Skip to Content

Point and Shoot Digital Camaras

Discuss and share your wildlife photography, filming and equipment
User avatar
CuriousCanadian
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 3529
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:12 pm
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Contact:

Re: camera for travel

Unread post by CuriousCanadian » Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:24 am

and this just in from another thread..... 8)

Subject: Travel

Dabchick wrote:Hi justbarb! Welcome to the forums :D

I agree with the other replies.

It's likely to be somewhere between warm, hot and very hot in March. Probably dry, sunny weather most of the time, but the possibility of rain (especially thundershowers) can never be excluded (especially not this year).

Thus - mostly cool clothes: t-shirts, shorts / capri pants, swimwear if you like to swim, sandals etc. One or two long jeans and a warmish (e.g. light fleece) jacket should suffice. A rain jacket may be useful if you don't like being rained upon while dashing between the bungalow / car / toilets at the picnic spot etc :lol:

Regarding a camera, first answer this question:
Do you want to get into serious photography and spend a lot of money for professional equipment?
If YES: then go for a Canon / Pentax / Nikon DSLR camera and be prepared to spent some serious dosh on a telephoto lens (at least 400mm is essential for wildlife photography).

if NO: go for a nice superzoom camera such as Nikon Coolpix P100, Fujitech HS10 or HS11, or Pentax X90 (There may be newer models out - this list comes from about 6 months ago when I was in the market for a superzoom camera). Canon may arguably the best when it comes to DSLR camera's (or at least one of the best), but it doesn't have a superzoom that measures up to the 26x to 30x optical zooms (equal to > 600mm SLR lens) of the cameras listed above. It's much lighter and one can get decent wildlife photographs without spending serious money. The only problem that I have with my Nikon P100 is that it doesn't have manual focus (the other listed all have), which can be a problem with the subject is small (such as a malechite kingfisher), and the background is noisy (e.g. reeds) - the autofocus doesn't always focus on the right thing :roll:

Hope this helps and enjoy your time in SA! 8)


:D
Appreciate what you have before it becomes what you had.

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Re: camera for travel

Unread post by DuQues » Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:34 am

DSLR is better, but makes for a lot of stuff you have to transport during flight.

Really good point and shoot cameras do exist though. I recently bought a Fuji FinePix S1700HD for my mother in law, and she got very nice photos with it after little practice.
The Panasonic FZ series is good too, several of those went on to win in the photo competition here.

You need to look at cameras with optic (not digital!) zoom reaching about 400 mm at least, but plenty offer that, and at good prices.
At that length a dslr-like model is most likely easier to handle than a flat camera (telephone model) due to its form. I would prefer a model with a viewfinder, not only a screen, but that is probably personal and habit.
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

justbarb
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:29 pm

Re: camera for travel

Unread post by justbarb » Tue Feb 01, 2011 4:17 am

I am down to the Nikon Coolpix P100 or the Panosonic Lumix FZ40. The Canon SX30IS is close but what should I buy. This is my trip of a lifetime (so far)

EOS_User
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:30 pm
Location: A grey UK ! Longing to be in SA !

Re: camera for travel

Unread post by EOS_User » Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:41 am

Hi justbarb;

I'll declare at the outset that I'm a huge Canon fan; and have been for decades 8) but I'll try to be objective...

Here are three links. They're for reviews of each of your choices at a well respected site; DPReview;

Canon SX30IS ; http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10091 ... .asp#specs
Nikon D100 ; http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond100/
Panasonic FZ40 ; http://www.dpreview.com/news/1007/10072 ... mcfz40.asp

(Sorry; newbie on the forum and I can't figure out how to embed links right now :redface: )

I've had poor experiences with Panasonics; so would not personally consider that; and (IMO) the specs for the Canon outstrip that of the Nikon...

You do need to consider that the longer zoom range you use, the less image-quality you will get at the long ends with these bridge-cameras; but they are a good cross-over between a Point & Shoot and going the full hog to a DSLR.

You will also need a spare battery (make sure you re-charge the day's used battery each night) and lots of SD cards. I would NOT buy a single large-capacity card, rather 2 or 3 4Gb cards - and shoot on the highest image quality available on the camera!

My reasoning behind that is safety in the (admittedly highly unlikely) event of card-failure, and also against loss of the card. If you lose a single card with everything on - it's all gone! But that's just me :)

Anyhow, I hope that helps...

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Re: camera for travel

Unread post by DuQues » Tue Feb 01, 2011 10:58 am

Barb, EOS_User isn't completely right... The Panasonic Lumix series is a very good camera, check the link in my signature. Many photos from that series were the better ones, or even the best.

The links he gave are good though, they will tell you a lot about the cameras. I just have one to add:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/F ... _s1600.asp
This is an older model, if you walk around on DPreview you'll find newer ones. But it compares to the one I bought and was very happy with. The zoomrange is what you need, the quality of the photos was good, and because it has the DSLR look it is easy to handle, especially at long zoom.

I'm not sure what your finances are like, but you could also look at it's big new brother which has even more zoom.

There is an option on that site that may help you: compare cameras.
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

User avatar
DuQues
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Honorary Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14520
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Red sand, why do I keep thinking of red sand?

Re: Fujifilm FinePix S2550HD vs Sony H5

Unread post by DuQues » Tue May 03, 2011 8:41 pm

Sjoe, you added an old camera to the comparison! The Sony DSC-H5 is 5 years old, and unlikely to be in any shop.
Easy comparison: link
The not showing differences are in the quality of the sensors. The Sony probably has way less colourquality. In the intervening years sensors took huge leaps.
And there is the guarantee?

I would go for the Fuji, they are good cameras. I bought one for my mother in law. ;)
Not posting much here anymore, but the photo's you can follow here There is plenty there.

Feel free to use any of these additional letters to correct the spelling of words found in the above post: a-e-t-n-d-i-o-s-m-l-u-y-h-c

Straum
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:27 pm

Do I need a new camera?

Unread post by Straum » Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:41 pm

Will our Canon Power Shot SX110 IS (9.0 MP) be ok for taking pictures of birds, wildlife and landscapes? or should we invest in a Canon Power Shot SX40 HS (12.1 MP). We will be doing a self drive thru the park for 3 days (Mopani, Satara and Letaba) and 4 days at a reserve in Sabi.
thank you in advance.

User avatar
Bushbaby30
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 523
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Unfortunately not in KNP so I had to settle with Jo'burg

Re: Do I need a new camera?

Unread post by Bushbaby30 » Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:02 am

Welcome to the forum Straum!

Canon Powershot SX 110 IS has 10x optical zoom whereas the Canon Powershot SX 40 IS has 35x. That basically gives you a 36 - 360mm compared to a 24 - 840mm in 35mm terms. If you can get the SX40 the extra zoom will certainly come in handy for bird shots and other shots where the animals are further away! I hope you enjoy your trip whichever way you decide!
Nature does not hurry yet everything is accomplished- Lao Tzu

User avatar
Shidzidzii
Virtual Ranger
Virtual Ranger
Posts: 432
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 12:08 pm
Location: Tshipise

Re: Do I need a new camera?

Unread post by Shidzidzii » Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:08 am

I agree with fee that a bridge camera with a zoom of 35X is perfect for a non-pro . Reason is that manouvering inside a vehicle is easy while still being able to use a huge telephoto factor with IS . I also have the Canon SX30is and have taken amazing shots without the fuss of a huge physical telephoto lens . Our EOS450 may have beter IQ but the big lens is not handy in a vehicle with the affordable Sigma 150-500 and that still is less than the 810 @ 35X of the SX30is . And you can venture into digital zoom too - I have taken otherwise impossible shots with a low sacrifice of IQ . The Fuji Nikon Sony Olympus etc. are also excellent . And the makro ability in one lens with the tele is great atribute . If you can afford to upgrade you won't be sorry .

PantoffelSlippers
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 1:22 pm

Advanced crossover and DSLR

Unread post by PantoffelSlippers » Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:00 am

Hi

I've had a Canon 450D previously and now I have a Canon 60D. With my 450D, I had Canon 100-400mm lens. Unfortunately, both camera and lens were stolen during a burglary. I was able to replace the 450D with a 60D but due to other losses I wasn't able to replace the 400mm lens with anything other than the 18-135mm kit lens that came with the 60D.

I'm currently struggling financially to get a proper lens for my 60D.

I reviewed an article on the new Canon SX50 this morning. In short, it has 50x optical zoom, Digic 5 processer, goes up to ISO 6400, has a 4.5 stop IS and a few other nifty features.

My question is, with all the power in this SX50, is it really necessary to spend the extra money on the 60D (which I already did) and proper lens or two? It seems to me that SX50 can do pretty much 90% of what the DSLR can do. The mega pixels is a bit lower and I imagine the image sensor is a bit smaller. But does that really matter? How much of a different would I see?

I guess you will ask me what I intend to do with my camera. Look, I'm a beginner and even though I would like it, I will probably not ever make to a professional wildlife photographer. I do take thousands of personal pictures in Kurger Park etc. I would also like to start sending in my pictures to Weg, WegRy, Getaway etc.

So, can I compete with the big guns using only a SX50? Waat would the difference really be?

http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home...erShot_SX50HS/

User avatar
bert
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14292
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands

Re: Advanced crossover and DSLR

Unread post by bert » Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:02 am

i use both
Very happy with my Panasonic Z150 crossover
Just back from my annual Krugertrip and very pleased with the results
All in RAW, which is very important if you want to send images to mags and others!

main drawback with the newer generation of DSLR are the pixels
Above 400 ISO you will see pixels which will show.
And with the new generation DSLR (like the D60) ISO 800 is still very good.

And the lenses are great on the crossovers, but no match for a real white Canon lens
I use a 40D with the old white 300 4.0 lens and the image quality is much better then on my Z150.
This said i am still very pleased with the results from the crossover
With good light and ISO200 i have the best results
And a great camera for shooting from the hip at camps
And great quality for the price paid :thumbs_up:

User avatar
Dupacc
Junior Virtual Ranger
Junior Virtual Ranger
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:46 am
Location: Weltevredenpark, RSA

Re: Advanced crossover and DSLR

Unread post by Dupacc » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:34 am

Hi Pantoffelslippers

I use both and like you I am also a beginner and even though I also would like it, I will probably not ever make to a professional wildlife photographer. I do take thousands of personal pictures in Kurger Park etc.


Here are photos taken on the same day, the same time, same Fish Eagle. I hope this helps (all I did to the photos was to crop it, both were taken max zoom, setting on Auto)


Photo taken with Canon SX

Image


Photo taken with Canon 600D with 75-300mm Sigma

Image

I use the SX mainly where I need to go below 75mm, as well as where I need to maneuver quickly in the car and a long lens makes it difficult.

I hope this helps :roll: :roll:
Dupacc

I will join in the song, because I know why I sing. Soli Deo Gloria

EOS_User
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:30 pm
Location: A grey UK ! Longing to be in SA !

Re: Advanced crossover and DSLR

Unread post by EOS_User » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:24 pm

In good light, with low ISO, and short to medium zoom range, the bridge cameras will produce decent results; but they have two major drawbacks in comparison with a full DSLR;
- Shutter-lag, and;
- Much reduced Image Quality as you push ISO & zoom-range further out.

Shutter-lag is important for moving subjects. A DSLR is pretty-well instant. Although not great, a bridge-camera has a notable delay before firing the shutter, during which time the subject will have moved away from your focal-point, and may well be off the focal-plane...

IQ speaks for itself. If you've used the 100-400 you will know that it can produce stunning results at full zoom. That will not be matched by the bridge-unit. The fish-eagle images demonstrate the difference in IQ... As long as you can live with that, all will be well with the world!

User avatar
bert
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14292
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands

Re: Advanced crossover and DSLR

Unread post by bert » Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:46 pm

To make your decision a bit more difficult
The reason for me to buy a crossover where the 100-400 results
My panasonic (leica lens) matches the same quality

And with a decent adjusting program (i use lightroom) much can be done about the pixel quality.

Will post 2 images taken at Lake Panic tonite
So you can see the difference.
No crops

User avatar
bert
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Distinguished Virtual Ranger
Posts: 14292
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 9:02 pm
Location: mind in SA, body in The Netherlands

Re: Advanced crossover and DSLR

Unread post by bert » Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:32 pm

Image

200 iso, Canon D60 with 300 4.0 lens

Image

Compostition is different but the saturation, sharpness, detail and water is totaly
different. Both taken within 10 minutes of each other, With the canon (but its a very good lens!) you see lots of detail in the water, while with the Panasonic its more of a blur, hardly any detail.
But then again, the lens with IS is easily R15.000
And being a fixed lens not really a comparison with the zoom on the Panasonic
All in all i am not to disappointed with the crossover image
And the money difference is very big so i am a happy crossover user


Return to “Wildlife Photography Enthusiasts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


Webcam Highlights

Addo
Submitted by thiefbadger at 20:07:43
orpen
Submitted by Dibles at 11:11:23
satara
Submitted by vacation at 11:14:00
nossob
Submitted by thiefbadger at 20:06:18