smaller than I thought

Wow - this guy knows what he is doing



more here

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p ... tcount=437

and another from a different and very pleased shooter

Lots of potential with that camera. And that was one healthy gray squirrel.

P900 Cooper's Hawk...
There I was, trying to photograph some hummingbirds with the P900 (NOT an easy task!) when all the other birds in the area scattered, and there was this huge clatter. Peering up from behind the bushes where I was, a juvenile Cooper's Hawk had landed, evidently looking for a quick snack. He/she didn't see me as I was able to get a couple of shots off before it took off.

Had I had my rig DSLR rig, I could have never pulled it off...

for the socks knocking off photo



••••

Macdoc wrote:I've been following the incredible arms race in the Superzoom category and finally caved.

That Nikon P900 looks interesting.

The superzoom arms race doesn't really interest me. I like my glass, fast lenses that I can use in low light and get plenty of bokeh. The longest lens I own is a Canon 70-200 f/2.8L, but the one that stays on my camera is the 50mm f/1.2L. I've never owned a flash unit.

A while ago I thought about buying a x2 TC for my 70-200, but thought it might be more sensible to get a superzoom instead so borrowed the Nikon P610 which was about the same price. It just annoyed me. I ditched all my SLR stuff 20 years ago for a compact camera, and playing with the P610 just reminded me why I went back to dSLR. I thought the cropped images off my 70-200 looked better than the images off the P610, the shutter delay, viewfider, focus speed and low light ability all annoyed me.

But now I look at the images you have posted, and it has to be time to have another look. I was thinking about some 18x50 IS binoculars for Xmas, just for a bit of fun, and it strikes me that the P900 might be even MORE fun. I've just been viewing some video online of people using the camera to look at Saturn and Jupiter and I want to play.

I hear you.
I went MFT for weight and glass choice. The speed is acceptable in good light, awful in poor light.

The Superzoom is entirely for birding and weighs less than my Gx7 with the 100-300 and three times reach.

Happy with the Gx7 for wide angle and the 45-175 ( 350 mm equiv ) is fast and small for travel....GF likes it too.

Too much money to go to the larger formats with the weight involved and cost of glass.

The actual focal length of the Nikon P900 is 4.3-357mm. It's the small sensor size that makes for a 35mm equivalent of 24-2000mm lens.

My 70-200mm lens cost three times what this camera costs, and I know plenty of people who are happy with their very expensive 70-300mm and 100-400mm lenses.

Reading about the different camera formats competing with dSLR, and it's got me thinking.

We've got used to the flexibility of buying a camera with a variety of lenses, but this evolved from a time when the camera body would most likely be the most expensive part of the kit. Isn't it time that this was reversed?

Wouldn't it be nice if, after spending a couple of month's salary on lenses built to last a lifetime, you could put your lens on a different body for different situations instead? Put your lens on a small sensor body for superzoom capabilities, or a large sensor body for wide angle or low light.

That's the approach of the MFT - the camera body is disposable. I can get 90% of the performance of a $10k lens with a $2k lens.



http://www.43rumors.com/now-shipping-no ... -for-1999/

That said, the optical physics dictate against too wide a range of use as it is the small sensor that makes the reach.

The big sensor and your big lenses give the light gathering and the detail without distortion but with weight. You can only shoot when you have a camera with you. I can keep a 20 mm MFT plus a 600 mm equ zoom in my shirt pockets - Ishoot from a motorcycle so that size and weight is important to me.

The MFT is a compromise. Low weight, lower light gathering, lower price and longer reach due to the sensor size. Sensor tech gets better but the light gathering still suffers with the smaller lenses.....even the Leicas can't pull more photons.

Choice is good.

through glass and not great light ...the bird setting did an excellent job under cluttered background
This was heavily cropped and I find all the photos need sharpening



dismal depth of field but given the low light and a double glass door it's okay.

You can adaptors, also.

For example, you can put Pentax DSLR lenses on a Pentax Q compact, giving pretty big magnification because of the small sensor in the Q.

This shot from my Olympus SH 1 compact.

It has a few tricks up it's sleeve like reflection.

Ive been wanting a second camera for years. I still use my faithful canon slr, but i'm looking at the poweshot ones, around R4,000.

Im getting some insurance money from the accidental damage to my computer, and going for the least expensive model I can afford this one.

Advice:

http://www.incredible.co.za/canon-powershot-sx530hs-black

I bought the little Canon Powershot. It's a really nice standby for when I either don't want to schlep the whole bag of tricks with me, and because it has a powerful zoom, I can also get fairly close up. Now I need a trip back to the mountains. Won't be able to afford that after spending money on toys.

Yes, people have asked me why I need more cameras when I already have a Canon DSLR and an iPhone. The phone's pics might be fine for Facebook but they're not suitable for printing on an A4 canvas and mounting on a wall. That's why I need at least two of them when I go on a road trip to take thousands of pics. We visited our Golden Gate national park last week, where I took over a thousand pics of magnificent mountains. Some of them are of course no good enough, others are just wonderful. I'm looking forward to the next road trip when I'll be able to employ both cameras for whatever I need them to do. I also carry a little point and shoot camera in my bag wherever I go, as well as my phone. I'd love another SLR one but at R10,000 its a little beyond my price range.

That 83 X Nikon is in DSLR-like class right ? Canon had S3 then S5 around 5 years ago in that competition.

I think the one I had was S5 with 12 X optic zoom, its unbelievable where they reached in such a short time. G series of Canon are cool cameras too.

Well - sliced bread category.....post capture focus....and it's free !!!!

http://www.digitaltrends.com/photograph ... -one-shot/

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/124455 ... on-feature





but not for my Gx7 yet ....

I need some advice about 35mm slides.

My ex died last year and left the family with dozens of boxes of 35mm slides. Some of them are really lovely photographs which I'd like to preserve for the family. I know there are scan (and 8mm film) scanners out there but the price differences seem to say to me that there is also a lot of rubbish so I could find myself spending money I can't afford on something that won't solve my problem.

I've looked around at local websites, obviously I can't afford to import something with the rand exchange rate being ridiculous at the moment, so does anyone know about these? Has anyone used one?

I also have some rolls of film, so if I can get a dual function device, that would be a great help. What can you tell me?

I don't know what photo editing software people are using, but I use Nik software in conjunction with Camera One Pro 9 (as raw convertor as much as anything). Google, who bought the Nik suite some while ago, have mde the whole lot available as a free download for Windoze & Mac OS X

WIN: https://dl.google.com/edgedl/photos/nikcollection-full-1.2.11.exe

OSX: https://dl.google.com/edgedl/photos/nikcollection-full-1.2.11.dmg