Getting familiar with the P600

I've had this camera for a several weeks now and have experimented a lot. I am still amazed with the zoom and the quality of the images when digital zoom is used a little. My Canon SX50 has features I wish the Nikon had, but in the end I like the pictures I get from the Nikon enough to choose that one for my upcoming trip to Hilton Head.

Meanwhile, here are some I've taken since getting it. I usually shoot at EV -7 so I normally do some editing in Faststone.

https://plus.google.com/photos/102508618965016893609/albums/6002643210536318273

Larry

Larry,

Very nice work, I used to have P510 but I had focus hunting issue in some situations. What about P600? I also own SX50, so far it produces the best bird photos for me. Can you please post some comparison shots of P600 and SX50 ?

Thanks,

VadiV

LarryInVA said:

I've had this camera for a several weeks now and have experimented a lot. I am still amazed with the zoom and the quality of the images when digital zoom is used a little. My Canon SX50 has features I wish the Nikon had, but in the end I like the pictures I get from the Nikon enough to choose that one for my upcoming trip to Hilton Head.

Meanwhile, here are some I've taken since getting it. I usually shoot at EV -7 so I normally do some editing in Faststone.

https://plus.google.com/photos/102508618965016893609/albums/6002643210536318273

Larry

Click to expand...

Hi,

I love these photos especially the bird with a fish in its mouth. How many photos did you take to get these? Also which do you prefer for image quality (sx50, p600) for close ups, distant, indoors and bright conditions. Also any focusing issues for both cameras ?

Cheers

Steve.

Thanks to both of you for looking at the pictures.

Comparing the SX50 with the P600 is a little subjective. Both produce nice pictures and the quality of those shots are pretty close. It really boils down to what you need and how you plan to use the camera. There are features on the Canon SX50 I miss when using the Nikon. Here is a link to some SX50 shots I have taken (I hope it works):

https://plus.google.com/photos/102508618965016893609/albums/5816990905220612225?banner=pwa

There were two reasons I picked up the Nikon. First, the extra megapixels make it possible to crop a picture and still have enough left to make a decent print. Second, the extra zoom. I didn't know how the digital zoom worked on the Nikon until I got it, but it turns out I like it better than the Canon which jumps from 100 optical to 1.5 digital. The latter can produce some images that are hard to fix in post processing so I seldom used it.

The eagles nest you saw in the Nikon collection is the exact reason I bought the SX50, and now the P600. I've watched that nest and pair of birds for several years and even bought a 100-400 lens for my Canon SLR in hopes of getting some good pictures. However, the nest is just too far away even for that combo. The SX50 did much better at 1200mm, but the Nikon has allowed me to get the best shots to date. I can't get any closer for legal reasons so I need to rely on the camera to get close.

When shooting a bird around the birdfeeder, the results are about the same for both cameras. I think the Nikon focuses a little faster. I have the custom setting on both cameras set at ISO 100 which I feel gives the best results. With the Nikon I found the pictures were too sharp for my taste, so I had to knock down the sharpness in the camera a little. Nevertheless, I think the Nikon's additional resolution is a plus you can see in the long-zoom pictures of birds.

To get the results I want, I usually shoot a number of shots and sort through them later on the computer. I think I get more keepers with the Nikon than I did with the Canon when handholding, but find the additional zoom makes keeping on target much more difficult. A trusty tripod is almost a requirement with the Nikon when you zoom all the way.

The thing I miss the most when using the Nikon is the remote control I had with the SX50. For that reason I keep the multiple exposure option on so when I push the shutter I get two or three shots, hoping the second or third picture will not show any shutter vibration. It helps, but means sifting through even more images.

Finally, I experimented with landscape and other types of shots with both cameras and, again there was little difference, except the Nikon had the extra resolution and the Canon had the punchy color. Nevertheless, I would normally rely on another camera for those kinds of pictures. When I go to Hilton Head in a couple of weeks, my bag will contain the P600 and my Olympus M-1 with the 12-40 lens. The P600 will do the wildlife and the Oly will take care of everything else.

Larry

Larry,

Thanks for the detailed informative reply. Please post the link to your photos from your vacation.

Enjoy your trip.

Thanks,

VadiV

LarryInVA said:

Thanks to both of you for looking at the pictures.

Comparing the SX50 with the P600 is a little subjective. Both produce nice pictures and the quality of those shots are pretty close. It really boils down to what you need and how you plan to use the camera. There are features on the Canon SX50 I miss when using the Nikon. Here is a link to some SX50 shots I have taken (I hope it works):

https://plus.google.com/photos/102508618965016893609/albums/5816990905220612225?banner=pwa

There were two reasons I picked up the Nikon. First, the extra megapixels make it possible to crop a picture and still have enough left to make a decent print. Second, the extra zoom. I didn't know how the digital zoom worked on the Nikon until I got it, but it turns out I like it better than the Canon which jumps from 100 optical to 1.5 digital. The latter can produce some images that are hard to fix in post processing so I seldom used it.

The eagles nest you saw in the Nikon collection is the exact reason I bought the SX50, and now the P600. I've watched that nest and pair of birds for several years and even bought a 100-400 lens for my Canon SLR in hopes of getting some good pictures. However, the nest is just too far away even for that combo. The SX50 did much better at 1200mm, but the Nikon has allowed me to get the best shots to date. I can't get any closer for legal reasons so I need to rely on the camera to get close.

When shooting a bird around the birdfeeder, the results are about the same for both cameras. I think the Nikon focuses a little faster. I have the custom setting on both cameras set at ISO 100 which I feel gives the best results. With the Nikon I found the pictures were too sharp for my taste, so I had to knock down the sharpness in the camera a little. Nevertheless, I think the Nikon's additional resolution is a plus you can see in the long-zoom pictures of birds.

To get the results I want, I usually shoot a number of shots and sort through them later on the computer. I think I get more keepers with the Nikon than I did with the Canon when handholding, but find the additional zoom makes keeping on target much more difficult. A trusty tripod is almost a requirement with the Nikon when you zoom all the way.

The thing I miss the most when using the Nikon is the remote control I had with the SX50. For that reason I keep the multiple exposure option on so when I push the shutter I get two or three shots, hoping the second or third picture will not show any shutter vibration. It helps, but means sifting through even more images.

Finally, I experimented with landscape and other types of shots with both cameras and, again there was little difference, except the Nikon had the extra resolution and the Canon had the punchy color. Nevertheless, I would normally rely on another camera for those kinds of pictures. When I go to Hilton Head in a couple of weeks, my bag will contain the P600 and my Olympus M-1 with the 12-40 lens. The P600 will do the wildlife and the Oly will take care of everything else.

Larry

Click to expand...

Thanks for the comprehensive response, very helpful. I looked at the photos at its hard to tell which camera is better.

As you said the Nikon looks a touch sharper, however I like the naturalness and the rich colors of the canon. It looks like they have similar detail. I live in the city and only go to the country every 3-4 months for a weekend with family. The majority of my shots won't be max zoom but a mix of portraits, close ups and some moon and bird shots. When I go to the country I like to do landscape shots. I suppose 80% will be in the 1-20x zoom range and the rest longer zoom. Do you have a preference for a camera for close ups, portraits and lower light conditions.

Cheers

Steve.

Steve, I am probably not the right person to ask about your needs. I am retired and picked up photography as my main hobby. It gets me out, keeps the mind going, and is personally rewarding. I am not very brand loyal, but invested in Canon equipment early on and Olympus MFT later.

Right now there a number of announced cameras that may fit tour needs. If I were you, I would start looking at the ones with the 1” sensor. You may need to wait for some to be reviewed by the pros as well as users.

Just keep in mind the bottom line is image quality. Things like WiFi and GPS make things more interesting from a technical standpoint, but they do not make a difference in image quality. Today’s cameras are computers with lenses. So, the two most important things are the software (i.e. firmware) and the glass. If the glass is fast and sharp, that’s great. If the software includes RAW, that adds the ability to improve the image quality beyond the cameras’ default settings. Etc., etc.

LarryInVA said:

Steve, I am probably not the right person to ask about your needs. I am retired and picked up photography as my main hobby. It gets me out, keeps the mind going, and is personally rewarding. I am not very brand loyal, but invested in Canon equipment early on and Olympus MFT later.

Right now there a number of announced cameras that may fit tour needs. If I were you, I would start looking at the ones with the 1” sensor. You may need to wait for some to be reviewed by the pros as well as users.

Just keep in mind the bottom line is image quality. Things like WiFi and GPS make things more interesting from a technical standpoint, but they do not make a difference in image quality. Today’s cameras are computers with lenses. So, the two most important things are the software (i.e. firmware) and the glass. If the glass is fast and sharp, that’s great. If the software includes RAW, that adds the ability to improve the image quality beyond the cameras’ default settings. Etc., etc.

Click to expand...

You have been a good help . I would like a superzoom and those two seem to have good image quality. I suppose I was wondering if you have just compared them more in low light and close up ability. Cheers steve

I also see the canon sx50 has raw. Do you use raw? Or is it just jpeg in above photos you have done. Cheers steve

Those are some great photos, thank you for your detailed response.

I haven't use either the SX50 or P600 for low light, indoor photography. I have other equipment that will do better. I don't have a camera that I consider excellent in all cases, but a number of instruments that are very good in certain situations. That is the reason I often carry two when I go out to handle most situations.

I generally shoot JPG/RAW (when the camera allows), relying on the RAW image to process those shots that I consider worth the effort. Like I said earlier, the software/firmware plays an important role in the quality of images, with the camera often making decisions in the creation of the JPG image based on averages. The RAW image has not gone through that firmware wash, nor has it been compressed by the camera like the JPG created by the firmware. RAW offers an opportunity to get additional detail from dark areas, improve colors and lighting, and eventually save an image that is an improvement over the JPG that the camera made.

Hope you find the camera you are seeking. Happy shooting.

LarryInVA said:

I haven't use either the SX50 or P600 for low light, indoor photography. I have other equipment that will do better. I don't have a camera that I consider excellent in all cases, but a number of instruments that are very good in certain situations. That is the reason I often carry two when I go out to handle most situations.

I generally shoot JPG/RAW (when the camera allows), relying on the RAW image to process those shots that I consider worth the effort. Like I said earlier, the software/firmware plays an important role in the quality of images, with the camera often making decisions in the creation of the JPG image based on averages. The RAW image has not gone through that firmware wash, nor has it been compressed by the camera like the JPG created by the firmware. RAW offers an opportunity to get additional detail from dark areas, improve colors and lighting, and eventually save an image that is an improvement over the JPG that the camera made.

Hope you find the camera you are seeking. Happy shooting.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Helps me understand raw better. So the photos that you had in the original link to your canon sx50 photos, were they done in RAW or JPEG as I want to compare your Nikon JPEGs with your Canon JPEG photos.

Cheers

Steve.

Great shots with both cameras, what features do you miss on the cannon? I am trying to decide between new super zooms. One poster feels the P600 is the best and his photos like yours look really good.

Nice collection of images Larry. You seem to have mastered the camera and it would be interesting to know what settings you have used and experimented with.

Keep posting those great images.

Bill G

Again, I don’t pretend to know what is important to you. For me the features I would have liked on the Canon have been mentioned in other discussions. Many would like to see them in the next model. Those would include a faster lens, quicker focus, more megapixels without compromise to image quality, better EVF, and so on.

In the end it appears they can only squeeze so much out of these small sensors which, in turn, allow using the lenses that come on these superzooms. It is important to know that these two cameras require pretty good light and lowest ISO to get the best results. Fortunately, both have good image stabilization that allows shooting at lower speeds.

Bill, I wouldn’t say I’ve mastered this camera or any others I have, but I am getting a little better as time goes by.

With regards to settings on the P600, I am sort of all over the map while I experiment. I just came back from trying out some landscape shots of a few of the local sites. (I added some to my P600 link at the top.) I’m happy with the way they came out and think compare well to my SX50 landscapes. Again, I miss the RAW feature in the P600.

I have my UserSetting set for ISO100, -7EV, Program Mode, and reduced the sharpness one click. I also have the digital zoom turned on because I find you can increase the zoom beyond 1440, where the bar just turns blue, and still get good results. Anything more than a nudge into that “blue” area and the images quickly start to suffer. I also set up my “P” mode on the dial to Exposure Bracket at +/-1, in case I get a chance to do some HDR photos.

I have experimented with the Full-Auto (green camera) on the dial. While you have limited control over the settings, the results are still impressive. An important thing for me is when in Full-Auto you can actually change the EV on the P600, unlike the SX50. I seldom used the Auto mode on the SX50 because it had a tendency to blow the whites and I couldn’t figure out a way to solve that problem. With the P600, as soon as I move to the Full-Auto, I knock down the EV to -7. Warning: When you turn of the camera off, that setting doesn’t stay. Also, it may just be my taste, but I think the Full-Auto is a tad too sharp.

Under the category of full disclosure, I very seldom accept an image from the camera as the final product. I almost always do at least some minor processing in FastStone Image Viewer, usually raising the shadows and playing with levels until I get the look I want. I may also crop to get the subject situated correctly, but I have not cropped any of the pictures from the P600 that I posted for this forum. (I did, however, straighten a few because my right leg must have shrunk with age and because the pictures lean in that direction.)

I hope that answers your question.

Hi Larry, I am happy to know the auto mode take good shots, important to me, because it is nice when shooting wildlife that can't wait for adjusting a lot of settings. Being able to extend into digital zoom and still get decent IQ is remarkable for such a long lens. I only have enough wallet for one cam, this year, and having a hard time deciding. Thank you.

--
KJ

Thanks so much LarryInVA for your posts. I have had a P500 for several years but wanted the extra zoom for birdwatching so bought the P600. Am doing experiments for two weeks before going to Ohio and Michigan peninsula for warbler migration so appreciate your comments about settings and zoom.

lilyJones91

lilyJones91 said:

Thanks so much LarryInVA for your posts. I have had a P500 for several years but wanted the extra zoom for birdwatching so bought the P600. Am doing experiments for two weeks before going to Ohio and Michigan peninsula for warbler migration so appreciate your comments about settings and zoom.

lilyJones91

Click to expand...

Two suggestions.

Turn on the multiple shot setting, for low, so you get a few images when you push the shutter button. It will increase the number of keepers and could make a difference in getting "the" picture. I was able to get some birds in flight using this technique. It only takes a second to erase an image you don't want, but you can never get back the one you missed.

Use a tripod. This camera's extraordinary zoom combined with the need to shoot ISO 100 for the best results dictates that extra steady base. I prefer a lightweight tripod that is 64 of more inches long, so I am not constantly bending over, which my old back dislikes. Since this camera is light, I use a inexpensive one I bought at Walmart. I attached a long velcro strap that I use to wrap around the extended legs when I use the same tripod as a monopod.