Advice, please: micro 4/3 or tiny sensor zoom for kid in Yellowstone

My young teenage daughter believes that the world doesn’t have enough pictures of squirrels, and she’ll likely thoroughly enjoy zooming in on other (larger but more distant) wildlife during our upcoming trip to Yellowstone. (She’s been using my old Fuji F30 for several years to capture images of coyotes and the like in a tiny central portion of frame.)

I just purchased a little super-zoom camera (a Panasonic DMC-ZS7, with the equivalent of a 24-300 mm zoom. I wonder, though, if she might be better off simply cropping a better (less noisy) image from a micro 4/3 camera (I’m thinking the E-PL1 with the older kit zoom is a great deal right now) for those few but essential 4x6 prints of various critters, and have a more capable camera for other uses. My few experiments with the ZS7 make me think that the camera is useless above IS0 200 and not very good there, the battery life is poor, crappy flash, et cetera—it’s not to my taste, but I’m struggling to remember that the camera isn’t for me, but for her. (I do understand that I could also purchase the Oly 40-150 mm lens for her, but I may not be that nice a dad.)

How do you think that she’d be better off? (And thanks to those of you who might take time to reply.)

Honestly I think she'll be better off with the p+s, especially if you will be giving it for her to use with just the kit zoom. Even if she will be able to crop the photos later, she will want to see the animals large on the screen. And this way there is no post processing to do, that will get tedious.

Thanks for your reply.

I normally run everything through Lightroom, so I suppose I (not she) will be comparing images after cropping (from the Oly) to what she could obtain directly from the p+s. (But then, I'm not a kid anymore.)

I would say return ZS7 and get EPL1 with 14-42mm and 40-150mm - this dual lens kit is currently at $500-550 for Mother's Day sale.

Get her a camera which she feels comfortable with. It's the fotographer and not the gear. Maybe she will get interested in cameras with better IQ later, or maybe not. But she could definitly loose interest in fotografy for ever with a camera not fitting her current needs.

tarnumf said:

I would say return ZS7 and get EPL1 with 14-42mm and 40-150mm - this dual lens kit is currently at $500-550 for Mother's Day sale.

Click to expand...

Maybe not a bad option, depending on your daughter and your budget. The kit lens is definitely too short for Yellowstone's wildlife (bear, elk, moose, & bison don't like folks too much) so you'll have to get a longer telephoto for her to shoot safely.

This would be a great gift if she's really interested in photography and will stick with it. If not, I think she'll tire of the size and complexity of any m43 system compared to a P&S or a superzoom. I know it's tough gauging a kid's true level of interest, and you don't want to overwhelm her with a relatively big, complicated system. I think a superzoom might offer the best balance of value, IQ, and useability for her between a P&S, superzoom, m43, and DSLR, but you know your kid better than any of us. Take her to a camera shop and let her handle some different options.
--
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Dont_be_a_dick

Get something like a Canon SX10IS. It is about 3 years old, good quality JPEGS and the 28-560mm (not including digital zoom) is a nice little package with great optical IS, EVF and articulated screen. It has a hot shoe and can take Canon flashes all the way up to and including the 580 EXII. The EVF is coarse compared to a Panny Gx or GHx and the Oly VF2, but she will quickly get used to it. It can be very manual if you want it to be, including manual focus. The macro distances are is phenomenal, almost too good. At 28 mm, it will focus on the front element of the lens, and when you are that close, you can focus on the dust. Fortunately, for most macro shots, the telephoto provides a good stand off distance.

Every manufacturer has a superzoom like this, but I figure there are plenty of Canons out there, and it was ground breaker in its time perhaps only matched by the Panny FZ28, but with more pleasing jpegs...but let's not go there

The current SX30IS is shockingly large (well 35x 24-840 mm, I guess not that large all things considered). It is about the size and weight of a GH2 and kit lens.

bwalsh said:

My young teenage daughter believes that the world doesn’t have enough pictures of squirrels, and she’ll likely thoroughly enjoy zooming in on other (larger but more distant) wildlife during our upcoming trip to Yellowstone. (She’s been using my old Fuji F30 for several years to capture images of coyotes and the like in a tiny central portion of frame.)

I just purchased a little super-zoom camera (a Panasonic DMC-ZS7, with the equivalent of a 24-300 mm zoom. I wonder, though, if she might be better off simply cropping a better (less noisy) image from a micro 4/3 camera (I’m thinking the E-PL1 with the older kit zoom is a great deal right now) for those few but essential 4x6 prints of various critters, and have a more capable camera for other uses. My few experiments with the ZS7 make me think that the camera is useless above IS0 200 and not very good there, the battery life is poor, crappy flash, et cetera—it’s not to my taste, but I’m struggling to remember that the camera isn’t for me, but for her. (I do understand that I could also purchase the Oly 40-150 mm lens for her, but I may not be that nice a dad.)

How do you think that she’d be better off? (And thanks to those of you who might take time to reply.)

Click to expand...

I will do what I am good at: equivalence:

ZS7 (having a crop factor of 5.62) at the tele end is 49.2mm F4.9, and suppose you take it at ISO100 (which I believe should be the specified native ISO of that camera), this is equiv. to 277mm F28 ISO 3158 (about 3200) to a full frame (35mm film) sensor.

Micro four third has a crop factor of 2. Suppose you use the old kit lens, long end at 42mm, and if you want to crop it to have the same FOV, it would introduce an extra crop factor of 277/84=3.3. So the total crop factor is 277/42=6.60. It is F5.6 at the long end, which is equiv. to F37.

So the performance of the cropped image would behave like 277mm F37 at ISO5400. (the native ISO of EPL1 is 124 according to DxOMark.)
So, now we have a common place to compare:
ZS7 tele wide open is equiv. to 277mm F28 ISO3158
E-PL1 w/ kit lens tele wide open with crop is equiv. to 277mm F37 ISO5400.
In terms of aperture ZS7 wins by about 2/3 f-stop.
In terms of ISO ZS7 wins by about 2/3 f-stop.

(because with crop, we only used the central sensor size, having a total crop factor of 6.6, larger than the crop factor of 5.62.)
So overall, ZS7 wins by about 1 and 2/3 f-stops. (1.56)

ZS7 gives you 12.1 MP. E-PL1 gives you 12.3/3.3^2=1.1MP. (so at 300 dpi, you could print it at 4X3" size.)
That's some calculations.

Suggestions: I would still suggest E-PL1 + kit. Since one might not use the long ends always which is the only place the smaller super zoom can excel (in a bright day).
At all other cases, E-PL1 truly excel, which is probably most used.

Actually I would suggest you to bought everything used, so that you could afford the 40-150 lens. Then that's far better than the small superzoom.

bwalsh said:

My young teenage daughter believes that the world doesn’t have enough pictures of squirrels, and she’ll likely thoroughly enjoy zooming in on other (larger but more distant) wildlife during our upcoming trip to Yellowstone. (She’s been using my old Fuji F30 for several years to capture images of coyotes and the like in a tiny central portion of frame.)

I just purchased a little super-zoom camera (a Panasonic DMC-ZS7, with the equivalent of a 24-300 mm zoom. I wonder, though, if she might be better off simply cropping a better (less noisy) image from a micro 4/3 camera (I’m thinking the E-PL1 with the older kit zoom is a great deal right now) for those few but essential 4x6 prints of various critters, and have a more capable camera for other uses. My few experiments with the ZS7 make me think that the camera is useless above IS0 200 and not very good there, the battery life is poor, crappy flash, et cetera—it’s not to my taste, but I’m struggling to remember that the camera isn’t for me, but for her. (I do understand that I could also purchase the Oly 40-150 mm lens for her, but I may not be that nice a dad.)

How do you think that she’d be better off? (And thanks to those of you who might take time to reply.)

Click to expand...

--I am surprised at the amount of negativism being expressed in these posts of the ZS7. I have and use several TZs up to ZS3 as well as several DSLRs and yes your teenage daughter will do just fine using your ZS7 for photographing wildlife in Yellowstone and certainly would be much more compact. As one poster pointed out the faster lens in the ZS7 means you probably would not have to venture outside of ISO 100-200 and the tele range especially with intelliigent zoom which extends its effective reach to about 400mm will extend as far as you need for most animals. No a ZS is not as good for action shots as a DSLR or m4/3 would be but certainly very useable just set at sports mode or burst mode.

Certainly using a DSLR or m4/3 camera and lenses would be better for active wildlife photography but that is a lot more money and space and I suggest just use what you have first. Some seem to forget that with heavy cropping using a camera with less focal length you will lose a lot of resolution. Also with your smaller format camera the pictures of landscape and wildlife will come out more 3D and naturalistic.

she will definatley have more fun with a super zoom, small sensor point and shoot.

Tedolph

tedolf said:

she will definatley have more fun with a super zoom, small sensor point and shoot.

Tedolph

Click to expand...

Sad but true.

May be the dad should tell the girl that micro four third was known in Japan as something like girl's camera or what. The dad should give her an image that this is the most trendy 'compact'.

Interestingly, I just sold and shipped my white E-PL1 today, which girls love. My fiancee actually don't quite agree that I should sell it since she think the GH are so ugly...

Give her some fancy color should do the trick. Though I don't think the old Olympus kit looks great. Putting a Panasonic 20/1.7 on a white E-PL1 is so cool. Panasonic 14-42 is also great. The white, black combination is actually very cool.

E-PL1 2nd hand body cost about USD300 (this is the price I sold at) and USD400 for a new one, and a new Panasonic 14-42 should be around 180 at eBay. This is not as a good deal as the promotion at Olympususa.com, but not far. Consider the fact that it is cool, focus much faster so that the girl can start taking great videos, sharper, etc. are really great.

tedolf said:

she will definatley have more fun with a super zoom, small sensor point and shoot.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Question for OP Dad: What camera will you be using on the trip? If you have an ILC of some kind, Yellowstone would be an excellent opportunity for you to occasionally swap cameras with your daughter to give her a taste of working with a more advanced camera. If she takes to it, that'll give you a good indicator of whether a m43 camera is right for her.
--
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Dont_be_a_dick

Thanks to you all for such thoughtful and thought-provoking replies.

While my kid would certainly like the Oly, I don't doubt that she'd like the ZS7 as well. I suppose that I'm guiltily of trying to steer her towards a camera that I would like. She does tend to use my stuff as much as she can (I'll be using a D300 on this trip, generally with the 24-70/2.8 lens) but mostly playing with macro flower photos rather than stalking the elusive squirrel. I do think that Mother's Day special sounds pretty sweet, though . . . If only my wife would wisely say, "Get both!"

Forget the squirrels. If possible, take a good telephoto for your Nikon along. If your daughter is even remotely interested in a more advanced camera, she'll know it the first time she gets a bear in the viewfinder.

OT: I don't know what your plans are, but Grand Teton NP has a lot to offer, so don't miss a trip to the south. Spend an afternoon in Jackson if you like that kind of thing. Also, I've found the main Yellowstone campgrounds to be crowded and poorly maintained (Xanterra sucks), especially compared to Grand Teton NP - Colter Bay. Same price, but Colter Bay is far better, IMO.

If you're interested in history, the Roosevelt Arch might be out of your way, but for me, it was a worthwhile detour just to be where TR started it all. Reading For the Benefit and Enjoyment of the People in person meant something to me. Also, the story of John D. Rockefeller, Jr.'s involvement in the creation of Grand Teton NP is touching.

Both parks are incredibly beautiful. If you're looking for an easy dayhike to a summit, MT Washburn is a good choice. Backcountry hiking is another matter entirely.

Have a great trip!
--
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Dont_be_a_dick

I would go with a zs7 (or a used zs3, which is just as good image-wise). I have a zs3 and the HD2 with several lenses (recent purchase). The noise levels in the zs series is mostly due to the jpeg engine noise removal algorithm being grossly understated. I recently reworked a lot of my zs3 photos with noiseware pro at default settings and it makes the zs3 a different camera. The easily visible noise at iso 100 and 200 is gone after a run thru noiseware.

The camera is actually very sharp for a tiny sensor camera. Its extended zoom capability (up to 400mm efl) will make it great for wildlife and flowers. I have a few shots as high as iso 800 that aren't too bad after a run thru noiseware. the video is outstanding at 720p both indoors and outdoors. Almost as good as my GH2.

For outdoor photos it will be no hardship to use iso 100 or 200 and a teen will love the smallness and versatility. Not many teens want to change lenses or lug around a heavy camera.

We made trips to Jackson in 2002, 2003 and 2006 with two sets of our teen grandchildren and they loved it. Have a great time!

453C said:

Forget the squirrels.

Click to expand...

Now THAT'S advice that I can take to heart.

Thanks for the trip advice, too. We will spend about half the trip around Jackson. Mt. Washburn sounds good to me. We plan to do as much hiking as we can while still exposing our dear daughter to the geysers and such that every lucky kid should see.

What passes for a 'telephoto' in my kit is the 105 mm macro lens with a 1.4x converter, which is rather like a 220 mm lens for me. I think that's enough for friendly squirrels, and I don't like most really large unfriendly mammals. (One night long ago, during a late October backpack trip in light snowfall, a rather enormous bear tried to steal the food that I'd hung not quite far enough from our tent in Yellowstone's Grizzly Canyon; I didn't try to photograph the bear, but I would have wanted to use a very fast 10,000 mm lens in I had had the choice.) Mostly I use 35-40 mm and 85-90 for my preferred focal lengths, as I have for decades; old habits die hard, although I probably did miss some great squirrel portraits.

Hi. How do you set your camera to enable you to reduce the noise?

Yesterday I tried setting the ZS7 to -2 contrast, -2 sharpness, and -2 noise reduction before running the photos through Lightroom. (Since I import everything via Lightroom, setting up defaults for each ISO is easy.) It seemed to help, although I'm sure greater efforts could bring somewhat better results. (My daughter would prefer to see the whiskers on every squirrel.)

453C said:

tarnumf said:

I would say return ZS7 and get EPL1 with 14-42mm and 40-150mm - this dual lens kit is currently at $500-550 for Mother's Day sale.

Click to expand...

Maybe not a bad option, depending on your daughter and your budget. The kit lens is definitely too short for Yellowstone's wildlife (bear, elk, moose, & bison don't like folks too much) so you'll have to get a longer telephoto for her to shoot safely.

Click to expand...

Have you been to Yellowstone?

The bison are so numerous and so tame they wander through the camp grounds.

While there are shots of the large wildlife to be had, you will waste so much time tripping over and cropping out the thousands of tourists that it is a fool's errand. The worst and most tedious time spent in Yellowstone are the "bear jams", the traffic jams every few miles created by a distant bear sitting along the roadside. I can't fathom why those people go to Yellowstone, so they park their cars and clammer over each other to get a picture of a bear at 300 meters.

They vast majority of great pictures in Yellowstone can be had from the fantastic vistas and the wildlife that isn't walking around of 4 legs. And for this the kit lens is better suited than the zoom.

I have no idea what your daughters interest in photography, or what kind of gear you are going to bring yourself, but here's my experience w/ Yellowstone and a GH1. We were driving cross country on our move from Chicago to Portland and stopped at Yellowstone for maybe 5 days this last fall. We were traveling light so I had minimized the camera equipment, just a few lenses and no tripod. I had already gotten rid of my first 45-200 because I just didn't find myself using it with the 14-140mm.

Wouldn't you know it while we were there, there was a bison kill, the Lamar Valley wolf pack was there as was a herd of bison and a couple grizzlies. Awesome photographic opportunity right? Not with a 14-140mm it wasn't, it was a bit too far off the road. So here's what I got instead:





That dot is a large grizzly on top of the carcass with three wolves challenging him. To the right is another grizzly and (I think) a vulture on the rock. A few other wolves were in the grass and would pop up periodically. A 100-300mm would have saved the day here.





Thats a smaller grizzly walking away from a face off with a few bison. A couple of the bison got out in front of the herd and wouldn't be intimidated by the bear.





A little black bear at dusk. Was really pushing the limits of the GH1 + 140mm, it was an early model GH1 so I didn't dare push it to 1600, thats about the best I could get. Really wish I had something with better 1600+ performance and/or a faster lens in this situation.





Our campsite at Slough Creek with the 7-14mm. We were surprised to find such a great campground in Yellowstone. Check it out if you tent camp!

So anyways Yellowstone was awesome, and I feel like we had a pretty lucky experience seeing the wolves, but I felt woefully underequipped with the GH1 + 14-140mm. Maybe it was all the guys with full frame Canons and 300mm L lenses with teleconverters, but I was feeling a little telephoto envy. The 7-14mm was GREAT for Yellowstone. Right after getting settled in, I ordered the 45-200mm, then when the 100-300mm came out I got that. Next time I go to Yellowstone, I'm bringing:

7-14mm
14-140mm
100-300mm
100-200mm f2.8 Tamron 30A
500mm f8 Tamron mirror lens
and a few primes
Tripod

I have a few more pics in my gallery, wideangle shots of the thermal stuff. Personally, Lamar Valley was the highlight for us. But please, either get your daughter a very nice superzoom, or if you go the m4/3 route a 100-300!

Can't wait to go back...

Rob

bryanbrun said:

453C said:

tarnumf said:

I would say return ZS7 and get EPL1 with 14-42mm and 40-150mm - this dual lens kit is currently at $500-550 for Mother's Day sale.

Click to expand...

Maybe not a bad option, depending on your daughter and your budget. The kit lens is definitely too short for Yellowstone's wildlife (bear, elk, moose, & bison don't like folks too much) so you'll have to get a longer telephoto for her to shoot safely.

Click to expand...

Have you been to Yellowstone?

The bison are so numerous and so tame they wander through the camp grounds.

While there are shots of the large wildlife to be had, you will waste so much time tripping over and cropping out the thousands of tourists that it is a fool's errand. The worst and most tedious time spent in Yellowstone are the "bear jams", the traffic jams every few miles created by a distant bear sitting along the roadside. I can't fathom why those people go to Yellowstone, so they park their cars and clammer over each other to get a picture of a bear at 300 meters.

They vast majority of great pictures in Yellowstone can be had from the fantastic vistas and the wildlife that isn't walking around of 4 legs. And for this the kit lens is better suited than the zoom.

Click to expand...

Yes, I've been to Yellowstone twice in the last two years, including a week in the backcountry. Based on your advice, I believe you know far less about wildlife than you think you do. Bison aren't tame. Bears aren't tame. Elk aren't tame. They go where they want to because they can do just about anything they want to do. Who can stop them?

I've seen morons approach within 15 yards of bison, elk, and even bears when they come along roadside and through campgrounds. I've also read many accounts of those morons being seriously injured or killed when getting too close to those large, "tame" animals. Yellowstone visitor centers sell videos of dangerous animal encounters, and books such as Death in Yellowstone . It has a whole section full of fatal, "tame" animal encounters in areas just like you mentioned. Why, here's one of those tame, cuddly bison in a parking lot!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwUD51DeKqo

A telephoto lens longer than the kit lens is recommended for photographing large mammals such as the ones found in Yellowstone. I've seen 300mm EFL mentioned in different books, and based on my experience, that's a good idea if you want the animal to fill the frame, but don't want to risk your safety.

I don't know why you made such comments, but I'd advise anyone going to Yellowstone to not treat any of the animals as "tame". BTW, that's the same advice the NPS gives visitors, too. Not following it might get you a blurb in the next edition of that book. Ordinarily, I wouldn't care much what someone posted here, but what you said was dangerously wrong.
--
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Dont_be_a_dick