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.
I like Fuji: they launch simultaneously 42X ,44X and 50X super zooms, so that the Fuji fans can choose the EXACT super zoom they wanted!
As just a hobbyist, my opinion is that many people that can afford to buy this technical jewel don't know how to use it, and I'm saying this because I wasn't impressed at all by the samples of the forum, but the samples of the Korean review recommended below were actually jaw-dropping!
Nice kitty! The cats usually play the "H&S" game as a part of their exceptional hunting instinct!
Stunning image and composition! Congratulations!
Two problems: the first, VERY IMPORTANT, is that the images lost their former clarity and it's only a zoom in step; the second, of secondary importance, is that in the "Recent forum activity" appear the messages but not the forum name to which they belong.
Thank you for your attention.
Valterj: Overall a good camera!
But there are some things that could be better:
Video is not the best - Sony DSC-HX100V is much better!
GPS takes around 1 minute to be active!
42X optical zoom for seascapes is like digital zoom!!!
Night shots with high ISO are too noisy.
No accessories, like macro lens adapters...
You can fit perfectly to it Raynox DCR-150 and 250, which come with an adaptor...
qwertyasdf: Hi Theano Nikitas and Barnaby Britton,
"The P510 is a very useful portrait camera towards the long end of its zoom"You guys really hv my curiosity going here, can you please show me a portrait using 1000mm, it's something i'll never accomplish in my lifetime.
Here is a sample at 180mm (1000mm equivqlent):
How do you like it?
keeponkeepingon: I'm disappointed that there is no mention of digital zoom, no samples, assessment of performance at extreme zoom, and that Nikon is not slammed for the anemic 2x digital zoom (the canon has 4x).
I am often amazed at what I can capture with the 4x digital + 35x optical zoom on the SX40.
Why digital zoom versus just taking a picture at full optical zoom and cropping?
Because: Even though the resolution is not improved, digitally zoomed, the focus and exposure can be much improved as the camera is only figuring out how to get the best image of your subject, not a full frame of other stuff.
Finally you should include a "moon shot" with these super zooms. It really lets them "strut their stuff" versus the normal P&S and DSLRs with sub 800mm lenses.
An example about SX30 vs SX40 here:
By the way, Nikon P510 has also such absurd limitations in the M mode, contrary to my old "toy" Canon SX210IS, where all parameters (aperture, shutte rspeed and ISO) are independent on the entire scale, as they sholud be!
Moon shot? That's a child play! But what about SATURN?! Please search in the forum "P510 Visits Saturn" by Nightwings and think again...
I'm not saying SX40 is not a good camera, although it seems that SX30 was better (general "canonists" opinion, I own neither), but the optics of P510 is quite outstanding.
Barbu: Nothing unexpected, it's a nice camera (of course, if you're in the market for a supemegazoom).But one thing was just mentioned in the review: the VR system. The author said only that „it's very good”, which seems more like an opinion than a true test.A while ago reviews here meant testing and showing results, not just... „it's nice, just believe us”. Where have gone the graphs with the percentage of usable pics at max zoom?
I got an Oly SP-810UZ and I was skeptical (like you and everybody else) about the P510 VR at the telephoto end. But, nice surprise, it's incredible good! Besides, the digital zoom (2X) is also usable (at Oly it wasn't).Please see at the forum lots of good shots with hand held camera at the telephoto end.All the best (toate cele bune),Augustin
Frankly I can't understand this "war" between us, the users, in criticizing or defending a camera or a brand: more than often cameras of the same brand can be excellent or not so good. What is the purpose in defending a faulty camera or in criticizing a good one? I hope neither of us is an employee of a camera making company, thus for us the competition is benefic because we have more possibilities to choose that camera we like the best.