Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Recommend a new camera

  1. #1

    Default Recommend a new camera

    I am currently using a Olympus point & shoot SP-800UZ which has a 30X optical zoom/wide. I use the camera every single day in some way. I was going to purchase another Olympus point & shoot with a 50x. But recently noticed that about 6 of my screws are missing from the housing, the battery lever (holds battery in) has broken off and the company doesn't seem to be doing well. I have contacted lots of companies about problems with products. That's when you can really tell if a company backs it's products. I was asking for 6 screws to replace the missing screws and have been getting the run around. They don't sell them so I'd have to send it back. I refused to send it back just for missing screws and now they want me to call a number for service after I have already been communicating with someone through emails. Then I read articles about the Olympus CEO's doing some bad things. Which raised more red flags.

    So now I have to reconsider my next Olympus camera purchase.

    I like my current camera and have used it a lot. I would like to have another point & shoot with a stronger zoom. I think the model I was looking at was the SP100. It's gimmick is the sight below the flash. I miss a lot of eagle and plane pictures while trying to find them on the display. So I liked the idea of the sight.

    Any recommendations?

  2. #2

    Default

    I just wanted to add that my digital 30x is 4.9-147 mm. The digital 50x I was going to buy is 4.3-215 mm.

  3. #3

    Default

    Sorry, the manufacturers are almost all viewing these items as replace instead of repair it seems, makes it frustrating sometimes. I have not played with any compact superzooms less than 5 years old from today's date so I also can't tell you what is out there except that if I were buying one it would probably be a Panasonic.
    14 Days to Alaska
    Also available on Kindle and Nook

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troy Hamon View Post
    Sorry, the manufacturers are almost all viewing these items as replace instead of repair it seems, makes it frustrating sometimes. I have not played with any compact superzooms less than 5 years old from today's date so I also can't tell you what is out there except that if I were buying one it would probably be a Panasonic.
    I'll have to look at the Panasonics.
    I've been comparing models. I am interested in a Nikon Coolpix P600 60X. 4.3-258 mm (supposed to be the equivalent to 24-1440 in a 35mm)
    I haven't owned a Nikon as of yet. http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/coolpix/p/p600/spec.htm
    Thanks for your reply Troy.

  5. #5

    Default

    My pleasure. Hope you find something you like and that works for you. I generally like Nikon, but it seems like all the manufacturers in the superzoom category were busy making computers that take photos rather than cameras that happen to be computers. Panasonic seems to have really hit this segment of the market with some quality products, but I'm sure there are lots of good ones available, including Nikon's. That 24-1440 sounds awesome. The problem with the long lenses is always the aperture at the long end. That's why the guys on the sidelines at the NFL game have huge lenses, they need more light. The little lenses that go out to those focal lengths don't let in much light, so the ability to get enough light for a good image is the primary issue, as well as the compromises in engineering an optical path that complicated.

    By which I only mean...it is good to read objective reviews about lenses like that if you can...they might be awesome, but it is a serious top-level engineering challenge to make a lens like that.
    14 Days to Alaska
    Also available on Kindle and Nook

  6. #6

    Default

    I think I understand.
    I like to take pictures from my tree stand during archery. The deer usually show up a little before it turns dark.
    I often have a problem with the pictures going blurry during this time. One example would be when a nice buck
    walked in to my stand. I didn't have a chance at shooting him so I thought I would take some pictures as he was
    leaving. I couldn't get a clear picture because of lighting issues.
    On the other hand, one night a policeman had a truck pulled over about 1/4 of a mile away. I was able to get clear
    pictures from that distance in complete darkness because of the headlights and the police lights were flashing.

    Because my Olympus has so many computer like settings. I may be missing something that may help with lighting.
    I also do not understand why a camera actually needs wifi. The Nikon has wifi.

    I was just trying to avoid buying a bunch of lenses. I have a 35 mm with a few lenses.
    I like to take close up pictures of bugs and weed flowers. But also like to take pictures of animals at long distances.
    While at Yellowstone, I was taking good pictures of a grizzly from a long distance in good lighting. As soon as the
    sun started to go down, the camera couldn't focus on elk that were near the road.

    But the Olympus did raise my picture quality to another level overall. My wife has had at least two women ask her if
    I would consider taking pictures at their weddings. I would never do it and find it funny that they would ask. But it is nice that
    they like my pictures. I am hoping to improve a little more with my next camera purchase.

  7. #7

    Default

    Low light is a challenge for photography. The options are to increase the amount of light coming in (bigger front element) or improve the ability of the sensor to record from fewer photons (usually somewhat tied to bigger image sensor). The compact superzooms are really convenient but they don't have big sensors or big apertures. Not saying you can't get a great photo...but you may have to really work for it.
    14 Days to Alaska
    Also available on Kindle and Nook

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    I have heard a lot of good comments about the panasonic FZ-1000. Over at the photography forum of "accuratereloading.com," Saeed posted some photos taken with it. The only problem is that the Leica super-zoom is up to 16x (something like 25-400mm), but Leica lenses are nothing but outstanding. It is not a cheap super-zoom camera, however:
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Fc-Bfgod7y0AhA

    By the way, I posted the B&H link above because it shows the camera and specs. But I am certain that the sponsor of this forum, CameraLand, has the same camera, and can tell you the details about it. I use Canon cameras.

    These are Saeed's photos:
    http://forums.accuratereloading.com/...3/m/3381063602

  9. #9
    Member bobmikk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    359

    Default

    I have to echo Troys comments... spot on.

    I have a Panasonic FZ50 and that camera just takes great photos. I like to use it for quick shots of fish I catch and release, or have it handy in the canoe for unexpected encounters. Lecia lenses on those cameras are just great. And I can imagine the FZ1000 will be stellar as well. But to me, if you are in a tree stand and want to grab a quick shot of something wandering by down below and in lower light, you will likely not be impressed. Those shots are best pulled off with full frame cameras with large light gathering sensors, coupled with lenses designed for low light (f2, f2.8).

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,083

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bobmikk View Post
    I have to echo Troys comments... spot on.

    I have a Panasonic FZ50 and that camera just takes great photos. I like to use it for quick shots of fish I catch and release, or have it handy in the canoe for unexpected encounters. Lecia lenses on those cameras are just great. And I can imagine the FZ1000 will be stellar as well. But to me, if you are in a tree stand and want to grab a quick shot of something wandering by down below and in lower light, you will likely not be impressed. Those shots are best pulled off with full frame cameras with large light gathering sensors, coupled with lenses designed for low light (f2, f2.8).
    Yes, but if you are on a tree stand where weight and bulk is kept at a minimum, a FF camera with the associated lenses may not be what the OP wants. Besides that, while a FF camera is nice, any cropped-sensor camera will work with a faster lens. And please don't get me wrong; I used both FF and cropped-sensor cameras.

  11. #11

    Default

    I have recently settled on a camera choice. It's been really tough. There's just so much to consider. Then
    the more you look into it there's more to consider. I enjoy taking pictures of animals in places like Yellowstone.
    So I really want a larger zoom. This year I took a lot of grizzly and wolf pictures that could have been so much
    better. In the past I would try to take pictures of wolves across Hayden valley and they would basically be a dot
    in the picture. So the zoom basically made my final decision. But to buy a camera with different lenses and a
    super zoom lens would be so many thousands of dollars. So I am going to try the Nikon P900 specifically because of the
    83x zoom. (Equivalent to 24-2000 mm 35 mm lens) This camera is a bridge camera and it probably will take me over
    to eventually buying a camera with multiple lenses, larger sensor, etc...

  12. #12
    Member mkays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    21

    Default

    I have purchased the Nikon D5100 with the 50-300 mm lens. I have had great results with this lens. I am able to get far, clear photos of anything that I shoot. It is comparable to the view in a Vortex spotting scope at 16X.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arrowchaser View Post
    I have recently settled on a camera choice. It's been really tough. There's just so much to consider. Then
    the more you look into it there's more to consider. I enjoy taking pictures of animals in places like Yellowstone.
    So I really want a larger zoom. This year I took a lot of grizzly and wolf pictures that could have been so much
    better. In the past I would try to take pictures of wolves across Hayden valley and they would basically be a dot
    in the picture. So the zoom basically made my final decision. But to buy a camera with different lenses and a
    super zoom lens would be so many thousands of dollars. So I am going to try the Nikon P900 specifically because of the
    83x zoom. (Equivalent to 24-2000 mm 35 mm lens) This camera is a bridge camera and it probably will take me over
    to eventually buying a camera with multiple lenses, larger sensor, etc...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •