachments
scodgerott
Well-known member
Just wanted to add a couple of things.
Firstly, sorry about the small size of the 3 images, I just couldn't seem to get them down to the required mp limit without some savage pruning.
Secondly, I haven't heard any rumours about the replacement for the FZ100/45/40. All I know is that on the 21 July each year for the past several years Panasonic has released a new FZ series camera/s. I have read on other forums, that things may be different this time because of the tsunami. No one knows what effect that will have on production, especially if one of the component makers factories happened to be in that area.
Firstly, sorry about the small size of the 3 images, I just couldn't seem to get them down to the required mp limit without some savage pruning.
Secondly, I haven't heard any rumours about the replacement for the FZ100/45/40. All I know is that on the 21 July each year for the past several years Panasonic has released a new FZ series camera/s. I have read on other forums, that things may be different this time because of the tsunami. No one knows what effect that will have on production, especially if one of the component makers factories happened to be in that area.
By "controls", I meant things like a focus ring for manual focus, and dedicated buttons and wheels for commonly accessed things like exposure compensation and ISO, instead of having to lower the camera to dive into the menus. I think most superzooms allow manual exposure, and aperture and shutter priority, but don't necessarily let you make adjustments in those modes very easily.
It's the manual focusing I had most problems with with my Canon S3, and part of the trouble is the low resolution EVFs making it hard to tell if it's focused anyway.
That said, not all DSLRs have dedicated controls for everything I want either, and manual focus "by wire" with all-electronic lenses is often harder than with mechanical focusing (I've heard).
scodgerott
Well-known member
Hi Pshute, Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant about the lack of some manual controls. My FZ100 does allow you to do most things "on the fly" without having to delve into the menus, but a focus ring it does not have. That is on my wish list, as the little wheel on the back is too slow. I have also heard that the focus/zoom ring on the new Sony superzoom is also slow. Someone who has used that camera should be able to confirm that. I have a Sony video camera and the focus ring on that camera is sooo slow.
I agree with you about the EFV's, they can make it very hard to see how well the camera is focused. My Panasonic is "guilty as charged" on that matter. Most of the time I can read it ok, but every now and then I can't tell and that usually means its not on focus. One of the big problems I have trying to focus manually (other than the slow wheel and the much faster left and right direction keys), is that I'm usually doing it at full zoom and any movement of the camera makes it almost impossible to get a good look at what you're doing. I guess that would apply in a lot of cases to all cameras using a long lens.
I agree with you about the EFV's, they can make it very hard to see how well the camera is focused. My Panasonic is "guilty as charged" on that matter. Most of the time I can read it ok, but every now and then I can't tell and that usually means its not on focus. One of the big problems I have trying to focus manually (other than the slow wheel and the much faster left and right direction keys), is that I'm usually doing it at full zoom and any movement of the camera makes it almost impossible to get a good look at what you're doing. I guess that would apply in a lot of cases to all cameras using a long lens.
I used to use a Canon S3, which only had buttons to adjust the focus. I would have really liked a wheel. When you say "slow", do you mean it's difficult to reach, or that it takes a lot of turns to get it where you want it? I think I read that the wheel on the SX30 changes focus more if you turn it fast, less if you turn it slowly. Can anyone confirm that?
Does it have a setting to enlarge the middle of the EVF as soon as you start manually focusing? That's very helpful, and in my opinion potentially better than an SLR if the EVF resolution is reasonable (most aren't).
Are you saying that it wobbles around too much as soon as you try to adjust the focus? I don't think I had that trouble, even with a 1.7x teleconverter on. Are you holding the end of the lens with your right hand? Or does the position of the wheel force you to let go of the camera? Can you reach it with your thumb without letting go? Maybe it takes practice.
The problem I had was that the MF button on the S3 could only be reached with the left thumb if I held the lens at the base. I ended up taping an icypole stick to the side of the lens so I could press it without moving my hand.
scodgerott
Well-known member
The FZ100 has a manual focus on the left side of the lens barrel, but is very close and easy to activate while using the camera. The camera also has a "one touch" auto focus button just below the manual focus switch, which means you can keep it manual focus and then just by pressing this button once it immediately goes into autofocus. Then it will hold that focus until you touch the button again for a new focus. It is a very handy feature and I use it a lot. Hope this helps.
Last edited:
I already have an FZ28 and I was on the look for a camcorder... but finally decided on the FZ100. I know I won't see a picture improvement over the FZ28 but I thought why get a camcorder when you can have comparable video quality with a camera so full in features ? The video duration limit doesn't really bother me and the camcorders are taxed more heavily. And the girlfriend can have the FZ28 since she's always complaining about the low zoom of her point & shoot.
Looks like I can't get away from Panasonic.
Looks like I can't get away from Panasonic.
scodgerott
Well-known member
One of the benefits of the FZ100/45/40 and also the FZ35/38, is that they allow you to alter the shutter speeds and aperture in the video mode. None of the other "super zooms" offer this feature. It is most useful in bird photography, as being able to shoot at a faster shutter speed means that if you look at your video frame by frame you get clear images of birds flapping their wings and movement in general, rather than just blurred still shots. The faster shooting modes are also useful for shooting birds in flight. Last weekend I was out with a number of other bird photographers, all with DSLR cameras and I was able to get all the shots they were making, as the FZ100 was fast enough in focus and burst rates to catch the action. In fact, it had higher burst rates than most of the DSLRs. I'm sure they got better quality images, but mine were pretty good, so I wasn't disappointed.
The FZ100 also has that 220 fps mode which although it works only in QVGA resolution, it is very fun for making some slow motion videos.
I've never seen anyone complaining about the features of the FZ series. And since picture quality is at least average for the category, it's no surprise that Panasonic has been leading the superzooms for several years.
I've never seen anyone complaining about the features of the FZ series. And since picture quality is at least average for the category, it's no surprise that Panasonic has been leading the superzooms for several years.
I think Pana was class leading for picture quality for some time. If they still are, I am not sure (some indications of the opposite above).
Niels
