-
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 Coolpix p900 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fiveroll
- Start date
MelospizaMelodiaFan
I photograph birds
I don't own this camera, but I use a setup for walking that is almost twice as heavy. I think it should be fine.
It's not the smallest of cameras, but weight-wise it's pretty light. In decent light hand held shots are fine, a monopod helps in low light, but the IS is pretty good. Biggest issue with it is the viewfinder is very poor (the 950 is much better), but for the price the camera as a whole performs decently.
I've been using the P900 since 2019 and am delighted with it. I have back/hip problems so can't carry much weight. This means a tripod is out of the question for me.
If I want to use full zoom I lean against a tree or use a friend's shoulder to support the camera (this especially for subjects high in a tree).
I have a Blackrapid shoulder harness (not particularly cheap), but it allows the camera to swing free by my right hip, making it really quick to lift to my face to take a picture. The weight is so well distributed, I'm hardly aware of it, managing (for me) some quite long walks in the outback. You can see my pictures by clicking on my avatar and selecting Gallery from the pop-up.
Bearing in mind I'm a birder who takes photographs. I'll never be a 'photographer' LOL. I mostly use the built-in automatic settings, one of which is for birding!
If I want to use full zoom I lean against a tree or use a friend's shoulder to support the camera (this especially for subjects high in a tree).
I have a Blackrapid shoulder harness (not particularly cheap), but it allows the camera to swing free by my right hip, making it really quick to lift to my face to take a picture. The weight is so well distributed, I'm hardly aware of it, managing (for me) some quite long walks in the outback. You can see my pictures by clicking on my avatar and selecting Gallery from the pop-up.
Bearing in mind I'm a birder who takes photographs. I'll never be a 'photographer' LOL. I mostly use the built-in automatic settings, one of which is for birding!
Mikbul
Mikbul
I would get the Nikon D3500, the worlds lightest DSLR. I got one from my daughter and we love it. Works well with the 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR lens.
It's an okay camera - but for bird photography you surely need at least a 600mm lens?
Mikbul
Mikbul
Here's a photo my daughter took of a red tail hawk the first week with the D3500 and the cheaper 4.5-6.3 zoom. Not bad for her first REAL camera! (the 70-300 4.5-5.6 is a better lens with less C/A and is faster, 67mm obj. v/s 58mm)
Not many newbies would have gotten the bird in focus with all that going on around it!
Not many newbies would have gotten the bird in focus with all that going on around it!
Attachments
Last edited:
Mikbul
Mikbul
All my Canon prime lenses I buy used, great prices on used Nikon and Canon primes now and remember the longer the lens watch out for atmospheric shimmer. (magnified by excessive focal length) That's why I only use my Canon EF 1X4 and 2X sparingly. My 300L IS gives me 300 f/4, 420 f/5.6 and 600 f/8. That in flight peregrine shot was 400mm at f/8. (I rarely use the 2X extender)
Last edited:
What would the weight of the lenses be that you'd need for a day's birding; if, say you were out in the hills.
I'd want, probably, to take some nice views of the landscape and distant hills, a bird close to on a fence post or in the heather, a bird flying past and probably one soaring at height. Also, if I'm lucky an insect or two.
I'd want, probably, to take some nice views of the landscape and distant hills, a bird close to on a fence post or in the heather, a bird flying past and probably one soaring at height. Also, if I'm lucky an insect or two.
Last edited:
Mikbul
Mikbul
If Nikon 70 -300 4.5.5.6 ..................744 grams
The D3500 is only 415 grams
Also image stabilized so no tripod needed.
My Canon 300L is 1,180 grams lens only! My D5 Mark III is 955 grams, so about 1,000 grams lighter than my setup!
The D3500 is only 415 grams
Also image stabilized so no tripod needed.
My Canon 300L is 1,180 grams lens only! My D5 Mark III is 955 grams, so about 1,000 grams lighter than my setup!
Last edited:
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
I have the P950 which is more or less the same camera.
I take all of my pictures lying down or sat down simply because it's much easier to keep it steady. The weight is nothing. I carry it 'round my neck and barely notice it's there while I'm walking along not seeing very much.
It's not easy to keep steady standing up.
I have a tripod but never use it because the best bet for getting into decent range is being sneaky and flexible. But then I suppose it depends on which types of birds you're photographing most often. I generally photograph song birds rather than waders, and that being the case a tripod is not much use to you.
If weight and size is a consideration (which seems to be) you cannot go wrong with the P900/P950. Just be aware of its limitations due to its small sensor size, but some of us have got very decent shots with it under the right conditions (many examples in other threads).
I shoot almost always handheld as a tripod/monopod would make the whole set up heavier/bulkier, what is exactly what I am trying to avoid. Ocassionally I would lean against a tree/fence or use anything else I find around for support, but only if I am shooting at the longest end of the zoom (mine is the P1000, hence 3000mm)
I shoot almost always handheld as a tripod/monopod would make the whole set up heavier/bulkier, what is exactly what I am trying to avoid. Ocassionally I would lean against a tree/fence or use anything else I find around for support, but only if I am shooting at the longest end of the zoom (mine is the P1000, hence 3000mm)
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
The only time I would use a tripod with the P950 is when in a hide. In that situation I think they're useful. It doesn't work for me because I'm not one to sit in hides, I'm more of a walker.
I did buy a portable hide, which is good by the way for the price paid, the problem with that is the camera doesn't capture anywhere near enough light because the hide blocks it. 'Just the wrong camera for that situation, I reckon.
I'd imagine a tripod could be very useful when photographing waders and the like, however.
Same! I like walking around rather than waiting...P950/1000 are "walkers" cameras as we benefit from its low weight/small size. I also got a portable hide a few years ago and and use it when the only option to see a subject is to wait i.e. with badgers.
In relation to the hide blocking the light (if I understand what you are saying)...the camera would use the light available at the "subject/object" you are trying to photograph, so if the camera is in the shadow but your subject is well illuminated, there should be no issue. You can test this at home i.e. if you stand with your camera in a dark room and point it to a window or well illuminated area in M model you can see how the exposure indicator responds to changes in light available. You may want to try "spot", as opposed to "balance or matrix" for light capture if not already done.
Back to stabilization...tripods and monopods are super useful, my issue is that I need to carry them, hence the workarounds. Sometimes I take a small bean bag (super lightweight) that I hook to my backup and/or use my trekking pole for additional support. When in a hide (a real one, not a portable one) I may use my backpack as beanbag. When I do carry my spotting scope (and its tripod), is use it to provide support too.
As said, a dedicated tripod would work better, I prefer not to carry one.
Similar threads
