• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Sony RX10 1V the new boy. (1 Viewer)

Jacek Zarzycki

Well-known member
and how is it with shooting birds in flight? I mean three situations - the bird approaches (or moves away), the bird starts vertically from the ground and the bird flies across the observer in relation to the observer.
 

Andy Hall

Notts Birder
Some lovely images there.I was tempted by this camera for a while but the price is a bit daft for a bridge camera.I ended up with a p900 and it is capable of some great images....equal to those of the sony in my humble opinion.


Yes, it was a bit pricey, but I had a bit of a windfall, and thought I'd splash out.

I previously had the Panasonic FZ1000. The Sony is definitely better.

I have heard good things about the P900.
 

HermitIbis

Well-known member
The Nikon P900 or P1000 are great for distant birds. For an expert who uses a bino and can easily ID birds from their voices, such a bridge camera can be a fine tool - to get ID shots and some wader watching. I might replace my 2.5 kg heavy "wader solution" by a dedicated long-distance bridge at a later point.

However, the Sony RX10 iv (or my V2) can shoot birds in flight. Which matters a lot for less experienced birders like me. I want to see the pics of a migrating Honey Buzzard on the screen. Or other birds not breeding here. On a coast trip I saw 14 new species, mostly in flight. And BIF becomes addictive once you started it... So for me the Sony RX10 iv is surely a tempting camera. Its price has already come down a little: Euro 1,250 (apparently grey imports).

I've seen an informative review by trustedreviews.com ("Even with erratically moving wildlife, the camera does a remarkably good job.") which recommends: "I found it performed best by setting the camera to wide-area AF mode, allowing it to first identify the moving subject, and then track it." The cameraergonomics site writes about BIF settings:
But for birds in flight with clear or cloudy sky in the background, which by the way the RX10M4 can readily handle, [Wide] is better as the bird will not always be behind the AF Area box. For BIF with a busy background such as trees, I need to do more research. As they say in the movie….it’s complicated.

Back to this thread and one of the most instructive posts above:
I'm still getting used to it though and need to find settings that work. But overall i'm happy with how most have turned out, it's a big improvement on the SX60 but i guess you'd expect that anyway.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/charlesbeams87/

These examples by Chris Small are some of the best I've seen so far from the Sony. Shore birds like a ringed plover, turnstone or redshanks are not large and also fast flyers. Of course, this shooting situation is not the most challenging - birds sailing along the coastline, parallel to the camera, no trees. ;)

Jacek's question refering to more problematic BIF situations is partly answered by this user report from August. Quote: "But when the bird is coming towards you, this is where RX10 IV shows its weakness."

It's fair to say, however, that every camera is struggling in this situation...
 
Last edited:

Neil G.

Well-known member
Some lovely images there.The p900 is easily capable of capturing gulls and similar in flight....like you say not the most challenging of conditions.
 

poledark

Well-known member
I would also have to take in to account the number of opportunities which occur on the day. Being prepared is more than half the battle I think. Just taking gulls for example, on the right day they will continue to fly past for hours on end and almost any reasonable camera will eventually get a couple of good shots.

On the other hand, like yesterday, suddenly a raptor (not sure which) hurtled past L to R and I nearly ricked my neck trying to keep up and get at least a blurred shot :)

Den...
note to self...stop zooming out as much.
 

Neil G.

Well-known member
You are right Den,being prepared is half the battle.Practice is also important.....the more you use a camera the better you will get with it......you can get great bif shots with an old manual film camera if you know what you're doing.Cameras such as the p900 or many other good bridge cameras are more than capable of great bif shots......as long as the photographer is.
 

HermitIbis

Well-known member
On the other hand, like yesterday, suddenly a raptor (not sure which) hurtled past L to R and I nearly ricked my neck trying to keep up and get at least a blurred shot :)
Den...
note to self...stop zooming out as much.

In such a situation, when you have perhaps 4-5 seconds, can't you focus on a tree close to the raptor's flight and lock focus? A half-decent ID shot would be almost guaranteed, or am I overlooking something?
 

Jacek Zarzycki

Well-known member
The Nikon P900 or P1000 are great for distant birds. For an expert who uses a bino and can easily ID birds from their voices, such a bridge camera can be a fine tool - to get ID shots and some wader watching. I might replace my 2.5 kg heavy "wader solution" by a dedicated long-distance bridge at a later point.

However, the Sony RX10 iv (or my V2) can shoot birds in flight. Which matters a lot for less experienced birders like me. I want to see the pics of a migrating Honey Buzzard on the screen. Or other birds not breeding here. On a coast trip I saw 14 new species, mostly in flight. And BIF becomes addictive once you started it... So for me the Sony RX10 iv is surely a tempting camera.

it is even more temptating when someone plans to visit other continent or distant country with different avifauna - almost all birds are unknown, it is hard to bond them to any group not say about species, so camera is used first, binos next. And , what's more - in some of these countries big camera with giant zoom lens may attract local thieves. So smaller bridge camera may be less problematic and it can also be lighter and still take great photos. Therefore I think about change of my camera and lens...
 

poledark

Well-known member
Herms, 3/4 second????? I wish :) Out in the open maybe would stand a chance, but in a hide...no way.
First job was to avoid smashing the lens on the window frame, by which time the bird had gone...

I got some pretty good shots of a Kestrel hovering by presetting the focus, but had plenty of time to get set up. and of course there is the infinity button.

Den
 
Last edited:

Chris.S

Well-known member
Thought i'd got some nice Pied Wagtail flight shots today, was focused on the bird while it was on the rock, but as i followed it, it seems to have focused on the sand |:|| Images are cropped and slightly sharpened.
 

Attachments

  • DSC04375.jpg
    DSC04375.jpg
    376.9 KB · Views: 286
  • DSC04377.jpg
    DSC04377.jpg
    362.8 KB · Views: 197

Skean

Well-known member
So I have this image:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pi_birder/30893422597/in/dateposted-public/lightbox/
With an additional thought on this or any other bridge camera in general. Lighting and distance from subject are of the utmost importance to getting an excellent shot. That said the camera lens and focusing system are certainly important and I believe, based on the couple of weeks I have used this camera, anyone who has digiscoped or has used a bridge camera with success will very much enjoy and find it easy to use this camera to get great shots. I am not even trying and the camera makes up for the lack of effort. 600mm is not great reach but having a fast/sharp lens and bigger sensor (for a bridge camera) IMHO goes a long way to making this camera the camera to bring along on a wide variety of trips.
The most important thing about any camera you use is that you enjoy the experience!
Good luck to all on any path you choose!!
Richard Messer a.k.a Skean
 

Chris.S

Well-known member
Had fun watching this Little Swift flying within feet at Hartlepool today. Took plenty of pics but it was difficult following it at times and almost impossible to follow when there was a darker background, mainly rocks and pavement, but think i did pretty well to follow it. Pretty heavy crops too and the images are still decent.

Chris.
 

Attachments

  • DSC04484.jpg
    DSC04484.jpg
    167.9 KB · Views: 281
  • DSC04750.jpg
    DSC04750.jpg
    223.2 KB · Views: 278

Steve Babbs

Well-known member
For anyone used to cameras like the Canon HS50/60 this is a totally different league. The issue is whether it is a replacement for a SLR and lens. For me it is. But I haven't been quite brave enough to sell my SLR gear yet. I suspect the lens will be on the market after what is likely to be a largely nocturnal trip to the Western Sahara next year. Noise at high ISO is definitely an issue but I don't find the autofocus much inferior to a Canon 7D mark ii + 100 - 400 mark ii although it is definitely not quite as good.
 

Jacek Zarzycki

Well-known member
is it true that camera is completely ready for taking pictures within 20 sec after switching it on ? In bird photography it is millenia... I red such opinion somewhere in the net. I am just curious
 

njlarsen

Gallery Moderator
Opus Editor
Supporter
Barbados
is it true that camera is completely ready for taking pictures within 20 sec after switching it on ? In bird photography it is millenia... I red such opinion somewhere in the net. I am just curious

Imaging resource states 1.9 seconds. Did you overlook a period?

Niels
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top