Hi all,
Thanks again for the many nice comments. We love to share our birds.
I'd like to just make a few comments here regarding the SX30, processing, and about photographing wild birds in general, ...in the spirit of helpfulness.
Wild bird photography is challenging for any camera and all photographers who attempt to do it. It requires patience, practice (skill), a good camera, and a bit of luck, All the best wildlife photos you will see here or anywhere, are the result of some combination of all of these things. You can't just buy a camera or lens that makes it easy. And those who attempt it occasionally or casually, will likely find it very difficult indeed, no matter which camera they use.
Perhaps the major key to success is getting close enuf to take a shot at all. How close varies with the reach of the lens being used of course. But you will likely hear it said that no lens is ever long enuf, and bird photographers employ a lot of different tactics and techniques to try and bridge that critical distance. Many use camoflage and/or stealth, birdcalls, or even bait. But millions of us simply put up feeders and water features around our property and give the birds an attractive habitat in which to live. And they come to us.
I want to assure everyone that all our birds are wild and free, not captive in any way... their only cage is the sky. And they are sure as small and fast as any wild birds you may find wherever you live. No matter which gear we might use to photograph them we would and do miss many shots because of this. But they live here, in our trees. And we spend a great deal of time outside with them. As a result they are somewhat accustomed to our being in their midst. So we do have the advantage of many opportunities, and also considerable experience from years of practice photographing them. All of which has improved our success.
A few words about processing...
I would say again, that ALL digital photos are processed. In my opinion, "heavy processing" fairly describes what's done by most cameras during the writing of the jpeg image that users call sooc. As I've said many times, we "dial back" the settings for this in-camera processing, specifically to avoid such "heavy processing". And as I've tried to say and illustrate in several earlier posts, we recommend and use the most subtle and careful post-processing of these detuned jpeg images to try to achieve the highest and most natural image quality possible from our cameras.
Yes, I process all our posted images. But, the processing I do is generally "lighter" and less injurious to the images we capture than the processing done by the camera's default jpeg algorithms. And it's certainly lighter and less injurious than turning up the in-camera processing would be.
Perhaps more importantly tho, the processing I do is based on the specific characteristics of each individual image. In-camera processing is blind, and applies its default routines as if every image were the same... It has no awareness of whether any captured image is sharp or soft, or over-exposed or under-exposed... or any other aspect of it. It sharpens, applies contrast, and performs color correction without regard to the color or quality of light, the complexity of the scene, or even which elements in the image are subject or background. There's little chance that default processing will optimize any given image, and any such preset method universally applied is very likely to harm an image at least as often as it helps one.
Here again is another illustration:
The left pane is the detuned jpeg as produced "sooc" by the SX30. It is a little bit soft, has a yellowish cast from the morning sun, and is somewhat lacking in contrast. But the detail is intact. The right pane is the image carefully processed to adjust WB slightly, reduce bg noise, and apply sharpening and contrast to enhance the details in the subject without over-processing. This is not heavy processing and it did not take long to do. Indeed, some might find the unprocessed image quite acceptable, and the in-camera defaults may even produce quite good results sometimes. The primary difference is that I can see the image being processed and make (or not make) adjustments intelligently as needed, whereas the camera simply applies the same routine to every image, and to the entire image, no matter what. I prefer to optimize the processing of each image myself rather than depending on the camera to "get it right", and I'm confident this will nearly always result in better images than are rendered sooc.
And as regards SX30 "issues" ...
The SX30 does an excellent job capturing detail. It's reach is pretty much unsurpassed at any price. Its image stabilization is excellent. And for the record, it's shutter lag and shot to shot speeds, while sure not fast, are about average for current cameras in its class. But to get the best results with it (or any camera really) requires understanding its strengths and weaknesses, and developing your skills to control it in whichever photographic application you need it to perform. For us, that's bird photography... and we're very pleased indeed with the results it's giving us.
Is the SX-30 the perfect birding camera? ... No.
Do we often wish it were faster? ... Yes.
Do any other cameras offer superior features, performance, or image quality? ...
Ye$ .
Can it be used to take excellent photos of wild birds? ...
Yes .
Will you get excellent photos of wild birds with an SX30? ... Maybe not. You'll surely still need patience, skill, and luck. But you will have a pretty good camera for it.
As always, I hope this might be helpful to some, and wish good shooting to you all.
Kenn
--
Kenn & Temple - Backyard Birders in St.Louis, MO USA
http://kenn3d.smugmug.com 
