All your images are SENSATIONAL! Thank you for showing them and explaining how you achieve them.
An outstanding image, Evan! No wonder you won the challenge :) !
orion1983: IMHO, there is absolutely no reasonable advantage compared to a SX50 which has RAW and is also half the weight and dimensions but with excellent IQ FOR A MEGAZOOM. Unfortunately, it´s not produced anymore....but still available.
SX50 is an outstanding camera and it beats P600 on every aspect, except the lens, which is better at Nikon. In my opinion RAW isn't big deal to such a tiny sensor, it's although a shame Nikon persists in not implementing it, and there is no CHDK equivalent here too (NHDK!)
maxnimo: I'd love to see a camera just like this, but with a 2 inch sensor.
The Canon FF 1200mm weights 16kg and costs $1000000!It's the laws of physics :)
Henry Falkner: 2000mm equivalent permits moon shots without Digital Zoom. With an EVF and an articulated LCD as well as a wider range of settings, it does justify getting a bridge camera again. But after the P600 compared badly against competitors for focus reliability and speed on YouTube reviews (in that time frame) - how much better is the P900? We still get new enthusiast compacts that put grinding zoom noises on videos. Will the P-900 be quiet? And will it save a video and retract the lens before the battery goes flat? I am harping on about this because I have two reliable and quiet travel pocket zooms.
You're right as always, Henry! I have P600 and it's exactly as you said: the lens is outstanding, but the focus slow and unreliable, even compared with SX50, my other usual super zoom. But somettimes I can get excellent images, so I'm rather fascinated by that P900 super gun :) , despite that as all Nikon bridges lacks RAW, filter thread, hotshoe and lens hood.
Jim: Rhetorical Question: I wonder how much better the G3X image quality will be over an SX50HS when compared at 600mm and below? Especially so, since the SX50HS can be had for $200. Maybe it's just me but I am not seeing the value proposition here.
@Lan: I hope you don't mind, but did you SEE SX50? It's an outstandingly good camera, but NOT pocketable :)
whakapu: This may be all the camera I need, if the glass, sensor and general speed are up to snuff. My SX50 (not the crappy new SX60) is an amazing camera. I always seem to get more shots from that than my EOS when I take both. The lens is amazingly effective. The only thing keeping that from being a perfect camera is the tiny sensor (low ISO threshold - limited DOF control). If Canon get this one right they may not sell anything else
sierranvin: I can just imagine this thing at 600mm, my arms extended, outdoors, the screen vague from glare, my image wobbling with the animal or bird I imagined I might shoot, going in and out, in and out of view...in and out, in and out huh huh Where'd it GO!!!
Maybe Canon thinks folks will use it on a tripod through their urban apartment windows as a kind of poor man's peeping Tom tool?
I know a lot of people, myself included, who aren't professional photographers, just passionate to shoot and who doesn't care about the VF. I heard all the time that more than 25X zoom is useless without tripod, than 30X, than... Wel,l I shot 60X handheld and LCD and got nice results. So much for the photo theoreticians, which, strangely, don't have a single example in their galleries. Mario is right.
Now THAT's something quite outstanding! Congratulations to catch so well the moment, but I think the lady wasn't too happy when the bird tried to fly with it's "building material" to the nest :) :)
Augustin Man: Wow! Interesting to say the least, but how big and heavy would be that "grote" zoom? Besides, after the SX60 cold shower, I feel like treasuring my dear SX50, but also like moving away to other brands :(
To wait more than two years for a super zoom worse than SX50.
Wow! Interesting to say the least, but how big and heavy would be that "grote" zoom? Besides, after the SX60 cold shower, I feel like treasuring my dear SX50, but also like moving away to other brands :(
Excellent image, congratulations! But Zugspitze, with 2962m, is not even close to the highest mountains of Europe: in Austria only there are tens of peaks over 3000m! It's however the highest mountain of Germany.
Sven44: Part 3
This phenomenon is (more or less) compensated for by selecting a different ISO level. But that, in turn, means a DIFFERENT F-VALUE to give the same shutter speed.
So (ad nauseam)
An image taken with a 2x crop sensor at f/2 with a 50mm lens at 1/60s with an indicated ISO of 200
will produce an almost indistinguishable FINAL IMAGE to
One taken with a FF sensor at f/4 with 100mm at 1/60s AND AN INDICATED ISO OF 800.
Same depth of field, same scene brightness, very similar noise level (the smaller sensor of one compensated for by the higher ISO of the other).
OF COURSE THE FIRST IMAGE WILL BE FOUR TIMES BRIGHTER ON THE IMAGE PLANE. WE GET THAT, BUT IT’S IRRELEVANT! It *needs* to be four times brighter (intensity) because for a given indicated ISO reading, four times as much gain is going to be applied to the signals produced by pixels that are four times smaller!
So f/2 on our smaller sensor is IN EVERY SENSE THAT MATTERS *EXACTLY EQUIVALENT* to f/4 on a larger sensor.
I'm just a hobbyist, but I like the article quite a lot; actually it will not be for much use to me, as I'm only a "zoom addict" of P&S cameras, but I want to understand what I'm doing. Thus, I'll put your above comparison on the bottom of my camera, just in case of forgetting. Thank you very much!
1/16000 sec?! Sure isn't one zero too much?
This is my "Broken Branch" orchid, edited by Ed using PSCS6 to canvas resizing and cloning: great job!
tutek: Canon should be ashamed. Check out the new Nikon P7800. Exactly what customers want in this class ...
Ok, but if it's as SLOW as 7700 people won't buy it :(
I'm not at all impressed by the plane shot. Check out here planes flying at some 11km altitude with 900km/h:
ChristianG: I have to laugh (I shoot a DSLR where it doesn't happen) at a 60x zoom. Personally I think that even shooting at "only" 10x, unassisted by something like a tripod, is sailing very close to the wind.
Did you see some BIF at 50X taken with a HANDHELD SX50?
Here you are:
As the rest of his articles, this one is very informative and superbly illustrated by examples. I like that it also remarks the many difficulties such an action involves.In short, a top professional work.