Small sensor camera for birding

[2u77matt]

After looking at the pheasant picture posted earlier, I got to thinking about the use of small sensor large optical zoom cameras for nature photography. While a small sensor and lens obviously have limitations for low-light or fast motion, those aren't qualities I typically associate with taking pictures of distant birds, deer, etc. Obviously, SLRs with their larger sensors and larger glass can let in a lot more light and record with less noise to do things across the board that the smaller cameras could only dream of. However, of all the modes of photography, well-lit long distance shots seem to me to be one of the areas where the difference between SLR and superzooms is smallest. For the budget minded hobbyist ONLY interested in distant nature photography, it might not be a bad way to go vs. buying an SLR body (ching) and telephoto lens (double ching). Plus, it's probably easier to carry around on a long hike or pack for a camping trip. As sensor technology improves and noise becomes less of an issue, it could become even more attractive in the future. I just brought this up because I know a lot of people "browse" this forum thinking of getting into nature photography and assume that an SLR is the only way to go.

It's kind of like an extension of the difference between a full-frame DSLR and 1.6x crop DSLR. While the full frame camera has a higher ceiling, it also takes more expensive glass to reach it. A lot of telephoto shooters are perfectly happy with results of a 1.6x and it gives them a little more reach with lest $$$. So as technology improves will this be taken a step further?

[polarsusd81]

Matt, you bring up a very good point. While it is not a neccessity to shoot a DSLR for birding and other forms of nature photography, it is a luxury. I have a DSLR and love it, but before I got my DSLR, I shot a Canon Powershot G2 and had very good results with that camera. I haven't really shot with a great point and shoot, so I can't comment on how good they are now, but I do know from reading about them that the specs are getting better and better all the time. It is pretty hard to beat a camera that has lets say an 8 mp sensor and a 12x optical zoom. That would suffice for just about anyone looking to get into photography and can be had for relatively cheap price points. The same combo in a DSLR would be in the 2500+ range and a lot of people can't afford to just go out and drop that kind of ching on a camera. Maybe after a few years shooting, they will realize that either the camera that costs less will work for them, or they want to advance themselves into the world of expensive cameras and lenses and jump onto the DSLR learning curve.

I personally feel that if a person is really into photography, or wants to get into it, they should first pick up a book on the subject of DSLRs and read through it carefully. I think a DSLR in any of the program modes, really doesn't do much more than a point and shoot, but when you take control of the camera and tell it what to do, that is when a DSLR shines. Without reading about it or having prior knowledge, it will be hard to make a DSLR shine brighter than a point and shoot.

Tom

[MN Shutterbug]

Excellent points, guys. Although I just picked up a DSLR, I still love my Panasonic P & S. It has a 12X optical zoom, and with my Olympus conversion lens, it'll reach out 20.4X. I have been very happy with many of my photos, from this camera. Sure, it has it's drawbacks, such as low light shooting and poor high ISO quality, but for the price, I ain't knocking it. It's definitely the way to get started in wildlife photography. Nowadays, advanced P & S's give a person full control. If a person wishes to get more serious down the road, then they can spend the big bucks.

[Dbl]

2u77matt,

Great discussion I think. First off what are you expecting out of your photos. There are really two completely different camps here. Are you selling work or enlarging photos for print? Are you taking photos for yourself printing smaller sizes and viewing on the web?

Let me address a few of your points and how I look at them.

Quote:

---

SLRs with their larger sensors and larger glass can let in a lot more light and record with less noise

---

You are correct I think in saying that the smaller cameras are doing a great job with smaller sensors. Used to be anything over 400 ISO and noise was very prevalent, certainly not the case in some of the newer cameras. Keep in mind noise is just a portion of the overall equation of how a picture is recorded.

Quote:

---

Well-lit long distance shots seem to me to be one of the areas where the difference between SLR and super zooms is smallest

---

I actually think that is the area where the distance is the greatest. No lens on a point and shoot can come close to the resolving power of a 600mm prime, or a 400, or 300 even. Just look at the size of the elements, those lenses are capable of capturing more detail along with the larger sensors as you mentioned. So it comes back to what are hoping to accomplish with your photos?

Quote:

---

For the budget minded hobbyist ONLY interested in distant nature photography, it might not be a bad way to go vs. buying an SLR body

---

A good point and shoot with a decent lens will run you about the same money as an entry level DSLR. That is one reason the market on DSLR's is the fastest growing segment in photo sales. You can buy a low end zoom in package deals that make the cost of the DSLR very close to a good point and shoot. Even the lowest priced zooms I think will give you better picture quality, faster focus speed, and the camera will have less shutter lag, more control over output of the final product.

Quote:

---

It's kind of like an extension of the difference between a full-frame DSLR and 1.6x crop DSLR. While the full frame camera has a higher ceiling, it also takes more expensive glass to reach it. A lot of telephoto shooters are perfectly happy with results of a 1.6x and it gives them a little more reach with lest $$$.

---

You are right about more expensive glass to reach potential it again I think comes down to what are your expectations. If you make your living from a camera your expectations and your clients expectations will be different than if you are a hobbyist looking to just get some good photos.

There are P&S folks that post very nice work here and other places, jonny, hendenhook and others so yes you can produce great work with a P&S. Again what do you want from your equipment? There is no doubt that fine work can be produced from lower cost equipment. The photographer has more to do with that than the equipment. Great discussion, can't wait to see other's responses.

[jonny_redhorse]

Thanks Dan for the mention ....haven't made a "buck" off my various photos posted here or anywhere else but was certainly never my intention and my "point and shoots" (2 of em) certainly fit the bill for my needs as only use em for sharing on the net...I travel, what one could say, "light", as I throw one camera on my back(via the strap) and hand carry the other with a few batteries in my pocket....no camera bags for this guy .. ....sometimes I take a teleconverter with me but not very often(blurs the images )....when I see a bumble bee on a flower,I stick the lens of my fuji a quarter inch away and "snap" he's mine ...if I see a nice bird sitting on a branch 25' away, I may change cameras as one fuji takes "softer" images then the other and I choose cameras depending on the conditions at hand...one takes better macros(the fuji 9meg) then the other (6meg)....I don't have to change lenses(would certainly slow me down) I don't worry about "dust and dirt" on the sensor(I haven't even cleaned my lenses for months now and images seem to still come out ok(should clean my lenses I guess )just depends but price wise both cameras totaled came to about $800.00 I have about 10,000 images from the 6 meg fuji and about 5,000 on the 9 meg fuji....are they as good as the "big guns?...."good" can be takin many ways as they are good for me...depends as many have stated, what you are intending on doing with the images....these 2 cameras have given me some very nice images of spring,summer,fall,and winter....actually many of each...I'll miss my fuji's if one "buys the farm"

[finnbay]

Lots of good points here. P&S cameras have really gotten to be a pretty good product and in the hands of people (like those already mentioned) who understand their equipment and have an eye for what they're looking for, the end result is pretty amazing. One idea danced around, but not stated directly is that the P&S can be thrown into a pocket or pack and is THERE when a shot presents itself. Too many years I left my film SLR at home on fishing trips because it added too much weight. I wish I had photos from some of those days. Today, if weight is a factor, I have a 4 megapixel Kodak that goes in the pack. Probably won't produce an image quality wise that a magazine would want, but I have an image that's worth keeping.

[jonny_redhorse]

won't be throwin this guy in your pocket

[MN Shutterbug]

I'll bet that picture was taken with your other Fuji. BTW, is that an Olympus 1.7 conversion lens on the end of it? I always use that with my Panasonic.

[finnbay]

Geez, jonny. Don't be fallin' out of the boat with that hangin' around your neck!

[mmeyer]

This is a great thread. I think a lot of people think to take good images you need to have an expensive camera. As Jonny and others proove, a big big part of taking good photos is the person and the knowledge behind the camera. Before I bought my DSLR I used a Sony 12x zoom camera. I miss some things about that camera.

That being said, the main reason I went with a DSLR is SHUTTER LAG! I hated it. I like to take action shots of animals and my kids. Trying to do that with shutter lag is very difficult. I got very frustrated with it so I went the DSLR route. I'm very happy with it and will never go back.

One thing I think that sets apart P&S users from DSLR users is that many more P&S users just use the auto mode on their camera. I have tried it a couple times on my DSLR and I haven't gotten too many shots that I couldn't have gotten at least a little better in manual mode.

Thanks for starting this thread, it is interesting to get both sides.

Mike

[MN Shutterbug]

I kept my P & S. As soon as I bought the canon, a member inquired about my Panasonic. I decided there are too many things I like about, than to get rid of it. The only automatic setting I ever tried with my P & S, was a sports mode, at a friend's softball game. I then set things my way, and afterwards, found that my settings worked better. Since then, I haven't even played with any of the 14 preset scene modes. I consider myself a little smarter than the camera.

The main advantage I've noticed with DSLR is much faster focus in low light situations. The focus is also more accurate, in less than ideal conditions. The shutter lag doesn't really bother me. I can set my Panasonic at 3 frames per second, and that's where I usually keep it. Although, I can shoot my Panasonic at 734mm and F3. I sure can't accomplish that with my canon. Also, I will take my Pan in my boat, but never my Canon.

Basically, with the right P & S, and in the right hands, high quality photographs can be made, with just a few more annoyances and missed opportunities.

[Steve Foss]

Well, very little left to add, you guys. Quite an interesting and complete discussion to come home to. Thanks for the food for thought.

I simply want to emphasize a point that's been mentioned already, and to me the most important point for anyone taking pictures. It's tremendously rewarding to get good with the equipment you have and take pictures you like.

In other words, as that old song says: Love the one you're with.

[jonny_redhorse]

Sure is XT... I use it occasionally and it does bring things closer but at a price...purple fringing to a degree.... I take it with each time in the camera case but sits collecting dust most of the time ...I use it for those "deer in the field" shots 200 yards away

[jonny_redhorse]

I certainly agree Mike on the shutter lag thing...I have missed some pretty decent shots because of it...all I get at times is the deers butt going into the alder brush ...or the camera takes a pic of a tree branch where a bird use to be ....useing a point and shoot requires patience for sure .. ...but after awhile (after a few curse words and "talking to Jesus")... I usually end up with a decent shot or 2